Volleyball people have been trying to doodle with the traditional scoring for ages now. The volleyball playing rules today are far from Dr. William G. Morgan’s mintonette game.
We have evolved from nine players on the court to six
players on the court. We have incorporated a service rotation. We have gone
from sideout scoring to rally scoring. The changes have evolved over the years,
many of the recent changes in the rule have been motivated by people wanting to
make the game of volleyball attractive to television broadcasters, obviously to
get our beloved game shown on television.
The legendary Dr. Jim Coleman had experimented with applying
tennis rules to volleyball, having the teams play best two out of three sets
but each set is scored like tennis: the winner has to win at least six games of
15 points with a margin of two games in each set. I saw it when the USPV was
barnstorming through St. Louis during their inaugural season. I don’t remember much
about the match, but it all felt kind of weird to watch because of the novelty.
I was talking to my friend Santiago Restrepo about alternative
scoring for volleyball earlier this week, he said he has his solution to
getting more television exposure. It seemed kind of interesting, so I will
present this version of Santiago-ball for consideration. See if his confidence
in his rules is justified.
·
Play best 4 out of 7 sets.
·
Each set is rally score to 15.
o
The intent here is to play the last 15 points in
a 25 point set and do away with the first 10 points because nothing is on the
line for the first 10 points anyways.
o
This works out to playing 2 to 3.5 sets in the
regular scoring.
·
Each team plays their best rotation every set.
They can play setter front row if they want, very unlikely, or they can play setter
back row. Players don’t rotate, front middle stays front middle all the time,
setter sets from wherever they want for every point. No overlap rule. No out of
rotation calls. This is like the Chinese 9-man rules.
o
Keeps the stoppage to a minimum and keeps the
best players at that position playing at that position the entire match.
·
No substitution restrictions, you can sub entire
platoons every point if you want. I remember watching Lindenwood under Ron
Young play against Stew McDole’s Graceland team, Stew was trying to stop the
bleeding and subbed six at every stoppage, I believe that NAIA had no substitution
restriction. In that case the subs still
had to be recorded in the scoresheet, which slowed the game down; whereas in
Santiago ball the players just run in and out of their positions in the
rotation, so that there are no added stoppage for subs.
o
The intent is to put your best attackers and
defenders on the court all the time against the best attackers and defenders
from the other team. The players can just: “Go at it hard.” They are also
playing that one position the entire match, which should keep them in the flow.
o
If your #1 middle stinks it up, just sub her. If
your leftside hammer’s shoulder is hanging on by a thread, sub her. If anyone
in the back row is shanking balls, sub them.
·
There is one designated server. They serve every
serve. It could be anyone playing the backrow, but if that position gets subbed
out, it is still the player playing that position that serves.
·
Each team gets two timeouts each set, for 30
seconds. Minimizes stoppage time.
·
That’s it. All the other rules are the same.
Some downside is that the teams are much smaller because not
much playing time to be had. Which makes it unpopular in college, club, and
high schools. But we are living in Santiago world, so no one cares.
Now. I am awaiting with great antici-pation for counter
arguments, counter proposals, and alternatives.
What says you?
