This is not a vent board or any other kind of therapy. Before you hit the POST button, ask yourself if your contribution will add to the level of discussion going on.

Important notes on articles:

• Please do not copy entire articles into your post; rather, provide links to them.. We are now links-only for ALL Internet publications. If only a small portion of the article pertains to your post, Fair Use allows you to copy those one or two paragraphs, provided you cite the author's name and the publication for which he writes. Otherwise, put a link in the HTTP Link box.
• Even if you're copying a reference to an article, provide a link to the page from which the article came. We're trying to cut down on duplicate topics, and the posting process will check the link to your article to see if it's already being discussed on this board. At the very least, you'll save yourself some grief on the boards.
• If your first reaction after reading the article you're going to share is the author is uninformed / stupid / a jerk / all of the above, it's not worth sharing with anyone. Not every article needs to be discussed. The more the hair-pulling articles are discussed (e.g. ESPN Page 2), the more the authors will write hair-pulling articles.

Post being replied to

Out of system: by SavageDragon

Basically, "not set up for optimal attacking play", akin to "behind schedule" or "behind the sticks" for a football offense, but with a bit more nuance. It typically refers to one of two things:

(1) the setter had to dig, so the player setting isn't the setter, which throws off court positioning (and also, of course, the other players are presumably not as good at setting as the setter is)

(2) the dig put the setter out of position or with an awkward ball so that she does not have all available options for her set -- that is, she cannot easily set for multiple different players, and thus the D can collapse on the one player that will obviously be attacking.