Short characterization CHINA

 

PLAYERS

STARTING SIX - SUBSTITUTES

RANKING   2001-2011

1

XU Ruoya

WCH 2001

1

2

CHEN Jiao (C)

4

WANG Yunlu

WCH 2003

1

5

WANG Ning

7

TANG Ningya

WCH 2005

7

8

LI Weiwei

9

LIU Peiyi

WCH 2007

1

11

HUANG Liuyan (L)

15

ZHU Ting

WCH 2009

13

16

WU Bei

17

DUAN Fang

WCH 2011

2

18

YUAN Xinyue

 

General remarks

In the only match that the team lost against the host Turkey, in front of 7.000 spectators, the several times youth world champion had no chance and finally ranked 2nd (7 wins, one defeat, 21:6 sets). But nevertheless the young Chinese players presented extraordinary performances - with the exception of service reception. The variable attack play controlled by the play maker No. 16 (2nd in individual ranking) was very impressive and included all players on the court in a very effective manner.

 

Service               

CHN made us of a huge variety of service options. Five players served powerful standing floats from different positions which were directed to certain target areas according to the tactics chosen. Two of them served distance floats and three backline floats. All service actions were based on 2-3 run-up steps.

Three players served jump floats from back line positions (P1/6/5), one of them with single legged jump-off. No. 1, a very athletic player, completed the interesting service options with her jump spin power service.

The team of China only ranked 5th with a low rate of faults, but also with the lowest number of asses (54 / 7%). No 7 ranked 4th in individual ranking (serve direction hard to anticipate because of short, quick hitting movement).

 

Reception

The Chinese team only ranked 6th (40% exc. / 13 faults), with a performance level which was significantly lower than the new world champion (45%+ / 10% -). The team preferred the very open 3-player-formation with the players almost in one line in the middle of the back court. In case the diagonal player No. 9 was part of the reception formation (only 36% exc.), the reception formation, often, especially when receiving jump floats, was changed to the 2-player-formation. 30 % of all actions in the reception process were controlled by the very agile and flexible libero (in the individual ranking 4th 54% exc. / 8% faults). She often tried to support the reception player in position 1, which sometimes created problems as it not always happened in a well coordinated manner. Overhand reception was not applied. The quick attacker No. 7 and the diagonal player No. 9 were incorporated into the reception actions.

 

Set / Attack (Complex I and II)

Team rank 3 for the “Best Setters” and rank 2 in individual ranking for the setter  No 16  underline the very good level of performance in setting. The setter‘s actions were very agile and reliable. She could adapt her actions very well to the attack players on the court and varied her set velocity and height accordingly. With a well balanced distribution of the passes she reinforced the individually strong points of the attack players and did also immediately integrate new attack players into the attacks. All players performed under-arm sets very well. Among them the setter impressed a lot by her sensitive and precise actions even when running quickly. .  

Complex I: The attack play in C I is characterized by an affective combination of quick attacks from outside positions (pos. 4 and 2) and variable quick attacks in front of the setter in pos. 3.   The team has three attackers of comparable performance level (average height 188 cm), four quick attackers which perform on the same level (average height 189 cm) and one power attacker on the diagonal position (188 cm). All attackers on the outside position have the capacity to score with great action height and with powerful spikes (line as well as diagonal) as part of variable tactics. The middle block players were very often ready to become part of offensive actions – also on intermediate positions – and they spike quickly and with variable technique.

Complex II: Following successful defensive actions attacks on outside position 4 were dominating. In case of freeball situations the team strictly and successfully enters into 1st tempo attacks resp. Quick passes to the outside positions. The quick transfer to counter attacks was worth mentioning.

 

Block / Defense

CHN performed well in block and field defense, ranking 3rd in both elements. The players showed variable step arrangements close to the net. Based on position adaptation, timing and offensive blocking technique of the outside players together with the middle blocker effective group blocks became possible, in the míddle of the net sometimes as 3-players block. The successful individual blocks on all positions are worth mentioning. In this element the precise adaptation of the position and the blocking actions quick as a lightning (jump and active arm movement towards the ball) were impressive.

In field defense the team played with pos. 6 back position (starting position in the middle field) and back yard players on pos. 1/5 being responsible for the close coverage of the block. According to the match situation the basic system varied between 2:2:2 and 2:0:4. The libero (ranking 1st individually) played on pos. 5 and quickly approaches his block covering position forward/ forward inside (P4/P3) or to become part of field defense (P5/6). The group block on pos. 3 is covered by the free net player. In case of a 1-player-block a 3-player-formation with far forward outside players represented the defensive formation.