Comments on this article
|
fiasco
05-15-2004 1:53 pm
|
Report this post
|
lunatics
who is doing this?
Running in the way of Sohail's dragflick...That sounds like madness to me
|
|
Player
05-15-2004 4:47 pm
|
Report this post
|
New Rules
Hardly think that many players would actually run in the target direction of the shot to be intentionally hit and injured. New rule hardly makes enough sense to be enforced.
|
|
Errol D'Cruz
05-15-2004 5:03 pm
|
Report this post
|
|
Madness...maybe. But they did it. The Koreans...at Sydney 2000, the Olympic semi-finals. One of them went to hospital. But the team went to the final!
|
|
someone
05-15-2004 5:31 pm
|
Report this post
|
|
jugraj ran into sohails dragflick. toow like 3 of them in the same spot
|
|
Spicoli
05-15-2004 5:48 pm
|
Report this post
|
It is commonly done at the international level. The interpretation used to be:
- Below the knees, redo the PC
-Above the knees, dangerous and a 16yd hit.
Great tactic, if you don't care about injury.
|
|
YEN
05-15-2004 10:38 pm
|
Report this post
|
LETS TAKE PC
LETS TAKE PC WITH ONLY GOALKEEPER TO DEFEND. AND PS WITH OPEN GOAL NO ONE TO DEFEND.
THAT WILL BE MORE FAIR.
BY THE YEAR 2050 WE MAY HAVE NO GOALKEEPERS TO BE MORE FAIR.
KEEP IT UP
|
|
mili
05-15-2004 11:26 pm
|
Report this post
|
WHAT¿?
IT IS AN EXTRANGE DESITION, I UNDERSTAND YOUR OPINION ABOUT FAIR PLAY. HOWEVER, THIS DETERMINATION IS WORSE. ALL PENALTIES CORNERS WILL BE GOALS IF WE DON´T ALLOW TO THE MAIN RUNER DEFENDER BLOCK THE SHOOT. WITH THIS RULE, YOU MAKE THAT HOCKEY BECAMES IN A CORNER PENALTY PLAY.
|
|
wansbo
05-16-2004 1:17 am
|
Report this post
|
PC drag flick
In the olympic qualifier Belg Vs Pakistan the belgians wore masks and ran straight at sohail. Ihe Canadians did that also against Hayden Shaw in the final test vs the Kiwis in 2003 effectively blocking half the goal and leaving their goalie the other half.
This is a ridiculous rule and will require the Umpire to stand behind the net in order to ascertain whether a shot was run into or the poor @#$%! got hit by it. Hocket needs this rule like a hole in the head !
|
|
smiler
05-16-2004 1:59 am
|
Report this post
|
|
Yen you have scored! The rules committee needs to appreciate the fact the penalty corner, through new techniques (and equipment shapes!) has become too dominant in the game. One solution will be to increase the size of the circle. This would give the defenders, especially the GK more reaction time at PC's. Co-incidentally it would also make for more action shots on goal - this is what the spectators want. How much bigger? The Rules Committee will have to experiment - say start with 2 to 3 metres.
|
|
someone
05-16-2004 2:11 am
|
Report this post
|
yen
lol....i agree with you. its the persons fault for rushing. the koreans were smart and kept extra pads behind the goal so during a pc, they could put on the pads, rush, and not get AS injured as they would have without pads.
|
|
Teo Loh
05-16-2004 2:33 am
|
Report this post
|
Stupid rule change.
Instead of ensuring the drag flick is no more than the backboard height and thus render the game safe from such dangerous practice, the authorities resort to another stupid rule change. What is the criterion for determining dangerous play as after all the defenders must often rush the corner takers to prevent the strike at goal. After all the speed in which the some of the drag flicks are coming in, it is a matter of time when someone will be killed by such head high flicks.
Over to you the Hockey Rules Board. One flick of Sohail I witnessed at the Azlan Shah tournament in February hit the crossbar and rose nearly ten foot up into the air. Imagine that hitting a defender. I am sure his mother will not recognise him again.
|
|
Asghar Khan
05-16-2004 6:37 am
|
Report this post
|
Good Change !
I entirely agree that no player should deliberatetly act as human shield ,as amazingly no player as yet had received a fatal injury to the head of throat.
|
|
hockeyfan
05-16-2004 8:10 am
|
Report this post
|
hypocritical rules
this is anothe stupid rule that makes no sense. Like putting the cart before
the horse. The drag flick is a power tool in the hands of those teams playing european style hockey. Recently, the asian teams, including India and Korea have had some brave rushers who by putting themselves in the line of the ball, take away the advantage. Now the drag flickers can just have a open shot at goal.
The drag flick is in itself dangerous. It is hypocricy that anything about the knees in open play is considered dangerous, but the drag flick is not considered dangerous at all???? Anyone see the subtle manipulation of rules here??? Disgusting! Asian hockey playing nations, speak up....
And the reason for this is given as "fair play"? Yeah, right!
|
|
MOSkeete
05-16-2004 9:34 am
|
Report this post
|
New Rule for Penalty Corner
Too many rule changes too often. If we want to do something about the practice, penalize the infringement first time with a Penalty Stroke, you are only giving the defenders a second chance to repeat the foul.
|
|
hockey player
05-16-2004 10:09 am
|
Report this post
|
funny rule
Hockey is a team sport, and not allowing the 4 PC defenders to block the ball what is the point of having them?....the PC should probably to be replaced by having a direct shot free hit on top of the D to replace the PC. Another wonderful and smart effort made by the idiots of FIH. CONGRATULATIONS.
|
|
Peter D'Cruz
05-16-2004 11:16 am
|
Report this post
|
Use the precedent of the hit on the penalty corner
In the 1970s, the rule changed to restrict the direct hit on the penalty corner to backboard height because the hit at a height above the backboard was rightfully considered dangerous and the safety of the defenders was of genuine concern. Once the first hit was taken on goal, then any shot (hit or push) on goal during that PC were judged as if in open play.
This same approach should be used for the drag flick which is probably as powerful as a lot of the hits on goal during the 1970s. The FIH Rules board should take exactly the same approach if they are truly interested in safety. The first hit or drag flick shot on goal during a penalty corner should not count as a goal if it is above the backboard. Please note that a push shot (which is clearly different from the drag flick) has always been allowed at any height and this should remain so.
|
|
Hockey Fan
05-16-2004 11:19 am
|
Report this post
|
New Rule
I watched hockey for over 40 years, mostly international such as world cup, champions trophy etc. The reason why hockey can never be propular as soccer, tennis, golf, rugby, cricket... it's all because we keep on changing rules. This year that and next year another one comes. What's going on with FIH???? Are they promoting hockey or in such a way downgrading hockey!!! Come on FIH.. you people must do something and bring back you loyal fans to watch. Otherwise, hockey will be just an ordinary sports or social sports in a PE lesson!
|
|
mili
05-16-2004 12:34 pm
|
Report this post
|
...
in the next years maybe hability players won´t be allow to make magic with their stick!! goalkeepers won´t have pads because anyone will can shoot balls strongly..
|
|
mili
05-16-2004 12:36 pm
|
Report this post
|
all thing ridiculous!
the f.i.h cange the rules before 2 months for the olimpics!!! Teams have to prepare a new defence to the penalty corner in only 2 months!
|
|
Pierluigi Collina
05-16-2004 3:10 pm
|
Report this post
|
|
The new rule is just logical. Touching the ball intentionnally with your body is clearly a fault. Ofcourse it ain't gonna be easy for the refs to appreciate whether the player did it on purpose or not. The only ones who are ridiculous are just teams who try to counter dragflicks by getting their bodies on the way.
|
|
Perplexed
05-16-2004 5:29 pm
|
Report this post
|
|
This rule interpretation is utter nonsense. The umpire has no chance with this one.
|
|
down under
05-16-2004 6:15 pm
|
Report this post
|
It isn't that hard really - if you get hit then logically you ran at the ball since the path and eventual push out and the drag flick can clearly be seen. However it is contrary to the dangerous play rule that in the field you can run at a player about to drag flick as in overhead pass and it is considered dangerous - very interesting!!!! I think it should have been presented as a special rule to allow for more opportunities for goal scoring from PC's and that this will make the game more intersting. But will this mean that teams will now focus on getting into the "D" and working a short corner and forgeting about field goals!!!!!
Without doubt more research and trials needed to be carried out before introducing onto the international arena, has this rule been tried at first grade levels in all countries to acertain the impact on the game overall?????????
|
|
fiasco
05-16-2004 7:55 pm
|
Report this post
|
research
how about we all start wearing helmets or we can start researching the issue when someone is killed
|
|
wtf
05-16-2004 8:20 pm
|
Report this post
|
|
if players arent allowed to run straight at the players taking the hit then how else are we meant to stop the pc?.....if the player running does get hit then it is the players own fault but not if the ball played was at a dangerous height....why are so many rules keep changing and new ones added?
|
|
Silver Bullet
05-16-2004 10:15 pm
|
Report this post
|
It's about time
Why would anyone think it was acceptable to block a legitimate shot with their body during a PC when putting oneself in the way of a legitimately played ball anywhere else in the game results in a penalty or even a stroke?
It's pathetic when a PC is being taken to see players putting on masks etc and running into the shot. ( Almost as silly as having special sticks at the net for PCs or strokes. It's not golf). Any action the requires such equipment is obviously dangerous and should be penalised.
In Madrid a number of teams tried this tactic. Interestingly enough the teams usually adjusted their play to take advantage of the early commitment of suicide runners to score.
As far as the timing of the change, give me a break. We are talking about the best players in the world with the best coaches at the Olympics. If they couldn't make such adjustments to their game plans they wouldn't be there.
|
|
down under
05-16-2004 11:26 pm
|
Report this post
|
running straight
I hope you have played hockey "wtf" because if you had you would know that you never run straight at the ball hitter with your body. In fact you run slightly to the right of the hitter which is slightly to your left hence avoiding the ball hitting your body. However you should be using your hockey stick at your side which should be "hopefully" in direct line-of-fire....hence deflecting the shot wide or blocking the shot. Sometimes if you are unlucky you can in-fact deflect it into the top of the net - ooops....
|
|
Bemused
05-17-2004 1:00 am
|
Report this post
|
Bandaid option!!!
This rule is simple put rediuculous.....
Firstly for a start wouldn't it be the person that is flicking the ball at 100 plus km an hour that is creating the danger?? not the defenders that are trying to stop it yet the FIH say the defenders are not playing "in the spirit". What happens if the guy outside the left post on a 3-1 defensive variation is hit in the head from a stray flick, is it his fault for it being dangerous!!!
Secondly, if you look at all teams attacking corners they are now changing where they trap the ball to counter different defenses, so how is a runner out suppose to anticipate where the trap is made if a team moves there trap 2 meters to the right and therefore puts the runner in the direct line???
Thirdly what is the difference between running down a flick and running down a shot on goal or a pass in normal play??? you are never trying to use your body, at the end of the day every defender would love to get it off the middle of their stick!!! but yet just because its a PC its different, and sadly it seems its just because the FIH want to creat 8-6 score lines!!! very sad.
Thirdly, its very interesting to know how a rule as influential as it is can be passed so quickly, and so close to the olympics (the biggest tournament in hockey) when the rules board has been disbaneded and therefore voted for it via e-mail without it being discussed or trialed properly!! It hasn't even been trialed in and international tournamnet and yet they can implement it for the olympics!!!
and finally has anyone had a close look at the wording of the rule.... if a defender is caught making the offense for a second time after being cautioned there is CONSIDERATION given for a card or penalty stroke. How undefined can you get, in the gold medal match of the olympics its going to be possible for an umpire at one end to give a penalty stroke and a crutial goal while the other may just send the player off for five minutes!!!
well at least we know one thing now, the dutch and Pakistani teams have jusat been given the biggest advantage ever!!
|
|
N
05-17-2004 2:43 am
|
Report this post
|
|
It should be quite an easy ruke to enforce as the 2nd umpire should have a perfect head on view of the defensive runner. Personally I think it is a fair rule to have, its protecting those in a fragile mental state from themselves. I do agree though that the PC is too dominant in the current game which shows a good adaptation to the rules by the attacking team but not by the defensive (stopping the ball outside the D, stopping the ball above shoulder height etc). Maybe the numbers should be evened out or maybe the ball should travel further from the D.
|
|
Anthony Tabone
05-17-2004 3:48 am
|
Report this post
|
PC
In my opinion dragflicks should be kept at backboard height and that only for me is considered as fair play. Forget for a moment the "suicidal" rushers out; what happens if defenders are standing close to the goalkeeper barely 7 metres away from the dragflicker and are hit or make evasive movements to avoid being hit? What then?? As some of the above contributers have expressed make away with defenders and leave an open goal with maybe, just the goalkeeper or as also has been suggested transform a PC into a stroke, in whatever style, to be taken from the top of the D. That is my good fellows at FIH is what I call Fair Play.
|
|
Aalam
05-17-2004 5:44 am
|
Report this post
|
That happened
That has happend many a times e.g in the semi-final a korean defender ran into the line of sohail's flicks on more than one occasion and finally dislocated hsi knee with a powerful flick from sohail.
Thats a good move from FIH
|
|
Hockey no hoper
05-17-2004 6:29 am
|
Report this post
|
Ridiculous
Being brave is a skill just like being able to execute the basics of passing etc.
This rule will probably lead to even more dangerous play than at present on penalty corners. I can imagine some PC takers just lining up the first runner regardless of his positioning - knowing that it will result in another penalty corner.
For umpires this will be a nightmare - who is going to be accountable for anyone getting seriously injured from a dragflick when the ball is deliberately flicked at the runner - after all it will be another penalty corner.
The present rule was ok in that it meant that the runner had to be quick - ie get within 5 yds of the flicker to be 'safe.'
|
|
Scot
05-17-2004 6:31 am
|
Report this post
|
Gotta agree with down under as a coach I get furious with my team if they run straight at the ball as all it does is gets them injured and blocks the keepers view. I can't imagine the team talk where the coach points to his first runner and instructs him to charge straight into the ball, the words OFF and FCUK must have been used on more than one occassion!!!! The runner should run so that his body is out of the line of the ball preventing injury and obstructing the goalies view. His stick should be held in the right hand about 1/4 of the way down to give good strength to avoid those embarassing deflections.
I also kinda agree with earlier comments about first shot being backboard height drag flicks are getting very fast and hard to defend but then you will see less goals from PC as goalies can just lie down with defenders sweeping the pads. Sadly it will need someone to be badly injured at the olympics for that to change
|
|
The Desolate One
05-17-2004 6:51 am
|
Report this post
|
running straight
Well said 'Down Under'!!!
I have played hockey for years and concur with your description on how to block a penalty corner shot/ drag-flick. As a player running no.1, if you cannot get to the hitter/ flicker before they 'off' their shot then you simply get out of the way.
|
|
Rich
05-17-2004 7:41 am
|
Report this post
|
Asgar Khan
Someone did take serious blow to the throat. Craig Parnham of England and GB took a Sohail shot in the throat and nearly died on the pitch, saved only by slicing his throat open so he could breath out of his neck. His throat was smashed to pieces. It is not up to me to make the rules, but I think the height of the backboard should count for hitting or flicking. I know that sounds boring, but I dont really want to see any deaths - its just a game. players like Sohail, Lomans, Dave Matthews and Jugraj Singh can flick a ball as hard as anyone can hit it, so it just seems stupid to me
|
|
bob
05-17-2004 9:02 am
|
Report this post
|
down under & hockey fan
Down under - your answer to wtf is not correct. In international and even top league hockey it is pretty common practice for the first runner to block the shot to the goalkeepers left side. It has been a standard part of the defence in the last few years. It is not much fun if you are runner but tough. I can understand the teams that have started wearing masks when running out. Having been that person against top flickers I would also have liked to have had a mask.... and a lot of pads
really goThe idea of stopping the top flickers by dangling your stick somewhere in the direction of the flick is a joke and most keepers i know that play seriously say either block it by being close enough to make a proper challenge or keep your stick out of the way. The reasoning being that the deflected ball is the worst one to try and stop.
to hockey fan - "asian hockey playing nations speak up" pakistan maybe? who will say thank you very much FIH. This is a rule that will benefit pakistan as much if not more than the european teams. it is not anti asian.
|
|
b
05-17-2004 10:00 am
|
Report this post
|
Players wearing masks?
What's this about players wearing masks? I thought that was supposed to endanger other players.
|
|
The Desolate One
05-17-2004 10:49 am
|
Report this post
|
Rich
Let's get our facts right first of all.
Craig did not take a Sohail Abbas shot to the throat, it was Sohail's stick that caused the damage - on the follow through!
|
|
z
05-17-2004 10:52 am
|
Report this post
|
Spirit of the game
How many of us, in the old days before drag-flicking (but not the really old days when you could hit the ball anywhere in the goal) would joke during penalty corner practice when the striker accidentally under-cut a ball "That got the first runner", or "At least that will slow him/her down the next time"?
Did anyone ever use this as a "tactic"? Is it in the spirit of the game?
As hockey no hoper pointed out what is there to stop a drag-flicker shooting at a runner, knowing they will get another corner and that if they do it repeatedly that they will get a penalty stroke? Is that in the spirit of the game?
N thinks "It should be quite an easy ruke (sic) to enforce as the 2nd umpire should have a perfect head on view of the defensive runner" - where would you have the umpire stand? Even if the umpire stands in the middle on the 25 you have a runner running at an angle (so the goalie can see something) and a drag-flicker who is typically moving the ball from left to right between the stop and the release point - do you want to penalise a defender for standing (or running) "too close" to the drag-flicker? How close is "too close"? Is the runner "too close" if they get hit? If getting hit is to be part of the determination of a foul (or is trying to get hit by the ball and failing also to be punishable), how can the umpires decide whether the drag-flicker is shooting at goal or at the runner? This will only be clear if the drag-flicker is shooting at the corner flag.
There is no reason to change anything here [except the thing that wansbo mentioned about players wearing masks which is absolutely ridiculous] - the drag-flickers are fine, what they are doing is executing something with skill. If some brave soul wants to run at them that's ok too. If the drag-flicker finds that their shots are getting blocked (whether with the stick or body of a defender) they need to make adjustments.
As suggested above, by many people, if FIH is concerned about safety they need to consider restricting drag-flicks to backboard height. I am not suggesting or condoning this but it is logical and consistent with the previous rule change regarding hits at penalty corners.
Again if FIH is concerned with safety why does it allow goalies to play without arm protection? A drag-flick or any hit could do considerable damage to an exposed elbow.
Let drag-flickers flick and defenders defend, both have a pretty difficult time of it as it is.
|
|
For the love of the game
05-18-2004 3:58 am
|
Report this post
|
Get real FIH
If you read the FIH letter you will see that they state that the game will be in the public eye during the Olympics and that they do not want to see people deliberately running the corner down. If so they have said umpires will be instructed to give out cards and even a penalty stroke for persistent infringement. With this the case do you not think that this will result in groups of players surrounding the umpires demanding yellow cards and penalty strokes? This will not look good to the public at all. There is too much surrounding of the umpire by certain teams. The same ones who deliberatly delay the game, whilst under pressure, by getting their goalkeepers to remove their gear. All of these things add extra pressure to the umpires which is unnecessary. Why add even more pressure on the umpires at the most pressurised moment of the game. Get real FIH and thing before you speak.......I am picking that the umpires will generally ignore the directive or the game will become even worse in terms of umpire intimidation !!
|
|
This is very Correct
05-18-2004 7:36 am
|
Report this post
|
Correct
Absolutly a must. Go ahead FIH. This is the best you can do. Prevent these people from killing themselves. But to help them also I would like to ask you to do the following; Do not accept any longer the special hockeysticks. Say no to the SUPERBOW and SUPERSUPERBOW sticks. Let the best penalty corner takers in the world come forward again and make it interesting on the pitch by equalizing the attack and defending power of both teams.
Three cheers!!!
Leve the Gronninger Studs
|
|
Al Mattei
05-18-2004 11:59 am
|
Report this post
|
I have a not-so-humble opinion on this.
I have always felt that the corner flyer is the most difficult position in sports -- more than an ice hockey goalie, more than a hill-climbing "domestique" on a bicycle racing team, more than the quarterback of a football team.
Now, they are going to regulate corner flying? Odd.
I'd rather see them either ban the drag flick or get rid of the penalty corner altogether and apply the "rink hockey" rule from India. No PCs, just a free hit from the 25. If the defense commits three consecutive PC offenses, a stroke is awarded (sort of like the way water polo does with its power play system).
How about it, FIH? Bring the flyer back into the game. (You all could also make long-grain artificial grass your official worldwide surface and accomplish that end, too.)
|
|
Bemused
05-19-2004 12:47 am
|
Report this post
|
I love reading all these people that think the person running out is mentally impaired or a child playing under 12's hockey on the grass out the back...
These players which this rule will concern most are the cream of the crop players from around the world that dedicate their enetire lives for one thing, winning a glold medal at the olympics.
So when a coach asks them to be the first runner they do that to the best of their abbility for the team AND YES coaches do ask runners to run the barrell to stop teams having a PC addvantage. Almost every nation in the world does it now!!!. And the thing that most of you writers don't understand is the first runner when they run at the flicker are NOT running to GET HIT. they are running on a certain angle to block a certain side of the goal to make the flicker flick to the open side of the net. So AGAIN it is the flicker that more often than not is flicking into the runner who is blocking a side of the net!! Therefore the flicker is deliberately flicking at the runner to get themselves another corner. WAKE UP FIH!!
|
|
Auramist
05-19-2004 1:01 am
|
Report this post
|
Penalty Corner Interpretation
The fact that a player runs into the line of a shot is not the question, if the player does so with their stick on the ground (or close to) the defender should not be panalised. However if the defenders run staight at the shooter with their sticks clearly not in a playing position, why is this to be tolerated. This is the ultimate in Professional fouls and should be dealt with accordingly. Lets face it as soon as a rule or interpretation is brought in someone somewhere will find a way to circumnavigate it. Rules and interpretations change, players intentions do not.
|
|
ztar
05-22-2004 5:58 pm
|
Report this post
|
what about the keeper?
Why not use the keeper to run at the shooter? No fear of injury and no fear of being in violation of the rules. This may be simplistic, but perhaps tactics have to be found which bring the keeper forward to take the brunt of these dangerous shots. Now you have the facemask, the extra padding, and play within the rules of the game: all the things mentioned by others above.
|
|
Inderpal Sehmbi
05-23-2004 12:33 am
|
Report this post
|
The Spirit of the Game
I understand the concern for danger and the risk involved with running your first runner in the line of the striker/flicker. There is a greater chance of injury. But now that the runner is not allowed to run in the line of the ball and will be penalised if struck by the ball there would be greater risk of injury.
For Example:
What if on the PC of the game Sohail Abbas realises that Dhanray Pillay is getting out to the battery quickly and blocking shots.....what is stopping Abbas from flicking at Pillay to injure him??? A hard flick into the body. Dhanraj now is not even protected against that type pf play, leaves him self to be exposed to injury and does not even get possesion of the ball???
Although injuring players is not in the spirit of game, this would/could be just another element of intimidation.
I think they should allow the first runner to run directly in the line of the flicker, I would run straight at a dragflicker if it meant winning a tournament or getting my team into winning a medal tournament.
Just my thought
|
|
Dave
05-23-2004 5:31 am
|
Report this post
|
I agree totally with Inderpal Sehmbi's example, the drag flicker is just going to aim at the runner.
If he misses the runner, its a goal bound shot, if it hits him, thats one less defender to worry about and in all likelyhood another PC or a PF.
Where is the "Fair Play" in that?
The umpires cant read the flickers mind and cant prove that it was a deliberate act, yet are expected to read the defenders mind and assume that if they are hit with a shot that they intentionally placed themselves in the path of it.
|
|
bruce
05-24-2004 1:35 am
|
Report this post
|
|
If a striker/flicker aims for the runner, with the sole intention of hitting that player. Then surely the runner should get the free hit as it is a lifted ball into the player, and not a ahot on goal.
|
|
Polak of Polo
05-24-2004 2:45 pm
|
Report this post
|
change the PC
Put one player at the top of the circle who can shoot the ball at the goal; the goal keeper stays on his goal line;all other players stay beyond 25 yards and run to play rebond or defend. Everybody start after referee had whistled!
big show, no injury risk,
tested approved and enjoyed by all players since many years at Le Touquet Tournament (France)
|
|
ztar
05-24-2004 10:59 pm
|
Report this post
|
change the PC
Polak of Polo: what, approx, is the conversion rate of this pc at the touquet tourney?
this certainly sounds like an alternative unless the conversion rate is too high (ie if goals come too easily)
|
|
Al Mattei
05-25-2004 8:26 am
|
Report this post
|
Ztar -- not a bad idea
In indoor, the goalie is the flyer. But in outdoor, too many GKs take the position of "logger." It would make it a heck of a lot more exciting. Heck, why not have the PC with the four field players behind the goal line, and the goalkeeper with one foot on the penalty spot (a seven-yard head start on the flyer)?
|
|
Goalie
05-25-2004 11:10 am
|
Report this post
|
Ask Simon Mason whathappens when the keeper is the flyer!
As a keeper the drag flick is the best challange in the game, sure you won't save all of them but noone's perfect. Personally I prefer the defenders to force the first time drag by preventing switches and taking my chances at stopping the drag, granted I don't face the power of Sohail but then I'm not a top class keeper who gets paid to stop these shots, can study videos of Sohail's hand positions, foot action or other tells he may have.
The rule that needs to be changed is to get rid of these super bow sticks and have umpires enforce the manufactured foul rule. A lot of PC are awarded by attackers deliberately drawing the foul similar to a soccer player diving, get rid of this practise and encourage more open exciting play. For those who think that a player like Sohail would deliberately go out to strike a flyer is doiing him a great disservice and act to encourage teams to return the compliment and deliberately injure him before he can let fly at PC.
Finally as my first coach used to say "the best defence to a PC is not to give them away in the first place"
|
|
Wansbo
05-25-2004 11:55 am
|
Report this post
|
New PC rule
Field Hockey is one pf the hardest games in the World to officiate with many rules and constant whistles. The Womens World Cup in Perth 2 years ago was analysed by Don Prior ? of Australia for correct Umpiring decisions and upon review discovered that 50% of decisions made were wrong !
If this is the best we can do at an elite level how on earth can we now bring an element of "intent " or "imputed intent " into the game. We are in effect asking Umpires to be mind readers !
As a flyer I am trying to get out as fast as I can to get a stick or even shin pads in the way of a shot..I am also running as fast as I can so are unlikely to be able to get out of the way of a ball to my mid riff.
This rule effectively says to all drag flickers .. drill the flyer anywhere you like ..sell the case to the Umpire ( you have a 50% chance of being right) and do it again on the next corner and we'll get a stroke.
There have been many posts about the clean intent of international Hockey players ..dont you bet on it . I have met Spanish, German, Dutch, Indian and Australian PC Hitters who would waste a couple of high shots just to intimidate flyers and fullbacks.
This new rule is open season on flyers and will result in way more serious injuries than we've seen before. Before long all hockey players will wear Lacrosse helmets.
Where do we keep findings these idiots who want to ruin our game.
|
|
T.K
05-25-2004 5:06 pm
|
Report this post
|
Rule Change
Many here could be making valid points. Trouble is there has been no period of time to experiment. This may not be a bad thing; changing it just before an Olympics. We should know by the end of August; then it should be reviewed.
The most obvious point made here is that the circle is too small;otherwise the game wouldn't come down to having to create so many corners in the first place. I'd say expand the "D" by 3 meters,at least, and for a year's experiment and see what the results are.
The other benefit would be helping keep goalies in the game. The way it is now, most goalies fall asleep due to a lack of action........it's boring! This would hopefully open things up and create more shots from open play.
|
|
ME
05-25-2004 5:46 pm
|
Report this post
|
Sorry but the above is not true at all.
We have been at the seminar for international umpiring. We have seen the stats but where never in any way in the consideration that more than half the decisions where wrong.
|
|
Mazon
05-26-2004 3:43 am
|
Report this post
|
Is hockey exciting anymore?
Hockey has changed so much over the years that the modern game played on astro turf is a completely different game to that played on grass. Not so long ago, scoring outfield goals were as important if not more so than pcs. The game has seen some truly outstanding individual talent. It was almost always a battle of styles between those adopting the attacking Asian style and those of the defensive European styles. Today, the game is very much won on the strength of the defence, fitness and ability to convert penalty corners!
The outstanding players then were players with truly amazing skills. You go to watch a game of hockey and come away fully entertained. Today, most teams adopt a very defensive strategy and packed their defence and midfield, and always playing to win pcs. If you haven't got a good drag flicker, then you are doomed. The game is very boring as it stands now. The general pattern of play is to string together passes upon passes patiently between defence and midfield with the occasional upfield hopeful punt. No wonder there is hardly any difference in standard between say a team ranked 10 to 25.
Even Pakistan's superstar now plys his trade with his ability to score amazing goals from drag flicks, but otherwise he is just an average player.
As far as the furore over the new pc rule goes, the logical thing to do would be to restrick the first strike (either hit or drag flick) to the height of the backboard. Anyone who saw Sohail's drag flick (live and not on tv) will tell you his drag flick is more dangerous than a direct hit. As fas as the runner running out and putting their body on the line, this practice should be outlawed and the runner penalised. It's a professional foul and very unsporting.
Hockey is heading nowhere due to poor leadership from FIH. So long as teams can devise and implement tactics to win games on pcs, it will remain boring. Its like winning a soccer game on free kicks instead of field goals, or rugby on penalty kicks instead of tries.
|
|
Al Mattei
05-26-2004 8:15 am
|
Report this post
|
Or, Gaelic football with one-point strikes over the bar.
____________________________
Mazon, just wondering: what do you think would happen to the international game if it were played on artificial grass (i.e., NexTurf)? Would that bring India, Pakistan, and the United States back into the "world mix?"
|
|
Referee in Canada
05-26-2004 11:16 am
|
Report this post
|
New PC Rule
If the intent is to encourage more PC goals and avoid injuries, change the PC to a stroke but from top of the circle. Allow, drag flick, push, hit whatever. You may get more goals and no injuries.
The new rule will be very difficult to judge to be of any impact.
|
|
Coach T
05-26-2004 12:05 pm
|
Report this post
|
Give the Defence a Chance
Anyone who has played indoor knows the pointlessness of standing on the line or running out at penalty corners. You can't see the ball and making a block at head height is a matter of luck rather than skill.
With the advent of technology, the outdoor drag-flick has become far more like the indoor experience. I coach senior and junior teams and have been amazed at the ability of some of my 16 year olds to drag-flick the ball from the edge of the D. At a junior level, this is very dangerous for the players on the line who may not be expecting the ball to fly at their head.
The answer is to force the first strike at goal to be 18 inches or below. Firstly for safety concerns but secondly because it gives the defence the feeling that they have a chance to make a block and would encourage them to avoid running down the line of the shot. It would also increase the percentage of short corners scored as the wide flicks that come at knee height are far easier to deflect in.
Until this is changed, I will continue to allow senior players who are brave enough to run down the line. At the highest level, defending penalty corners is no longer about skill, it is luck.
|
|
savanghi
05-26-2004 1:49 pm
|
Report this post
|
re: rules being changed constantly
Why not keep the rules for field play the same as they exist now? As for penalty corners, why not do away with both the drag flick and the penalty corner hit? Replace them with a corner as in football except that in this case there will be 6 or 7 forwards facing 3 defenders inside the defending team's 25 yard line. This penalty corner play will continue till the ball is cleared from within the defending team's 25 yard line or the ball crosses the defending team's goal line. In case of an infringement by the defending team during the penalty corner play, an indirect penalty will be awarded to the attacking team from the top of the circle. For this penalty, the attacking team will have 3 forwards against 1 defender and the goalkeeper of the defensive team. In case of infringement by the defending team during this play, a penalty stroke will be awarded. Otherwise, this play will stop if the ball is cleared from the 25 yard line of the defending team or if the ball crosses the goal line of the defending team. We may see better skills exhibited by the players from various teams. Also, we would like to see the return of natural grass or the introduction of NexTurf. Then Hockey will become a more attractive and a more skilled game. It is thoroughly unsportsmanlike that teams with bigger players, such as Australia, Holland, Germany and other European descent teams will have advantages over teams such as India and Pakistan because of their inherent physical attributes.
We cannot either permit or accept that because people are born with certain characteristics they will be further helped with turfs such as astro-turf, i.e., physically imposing people using their better height and build to overpower smaller but more stylish players on unnatural fields such as astro-turf. Teams such as Australia, Holland and Germany will do well on natural grass given the fact that they are physically outstanding, but teams like India and Pakistan will have difficulty on astro-turf given the fact that most of their players are not physically as well equipped as the current super powers, and also because much of their talent pool do not have access to astro-turf. We have to keep it in mind that on astro-turf the ball movement is vastly different. The ball moves exceedingly fast on astro-turf. People who are not accustomed to playing on astro-turf or on any other speedy unnatural turf will find it difficult to do the basics of the game right, such as trapping, flicking, passing, dribbling, dodging since stamina, reflex and speed requirements also go up dramatically on astro-turf. Let sanity return to all the hockey playing nations, and also to the FIH, and let us put an end to these constant rule changes.
|
|
savanghi
05-26-2004 2:12 pm
|
Report this post
|
re: playing turf
Grass is the true turf for all sports. All the great sports are played on grass, i.e., football (soccer), cricket, rugby, polo, et al. If the world's greatest sport, which is football, is played on grass, why not its cousin, field hockey? Sports should be for enjoyment and fun, not about what kind of hunkish outputs expensive modern gyms can produce to ply their trade on unnatural turfs.
|
|
Berns
05-27-2004 1:51 am
|
Report this post
|
Rule changes.
Rule changes are a good thing. But ever hear of too much of a good thing can be bad for you! Hockey is still a growing sport that is fast expanding across the world and at thiss time we need stability in the game. When you play hockey long enough your team becomes like family and I would do anything for my family. Even if it mean getting in the wayof the ball to win the game. But I have to admit they have a point. The people making the dessicions love hockey as much as we do. And if they do make a choice we have to accept it. It is for the good of the game.
|
|
Duke
05-27-2004 2:55 am
|
Report this post
|
|
How can the referee ever determine when a player intentionally runs into the line of the shot or simply finds himself there? I think this rule will lead to more (unnecessary) discussion on the pitch. Why can the FIH think of rules that don't allow for discussion...
|
|
david
05-27-2004 3:19 am
|
Report this post
|
|
NO WAY!!!!! Having played on grass for two years at schoolboy level and then on to astro i find it superb to play on, as for people that say it isnt exciting i say WHATEVER!! hockey is one of the best games to watch because of its SPEED. you start playing on grass again and there goes the speed!!!!!!! and a lot of young players!!!!
|
|
x
05-27-2004 9:20 am
|
Report this post
|
|
i agree with david-having grown up playing on gravel and then astro i played my first ever match on grass this year-it made even good players seem incompetent and these were players who had grown up playing on grass! keep astro!
|
|
mack dad
05-28-2004 6:05 am
|
Report this post
|
|
what!!! that is one of if not the most stupid ideas i have ever heard of making grass the turf again. david put it well the whole attraction of hockey is the speed. the way you can battle in defence then break up the field and score a goal on the counter attack. if they do change it back to grass i myself shall not be followin!!!!
|
|
Funkmaster Flex
05-28-2004 10:45 am
|
Report this post
|
mack daddy, yo
I don't think the discussion is about real grass. More like NexTurf -- long-pile artificial grass, which slows the ball down but is not as unpredictable as real grass.
|
|
Neal Feigin
05-28-2004 5:00 pm
|
Report this post
|
New shorty rule.
If the ball hits the defending players body on route to a diffinate goal,anyway it shold be blown as a p-flick.
|
|
Wheres Wal!
06-02-2004 4:07 am
|
Report this post
|
New PC Interpretation
If this interpretation is to make the game more "Fair" is the FIH going to change the line in the rules book that says "Umpires are the SOLE judges of FAIR play?" What a joke guys!
With all this controversy about the drag flick - why not just get rid of it. After all they FIH got rid of the last "spectacular" hit - the undercut. It too was dangerous just like the drag flick.
Does the FIH rules panel have rocks in their head!!!
|
|
Cecilia G.Martinez (LLN12)
06-09-2004 3:30 pm
|
Report this post
|
Not necessary
It was unnecessary to change that rule because I don't think that the rules of the game should be changed, they were just fine before this.
|
|
Hockey Fan
06-25-2004 3:26 am
|
Report this post
|
New Pc Rule
One of the reasons FIH were forced to introduce this is for the legalities of it.
There are a few teams who run down the line of the flicker without making any attempt to play the ball, their stick is actually to the side of there body not where the ball would possibly be. They are simply allowing themselves to be hit by the ball.
The FIH Umpires coaches have Video evidence of this going back to the Champions Trophy in Holland last year.
If someone running down the line of the ball gets hit and ends up with serious head injuries and FIH have not put any documentation out that says it is illegal - then FIH can be held liable for it.
I understand that the umpires are concerned about it aswell as it will be something else they will have to interepret in the heart of competition.
I guess FIH feel that the legalities really outweigh having to change a rule ?
|
|
bert - indoor league chairman
07-13-2004 9:32 am
|
Report this post
|
indoor short corner
I notice repeatedly these days that when a short corner is pushed out it is stopped or controlled outside the D and then a flick at goal taken. Surely if the ball leaves the stick before entering the D then it would not be a goal if it en | |
x80
