Comments on this article
|
Kl Bart
12-08-2002 11:27 pm
|
Report this post
|
Rule change
As an umpire and coach life will certainly be made easier for the umpires by removing the stipulation of stopping the ball before the first shot is taken, while not removing the uniqueness of field hockey penalty corners. The benefit is now to the attacking team and particularly at the lower levels of the game where the skill required to consistently stop the ball consistently and cleanly may not always be present. The use of the stick above the shoulder in saving a shot at goal is only fair, providing the safety element is maintained. Is this rule going to be applied at Indoor tournament as well? Indoor World Cup in Germany springs to mind
|
|
Munster Umpire
12-09-2002 9:25 am
|
Report this post
|
Thanks For Keep It Simple FIH
Well done to the Hockey Rules Board for simplifying the two existing rules instead of coming up with new rules.
This is a step in the right direction and for once it has a positive spin off for the umpire.
Now, simplify a few more and who knows you may find more people wanting to umpire and find out that they enjoy umpiring.
|
|
SYED GHAZANFAR ALI
12-09-2002 9:28 am
|
Report this post
|
Good Rules
penalty corner rule , the defender which will stand in the Goal post has a chance to show his techniques without hasitation. And for ball stopping rule is difficult for defender during dash.
|
|
Gimp
12-09-2002 10:03 am
|
Report this post
|
I thought the idea was to make the game simplier to understand, but this rule change allowing defenders to lift sticks above shoulder height for shots at goal only further complicates matters. It is completely at odds with the rules regarding every other area of the pitch and will leave those who we are trying to attract to watch the game ie new spectators completely confused as to the lack of coherent logic behind the rules. The addition of the 'is done safely' element to the defenders actions only further complicates the situation by leaving alot of discretion with the umpires in a situation where their discretion is tested already as to whether any lifted shot at the goal with a defender in the way is dangerous anyway? Does this rule apply only to defenders standing on the goal line, or could it not be argued that a defender standing towards the top of the circle will be saving a shot?
These constant rule changes only serve to complicate matters further and do not help in the retention of any new spectators who are not necessarily avid players themselves. Surely these FIH officals should leave the game they profess to love so much alone and would be better spending their time working on strategies to promote grass roots hockey across the world and assist television companies in getting some form of highlights package sorted out instead of wasting time further confusing the tv audience already too confused by the excess of rules to watch in the first place!
|
|
A
12-09-2002 11:33 am
|
Report this post
|
Gimp
Constant rule changes?? This is a positive move that the majority of players have been crying out for and will applaud. It is not complicated but very simple and will make hockey more entertaining for spectators as it will simplify the short corner. I think your mask is on too tight or maybe its the suit!
|
|
rmi
12-09-2002 1:58 pm
|
Report this post
|
questions
If the defender stop the ball over their shoulders, can the attackers shot the ball over their shoulders to make a goal???
The defender can only stop the ball or they can shot the ball over their shoulders??
If the umpire decision is that the defender has played in dangerous way, a peanlty stroke has to be given or just a short corner???
|
|
Al Mattei
12-09-2002 3:37 pm
|
Report this post
|
Will Rule 2 take the corner flyer out of play?
I can see touch passes and trick plays out the gazoo if you don't have to stop, or even control, the insertion pass. I see corner defense teams playing zone defense. And hoping.
I wonder if this rule was aimed at the United States, which allows dead stops (NCAA) and controlling the ball (NFHS) inside of the circle. Methinks the Federation and the USFHA have taken notice.
|
|
fdhkydemon
12-09-2002 4:18 pm
|
Report this post
|
I hope that rule won't take out the Flyer...it's one of the coolest postions unique to hockey...hahaha...that and the stickstop! guess those will disappear:(
Maybe it's just me, but I thought the Flyer and StickStopper were two positions that merited great skill and while corners are an attacking advantage, these positions gave the corner less of an advantage to the attack...which made for an interesting fight between defense and offense and in turn, the game more interesting to watch. Now that I think about it, does this mean that the "double assist" will be taken away from corners? With this rule, By making corners less difficult, from an attacking standpoint, will mean that less technical skill and execution will be necessary in order to score a goal...I think this takes away from the one of the most technically challenging aspects of hockey (coaching and then executing corner plays)...because teams won't have to worry about stopping the ball dead, and hence, if they don't stop it dead, screwing up the execution of the planned corner play...when i first read the rule I thought it was great because it gives a better scoring opportuinity off a corner, but now I think that the rule takes away some of the technical challenge and beauty from the game.
|
|
G
12-09-2002 4:47 pm
|
Report this post
|
not so good
I'm not sure that we're moving away from hockey and more towards hurling with these rule changes... the danger aspect can't be discussed enough. While there will be plenty of control from the players and umpires at the higher levels, at the developmental levels, where the umpiring and coaching are just whomever turns up to help, we may as well pass out helmets for protection... I hope that there is some wising up and move back to the technical challenges and beauty that fdhkydemon speaks of... and unfortunately, the NFHS that all speaks about put the rule in b/c they know that the coaching isn't there to teach the stopping skill. from the danger aspect... let's hope that these are short lived... especially when the defender on the goal line winds up to have a go at something coming at him or her.
|
|
fdhkydemon
12-09-2002 9:40 pm
|
Report this post
|
Rule change #1
less penalty strokes now...hardly any will be awarded...but crazy defense is fun too! and there will be a lot less arguements with the umpires...but it's too bad that I feel that this rule change sunk down to the level of bad officiating...because if strokes were called when they were supposed to and not called when they weren't supposed to, then you wouldn't have this rule change...
|
|
Deon
12-09-2002 9:51 pm
|
Report this post
|
Danger Intpretation
We generally look at, and it has been blown mostly as such in South Africa - if the ball strikes the 1st wave above the knee within 5 meters from the drag flick, it is considered dangerous and a free hit is awarded against the flicker - a distance past the 5 meters is generally considered safe, but must still be looked at for danger.
Possibly the "rule of thumb" intrepretation for danger should then be:
a. Drag Flick striking the opposition above the knee within 5 meters from the drag - free hit against the flicker.
b. A vertical / horizontal stick stop by a defender is acceptable, a horizontal / crossbat swing at the ball by the defender - re-award of PC. i.e The defender can only stop or deflect the ball when making a save, but may not hit it away.
Any comments?
|
|
Stick
12-09-2002 10:54 pm
|
Report this post
|
Goal-line saves
This rule seems to put the onus of safety on the defender, instead of the attacker.
Does this rule change make ANY sort of shot at goal allowable?
Comments, anyone?
|
|
Tom Harris
12-10-2002 12:36 am
|
Report this post
|
Hockey for Children
For those of us who would like to promote hockey for the younger players, it has been difficult to teach eight year olds how to stop the ball on artificial turf on a corner. For those who are playing on grass it must be impossible.
|
|
Innovator
12-10-2002 12:00 pm
|
Report this post
|
rule change
now lets modify the scoring system, 1 point for a penalty corner, two popints for a field goal.
|
|
fdhkydemon
12-10-2002 4:47 pm
|
Report this post
|
|
that's why high school rules don't really allow for the ball to be stopped dead, just controlled...while, it's still hard to teach kids corners, every sport has elements that are difficult to learn; and with age, and hence, greater cognitive abilities, children will understand corners better...part of what makes field hockey so great is the fact that as new player can't just "learn" the rules..it takes time...if field hockey was so easy that 3yr olds could understand all the rules....well, i think it would be a boring game...but yes, Tom, I agree with you in that 8yr olds cannot be expected to stick stop, let alone, stop a ball dead...so this rule helps them out:)
|
|
East
12-10-2002 7:04 pm
|
Report this post
|
What if the defender's stop is "Dangerous"?
Will it be a stroke or a corner? Any possible ideas?
|
|
petey p.
12-10-2002 9:49 pm
|
Report this post
|
re: stick
regarding stick's comment on goal line saves, my understanding is that the onus of safety has been on the goal line defender for some time, in terms of their placement. the interpretation is that they have volunteered to stand in a location of considerable inherent risk. the flicker is not responsible for them. i do not see the new rules as altering this. in regards to G's comments about the danger of the goal line defender batting the ball away, this seems like an easy call. it is not legal to smash the ball into a crowd, whether you are smashing it toward the goal or away from it. also, as a practical concern, it is easier to stop a ball by letting it come to you, rather than by swinging at it. so i don't foresee many (smart) defenders on the line swinging at oncoming balls.
i think these two changes will be for the best.
|
|
Marto
12-10-2002 10:12 pm
|
Report this post
|
RE: What if the defender's stop is "Dangerous"?
It would be a corner.
When a GK makes any save and the rebound is dangerous, a corner is awarded.
|
|
Stick
12-10-2002 10:35 pm
|
Report this post
|
Petey P
What you said is true, about being on the goal-line.
But what if the defender is higher up in the D - away from the goal line - with, presumably, the goalie behind them?
Does that one player constitute a "crowd"?
What do you think?
|
|
Dougal_bug
12-11-2002 6:49 am
|
Report this post
|
the non stopping of the ball, will make everyone's life easier including keepers, as it is likely to open them up to more straight shots, bring them on is what i say. As a keeper it is easier to read a straight shot than that of one being slipped.
As for defeenders being able to raise the stick, no. Its can create further danger within an area where a lot of injuries already occur. Maverick players will see it as a chance for them to make 'that save', and create more danger plus make the keeper's job. Plus the interpretation is open to the subjectivity of the umpire (and im not having a go at them here). But no one indidivual will interpret a situation in the same way as another. As it is umpires can make incorrect decisions that can costs teams a game, it happens, to put more pressure on them at a time where decisions are being questioned more and more by players is ludicrous, especially when their is no finite line to cross.
Lastly, no matter what people say, if a player is allowed to raise a stick in the circle, then what is going to stop him from doing it in a game, some of its comes from a natural reaction, if there is going to be a rule change like this they must keep it consist across the whole pitch and not just a small area.
|
|
lillypod
12-11-2002 3:54 pm
|
Report this post
|
Club hockey
Is this only for international hockey or is it at club and school level
|
|
ON Fan
12-11-2002 7:57 pm
|
Report this post
|
Marto's response
Marto is simply wrong - if a defender (field player or goalkeeper) stops a certain goal illegally the only correct decision is a stroke - and it has always been thus!
I think these are two great changes. I don't understand all the concern about defenders using stick above shoulder; goalies have had this privilege for a number of years with few if any problems.
|
|
Taffers
12-13-2002 3:36 am
|
Report this post
|
Good and Bad...
Firstly Defenders (Good) ... As a player, it's about time that defenders were given the same stick rights as the 'keeper. Instinct will rule and in response to Deon, it won't matter what orientation of the stick is used. As an umpire, it changes very little for us. The 'keeper cannot save a high ball with a swinging stick so a player can't do it - stroke. If the save rebounds into a dangerous area then PC. Straightforward. Lets be honest, what we are talking about here in the greater majority of cases will be PC situations, where the most likely save will be a deflection and the build up to the shot will still carry all the same criteria regarding danger. All I would say is mandatory gum shields at the same time?
PC stopping (BAD) .. The comments regarding lower level and junior hockey are valid but to remove 2 of the fundamental challenges of playing and coaching (the stop AND the inject) is a further dilution of the key skills of the game and another step in the wrong direction. Lets teams that can perform the skills prosper and those that cannot practise. I think Peter Cohen will come to regret saying "..without altering the overall nature of the penalty corner which is unique to hockey."
Leave the rules alone. Focus on the development of hockey in schools and at junior level and lets market the sport properly for a change not only to attract new players, but to encourage the media and television in particular. Tinkering with the rules & 'writing them more clearly' will not attract new players and spectators.
|
|
|
|
Wasimullah
12-13-2002 5:06 pm
|
Report this post
|
Stopping Skills
These rules take away the stopping skill. It also means that hockey becomes billiards. Thats not what we want.
Dear Tom,
If you have a problem teaching 8 yr olds how to stop on turf, you should sincerely take a trip to India ( Mumbai ) where the U-13 yr (grades 5-7) olds will show you how to dead stop a ball on Grass .I was a ball stopper for my school team. We did the flat dig. 9-10 times in practice we had injuries to the face and hands ( OLD LEATHER BALL). Then you start loosing fear of the ball. Thats when you learn to play hockey. Turf is cakewalk if the pusher knows what he/she is doing. Practice is all that is needed.
As far as the NFHS is concerned, many of the skills are never taught to the kids, leave alone PC stopping. If they can do basic stopping on grass, that will be a big deal to many schools. Dribbling is another rare scene. If you find one dribbler on the field, you know which team will end up winning.
Since the ball need not be stopped dead , the first wave literally becomes useless if a dummy stop Cball just stopped with rolling) and later cross passed to the right or left and then whacked onto the goal in a high manner becomes legal! The ball has had a third touch. A high hit is fine, since from 16 yrds line its looks as though the defender choose to stand in the goal. Since a PC can be completed in a manner of seconds rather unfairly , I think that the rules should not be tampered with respect to stopping. The defender should be able to stop it high. If you remember many of the World cup goals from germany came via high flicks. Though executed superbly, the defender could not stop it on the goal line.
|
|
Canuck
12-14-2002 12:08 pm
|
Report this post
|
Stick stop
I support the changes. It will be interesting to see if the "Stick Stop" will disappear, still be used,perhaps in a different way. I don't think skilled teams will just throw it out. There will still be chances to make it effective. The year trial will give everyone a chance to "fine tune" interpretations of the changes.
|
|
Kishan Patel USA
12-19-2002 8:05 pm
|
Report this post
|
Excellent Rule Changes
THe two new rule changes are great ways to make the game of hockey more exciting. Especially the penalty corner no ttrap rule... Love it.
|
|
FC
12-20-2002 4:34 am
|
Report this post
|
To all you trainspotters out there who sit alone in your bedroom on a Saturday night dreaming up nonsense permutations and combinations of what are essentially very simple rules - wise up.
Both of these new rules are simple in both their wording and application. Taffers has got it spot on with the defenders high sticks rule. Now there is no distinction between the GK and other defenders regardless of whether they are on the line or not.
I stand be convinced on the penalty corner stop in terms of the potential danger from fly hits.
In the meantime, to all those who plead for a simple game that attracts spectators and players alike, keep it simple, don't over complicate it by over-thinking it!!
|
|
B
12-20-2002 7:10 pm
|
Report this post
|
International or club?
Are these rules to be applied to club and/or school?!?! or is it just the international hockey scene?
Also- i've heard these rules are to be tested for one year- is this true- or are they here to stay?
|
|
eagal_one
12-29-2002 4:40 pm
|
Report this post
|
New Rules
Rules look like they are here to stay. Just reading through the other comments, the dangerous rule WILL always apply and as much as a lot of umpires enjoy a great advantage goal, the vision and wistle responce has to be instant, once the thought or sight of bringing the ball into a dangerous situation. Stop or Deflect, hitting l would be a stroke not a corner. Lets get that across to the players very early in the peice, like yeasterday.
|
|
Jammy
01-05-2003 7:34 am
|
Report this post
|
Trying them out today
The Bermuda Hockey Federation has decided to adopt the rules, and I will let you know how it turns out.
We do play on grass and this may be a god-send for the surface, stay-tuned !!!
|
|
Tom Harris
01-06-2003 12:14 pm
|
Report this post
|
Dashed line
Will we still need the dashed line that is 5 meters outside the circle?
|
|
UmpB
01-07-2003 7:16 pm
|
Report this post
|
New rule
Will someone please clarifly the interpretation as it relates to the defender and saving a high shot at goal. From what I am reading above I think there is a misinterpretation of the intention of the rule.
|
|
difazio
01-08-2003 11:51 am
|
Report this post
|
Scaffold shoot-out
The new penalty rule will transform the attacking team in a sort of shooting execution patrol, and the defenders into hopeless convicts. There will be no beauty in the play anymore. By the way, it is nonsense to say that stopping the ball cannot be teached and therefore, let's forget about it...it's just like saying, don't teach the kids to write, it's too hard!
|
|
Carike van Staden, South Africa
01-15-2003 1:54 pm
|
Report this post
|
Why change the way hockey is played on all levels ?
WHY CHANGE THE PENALTY CORNER RULE? When I started playing hockey and manage the basics I was taught, my coach taught me after 2 weeks how to stick stop at a PC. I practised and got the hang of it. I could dead stop on grass & turf. I was 13 years old. Of course you're going to have trouble teaching young hockey players to stick stop, even my 1st team school mates can't stick stop it. In my whole school we are 4 players who can do it correctly. 1 on turf, 2 on grass & me on both. I was fortunate enough (& very grateful) to have had a great coach at that age, who helped me master it.
This is an advanced skill & which is original to hockey. Why change it? There were only a few players who could do a sucessful stick stop & now that rules it almost completly out.
On a positive note I support the rule for defenders to safe high shot on goal, but FIH should look in to get defenders protective gear for their heads as play in the circle would become more "out of control" with sticks flying around & attackers perhaps hitting balls even harder past a defender? Just a thought ...
|
|
John Gawley
01-19-2003 6:50 am
|
Report this post
|
Experimental Rule - High stick in circle in defence of goal
I have no problem with the changes as such but fear that permitting the high stick defence in the circle while heavily penalising a similar high stick in the midfield will lead to confusion among players, umpires and spectators and could lead to loss of confidence in the rules. We could have the situation of a high stick within a metre of the circle receiving a suspension whilst a high stick five metres into the circle will be applauded (provided always that it is safe, of course).
Despite this, I fear for the safety of the game at lower levels where inexperience of both players and umpires prevails. And let there be no pious comments about these people being coached - many teams are lucky to turn out with 11 players, leave along have a coach, manager and physio!
|
|
Mipe - Brasil
01-29-2003 6:07 am
|
Report this post
|
Easiest to coach
Dear friends do not think about high level hockey only. Think about poor countries with terrible pitches (grass or artificial) and no hockey culture among children and teenagers. What Tom Harris said above is absolutely right. With no P C stops the game will be easier to be played understood and loved. The better for the arrackers the best for hockey in terms of increasing popularity.
I think the dashed line still determines if you can hit the ball high.
See you,
MIPE
|
|
Ativist
01-29-2003 6:20 am
|
Report this post
|
Prejudice
Letīs banish hockey for outside Europe (and its colonies) that would preserve the holy hockey!
Donīt come with this trainning dead stop stuff. You do not like what you do not undertstand! Lets make hockey easier for the new public.
I think they are afraid of what it should be if hockey gets popular in Africa and in the South America! It would happen the same thing that had happened with football. Where is the English football? Where is the dutch football? Brazil, Argentina, Colombia, Cameroon, Nigeria are the world power!
Think about it.
|
|
Lax & FH Player
01-29-2003 1:59 pm
|
Report this post
|
Women's lacrosse approach to rules is safer
One thing that I really like about women's lacrosse in the US is that it has rules that focus on keeping unprotected players safe. Consider the following three rules:
"Obstruction of Free Space" is a major foul that occurs when a defender is not closely marking her opponent and is in the free space to goal of the attack player with the ball. The attack player must have the opportunity and be looking to shoot.
"Three Seconds" states that a defender may not stand within the eight meter arc, unless she is closely marking an opponent, for more than three seconds.
Another rule is called "dangerous shot". This occurs when a player propels the ball toward the goal without control, or in the direction of a field player or the goalkeeper.
In women's lacrosse attacking players are not rewarded for purposely hitting an opposing with the ball and unprotected defending players are not encouraged to position themselves like sitting ducks.
I wish the rules of field hockey were developed around this premise. I see a lot of unnecessary injuries in field hockey because the rules encourage attackers to fire away at opposing players and because defenders are encouraged to expose themselves to injury by positioning themselves in dangerous positions.
This rule change that allows a defender to raise a stick to save a goal encourages defenders to throw themselves into harms way. It will also lead to a great deal more "batting". Moreover, defensive players are now being encouraged to assume some of the duties of the keeper.
Sorry, gang, but I do not like this particular revision. I wish our rules were devloped around the fact that field hockey is supposed to be an unprotected, non-contact sport.
You know, every now and then some one tries to get state legislature that mandates helmets and other protective gear for field hockey and women's lacrosse. With rules that encourage such dangerous behavior, I can't say I disagree with mandating helmets for youth field hockey.
|
|
Rod Hurst (Australia)
03-01-2003 7:11 pm
|
Report this post
|
General observations
Having read all the previous comments, many have merit. While the proposed changes make some elements of the game easier to umpire, play and possibly to coach, recent rule changes seldom seem to pay any attention to safety of players on the field, in favour of developing "the spectacular" shot making. At some point, there is likely to be a major legal issue for the sport to deal with, as there are in other parts of society, and at that point, I'm afraid the rule makers will be right in the spotlight, and I hope they realise that.
On the other hand, spectators enjoy watching free flowing events and changes to advantage, obstruction, off-side, raised ball shots etc have assisted this endeavour. These new experimental rules will be welcomed in this regard, however they will do nothing to lessen certain dangers in the circle, and if attacking teams can develop some smoothly executed P/C options, there should be many more goals scored. Against such options, defending teams will really struggle.
Therefore it is necessary to understand if the intention of the game's ruling bodies is to increase the number of goals scored in total, regardless of whether scored from the field or from PC options. Spectators would much prefer to see field goals with skillful leadup and a positive finish. If the new PC rule leads to encouragement of manufacuring a PC, and therefore a goal, at the expense of FG's, then I would advocate the points system previously suggested by previous respondent.
|
|
captmehta
03-04-2003 3:50 am
|
Report this post
|
how many more changes
will some one tell me how many more changes will take place.
due to constant changes , everyone is loosing interest in hockey.
football is played with same rules for last 100 years and see how popular game is.
only change reqd is make hockey field as big as football and goal can be scored from any where . that the only change reqd.
will someone support me .
|
|
AMY
03-04-2003 7:50 pm
|
Report this post
|
This is great
I think that these two rules are great and they will be appreciated by many hockey players around the world. But i don't think it will be good for younger players as it may be more dangerous. But for older players i think it will make it more interesting and fun!!!!
|
|
Keith
03-18-2003 6:24 am
|
Report this post
|
Not a good idea for low level hockey
I play and umpire at an extremely low level in the UK, and am personally not looking forward to these rule changes one bit, if only from the safety point of view. Our games consist of kids who are just getting into the sport and older more experienced men. The prospect of these guys being able to shell the ball back in towards goal almost instantly after recieving it from a corner is almost certain to increase the number of injuries i see every week, not to mention intimidate the new players. I fully agree with previous comments about the safety of players once sticks can be raised in defence within the D. Frequently this area is packed with players and i am less than happy able players who don`t yet have the skill to be about to control such a raised ball being able to deflect it accidently towards other players.
We have no spectators apart from the occasional friends and family of the players to keep interested in the game, and this is something for us to address at a regional level.
As an umpire my first concern is for the safety of those involved in the game and i feel these rule changes only serve to reduce safety on the pitch. As for making the game simpler to follow, hockey is not exactly the most difficult sport to understand.
|
|
CHRIS
04-18-2003 6:26 am
|
Report this post
|
|
PLEASE INFORM ME IF THERE IS A NEW RULE STATING THE LEAST NUMBER OF PLAYERS THAT HAVE TO START A HOCKEY MATCH
|
|
Brian H
04-23-2003 10:34 pm
|
Report this post
|
Changing of Stick at Penalty Corner
At the awarding of a Penalty Corner, is anybody aware of a new rule that would allow an attacker to change their original playing stick for a purpose built stick for the taking of the shoot at goal. This has come from a prominent Sydney club official. I am an umpire and unsure.
|
|
mike
05-27-2003 10:27 pm
|
Report this post
|
please some one to send me rules and the main player postions
HI even though I have not played in years my bro has taken up th sport so to help him and his under 15 school team I have been asked to coach them so IF YOU CAN E-MAIL - ( mike_cash_2001@yahoo.com )WITH ANY THING THAT MAY HELP, please note that I am a professional over the age of 28 and therefore prefer that those who emali me do so in all seriousness.
|
|
shivana
05-31-2003 12:39 pm
|
Report this post
|
field hockey
what are the protective gear and equipment used for field hockey?
|
|
Eddie
07-11-2003 11:37 am
|
Report this post
|
Rule Change: No Dead Stop of Ball - Corner
It does appear once again - TELEVISION - is ruling the decision on the game.
This may prove to be effective for the International Elite of the game, but no so the grass roots of the game - Club Hockey/All Countries
Agree DEAD STOP not the way to go..... Why get a corner then be penalised to stop it dead..... However, surely a CONTROLLED STOP would be more effective.
Much of the world hockey is still played on NATURAL TURF .... and the non-stopping or non-control of the ball, is now making the FLY-HIT a popular choice (even to backboard height). At junior level this is not an effective coaching tool..... and the lower levels of Club Hockey are seeing injury results.
Would like to see a control stop, much like the old-indoor used in Australia - and advocated by many, even Ex Internationals ie (one rotation of ball).
Would not like to see any changes to points system - ie per goals scored as in some Super-Seven competitons.... Leave as 3-Points Win, 1-Point Draw, Nil-Points loss....
Consideration - Reverse the circles.
1. Current Circle to become dotted - for Penalty Corners
2. Dotted Five Yard circle to become normal circle.... this will
surely open up the scoring for Television and Spectators to
the game.
3. Penalty Corners - can be trapped (control - not a bunt fly-hit)
Trap with Dead-Stick or Deflection behind or above goal on
shots above the waist to be allowed by defenders (to Long
Corner) - if below waist, Penalty Corner
THOUGHTS AND COMMENTS ???
|
|
x48
