Mon 6 Oct, 2008
|
|
|
|
‘Third umpire in hockey will destroy its beauty’  x2
 |
| International |
August 18, 2003 
The Asian Age
> Page Views 3606
- By Jitender Negi
New Delhi, Aug. 18: The controversial third goal by Holland against India on the opening day of the elite six-nation Champions Trophy on Saturday has raised the issue of “the need of a cricket-like third umpire in hockey” as well.
“I do not agree with the idea of a third umpire in hockey. Certainly not,” Olympian Ashok Kumar told The Asian Age when asked if hockey needed the help of a third umpire apart from the two pitch umpires. He believes that if the third umpire concept is introduced to the game “it will destroy the beauty of hockey”. The call for a third umpire came to the fore after the controversial India-Holland match in which “Blue Tigers” strongly opposed the third Dutch goal saying that an attempt by Floris Evers had been clearly stopped by Baljit Singh Saini before it could cross the goalline.
“Hockey is a totally different game. It’s not cricket where you can wait for third umpire’s decision. Hockey is a fast game and whatever decision is given by umpire on-field should be the final one. There should not be any controversy. Deploying a third umpire will take away the sheen from the game,” said the member of the 1975 World Cup winning team.
Apart from the controversy, the veteran hockey player feels that the present Indian team is playing with the right spirit. “But instead of attacking they are giving too much importance to defense which is not our style of hockey. The major reason of India’s defeat to Holland on Saturday was the same as it was evident in those last seven minutes when the whole team crowded the ‘dee’ leading to chaos. And the Dutch players took advantage of that.
“In my opinion Gagan, Prabhjot, Dhanraj and Deepak are extremely dangerous strikers provided they get proper support from the midfield. The midfielders and defenders should, however, realise they have a larger responsibility.
“In the last two games, I saw deep-defender Jugraj Singh moving forward quite often, leaving a huge gap behind, which can be dangerous. So he and every one in the team should understand their responsibility on the field,” Ashok, the son of great Dhyan Chand, said. He also felt that India should not try to adopt foreign techniques and stick to their natural game. “Players should start hitting from 50-25 yards that can put opponent under sever pressure.”
On the India-Pak match, Ashok thinks that Shoail Abbas has raised the level of the Pakistan team. “The presence of Abbas has made it a tough opponent for India. He is a player of world class and India need to guard him closely. And one more thing I have seen in the Pakistan team is that they are in good rhythm and are playing well. It will be an interesting match.”
Your opinion counts.
Rate this article or enter your comments below.
|
Opinions expressed here do not represent the official views of PlanetFieldHockey.com or its staff. Comments will be removed if they are considered offensive or of a personal nature.
Comments on this article
|
Al Mattei
08-19-2003 9:02 am
|
Report this post
|
The Third Umpire
Simply put, it is going to happen. I mean, the National Basketball Association almost 20 years ago starting using a third official to help control 10 players on a 94-by-50 court with a large bouncing ball.
In field hockey, there is no way, with a tiny ball ricocheting at 90 miles an hour on a 100-by-60-yard pitch, that two sets of eyes can take charge of 22 players whilst:
1. Making individual foul calls in traffic like a lacrosse official;
2. Calling the lines like a tennis line judge;
3. Making judgment calls from a long distance, trailing the play like a back judge in American football;
4. Making offside calls like a soccer referee (something which, thankfully, is no longer in play); and
5. (And most importantly) Being able to be in the position to make off-the-ball calls like an NBA basketball referee.
International hockey umpiring MUST have a third, co-equal official (not a goal judge or video ref!) to get a triangular, three-dimensional view of the play as it continues. A two-umpire system only brings up debate over "territory" and which official has which circle, and you only get TWO dimensions with two sets of eyes.
It's like trying to drive a car with one eye; you lose depth perception and cannot judge accurately how quickly you are coming up to that stop sign. With an extra eye, you get a better perception.
For some domestic competitions (school competitions) it would be very difficult to get that third umpire, but it could be done in post-season.
I call upon the U.S. colleges to experiment with this rule in a small arena (every regular season match in NCAA Division II, perhaps?) and report to FIH with results. It should be very interesting.
|
|
Tim
09-05-2005 2:36 am
|
Report this post
|
|
Employing a third umpire in hockey would destroy the pace of the game. It would also lower the standards of the umpires on the field, as they know that they can be reliant on the video replay. It would destroy the beauty of the game! Hockey is also looking to increase the standard of umpiring and this isn't doing that, as it is just giving the umpires a safety net to fall into.
|
|
|
|
 |
HOME | FEATURES | CLUBHOUSE | CAMPS | LINKS | ABOUT US | STORE | ADVERTISE
Use of this site is subject to certain Terms & Conditions.
|
|
|
