📅 Jun 16 19.00 GMT
➡️ YouTube
We're going to nerd out over free hits at the 23m line, shots at goal (a perennial favourite!), and marking battles in the circle. Also, we'll talk about changing your stick in the shoot-out, and the topic that never ends, dragging on the PS!
This special #WhatUpSunday is only one-half of the amazing learning opportunities we’ve pulled from the last 10 days of Pro League action, and it's a quick turnaround for a regular WUW for the rest. Can’t wait to see you live!
See you there!
🚨 Sign up now and nail those big calls with Mission Critical Positioning!
⏱ Chapter Markers:
0:00 Chair Dancing
00:06:30 Topics!
00:07:23 1a. Free Hits at the 23m ➡️ #FIHProLeague GBRvAUS (M)
00:20:09 1b. Free Hits at the 23m ➡️ #FIHProLeague USAvGBR (W)
00:38:04 2a. Shots At Goal ➡️ #FIHProLeague USAvGBR (W)
00:48:39 2b. Shots at Goal ➡️ #FIHProLeague GBRvIND (M)
00:52:08 2c. Shots at Goal ➡️ #FIHProLeague GERvAUS (W)
00:57:41 2d. Shots at Goal ➡️ #FIHProLeague GBRvAUS (M)
01:11:34 3. Double green cards ➡️ #FIHProLeague AUSvARG (M)
01:15:39 3b. Battles in the Circle: #FIHProLeague GBRvIND (M)
01:23:59 3d. Battles in the Circle: #FIHProLeague GBRvAUS (M)
01:32:51 3c. Battles in the Circle: #FIHProLeague GERvAUS (W)
01:40:48 4. Changing a Stick In The Shoot-Out: #FIHProLeague AUSvGER (M)
01:48:41 5. Dragging On The PS: #FIHProLeague GERvAUS (W)
Check out when the next #WhatUpWednesday will go live.
🟢🟡🔴 🏑
Transcript
🎶
01 Main Mic
Keely: A good Sunday or Monday to you all. It is a special edition of What Up, Wednesday, Sunday, Monday. Thursday. Look, I don't know if you live in the future. You might, you might. And in that case, you live in Australia or New Zealand and you're pretty lucky because those are great places. I am Keely Dunn. This is FHumpires and you are the third team.
And I'm very happy that you took some time out on your weekend to join me. And if you're watching on replay, hey, super cool too. I am so happy about you folk. You make me feel like. It's not just about the hangout, it's about the information that you get, and also you get to watch me on Two Times Speed. So you're smart.
You're smart. I like that. It's really nice to see you, um, Baby Gravy, hi, you're, you're new, so let's DJ your horn. Is that too loud for you? That's, that's loud for me. Let me know how that volume balances. That was a little bit on the aggro side. Uh, don't know. So the reason that we are doing this on a Sunday is because I was otherwise occupied on Wednesday.
And I'll go into that, uh, in a little bit, uh, just to give some shout outs and some thanks to some marvelous FHU community members. But, uh, you know, there's been some stuff happening. There's been some pro league. There's been a lot of pro league. There's been so much pro league that it's been pro leaguing my pro league.
It's been just the pro leaguest pro league ever to pro league. And Mike McCartney here is, um, also has been pro leaguing the pro league a lot because he basically set up a tent, uh, or an RV outside of the video truck. And he was just living at Lee Valley for the last two weeks. So lucky guy. And, uh, the fun part was of course, that we got some inside intel as things were happening on the pitch.
Mike was able to see things that obviously we couldn't see on the cameras. And then, you know, have a couple of conversations on the side with a few folks. So Mike, thank you so much for passing on the information that you got from there. That's going to be, um, very there. The balance affects the. The, uh, sound effects of the moment.
Okay. Let's see if I can fix this. I'm going to turn all the sound effects down to about this. What if I do, um,
let me know. And, uh, yeah, Mr. Denman knows the truth about Lee Valley that you can only live on Greek kebabs and seven quid beer for so long. I don't know. I think I could probably do a lot of that. And There we go. Okay, so that seemed to affix the sound a little bit and Florian, I'm glad to see you. Really great to have you.
So we're doing, I have a lot, so we're splitting this up. I'm actually gonna do another regular episode on Wednesday. So if you're in the future and you're watching this on replay, and it's like Tuesday and Wednesday's coming right up, and you're gonna say, oh my gosh, that's a lot of Keely. Look. I'm not the boss of you, you figure out your life, just, you know, take time away when you need it.
It's very important. But half of the stuff that I've seen over the last 10 days, we're going to do today and then another half on Wednesday, basically. With a couple of other like fun things thrown in. next Wednesday. So I hope that sounds good to you. We're back to doing some polls today, so make sure you get in on those in the discord because we are talking about free hits of the 23 meter line.
Shots at goal. Yay. My favorite. Battles in the circle. Kind of fun. And changing a stick in the shootout. What? Okay. Dragging on the penalty stroke because
look, I hate to say it, but I'm right and y'all are going to see another example of it. It's been that, it's been that kind of couple of weeks where I feel a little bit, I feel a little bit under siege, you know, I've been under siege because there's just been a lot of things and a lot of questions and a lot of discussions and a lot of, okay, so we're, we're just going to go through it all today.
Good to see AJ. It's always a pleasure and I appreciate you being part of the third team. So thanks for joining in. All right, let's get started. Let's get this party rocking. Free hits at the 23 meter. We haven't had to do something like this for a while,
right friends? So it's, it's been a long while since we've had to address something like this. But, um, this is something, a question that comes up a lot at lower levels of hockey, where players don't understand some of the more, um, elementary parts of this whole rule and I'm not saying that this is what Walls intended to do.
I think he tried to move the ball five meters but it looks a lot like something that we see very often where a player on the attack who's been awarded a free hit right inside of that 23 meter line will say, oh well I'm just going to bring it outside the 23 and therefore the rules don't apply and I can now send that straight into the circle.
No. Just know it, the, the rules apply because of where the ball starts and the safety considerations for not blasting the ball straight into the circle don't go away because you take the ball one meter across a line that is just a little bit further away. The sound is going off and on with scenes.
Might've been you. Let me know if anybody else is having any, any trouble with that. Uh, cause hopefully everything is, I am, I am, of course, I have fine tuned some things on the back. But what we have here is a situation where, if I can bring up the correct scene, is that the ball starts just inside, and I believe as we're going to be able to count it, it's going to go almost a meter out.
almost a meter back in, and then another three meters before it gets released. So the action here, we don't see all of it here in this part of the replay, but we're about to in a second.
Okay, so we've got start of the ball, and it's, it's not, it's not even a meter inside, it's, you know, it's, it's a little bit less than that. So let's say we give that one, and we give that two back there, and then two steps, and then he releases. That usually indicates that it hasn't gone more than, uh, that the two steps kind of equates to about three meters, usually.
But we can also look at where that was released if I can show you just right here. Okay, so the ball is there and so it's just about,
okay, about there. So it hasn't reached the top of the 15 meter mark yet. And admittedly, this is a close instance, so I'm interested in what you all sort of think in your, um, in your estimations in the Discord poll. But, this, the, the assistance comes from the off ball umpire, comes from the supporting umpire, because as a controlling umpire, you're, you're kind of far away from that.
You're You should probably be around 21 to 22 meters away from that play, given correct positioning about what you're needing to watch. And you have a lot of bodies in the way of you and that play. So one of the things that I stress about mission critical positioning is that you're gonna want to hand off decisions, not based on geography or location of the ball, as I call it, but on who's got a better vision, who's got.
An unobstructed view of that play, and in this kind of instance, the unobstructed view belongs to the supporting umpire. And you don't have to be super close to this, you just have to be able to see it. And that's kinda true of a lot of hockey, to be totally honest. So, let's see what, uh, a lot of, uh The folks are saying here, Scott, this happened to you in an over 45s match you umpired yesterday.
You don't like stereotyping, but it seems like older players aren't always up to date with the rules. It's, well, it's, it's hard. It's hard. And I mean, I'm a hard carrying old and I have to work really, really hard. So hard that it's my job to stay up to date with everything that's happening. So you can imagine that, that players, especially those who have taken some time out because of family, careers, injuries, all just wavering interests.
I don't, I don't know what that means. I don't know how you don't get interested in hockey, but okay. And they've taken some time away from the game and not seen the, the incremental changes or being able to process one or two changes at once. It's like Boom, 20 years later, the game is literally, like, manifestly different.
So that's gotta be a lot to take in and a lot to remember. And when so much of the way that we play comes by rote, it can be a little bit, you know, it can be a little bit much. So there he goes. Uh, Stane's saying that it looked like it traveled five. Okay. And look, GB Folk. Take a knee.
Yeah, I, I, I don't know. Um, I, I think Cohen had a, had a good angle, um, because he had an unobstructed view. So I think it's quite reasonable, especially considering the disadvantage that would have occurred in this, because it would have been a penalty corner. And the problem is, is that, um, well, I can't remember.
Does GB have their, did they have their referral? I'm in the way. Nope. That doesn't help.
Can anybody see that? Yeah. Australia's lost their referral in this instance. So when you think about the alternatives, it's if you believe as the supporting umpire, you want to take care of that quickly. And it's a stop place situation that you can correct when the two of you get together for a consultation afterwards, if you actually have to.
So there you go. Um, you'll get the ruler out and take into the proximity of the dotted line, which we know how far from the 23 meters it is. It doesn't seem likely it was five. Yeah. So remember that the top of the circle is, is 20 meters from the end line, which makes that only three meters between the 23 and the top of the line.
Now, if he doesn't reach the top of the hash line, he hasn't even gone three at that point. So if he goes, One ish and one. The that's the kind of math that we have to do. And you can see, um, yeah, the replay for Mike. So he's saying that he thought Kuhn's angle was absolutely fine. It was an unobstructed view.
Okay. Unobstructed. In the moment, he felt very close to five meters, but thinks that the call was proved correct, even though it was pedantic. The difference between a penalty corner and not a penalty corner for Australia is not just an issue of pedantry, it's an issue of fairness. So I think that's sort of reasonable.
Um,
well, Simon. Not a huge fan of this comment because you're talking about in the context of aerials and there's a whole set of different considerations in that. So I'm going to sort of park that aside because we're actually going to deal with aerials on Wednesday. If you're interested in that discussion, you make sure you come back because I, I got like five aerials and it's going to be really good.
And Walter's here. That's fantastic. Let's take a quick look at the poll. If you've had a chance to vote, I hope you have. Because otherwise,
otherwise, this is going to be, see, now I'm just giving you more chance to vote, right? That I planned it this way. I did not plan it this way. I absolutely did not plan it this way. It's a good thing I've gotten really good at this.
There we go.
Okay. Let's try this again. Let's load this bad boy up. And this is not, I keep forgetting I have to change this widget. That's my bad, but at least I know what my issue is. Battles in the circle. Wait, wait, wait. Do, do, do, do, do. See, there's a lot of polls today. I decided to really, to, to rectify what happened last and put tons and tons of polls in here.
So, um, so six of you think that the five meters was fine. And two of you think it was. And that's fair enough. I think what I want to draw your attention to are all the ways that you measure that understanding where the markers are and who has a good view of that situation. Because you think in the moment, oh wait, the control, that's, that's Lorraine's call.
Well, it's, it's going into her circle, but that doesn't mean she has the best view of it. and having a good pre match chat before you go into a game and being able to communicate with a colleague. Look, when I have a bunch of bodies in front of me, that's when I want you to take the decision and the ball's in the back.
It's a back view for me, but it's front view for you. I want you to take that call. And you should be, both of you, positioning yourselves so that you're, you're, you're thinking about the game more on a x axis rather than this diagonal line that was probably the most inefficient way to look at the field of play ever to ever.
So having that conversation is going to help you make those decisions, um, in all those cases. Let's just, um, And Steven, this is, this is where, yeah, I, I've been having a tough week. That's all I'm going to say. Um, I, I don't think this is a yards or meters thing, but you know, please don't swear and use the yard word.
I'm just kidding. It's okay. I just don't like to confuse everything like that. Good to see you, Paul. And Mike, the drag back from the 23 gains limited distance. The ball's played comfortably before the dotted line. Um, so. You can see why I couldn't make the call. Thank you for pitching in on that because I do think it was quite correct.
Thank you everybody who voted and that sort of thing. Let's have a look at, um, the next one. Uh
oh. I've got a lot of, and, and I don't have the music in this version. So now I'm, I'm eating sherbet mate. Because it got through my filter. What is happening in the world?
Sunday. I hope y'all are watching really carefully while I'm rambling on.
Okay. So from the GB USA game, this is late in the fourth quarter, two minutes and 30 seconds left, and GB is pushing to tie the match and they are very, very close. I'm happy with this decision. Mike, if you were here, yeah, the crowd loved this one. It was just, yeah, nut bar, nut bar. But when you watch it on slow motion and you don't listen to the commentators and what they say, what you notice is that this ball here is, at first, The free hit is awarded outside the 23, but the player taking it allows it to drift inside.
And by the time she contacts the ball, it is inside the 23.
So the question that you need to ask yourself as an umpire is at the level that you're playing, do you expect the players to understand the difference of the consequences between a ball that is Played as a free hit inside the 23 and outside the 23, do they see the ball? And I'm watching this when you watch in slow motion.
Okay player has her head down. She looks up She sees Robertson in the circle and then she has her head She starts looking down at the ball and she makes solid contact with that ball looking at it. She knows that it's inside.
Okay. Um, Rachel, you, the free hit was taken from inside. So the rules apply. So at beginner levels of play, you may want to double whistle and bring it back outside for folks who really struggle with understanding the difference or lacking the skill, strategy knowledge. Hockey sense to know what to do in those situations, maybe, but in this case, you can either call this rolling ball, but you don't really have to, you can just determine that this is an incorrectly placed free hit.
And it's advantageous for the team taking this free hit, not to wait and to try to take it as soon as possible. In that case. The decision to overturn that or reverse it or just simply award the foul for sending the ball straight into the circle, I think is really the correct one. I'm interested to see if anything, anybody else has something like this, because I have this, I have this somewhere.
Yes. This happened a couple of years ago,
late decision for a free hit outside the 23.
So in this case, The, the decision came back that the goal stood and it was unclear at the time whether the taking of the free hit was thoroughly reviewed. The, the placement of the ball. What you can argue in this case, distinguishing it from the first example, is that there is a touch and let's see if I can get this.
Um, I don't think I have this plate. Let's see if I've got this here. One C. One C. I do have it. Excellent. I'm doing stuff.
Okay, so it's, it's this moment here, and I'm going to slow this down as much as possible without staring at players faces, because that's weird. Sorry, friends.
Okay, now we're going to slow it down. Oh, that does, that's why that doesn't work very well, because they skipped over it.
I'll figure it out. I really will.
I keep pressing the five seconds back button, which doesn't help things whatsoever. Okay, so the free hit is clearly awarded outside the 23.
And what we're, what we're trying to figure out here is whether the free hit was taken inside. So now the play, the ball is getting sent back. And there's a touch there, and the ball is drifting, and so by the time the hit is being taken, it is inside the 23. So, it's very subtle, and it might seem a little bit excuse y, but I think there is an argument to be made here, and it's the argument I made when I reviewed the play two years ago, is that the first touch on the free hit is actually that.
reverse stick because we don't say that that players using their stick constitute or do not constitute the playing of the ball and what she didn't do was was like use it to to thoroughly stop it kept moving so you can certainly argue that that was what occurred in that case. Now when we go back to when we go back to this situation which is not happening
Let's see if that works.
There we go. So when we come back to here, there is no, the, the, the playing of the ball, the setting up the ball is in midair.
So it looks different. It feels a little different. That may not be,
that may not be the most important thing. Okay. But what's interesting to me is when I see this now, I think, Maybe that decision back in 2022 actually wasn't the correct one with a little more context. And that's part of the way that our interpretations and our understanding of what is correct or not correct or consistent or not consistent evolve is when we see these things over and over again.
Um, I'll be interested to see what you all think in the poll. So I'm going to go to that.
if I've got it right.
So let's see, um, whoops, that's absolutely not what I wanted to do.
Three of you think that it's a free hit defense and then four of you would reset the ball outside the 23 meter and that's okay. That's okay. If that's where you are in terms of the level that you normally umpire at, at this level, absolutely not. It's just no. You're, you're not going to reset that play.
It's, it's in effect a, Oh, well, you tried it on and it didn't work out for you. So it's an, in essence, it's a reversal. So yeah, let's just say, yeah, the interpretations are always subject to evolution. And, um, yeah, that's because it often isn't important. And what we're trying to determine, Paul, with the placing of the free hit is, do we know from where it's been taken?
Okay, and that's the, that's the underlying purpose of all of it. So that we can determine whether the ball's been hit inside the 23 meter line. If we can determine whether a defender is 5 meters away, can we determine whether the ball has traveled 5 meters? That's all we need to know. And if that's clear from where the ball is is slightly moving or spinning, or has been moving in one direction and then the player takes it off in another direction, clearly in a separate motion.
That is good enough. And that's the way that modern hockey is interpreted. So I hope that helps. And yeah, that definitely would have been a second bite of the cherry. So that would have been not cool. Not cool at all. All right. Um, we, we do have a lot of stuff, so I'm going to move right along to announcements and I would love to welcome and thank right here, do do do do, there she is, Irene Risa, who has just joined Yellow.
I am, look, I don't want to play favorites, but this is a really big deal for me personally because it's welcoming another woman into the third team. That means very much to me, given the gender disparity that I have going on throughout the community. It's something that I'm, I'm challenged with. I'm wishing to be able to, uh, mitigate, to ameliorate, to improve, as it were.
Bless. Irene is from Kenya and the more people that I can reach out to and bring into a community where they may not have a thoroughly established, a deep structure of support and education in their own country, their own region, that sort of thing. That's why I made FHumpires. And I love you folk in the UK and, and Netherlands and all that stuff.
Don't get me wrong. Don't get it twisted, but I felt the, the isolation and the lack of support and lack of continuing education in my community. And that's why I made FHumpires. So I wanted to be able to provide better for people who are umpiring after I had concluded my career. And so Irene, thank you so much for trusting me, trusting in us as a community.
And I can't wait to work more with you. Irene's been in the watch parties like Crazy for the last week and it's been a lot of fun. I think at times she's been going, what? Because I, um, Yeah, it's just a lot of things to go through. Um, so I hope Irina has been useful for you. And if you want to know more about the 13, just go, just go to that QR code that's there and have a look.
And, um, I'd be really happy to talk to you by DM or anything like that, if you have any questions. So, yeah. Thank you very much for that. And I wanted to just sort of give a shout out to these very fine folks. Uh, Viv and Steven Dyerberg were here and they were visiting from New Zealand, not just to visit me, but to, to, to visit a bunch of people in North America, but they took time out of their schedule to come and stop it in Calgary.
And we had a wonderful half day, day, half day. We packed a lot of things in, and this is at Lake Louise. I was able to take them through to that, as well as we went to the Glimmer Reservoir, and we went through. All the way through downtown and we did a bunch of stuff. You can tell this is kind of happening spot.
Lake Louise is very busy in the summer. There's a lot of tourists, but it doesn't mean that you can't find some beautiful spots and views and do some amazing photography shots. So, um, we had a really great time and we talked a lot and that sort of thing. And it's just one of those examples of amazing things that can happen in the 13th.
You can come to Calgary and stay in my place and go see stuff. Ask Mike McDowell. He did the same thing, except he didn't get to see stuff. Cause we didn't have enough time, but there you go. So thank you so much. That is why we missed Wednesday because we were in the mountains, but there you go. Um, Matt, you're cool.
You're cool. Umpiring Summer League. Good for you. Good for you. I hope you're enjoying that. There you go. Um, yeah, sleep is overrated. And yeah, I can't, it's, it's like I've developed the skill of being able to understand people's different time zones and such. Now, even though I screw it up every so often, but there you go.
And look at that. They're here. I hope you, uh, I hope you all rested up and everything went well on the trip back. It looks like, um, I'm a host. I'm a host. Am I the best host? I don't think so, but It, I couldn't go wrong. Um, you can't access the subscriptions currently. Florian, you and I can talk about this, um, and, and see, see what's going on.
Um, if you, if you have a chance, pop in to the post stream tease and I'll try to diag, diagnose and fix that issue. It's, I've been doing a lot of that in the last couple of days and there you go. And yes, Viv, it's, yep. We're lucky. We're very lucky here. It's been fabulous. And, uh, they were just there. Paul's mom and aunt, and now she's in Ottawa and ex international ump.
Oh, name, please. I may know. I may know. And Florian. We were best friends and then you said the thing that you said at the end of that sentence, which I will not repeat aloud because if somebody takes that out of context,
I'm sorry, I'm a Calgarian. You can't, you absolutely can't. And there you go. It, it absolutely is a fabulous part of the world, world. Elaine Hood. Huh. Must've been, must've been even further before my time than I can possibly imagine. But there you go. Okay. Let's move on to our next topic. Shots at goal. Ugh.
They're big calls, so we have a few of them to talk about.
Not this though. Yeah, this is, this is going to work out so you can watch the replay while I queue up the actual, I know I did this
there. Ugh.
So there's two issues, obviously, and we, I want you to focus on the shot at goal element, but I will quickly talk about the five meters a little bit.
The problem is, is that as. People who have been in the game for a long time. We have a certain framework, a lens through which we look at what is a hockey play, like what, what is a free hit? How does someone take a free hit? And we think that a free hit is taken when, and I don't know why my stopping buttons aren't working.
We think that a free hit is taken when a player has turned around and they are facing The direction that they are attacking, but that's not always the case. So if I go to this and I'm going to play 2A,
okay, free hit is awarded there. Player actually
is starting to play the free hit now. Okay, she can't go straight into the circle anyway, she knows that. So it's a very common thing in this sort of vicinity of the circle to start taking yourself paths based in another direction. So that's one, and then two, and then three, and then she turns back, four, and maybe five.
or more. And there's obviously a lot of distances, but just be, you can't start counting at the point where she is facing forward. That's not where, you know, what we're really looking at. But what I want you to focus on is this part. Okay. Is this shot, oops, as I
scrolled it back, of course I did. This shot of goals, a hit. And, remember, a shot at goal doesn't necessarily have to be on target, but we apply a stricter lens when danger is involved. And this hit, as we're watching,
is in and of itself not going to go into goal, and this is going right across, sorry, my head's in the way of,
my head's in the way of the thing, of the players.
Unlock. Move. Okay. So that's going across the goal. And as, and we, we see a touch that, but for that touch, that ball was absolutely not going on goal. And there was, I believe, legitimate evasive action that happened there. Now the umpire who's there. Is probably going, Oh my God, um, you know, has no idea what to do, um, or how, how to watch, how to watch for this because she's taken legitimate evasive action to legitimate evasive action as well.
She is, you know, so she's sort of turning away from it as well. And it's difficult for her to make that calculation. I think if this had gone to a referral, it would have been overturned. on the danger aspect. So that's where I'm seeing that. Let's see what y'all are saying here. Um, um, well, I'm glad you don't dislike the flames because otherwise we definitely would be able to be friends.
That would be an irreparable, um, rift in our relationship. Uh, for Mike, it had gone five, uh, looks very close because you move it a lot while it's not moving your feet. And that's why you can't just rely on foot movement. It's just one of those things that if they're traveling and you're trying to pace it out, it can be a help, but it isn't always.
And especially because some players take tiny little steps and some take big steps. On that zoomed, um, you're not mad about it either way. Even watching the Zoom group play. Um, hi Matt. Um, yes, so Matt was picking up on the danger there. Um, I think one, but that's okay.
Yeah, I don't know if anything would have really, I mean it's easy to say in hindsight that flashing out would have helped. I think I would have been flashing out in that moment and I would recommend that as a general course of action for many umpires is to get off that post because once that player turns to, uh, the baseline, the backline, and starts dribbling in that direction in order to see through that traffic, you know, but it's easy to say.
Um, why didn't she use her VR? Because I mean, if, if she doesn't know that there's something wrong, then she doesn't, you know, it's, it's difficult to know what you don't know or yeah, it's difficult, it's difficult to, to make that. So, I mean, would it have been a, uh, an, an excellent use of a self referral?
Absolutely. Is it understandable that she didn't? Because she didn't even see? And, and remember that your, your brain doesn't just go, Oh, I didn't see it. Therefore, I don't know. Your brain will fill in the holes for you. This is a very widely accepted understanding, psychological phenomena that are phenomenon that our brain will literally create a picture and a memory in our minds as to what we weren't able to see because of whatever circumstance.
So without having any indicator from, uh, a supporting umpire or weird reactions from the players or something like that, it's, it's not that you want to respond to appealing, but When I talk about our need to take consultations with our colleagues at certain times, that stems from our sensitivity of seeing that players are reacting unusually and it's just because they react in a way without dissenting, without coming at us in utter fury and swearing at us and all that kind of stuff.
But if there's reactions that we see that make us think, you know, that are genuine in the moment reactions that make us think, Oh, I think I missed something here. That's when you want to stop time. Absolutely. But we have to recognize that all of us, all of us will fill in the blanks. So, um, let's, let's not get too far on that one.
Um, you don't think it would have, Um, I'm, I'm not sure what you're watching, Paul, because that was so close to hitting the defender, and she took legitimate evasive action, and that is actually dangerous. I'm sorry, that I just, I, I'm gonna completely disagree on the facts with you there, because, I mean, it, it, literally the ball went right behind her, and the attacker's stick goes, goes past her waist.
in order to pluck it out of the air. And you don't actually have to get hit by the ball for something to be dangerous. But the defender's ability to play that ball is negatively affected. She is actually disadvantaged by the danger because the ball's coming flying at her and she has to try to protect herself instead of play the ball with skill.
That's the difference. The attacker is further back and Legitimate evasive action and danger does not apply between teammates, but she doesn't have to flinch away from the ball. The defender does. Sorry, outright disagree. And I think it's important, Paul, that sometimes I want you to take on a few more of these pieces of feedback because I've been doing this a while.
Okay. So let's move on to the next scenario.
Oh, I didn't go to the poll. I'll go to the poll after we see this.
I'll do two for one. Don't let me forget.
And I think, I, I really appreciate how Andy Halliday, uh, handled that because I think that's a very accurate or it's, it's, uh, a good understanding of how difficult it is to express these concepts. Sometimes within the parameters of a language that is not your first language, you're under pressure, you're making decisions in the moment.
Yes, Laureen is highly experienced and she's, you know, She's an extremely smart human being, and, but it doesn't mean that you're going to be infallible. So, in this situation, this ball is being sent wide of the target, and as I was saying before, I know Paul's going to disagree, but it's going wide of the target, and it's going to be considered as dangerous when it hits the body of the player, or causes legitimate evasive action, and that is why This is correctly called as a free hit.
All right. I'm going to have a look at the polls and see what, um, what y'all are saying here.
And let's see. Um, so on the first one, two of you are going with the goal, not thinking that there's any danger. And then, oops, and then four of you are saying the free hit for danger. And four of you, the ball that doesn't go, doesn't go five as well. And that's. And that's okay. I hope that what I did was be able to lead you through a different perspective on what we should be counting as that play.
And that it's not as simple as waiting until the player is turned around facing forwards in order to start the clock, as it were, to start the measuring tape, if that helps. And then on this last one, yeah, you didn't have a lot of time So totally fair, totally fair. Let's have a look at this.
Next time, Florian, don't even tell me.
So, um, Stain, you're asking, didn't it touch an Australian body? No, it didn't. It didn't. It, it, it appears so on one angle, but when you see it from above, it does not touch the Australian body at all. Um, and For Scott, an attacker appears to be in danger but you can't commit an offense against a teammate.
And I think that's one of the things that gets really difficult for us to parse in the moment, but it is a really important component of our decision making in this, in this time. So I agree with, um, those of you who are saying that, um, that the only player Who appears to be in danger whatsoever is the player who Snain thinks that the ball touched her body because she's jumping out of the way of it, but it doesn't touch her and she is a teammate.
So was there actually danger to any of the German defenders in this moment? Did they take a legitimate evasive action? And I mean, in that moment, Andy points out that Kurtz does move in a certain way, but she's She's moving out of the way of the swing, which is a positioning issue for her, and not necessarily a legitimate evasive action from the playing of the ball.
So, Scott thinks it's a goal because the defender isn't in danger, and then it's a goal, and I I agree with it. It's, it's hard though when players are jumping and they're moving and that sort of thing, it can get quite difficult to discern where is the legitimate evasive action from an opponent. Because again, we have to keep focusing on the fact that we're actually looking at how it makes it more difficult for an opponent to play if they're scared for their life.
if they're trying to make sure that they don't get hit with the ball and they can't exercise their skill. And that's why a ball that seems to be covering at the same height and from the same distance and all that thing can be dangerous in one level of play, but is not dangerous at another level because the player may have the skill to be able to attempt to play it and just isn't able to pull it off.
Okay. And that's why danger is one of those highly subjective, but in a good way, decisions that we need to make. Um, it's a bit of a mishit, but not dangerous. Plenty of room for the big swing. Yep. And, and that's okay. So looking at the polls, let's see, I know because we're on a, I'm on a delay from, or you're on a delay.
You see me about 30 seconds after I say something. So maybe we haven't had a lot of chance, but seven viewers saying for a goal and one of you for free hit danger. I hope that that, you know, that going through those principles really helped you out with that. And here's our last one for shots at goal.
So. What do y'all make of this one? This is a very tricky situation. One of the complicating factors with this scenario is that we don't have a very good understanding or we haven't really contemplated thoroughly just how far the ball must travel before it gets to the goal. And the definition of shot a goal is that the player The attacker must be attempting to direct it towards the goal.
Not that it reaches it, not that it gets five meters away from the backline or five meters away from the goalkeeper or anything like that. Just that it's directed towards the goal. Right? So if I make sure and go to the rules, let's get to the rules and I have this all set up for another scene, but we're, I'm going to do this and we're going to go to a shot at goal.
Okay. By playing the ball, attempting to score by playing the ball towards, oh, why isn't this working? There it is. Okay. Playing the ball towards the goal from within the circle. So it doesn't say that it needs to reach. It doesn't say that, uh, a deflection that occurs one meter, 50 centimeters away from where the shot was attempted, uh, It means that it's no longer a shot at goal.
There's nothing like that. And so we need to determine with our own sensibility, was that actually trying to score by directing it towards the goal?
Now I have to get back to this. This is hard. I got a lot of stuff juggling here. So the question for us to examine is now we kind of have to look at whether we think that this attacker was trying to score. So we're going to look at the angle at which that they're playing the ball. Okay. We're going to look at whether they had somebody to pass to, and that is all independent as from whether that ball goes off that defender or not.
So at the initial angle that it was traveling at, that we have to try to extrapolate from, you know, 70 centimeters. But for that touch, was that ball going to go on to the goal? Was that the intention of the attacker to score at that angle? And I'd love to see what that was that. Um, Paul thinks it was always going towards the goal.
You're very certain about these things. Um, yes, it looks like it was deflected. So valid shot, no goal. And so what, what you're saying is, is that you believe that the, the directionality, we can determine that very clearly from, you know, where it is. Um, and so we're not, danger is the lens through which a perspective we can apply to this decision, but what we're looking at is whether this is the first shot at goal or not, because the second, or that the scoring action is a hit.
So if this isn't a shot at goal, then this next thing, it doesn't matter whether it's dangerous or not. It 460 millimeters, which means that it is illegal. Okay. So we don't have to consider legitimate evasive action or all that kind of stuff. There is a black and white rule, which may or may not be a good thing, but there it is.
Uh, from Mark, the shot of goal definitely looks, it definitely looks like that to you. Would have gone over the line above the backboard from his hit. No goal, free hit defense. Um,
so I'm not sure what you mean, Mark, because the flick doesn't have to cross the backboard at any height. The hit later does. So it, we know that the hit crossed the goal line above 460 millimeters. Like that's fo sho'a. For sure. Okay. We can, we can see it right there. Okay. Does that help parse that out for you?
Uh, Sandy, this one feels so obvious. He was trying to score. You can't understand the argument otherwise, which means, and that's like, look, I love this. Thank you. Thank you for doing this because if you aren't undecided or going back and forth about this, I would invite you to To open your mind as Sandy is doing, because I've gone back and forth on this, and I'm really good at this stuff.
The initial angle that this player is moving the ball at, he's opened himself up, and we only have a very, very small distance that we're trying to make that assessment. I see that he's got a layoff here. That's Tim Brand. He's running in here.
Very well may have been the play. I don't know. But what I do know is when an umpire on the pitch makes a decision that I'm not sure I have better information of, I go with that umpire's decision. Something to consider. Okay.
So that doesn't necessarily, um, Viv, it's a really good point, but it doesn't necessarily mean that just because it went off a defender, it, that defender's touch, could have been before the ball was heading, you know, on its way to still heading quite wide. Okay. Um, and the runner got there, which stopped the whip, which, which had brought it on line.
Um, so then that means that the intention of the player changed.
Surely the final shot is the first hit a goal. The first look far, looks far too disguised to be a shot at goal. And so Mark, what you're talking about is that. that, that, um, that directionality of the body of the drag flicker and that, that Welch is, is opening his shoulders and he's, uh, pushing his hands back.
And there's an indication the ball is at least going to the right. And that is his favorite spot to go. He scored another goal, I think in this game, maybe in another game, going to that bottom right hand corner, attacking view. So there you go. Um, it's not that it's subjective. It's an objective fact as to whether it was going on goal or not.
We just don't know because we don't have enough information. So there you go. Okay. Let's have a look at the poll on this one and see what y'all think. And it's okay to go either way on this. What I want you to be doing is making sure that you're oops. And now I'm, I'm totally messing up my overlay here.
Um, it's important to understand the principles. Okay. And understand that your decision in the moment on the pitch might be a very difficult one to make. And what you're going to prioritize is probably if you're absolutely like 50 50, I don't know, you're not going to take away a goal that otherwise you don't have a reason to do so.
So that's where the danger perspective comes in to it that was mentioned earlier. Okay. is that if a bunch of players do take legitimate evasive action, but they're, but in a normal circumstance, if that shot was, okay, how do I say this properly? If they're taking legitimate evasive action, they're on the They're close to the back line, for example, and they're not marking and they're protecting the goal, but they shouldn't need to protect themselves in that instance, because it's not a legitimate shot at goal.
Then you would go the other way. Does that make sense? I don't know if that's helping, but it's about applying a fairness and danger oriented lens to things that adheres to the spirit of the game. I don't know if I explained that very well. But let's see. So let's see, one of you thinks that it was a free hit defense and nine of you believe that it's a goal.
And that's fair. I'm, I am literally 50 50 on this one. And I really don't know if I were the umpire in the, in the case, I probably would have called a goal because I wouldn't go against the natural playing of things unless I had a safety reason that, that, that colors the situation for me. Okay.
Excellente. Uh, little reminder for everyone, if I do this, the season training plan, we are now in pre we're in the first stage of sales. So everybody who signed up for the waitlist. for the season training plan. They have a few days to whip up their spots because we had a really good response on the wait list.
Um, it, it wasn't the full slots, but I want to make sure that everybody who signed up, they get first dibs on, uh, signing up for the season training program because it's limited spots available. It's only 20 that we're doing in order to provide the best attention and Individualization for those people who need it and that sort of thing and be able to make it responsive and, and gather all the data back that we can to make sure that this is serving your needs.
So if you didn't sign up for the waitlist, then Wednesday, Wednesday sales open up for the rest. For those of you who did sign up for the waitlist, go get your spot now, go get it, go get it. And yellow members are receiving their 20 percent discount on this. So I hope that that is helpful. Going to be interesting for you.
And if you're wondering, oh my God, yellow and all that kind of stuff. Yeah, this is the third team that we're talking about. So down there, QR code to go have a look. And it's just one of the many things that we do, uh, as part of the third team is, uh, yellow members get discounts on courses and programming and they get watch parties and debriefs and all kinds of stuff.
So you can come. Ask me questions about it. Ask Mike McCartney. I've subjected him to many a debrief and he loves it. He loves it. Every one of them have been just so much fun. Right, Mike? There you go. Um, reminds you of the one that elicited such a debate attacker throwing in this path of the ball while turn whilst turning away, but successfully deflecting into the goal.
Yeah, that was Scotland. Scotland and England at Euros. Women. I'll, um, pardon me. I'll, I'll go have a look and see if I can pull up that clip. Cause we did have a really long, lengthy discussion, long and lengthy redundancies. Redundancies. Um, those are there and yes, definitely the best photo ever. Wait, I want to go back to that because it was the best photo ever.
Look, look, it's like, doot, doot, doot, doot. It's we're like a mountain range. Or a mountain range. Okay. Um, oh good it put it in the link in the chat twice because you definitely need that. Right. How are we doing for time? Uh oh. Battles in the circle. This is something we haven't talked about a lot but boy there were a lot of clips in the last little while.
So I'm interested in your thoughts. This is sort of the lead up thing because I think what we're establishing here is an understanding of positional superiority. And it's one of those sort of guiding principles that we don't talk about very often, but it comes into play with obstruction. It comes into play with this kind of physical contact.
And when we say hockey is a non contact sport, um, we kind of want it to be that way, but it necess it isn't necessarily. There is definitely contact in there. And this is sort of the level of contact that We would normally, um, we would appreciate as being just good competition for the ball. And in this case Are we watching the right things?
Are we looking for who has gotten into the space first? Um, and it's an important thing to be able to develop this skill and it takes more than just, especially when the ball's in the circle and it's closer to us, our vision is going to narrow. We're going to start to look downwards and we're going to start to get very, very ball focused.
without appreciating all of the different pieces that are moving, all the chess pieces, the players, the chess players, who are moving in the circle in all different, you know, two dimensional space basically, and who is moving into position first. And so you need to be able to take a little bit of a step back and widen your view and your perspective and It's tough to say, look at everything, but you do.
And you also are going to want to ask and you're going to want to lean on your supporting umpire for this because of their further distance from the play. As long as they're not unsighted by bodies, they may be able to have a better perspective of all of the different pieces and who's getting where first.
So for me, I see as, uh, Paul does that the penalty corner that was awarded for the ball hitting the defender in the body after it flipped up her stick as being, uh, the initial decision that, uh, that we can stick there. And I'm gonna, I'll come back to the poll a little bit later because I want to give everybody chances to vote, but also move through the stuff as quickly as I can.
Okay. So A few things all happen in here and there's some misunderstandings I think about exactly what is needing to get parsed out and there's a piece of the puzzle that I don't think gets addressed here because the language that is being used is not specific enough. The biggest problem with this entire video referral is that there is, there are conversations happening right in front of me here.
That are coming through the channel, and then there are conversations going on with the supporting umpire. And players going to talk to him. And that's all going through the audio, so Loreen is, you know, at one point she says, I need you to clear the channel. Like, shut everybody up so that I can actually talk to you and get the appropriate information, because I'm not getting it.
So, the first issue is here on the swing from Manpreet. And let's see if I can get this, this moving properly. Okay, so as the ball gets crossed in, we're looking at the, at this here as the first initial foul, but then after the whistle goes, there is a strike at, at goal that to me should have been dealt with, with a card.
But because of the difficulty in getting to the, all the information out, it gets bypassed. So when we are in this situation. At home, when we get together with our colleague and say, did you see anything different? And your supporting umpire is going to see something different in this situation because at the angle that Maheel is at, he doesn't see the push the same way.
A supporting umpire, especially one who's in mission critical positioning and isn't out on the sideline and is more in the middle of the pitch is going to see that as clear as you like. And when you get together, it's going to be, well, what did you see? I saw the defender leaning through the attacker as they are shooting.
Intentional foul inside the circle, that's a penalty stroke for me, not danger on Manpreet's wing. After that, and you're going to step through all of it and say, and hey, there was this other thing that just happened, that playing the ball after the whistle dangerously, that is An easy green card to give.
And you can deal with those two things separately. You can give the penalty stroke for the physical contact and you can give the green card to the same team because that is misconduct after the whistle. It is not a team penalty. Okay. That's the way that I see that. Uh, okay.
Good to see you, uh, Alexander. Drive by like, thank you very much. And I look forward to your comments on the replay squad. Was it enough, um, was it an intentional foul? Yes, it was an intentional foul. Absolutely. When you come in from behind on a player and you are reaching in and you're leaning your body on them, I'm not sure how that's anything but.
Okay. So I hope that. That really helps you. I, I think this is a very clear thing that McKeel was not just because of the angle when somebody's coming in from behind. If you're in that line, it's going to be difficult to see. And it's an excellent use of a video referral to get this, um, nailed down. Okay.
Uh, let's see. That is B. So I'll go to the poll just to sort of see where we're at so I can catch up with the last one. And
turn that off and let's see. Um, so five of you went with the penalty corner playing with the body with the previous situation, which was, uh, the GB, uh, uh, USA situation. And one of you saw the free hit for the push, and I'm sure the votes are going to keep coming in for this one, but right now we're at 50 50.
So,
um, gotcha. Let's see with the comments here.
Scott, your first question you ask yourself would be why did the attacker miss the swing? That's a really good starting point, a really good question to ask yourself, skill or pressure because of unfair contact from the defender. Yeah, I like that a lot. Um, no, it, it, no, we, we don't have to, we just go with the intentional foul.
Okay. Mark, you see the USA player red moving their body around the ball before taking possession, shielding the ball, free hit, but. Okay, I want to come back to this because this is a little bit concerning. She is entitled to take that position to try to shoot on goal. Like, how else does she get herself in a position?
Like, she has to stay open to the defender who's coming from behind her, from the side, to not shield the ball. So let's not get those things confused. Okay, there are, there are accepted and understandable aims of players that involve getting themselves in positions so that they can actually perform the action that they are out there to do, which is score a goal.
And it would be ridiculous for her to do anything else in this situation. And the defender just gets beaten to the ball. Okay, so I hope that that helps on that. Let's go to the next, I think this is the last one. Battles.
So, although the issue of, that was being discussed in the referral was whether the ball crossed the line or not, and Superfair didn't have the right angle to give any different information, so, uh, no advice possible being the conclusion there. What I hope that you were picking out of it was Kun, um, saying at least twice that he played a double advantage on fouls coming in.
This is the first one. That's the first shove right there. And I need to fix my overlay. Okay. There's one coming in from the player who crosses the ball. Okay. That is the first. So it's that one there. That's the first intentional foul. And then there's a second one. That takes out the player, as we'll see in a second, there, okay?
That's the second one. And he sees both of them. And he plays advantage on what could be two penalty strokes. And I don't often think, well, that was a great way to play advantage on a penalty stroke because the safest option is Almost always, just to make the decision, but look at the opportunity that that player has.
Goalkeeper is down and out. And just because an advantage doesn't work, doesn't mean it wasn't the best advantage. Because players don't score every penalty stroke. They pop them wide. They put them at the goalkeeper. The goalkeeper makes an insane save. The percentages, I think, were in favor of this being a goal, even more so than a penalty stroke.
And it just didn't work out that way. And so I, what I wanted to sort of just sort of illustrate, first of all, is like, oh my God, amazing advantages, but also what we're, what we're calculating as Intentional fouls that could result in, uh, penalty strokes and the notion of the body interference. And I'm using the word pushing a lot and I'm kind of hauling myself up on this right now because there's no foul in the, there's no, you know, the push does appear in the rule book, but not in this context.
It's about pushing the ball, but it's, it's either obstruction or it's interfering with the body of an opponent. With your body. or stick. And it is frequently going to be an offense, an intentional offense, because of the degree of control that a player has in that moment. Do they have the control? Are they making the choice in running in at an angle and putting their hand on, tripping them up with their feet from behind, throwing their body at them as they're diving across the goal?
Those are intentional fouls that are penalty stroke worthy. Okay. Let's see what y'all have to say as we're going through this.
Just watch the match, it was well umpired, it was very well umpired. Um, I, I think Kunz had a stormer in the last two weeks at Lee Valley. He's, he's been umpiring extremely well. Um, yep, and he played the advantages and they were awesome. And that save though, I know, but we're not talking about players.
We're not allowed to. Yeah, it was insane. And that's how good the advantages were that, like, you would have never, like, And. Had. Could, or any umpire, gone back in the situation and awarded the penalty stroke, or if this had been referred. And that's why it's so good, the way that Kun explained, I played advantage twice on this play.
So, if y'all want to go and try to refer this, both teams have the referral, so Australia could have referred this, and the message would have been, up to the video umpire, to Seb, I played two advantages off these strokes. I saw them. This was a significant equal to a penalty stroke scoring opportunity. Are you going to overrule me?
And Seb wouldn't know. So I'm really glad that that communication was clear enough for the players to understand. And that's what we need to be able to do on the pitch at times is to be able to say, I saw it and I played an advantage and y'all just didn't finish. Um, and this was not through, I mean, maybe Sharp could have gone high with that shot, but really that was just an outstanding, outstanding save.
And yeah, Cone puts his whistle to mouth on the second contact and refrains from blowing. It's a split second decision. He could have had his whistle in his mouth the whole time and he could have refrained from blowing both times. That would have been even better. Um, and that's okay. Most of us aren't umpiring at the level where this particular situation of all of these facts would put together, like, just imagine if you call that, because it's happening so quickly, we're watching it in slow mo, but it's happening so quickly, that ball was going to be in the net as Kuhn was blowing a penalty stroke.
And how do the players react when that happens? They lose their, their, their marbles. So there you go. Absolutely. Yep. I agree, Stefan saying an amazing job in their awareness and you can't give another bite at it. Absolutely. Mark, uh, the umpire allowed play to continue. Yep. There you go. Oh, hi taco. It's a what up Sunday?
Glad you're here. I'm going to go back to the polls just so we can see if anything else happened with, um, the last one. And I, I know what y'all are going to say on.
Okay. Okay. And
So we got four for the penalty stroke on that one and, huh, did I screw that up? I screwed that up. Everybody loved the advantage, 100%, two of you. Did I skip? Did I skip that one?
I did skip this.
Don't worry, Nikki and I have spoken about this. Eventually, I believe that she will change the way she talked, talks about that decision.
That's because I just showed you 3D. This is 3C. So I apologize. I'm, there's just too many, there's too many clips,
right? So you can see that this is another one of those really difficult ones. And if you put this alongside the GB India scenario, B, 3B, um, this is, There was a little progression that I, that I ruined from A, B, and C, but this one is a really, um, really tough one because there is definitely contact and leaning coming from the defender who is behind in this situation and using her leverage to push shoulder to shoulder.
The Australian player also goes down a little bit on this one as she's Trying to go for a shot, but would she, is she looking to develop a little backspace? So a lot of the players now are developing this skill, and we'll start seeing this, you know, in five years. It'll be at all of the levels of play that we're umpiring, where they know that if they actually work the ball back of their body that they will gain some space to actually be able to take the shot rather than trying to force it through a defender who is marking front space for them.
So, um, So really interesting. And yeah, this is a really good point, Mike. Um, Laureen visually sold this and managed in the moment for players and crowd, um, including big obvious look up to college colleague as decision is changing. I love this. Thank you for pointing this out because what Laureen makes sure to do is what we would call a arena umpiring.
She gets the indication from Cookie over the radio because in the moment she calls a penalty corner. And then is like, I'm going to check this, and she's immediately saying, I'm going to refer this, and Cookie's saying, yeah, I saw the push, I think it's a penalty stroke. And she changes her penalty to a stroke, because she could call a corner and then refer herself for a stroke, saying, I think actually I should have gone bigger on that.
And. She still continues with the self referral, but all of her body language in her presentation shows that she's getting information from her supporting colleague, which is fantastic. And that's exactly what we need to be doing when we have the ability to use radios, is we don't just make it secret, um, agent, like, okay.
Yeah. All right. We, we want to make it nice and big so players understand that we're working together without having to take the time to have a consultation every time. Okay, so really valuable skill and I like that. Um, why what? I need more information? Um, would be interesting what the video umpire would advise if it were a PC.
Hard to say. Hard to say, right? And this is again, going back to the original thing that I said, when umpires make a decision, the two of them on the pitch decided together on the penalty stroke, if you're not sure you need clear evidence as a video umpire, that you're going to change the decision. And Ahmed just went in it.
So, uh, no, no, I showed you, you're here at the right time. We didn't talk about anything. Of course you have to watch the whole thing. And yes, making it obvious that you're talking to the colleague. Okay. So more of this is about working with a supporting colleague than what the actual decision was in the moment.
I hope that helps. And Scott says, uh, that he acts a little melodramatically, melodramatically to show everyone that you're consulting. With your colleague, it calms the players down. Absolutely. Showing that clearly is going to help them. It takes away one of their avenues. Like, well, ask that person, you know, that person disagrees with you.
It's like, actually, no, they're the one who told me. So we're on the same page here, friends. And yes, it is a fantastic management tool. Um, and Stefan, just going back to the last one, the nation cup men's shootout is an example of how easy it is to blow early. Yep. Exactly. It's sometimes a damned if you do, damned if you don't, but I still think if an umpire opts to blow early in, particularly in a shootout situation because of time running out, I'm going to back them up on that 10 out of 10 times.
Okay. Okay. Um,
bit word, I'm, I'm waiting to see, oh, a bit word, bit word for a Sunday. Melodramatically. I don't know. Um, 12. 4 V help from other umpire. Why? I don't understand what the problem, what you're asking. Are you asking why you're supporting umpire would help you on that decision? Um, oh, and a big word. Okay. A big word.
There you go. And yes, it's for everybody. It's for everybody, especially because when you've got, you know, more than just, uh, somebody's uncle and their dog watching a game, their verbal reactions really fuel how players and coaches see the situation. A mob mentality works all over the place. And if the players are getting all jacked up because of what they're hearing from the people around, just.
You know, umpire any university, any Bucks match in England, and I'll tell you all about that. Um, if you can control that, you have a very effective, uh, extra management tool. Scott, if a penalty stroke is awarded in a shootout, does the same attacker have to take it or any player from their team, any player who is eligible to take it?
And it doesn't have to be from one of the shooters. It can be from the. entire roster, as long as they haven't been permanently suspended from the game. Okay, we're almost there. We're gonna go through this really quickly, she says.
We're skipping right to the video review of this shootout.
So you can see that a stroke ends up being called in this situation.
I'm gonna skip, but there was another stroke, um, in this, Same game, like, one set later and the, um, and the goalkeeper changed their stick again. The, uh, the save was made off the blocker in the first stroke and then the second stroke scored. Just so you know, not that that's crucial. However, like I often do, I hear this information that a goalkeeper can change their stick.
Because it's a shootout or a penalty stroke. And I was like, Oh yeah, that sounds reasonable. Except, uh, it's wrong. So we're going to go to the pro league shootout regulations. Okay. And it's kind of hard to go through three pages of shootout regulations, but there's nothing in this. Okay. Uh, three pages that says that a stick can be changed, but what I want you to see is the very last item, 23, unless varied by this appendix or appendix one, the rules of hockey apply in a shootout, right?
So we're going to go to the rules of hockey. Oops. I didn't mean to put up the video on power protocols. I meant to put up the rules. Oops. Oops. And this is something that you probably haven't looked up because it doesn't happen in regular play. You don't see a goalkeeper playing with a stick and, um, and, and playing in regular time and then wanting to use a different stick for their penalty stroke.
But players must not change their stick between the award and completion of a penalty corner. Or penalty stroke, uh, unless it no longer meets the stick specification. So because there's nothing in the shootout regulations that allow it, the rules of hockey apply and a player is not permitted to change their stick.
So absolutely fascinating. I, I mean, I've been watching. Hundreds of matches every year, international level. I've done my own. I have not seen this come up as an issue. The goalkeepers who are changing their, who, who use a different stick in the shootout are doing so because they want extra length in the shootout because of the specific kinds of saves that they're making in that one on one situation, different from the kind of saves that they want to make in a penalty stroke.
And this is just You know, one of those things that once you know, you know forever, but maybe it was something that escaped you. It certainly escaped me, so I'm grateful for the opportunity to have seen that. So, um, yes. Uh, the shootout should have been done with the stick he started. He started the shootout.
Um, that he started
the shootout with, not necessarily the game. They can change their stick. He is permitted to change the stick for the shootout and use all of those things. And he could even change his stick between different shootouts if he wants because there's no prohibition about changing the stick in those moments.
But as soon as a penalty stroke is awarded, the stick that he was using prior to that moment has to be the stick that he defends. Uh, it, no, you just don't let it happen. And the umpires there did let it happen because they were mistaken. And very reasonably so. So it's, it's just, it's, it's not that it's, it's a retake, you just, you just don't let it happen.
And once it's happened, it's over. It's over. It's done. Um, Mike, you once had this in a game, goalkeeper complained their grip was unraveling in the rain and wanted to switch, told them to wait till quarter time.
But, was that between the award and completion of a penalty corner or penalty stroke? Remember, the whole idea of this was not to stop players from changing sticks altogether. It was so that drag flickers couldn't play with a stick during the rest of the game, and then when a penalty corner was awarded, go get a specialty drag flicking stick that had a big bow on it.
That was the reason for it. That's why this rule came into place. and also just speaking as somebody who used to have a 45 millimeter bow stick for indoor, I can tell you that all flicking, including, uh, taking penalty strokes was a lot easier when you had a wicked bow, but it made it really hard to make all of the other skills work like receptions.
So, uh, so that's, That's the key. And I mean, if, if Mike, I'm still thinking about your situation, if a goalkeeper wants you to stop the game so they can go change your stick, that's different. You're like, no, you don't get to do that. But if they wanted to have another stick behind their goal and change it in the middle of play, that's different, but they can't change it.
Once a penalty corner or penalty stroke has been awarded, anything else is allowed. I hope that helps. Oh, during a PC. Okay. See, you got to tell me these things. Pieces of information are important. Okay. Another dragging on the penalty stroke.
So this was after the penalty stroke was awarded in the Germany, Austria, Australia thing that we just watched.
So what we're seeing here is that motion of the curl of the hands and the bowing back of the hands. that has the ball moving potentially a little bit on her stick. But,
and the other thing that, that we just, we just heard a little, okay, I'm going to listen.
I'm not going to blow the whistle or I'm not, I'm not going to ask. I'm just going to blow the whistle. So when I blow my whistle, we start. She, she says that to players every time, because that's the fricking rule. So stop asking players, player ready, goalkeeper ready, striker ready, penalty. Is your dog ready?
Nobody cares. Are you ready? Make the players play. End of story. Those are the rules. Okay, so what we want to see here is that back foot. That back foot is not ahead of the line of the ball. It doesn't move. This player does a classic penalty stroke footwork motion, which is starting with their feet together and then takes one step ahead.
So for all you purists who don't like the whole, I can take multiple steps book, she's got both of her feet and her right foot is behind the line of the ball. I just wanted you to see that.
I rest my case. Um, Andrew using, he was using a 42 inch stick. Would that conform to the rules of hockey, excluding the shootout regs? Yes, it does. It does. That's the maximum length stick in the rules of hockey. And we can go look that up, but I know it's there, so you can go find it. All right, so we went well over time and that was only half of the joy.
The, the fruits, the few its of the dibby, the fruits of the FIH Pro League action from 10 days. So we're going to do it again on Wednesday because I'm a sucker for punishment. And so are you! And we're gonna cover some intentional aerials, we're gonna cover, um, goalkeeper obstruction and shootout, mm hmm, and a few other fun little tasty treats.
So don't forget to come back and join if you got value out of this. I would appreciate if you would show that appreciation. I would appreciate if you would appreciate. I would be grateful if you'd show your appreciation and give me a like. Um, I can, I can do that, right? I can do that. Where's my where did I put that?
From a huh. I've lost it now. GIF? Nope. I've lost my like and subscribe and do all the things button. Oh no, there it is. I found it. It was tucked away in a folder. Um, and for all of you who keep coming back, I love being able to spend this time with you and having my brain pushed and, um, showing y'all how difficult it is for me not to make a mistake in every live stream.
So thank you very much. Um, toodle pip sir, as always, and you were in the garden. Don't even. Don't even! I'm just kidding. I'm glad you're here. Yep. More joy on Wednesday. And it was a great, this is not a Keely Hour. This is a Keely Hour in a bit. So apologies. And nice to see you, Stefan. And I know it's Monday morning for you and all of my other Keely friends.
So thank you for skipping work. I won't tell you boss. It's fine. It'll be absolutely fine. And there you go. And Stain, you've got something else. Yeah. I'll be prepping for Wednesday as soon as I. Stop doing this. So it's fantastic. Taco, thank you for showing us and you will do the two time speed. Excellent.
Good to hear. Enjoy the rest of your Sunday. Enjoy your Monday for those of you in the future, and we'll see you in the discord server for teas, if you're available, see you later.
#hockeyumpiringvideos #fieldhockeyumpiringvideos #hockeyedumpiring #hockeyumpiringrules
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.