Live Q&A #WhatUpWednesday Ep. 119

📅 May 31 18.00 GMT
➡️ YouTube

We're chock-a-block with lots of interesting scenarios and questions on the table. We'll work through a VR from the GBRvBEL #FIHProLeague match where a back stick led to the ball travelling off the end line. And how do you prove to me that bullies are the worst? Let me show you how with this hot Promotieklasse clip. Wrapping the main event is a scenario where the umpire is faced with raised vs. danger on hit.

We'll also determine how intimidating goalkeepers can be with spicy leg guards, whether FIH umpires should know the difference between ENG and GBR, and what it means when sportsball VAR officials get fired en masse.

See you there!

🚨 Sign up now and nail those big calls with Mission Critical Positioning!

⏱ Chapter Markers:

Check out when the next #WhatUpWednesday will go live.

🟢🟡🔴 🏑

Transcript

🎶

hello. I think things are going well. Let's try this again.

Warm up.

🎶

I'm ready to go again. I'm ready for that song again. I don't know. I was, I've gotten away from my routine of listening to some fun music before the streams, and I know it sounds really silly, like, why do you need to get hyped up, blah, blah, blah. It really does. I. Change your mood, change your approach, all that sort of thing.

So I was dancing to a few of my favorite songs as I was finishing up my makeup and doing that sort of thing. And then this is one of, you know, my favorite songs as well and I was really enjoying it. And I'm, you know, maybe it was an intentional error in the beginning of the string. I don't know what happened.

It's good to see you all. I am very happy to be back on a what up Wednesday. We have a really, uh, cool mix of topics for you. And, you know, here's gonna be the fun part because I'm pretty sure that I didn't program this scene properly. So while y'all are talking to yours amongst yourselves, I'm gonna get this queued up so that I can fix this on the fly.

You got, this is gonna be good. This is gonna be really good.

Okay. I'm ready. I'm ready. Okay. These are our topics today.

No.

Oh, it's not letting me do it. Here we go. A video referral for a backs stick off the end line. A bully Dispute what raised versus danger on a hit. Rules on goalkeeper. Leg guards. And we're gonna talk about a little Twitter thing. G B R, not England. And we might talk about VR officials in sports while getting fired.

No guarantee. Oh goodness. You know what? It's good times you guys. It's very, very good times. Okay, so applied all scenes. There we go. I'm gonna fix this. I am absolutely gonna fix this. Ah, it wouldn't really be a stream if it wasn't a complete. Wonderment. It's a wonderment. Let's, let's just go with that. Raj is here as well.

I'm really excited to be, uh, seeing Mr. Oh, I'm gonna say it wrong. Steven. Hi, Dyhrberg. Dyhrberg, it's, you're from South Africa, so I'm guessing I'm gonna do it wrong no matter what it is. Oh, no, no. You're from New Zealand. That's right. Still gonna get it wrong. So there you go. Uh, Steffan's here so you two can connect, which is really nice.

Um, there you go. And, uh, the mea family's here, ladies and gentlemen. Airhorn that, wait, there it goes. I dunno why. It's just the thought of a whole family watching me. Just because there's one of you in front of the TV right now does not mean that there's not a whole bunch of you watching right now. And I don't know what is going on with my stream health rate here because it is choppy af.

Let's see what's going on here. The whole, the whole thing, when I look at the stream health, it says it's healthy, so

Mm. That means the problem's not on YouTube side. The problem is on my side,

and I don't like this at all, it's just Frank. Frank, you're never a just, it is Frank. It's very frank. That's what I need you to, to grasp. Oh, and it's my e cam. It is my e cam That is killing. It is operating at 30 gigabytes. Oh, it seems to have fixed itself. Okay,

let's just go with it. First one diver. Okay, I got it. I got it. First one's diver locked in. No, it wasn't just you. Okay. The voice is okay. Everything's okay? Everything's okay? Yeah, it looked like 10 frames a second and I'm still operating in some really awful memory situations here. So you think I'm back, Chris?

Uh oh. I'm just gonna take a little screenshot of this so I can send it into tech support.

I think I'm back too. Okay. Fun times. But before we get into even the more fun stuff, I would like to here with announce the following fantastic news. Let's Go. Crispy has done it. He has achieved his grade in, in international grade of indoor.

Apparently, uh, web M effects are not going to be okay today, but I only needed it for Crispy and I'm, I don't care. I'm gonna push through for Crispy because he deserves it. He's been waiting so long and working so hard for his indoor, and I know he loves to do indoor hockey and we need more people who are both versed in, who are both versed, who are versed in both areas of the game.

So it's been a good few months for Crispy new dad, new badge. And I'm really proud of you buddy. Uh, Crispy's, part of our yellow program here with F H U three T. So if you're interested in hearing more about it, you better pop over, um, to fh umpires.com/f H U three T. There are some big changes coming up.

So my suggestion would be to you, if you've been thinking about it, you have two choices. You can hang on until July or get in now and you might be locking in something at a better price, just saying, but we'll see what happens. Okay. Um, my mouse is lost. It's lost. It's lost. It's lost. This is really fun today.

It is really top stuff and. What I love the most is how Crispy shows up for our yellow huddles and he's never on camera cuz he's either building something or he is holding a baby. Like that's great. That's a great green shirt that he was wearing. Yes, yes. There you go. All the congratulations coming Crispy had to add a baby into the mix.

I know, right? It's not the usual thing. It's not the usual thing, but I guess just a little, little change up in the world that happened. Good to see you, David. Of course. And David, for all of you who don't know David, David is not in the hockey world and yet he still comes to these streams on a regular basis just so he can learn stuff and watch how many times I can break my live streams.

The answer to that question is all the time. All the time. There you go. Can is 4:00 AM Girl, it's good to see you again. Let's see. Can I, can I like that. There you go. It's always good to see you and I really appreciate you getting up at such a crazy hour. Okay, let's get another topics. Let's, let's see what I can break today.

Should be good. Here is our first topic, a VR backtick off the end line. This came from pro league action this weekend, outside sale. Trying to have a look. That was the, wasn't it? It's not in the circle over. You don't need to appeal.

1, 1, 1.

Yeah. Look, in real time it looked like a back stick. Oh.

Yes. I'm giving a question now. Wait, looking for a corner for England was a deliberate backtick. Okay, take a look.

This is deliberate. Look at looks, Paul. It's gonna need to be super slowmo to see that contact. It just looked in real time. Very strange. So we are looking at Paul's stick position. I was like in the circle in your appeal for a backtick because it felt like it was, oh, well back. See that be a back stick.

But is it deliberate over the baseline in the circle? Nailed on this is the issue is, I'm not convinced they can give it the deliberate backtick, but will he not be playing the ball off the back of the, it will be. It's considered to be deliberate, but I'm not sure he is even looking at it. He's spinning his hips.

It is a backs stick, but that's what it looked like in real time recently. Greg Britain should've got the long corner. But that, well, if that's considered to be deliberate, it's a, it's a big call if you see it going. I have a dis Okay. We got a decision coming.

Go ahead. Yeah. I have advice for you. Yeah. It is going to be a long corner. Yeah, but they will lose their referral because it's not a penalty corner. Understand. I need your captain, please. Captain.

Okay. For us. Okay. The advice is, the advice is it's gonna be a long penalty corner.

Yeah. And you know me so well because I thought it was a spurious call from Ropa, he said was Backtick and he saw that. But you're then trying to ask about interpretation of deliberate, not deliberate. It was in the circle. Absolutely. But I don't think you can blow that as deliberate PO was spinning and reeling.

So I made sure to let you listen to the commentary this time, and it's up to you to think about how much of that is going to help or how much of that you would like to not be listening to so you can make your own evaluation. So we were running a watch party during this, uh, with the yellow group and I had some, some input at the time and I was fortunate enough to be able to, um, to, to guess the right way from what I understand.

So, um, let me hear your thoughts. Let's get a poll on this. Do you think this should have been a penalty corner, or do you think that this should have been a free hit outside the circle, or do you think that this should have been a 23 meter restart or a 15 meter?

Now, the one thing that I want to get across right away is that as we're watching this replay, I think the thing that a lot of observers who don't umpire on regular basis don't understand is how difficult it is to get decisions, right When you're close to the ball and it seems ridiculous. We spend a lot of time training ourselves.

There's a lot of people who think that you need to be close in order to make accurate decisions, but. Actually, in many cases, being close means that your margin for error is so much greater if you just happen to be looking off the focus. If you've taken your eye to another player, if you're just, if, if a leg gets in the way at the wrong time, suddenly you don't see something that seems patently obvious.

So that is not the theme of this discussion whatsoever. We're gonna go through what the decision process has to be, and we're gonna explain it about video referral. And I know for a lot of people, we think like, why are we spending so much time on video referrals? Because you all ask me the questions.

Okay. That's why we do it. There's so much and there's, there's a lot of things that we can, yes. Eventually learn about the scenarios when we do so. Okay? So let's see what we have to say. Uh, Frank let me know why. Okay. You know what I'm like, you know, I want to hear the details and I wanna hear why Brent in Slowmo, it looks like an intentional, backtick good highlight.

In Slowmo, it looks like an intentional backtick and the more we look at matches and we have the opportunity to look at them at different angles and it at different rates of speed and that sort of thing, we have to understand when slow motion changes our perception of realtime events. And when Iyana was on the show, uh, prove it's probably a couple years ago now, and she did a really good job explaining from her perspective as being one of the top video referral umpires in the world, particularly that she makes sure that she watches the events in real time as well.

So she wants to see it first in real time, and then she wants to see slow motion because she understands how much of her perception is going to be colored or changed. And then looking at all the different angles and such like that. I told you on Instagram. Oh, did I? I didn't know that. After you joined a livestream for the first time.

Oh, okay. Hi. Are you allowed to use a stick behind your body or do you have to have it in front of you at all times? Good question, David. And know the, it's not that the stick has to be in a position of your body, it just, you can't be. Obstructing another player from accessing the ball by using your stick or your body or one of your teammates to block them away.

Okay? Okay, Steffani, you have a question? The first call was for a 50 meter defense, and it changed to a 3 23 meter restart. So the video referral's lost because the challenge was a pc. Precisely. Okay, so let's deal with that right now. A video referral can only be asked for by a team requesting that either a penalty corner penalty stroke goal is a w an in, sorry.

Teams can request a video referral on incidents that lead to decisions about penalty, corners, penalty strokes, or goals they cannot ask for. An out of bounds. They can't ask for a free hit outside the circle. It has to be a decision relating to one of those things, one of those three things. Okay. If they do not get the results that they ask for, then they lose their referral unless the thing that changed the decision.

Oh boy. No. I'm just gonna leave that for now because my mind will catch up to my mouth in a moment about when something happens prior to the incident in question. Okay. Slow motion. It looks like backtick. Not sure though. Okay. Let's go back to this. Around the outside in real time

that I was about to be sick, wasn't it? And it's not in the circle, right? I'm gonna look for a few others. Mike agrees. Good. You need to be close enough to sell it in far away to see enough. Maybe you don't have to be close to sell things anymore. And I think we really, you know, I talk about this a lot when I talk about c p, don't let me get off on a tangent, but in brief, I don't think that is as crucial as it used to be.

And even if being close is good for selling decisions, is that so high on our priority list that we're gonna sacrifice things like actual accuracy, actually being able to protect our circle. Okay. I think those two things are a lot more important than selling a decision because the best way to sell a decision is to get it right.

That really does help. Um, thanks for putting a Q Colon. Luckily, I've been well trained by my people not to ever look for that. Um, deliberate. You feel the defender knew he was beaten. Okay.

The last of the movement for Steven. Looks like you played that with some intent. So deliberate. Okay. Let's talk about what we look at when we determine whether somebody plays the ball intentionally off the end line. Okay. There's two ways in which this decision could result in a penalty corner. I hope everybody's in agreement that the contact with the ball is outside the circle.

Okay. Which means my thing isn't working. Of course it's not working

and this isn't working either. Man, this is annoying. Okay. I won't be able to do this. Maybe I can do it this way.

Not if I can't find my mouse friends. Do. Do.

Okay. Is this gonna work?

Nope. No video pencil today. Sorry friends. So what do we look at when we're trying to determine somebody playing the ball intentionally off the end line? What factors did we look for? Because we're not mind readers. So what is it? We are looking for the directionality of the player's body. If the player layer is.

Has their feet, shoulders, hips pointed towards the end line and the ball goes in that direction. We're like, Hmm, could be a duck. We look at the amount of control the player has of their body at the moment that they play the ball. If they are well-balanced, if they have the ball in a good position, vis-a-vis their body.

If they can move their stick, they have so much control that they have different directions in which they could play the ball could be a duck. We look at the pace at which they hit the ball. Could be a duck. Do they get good contact with the ball? Okay. We have to look at all those things. So looking at this situation, let's look at where the defender is.

Okay, here's the defender in red as he's getting turned inside out by Roper. Great job, Phil. Okay. He is not pointed towards the M line in any way, shape or form. In fact, his feet are pointed out towards the sideline.

Okay? He is off balance in this moment, so he doesn't have good control of anything and his stick is kind of behind him. And I think what he tries to do, actually, I mean, he's, he's actually trying to get, he's trying to access the ball, but if anything, you could argue a bit of a stick obstruction at some point, maybe if kind of somewhat.

Okay. So I'll let it roll again. So how are we looking at. How are, how, what if we put together all of those things that we're looking for. We don't have a player who's facing the the end line. We don't have good pace on the ball. We don't have full control of the stick. We've got a player who's off balance, who's been turned inside out.

Do we have intentionally playing the ball at the end line?

Okay. Let's see. And yeah, it was a great move.

Okay, so going back to Steven's comment breakdown, what informs the words that you're using? Because using the words is begging the question. We need to actually gather from the facts from what we see, what we believe contributes to the application of that principle. This happened in one of the games you were umpiring, you would've gone with a 23 restart.

But that's also because the level of town is lower. Okay. Ak? The backtick would absolutely be unintentional over the back line. Okay. Back of the stick outside The circle is a free hit outside if it's unintentional. Absolutely. The advantage here is it goes over the back line. So 23 meter restart can be applied.

If it's a deliberate breakdown, then upgrade to a pc. Yeah. You weren't sure it was a backtick either. Yeah, it it is. I think it's a backtick. It absolutely is. But in order for GB to be successful in this referral, it has to be either an intentional use of the backtick or it has to be intentionally played off the end line.

It's gotta be one of those two things. If it's not one of those two things, Iyana cannot Under the rules. R. Advise Li to restart with a free hit because that's not an acceptable grounds. What she can do is restart the play accurately according to what happened on the pitch, which is the last player to touch the ball was a Belgian player.

Classic is a VR request for a PC that gets upgraded to a penalty stroke team. Keeps referral due to higher penalty applied. Yeah, I wouldn't call that a classic, but yeah, that That is that. That is a way in which you keep it. Now, let's say the penalty corner is awarded and the team requests a penalty stroke.

Their referral is denied. They do not get a penalty stroke. It stays a penalty corner. They lose their referral even though they got a penalty corner because they asked for something more. What they asked for was not awarded.

Uh, Jenny actually thought the attacker pushed the stick onto defenders in real time, so free hit. Oh, well that's, that's fair. It's definitely backs stick to judge if it's deliberate. Was there a hit slap push to move the ball away and was their body going in a direct was going, was their body going to direct the ball of the black line?

Okay. So Nick, you've, you've tried to isolate some of the factors and I like that. That's good for you. It's deliberate backs stick. And I think one of the things is I've pulled out the slow mo here. You see it a lot and I, what I hear is an awful lot of perhaps looking at how slow this is going. And that's informing, um, oh my goodness.

Please tell me how to pronounce your name correctly. Is it rock? Because if it is your name's dope. Rock, rock, burger. Your call's definitely a backtick, but intentional. So you think that the backs stick is an intentional, deliberate breakdown of play. You're throwing all the words in there. Intentional bracelet, breakdown of play.

Um, okay. You were thinking about a stick obstruction, uh, as well. That's okay. Can you be outside the field of play and engage the ball and play? Yes. Yeah. You're supposed to stay inside the play, but like, who's gonna be an officious jerk about that? Not this girl. You feel like he doesn't have much control over where he plays the ball.

So it's not intentional of the back line. You're more leaning towards intentional backs stick, but not entirely sure. I mean, that's interesting, right? Because. Can you, can you say, and I mean, okay, and here's an interesting part too. Let's go to the rules for a second because I think this is worth having a wee little gander at.

Okay? This is something I like to bring up every time we look at using the back of the stick because, um, okay. Yeah. Play players must not play the ball with the back of the stick. I think that's changed. Nevermind what I was about to say. This is why I look at the rules, you guys eyes.

Can somebody make a note, Cat? Send me a note to look at the wording of rule four 9.5 and the history of that, because that's something's changed.

Okay, so I think you, you saw the results, you know, what Ayanna called in this moment and what her advice was for the correct restart and all that sort of thing. And just going back to the real time again, and I'm going to Nope, nope. I, I, you, I don't need to confuse life anymore on the outside of pond sale trying to at these,

okay. The problem is we don't have a view of a closer angle that gives us a better idea of what was seen

in real time. As soon as it goes to the close angle, that gives us a better view. It's slow mo the whole way. Which is fair, that's the way that you'd normally, you would normally present it, but that really does change things.

It's not in the circle. Don't need to appeal. Um, but is it, ugh, okay. You feel the defender knew is gonna be beaten, therefore stepped into the tackle uncontrolled. Yep. And I, I understand that point of view and so I don't want to completely rule that out. And I mean, you guys know that I'm pretty hard on the whole reckless as to the result criterion for deciding what is intentional.

That that is the Thor that is the idea that we're looking at. And, but what I think is this is not necessarily a,

when the player is beaten, does it mean. That what he does with his body after he is been beaten or what he does is,

is something that I am going to stop or I'm going to be reckless as to potentially stopping this person from going through

with their body, with their stick on stick. Something like that. I don't think, I really don't think in this moment that the Belgian player had enough control, wherewithal, all that sort of thing. He was lucky as all heck, no question about it. If he had been 50 centimeters to the right, that would've been inside the circle.

That's a penalty corner. Easy. Okay. For playing the ball with the back of the stick. But I don't see enough composure control and the only thing that broke down the play was that. The ball was then off the end line. If they had been four meters away from the end line and this ball had been played, the attacker could have picked up the ball probably in this moment and been able to continue on their run.

But for me, I don't think there's anywhere near enough control in the moment that this could be deemed as intentionally playing the ball of the end line. And if, if that's, if, if they don't even have the intent to play it off the end line, are we saying it's reckless as to like just putting your stick in and not committing a stick obstruction, but the ball moves in such a way that suddenly you're playing with the back of the stick.

Are you gonna describe that as being reckless as to the result of playing the ball with the back of your stick? I don't, no, no. That's just not really the way we go. Our definition of intentional is important. If it was a foul, it was breakdown enough to remove the opportunity to enter the circle unopposed having been beaten, which for you would be a pc.

Playing the ball intentionally off the end line is not an intentional breakdown foul, though it is not a foul. It is a method we restart with the penalty corner because that is how we restart play after it's been done, after the action of playing the ball. If the end line is done, just because playing the ball off the end line intentionally stops the attacker from doing something, doesn't make it a breakdown of play because we cannot card for that.

We cannot upgrade to a penalty stroke for that. So now we're starting to get a little confused as to our concepts, aren't we? I don't know why I'm waving my pencil around why I can't bloody while you use it today.

Um, yeah, you, you can say that players know what they're doing, but that doesn't mean that they can't. Make mistakes. That's not fair. We're not gonna go that far with it. I know. This is what I do. I wear you down

and I'm, oh my gosh, who else wants to admit it? I can tell you that in the moment, I did not feel this was going to be a penalty corner. And the fact that in the moment li doesn't even see the ball touching the Belgian player stick, nevermind that it touches the back of the stick. Nevermind it's, you know, directed off the M line.

I, I've had this thought a few times over the last week with conversations going on in our server that people are a little bit like jumping on reasons to try to find out why the umpire was wrong and would it be more beneficial for us to think about the reasons why the umpire was right first. And this isn't about being an apologist or being overly generous towards umpires or the B word towards umpires.

No. This is about figuring out that, hey, those are the people who are on the pitch and they often have a very different angle from what we're seeing. And just maybe that information combined with the context, the full context of the game, the context of the competition, they're in the context of all of the competitions that umpire is umpired at in that level, that they understand what is dangerous, what is advantageous, what is good skill.

They've got all those things locked down. Whereas we're looking at an itsy bitsy, I was doing this, but no, with tiny, we're looking at a tiny portion of the play and maybe we're forgetting ourselves in that moment. You're very happy. It's not that, okay, I'm, I'm not sure which here. Okay, no worries. Happy anniversary.

Four down. Nice of you to stop in anyway. Okay. Um, because things are a bit of a mess. We do have a poll going on and I am going to, hopefully, if I can figure it out, can I figure it out? I'm gonna end the poll and see which y'all are, are at. Oh, it's this little, it's this little ai. Little do dad that's in the corner that's literally covering up the button.

Oh. And then it moves.

There it is. Got it. And pull.

But see what the results were cuz this is gonna be very interesting.

I have to bring it on screen, but right now, 40% of you, 40% of you were going with a penalty corner.

Can you imagine being the video umpire in that situation and having to make all those calculations in your mind? She's one of the best for a reason. 40% PC free hit outside the circle, 36% you fell for it. If it was us at our level playing, we don't have video referral and let's say there's a magic do over button, our colleague, for some reason has a better view of something that's right in front of us.

Like, yeah. Um, And we can correct it. Then 36% of you, I'm gonna go with that 23 meter restart, 15% and 15 meter restart for 7% of you, you fell for that one too. There you go. I appreciate all your input in your votes, and I hope that the discussion helped you think about what you still have to go through and apply the principles we're looking at.

In this situation, we're not looking at the playing of the ball intentionally breaking down the play because that's not the grounds on which the penalty corner is awarded. It is a method of restarting play that still satisfies the video referral requirements. It's weird, but our game is weird sometimes, and it's the act of playing the ball that we have to restart, but it is not a breakdown of play, so we have to be very careful of keeping those two issues separate.

Um, let me bring this up. If the award to GB was a 23 minister, it could be worse. The worth, the lost of,

I mean, roundabouts and horseshoes and hand grenades and all that kind of stuff. I'm not super bothered. I'm up, I'm up bothered. I'm bothered about anything like that, but um, yeah, you never know if you're comfortable with an intentional off the back line. You can't in the same breath argue. It's an intentional breakdown.

Thank you. That was like what I was trying to say. And you, you did it. Thank you very much. McCartney. The PCs have won the poll, but

was that actually the correct answer? I know and that's the point. That's the point. And what I wanna do is for give people the opportunity to see Steven. It's not about being right or wrong, it's about understanding did my process match the process that I'm trying to teach? Did my process, did your process match mine?

Did you understand the spirit of the rule? Why the rule is there? Did you know about the wording of the rule? Did you go through the factors that you should take into account when making a decision on how to interpret that rule in that particular situation? Right? And we did this in the service, Steve, and you remember this, and I'm very, I'm, I'm trying to make sure we go through this rigorous process because too many times we go, oh, well the ball could have only gone one way given where it was contacted.

What the f does that mean? That begs the question again, we can't be out there begging the question. We have to be out there answering the question with facts. With, you know, those things. Now, if you've looked at all the four or five things that I talked about with intentionally playing the ball at the end line, and you say to yourself the, I believe that despite the fact that the Belgian player was pointed towards the sideline and he was on his heels, that he had enough control that he could play the ball with enough contact, that he made full contact with the ball.

I mean, for me, at least four of, at least three of those things clearly weren't evident. And the fourth one, I don't think was there either. But if you look at those facts and that's what you see, well maybe we have to, we have to gather more facts together on a more frequent basis. You need more reps because maybe your threshold for that particular fact is not where it needs to be in order to.

Be able to apply the rules consistently, along with the consensus opinion.

Hi, Purdy. Good to see you, girl. She's here and drama rock. Um, but the thing with PCs that, there might be two different reasons for the pc, but okay. But if you're gonna call that a breakdown play, that the backtick stopped, the backtick didn't stop the player from playing the ball, the attacker from reaching the ball, the back stick, it was just, it, it, it just touched the ball.

And just because the ball went off the end line doesn't mean that that's, how do I say these words better? Mike McCartney, could you please, can you please answer?

It was useful. You think it'd been a, if it was a big enough backs stick touch to notice in person, you might have gone for a pc. What's a big, what is a big backs stick? What is a bad tackle? What is I, I really want us to get away from these subjective words because again, the words lead us to the conclusion instead of describing the things that we look for, like the swing was very long.

The swing at the ball started from behind the player's body and went all the way through. The player had a lot of control. They c they, you, you don't accidentally move your arm in such a big direction. Therefore, that player was reckless as to whether they were gonna miss the ball and take out the the attacker stick.

Therefore, that is an intentional foul. I'm gonna ward a penalty corner and a card for that. Okay, so you see the difference. You really have to go through the actual facts. So let's get factual kids. I'm wearing these glasses because it makes me look smart. No, actually I can't see. But get your glasses on.

Get nerdy about it. Nerdy is good. A free hit isn't an option, Mike, because it's a video referral and you can't refer full for issues that are free hits for events that lead to free hit decisions. Otherwise, we would have referrals like all over the freaking house. That is simply what the rules of video referrals are in order to draw a bright line between questions you can ask and questions you can't ask.

Now, should Phil Roper have known the difference? That's a tough one. I'm, I'm actually not gonna drag him on that cuz that's, that is a tough question and there's a, there's the potential there that the backs stick. Accidental was inside the circle cuz it was like this far away. So, okay.

Will he, will he watch this show and learn something about the rules? I don't know. Does he need to learn? I don't know. You focused on the stick on way and didn't take the holistic process into account when voting. Great way to describe Thank you. That's what we, that's what we do here with the F h E three Tech.

Okay.

I, I don't know. I don't know which part was close to a rant, but there you go. Anyway, thanks so much for participating and let's move on to our next topic. How am I doing? That's ridiculous. I blinked. I blinked.

This one's gonna take forever as well. I'm so sorry. This was at a. Promoting class game,

and I don't know if you can, for some reason, when I, when I ripped this, um, it didn't, or no, this was, um, Tish, Tish

heis recorded this for us. So the volume is very, very low, so you probably can't hear what's going on at all.

So what we had was a, the ball in the middle of the field and the ball probably went off, the red ball went off red player's foot, but was not called. There's an incident requiring a stoppage down in the other circle. So a bully is called,

the bully is played. Blue takes off with, takes off with the ball,

red plays the ball intentionally over the M line penalty corner is awarded and we have a Meli.

So there's a few questions going on in here

and uh, I think we can, you know, I need to parse this very carefully, uh, in the way that I present this because you know that I'm, I am not, again, we're always here not to drag, but to learn. So what can we learn from this whole process?

One of the first things that I look at, sorry. And, and while this discussion is happening, the supporting umpire comes over because the supporting umpire is able to see what's happening because he's staying out of it and the supporting umpire comes over and awards two yellow cards. And I think he's just picked the Captains.

Um, it, it's hard for us to, to track and t's very politely let us see the resultant penalty corner out of this, because one could argue here that this was an unfairly, one penalty corner, and much to probably everyone's relief, particularly the umpires on the pitch, the blue team fails to score. So the questions in front of us, I, this isn't gonna be really a poll thing, but I'd like to just sort of hear your general opinions on.

What you can do to, to change the situation, to handle this differently, because this kind of thing can happen at every level of play. Okay. So I'd love to hear your feedback. I'm gonna start going through the comments before I say too much. Yes. Um, oh, when I listened to the guy saying

Oh no, I, I tried to practice it before. It's for veg. It's for veg, yes. Oh, see, I have no, I have no pride. I am willing to sound stupid on the internet, but I'm trying, and it's a play game. Who wins? The series of three goes to, or stays in the Hoofed Plaza. So very, very big matches.

And rock. You see what I see now? Thank you. You understand? Okay. This was the second match. Amgen won the first after shootout, so SW had to win this game in order to still have a chance to stay in the class. Okay, so we've got the full color of this game. This is a huge game. Okay. Very, very huge. Huge ish.

All the huge, okay, so when this was put in the server, the question was kind of essentially, what do you do about this Cheating on the bully. And when you see the full context of this, the highlights only showed you that the players were standing over the ball. And you can see that the red player is kind of pointing a stick.

I miss seeing that. I'm interpreting that as, you know, you're gonna play it back to us, right? Because red had possession of the ball at the time that the bully was called. Okay, here's a signal bully.

And what we do know is when I go here, this is a story and hopefully it's, yeah, it's all translated, uh, appropriately that the players, you know, the, the, the, the red player is being interviewed here and says, we agreed, we agreed that he was gonna play the ball back to us, but then he took off with it. So, A couple of people in the discussion sort of argued, well, you know, do you really assume that it's gonna be an a, a non-competitive bully?

That was an assumption. There was an explicit agreement between the players.

So the question for us is, what do we do? What do we do about this? Don't award the pc. Stop trying to consult first, then give decision. Okay? What decision?

You don't fully understand why it's a bully in the first place. If it was brought back by the colleague, did they say it hit something, give a bully? No, there was, there was something going on in the far circle, whether it was an injury or goalkeeper equipment, I don't know. And because the red player was surging towards that circle, they had to stop time.

Okay? So that's why there was a bully. And it's, if I can, if I can isolate down the, the part of the replay. Um, oh, it's not on the replay. It's on the original. Okay. You'll, you'll see it if my head's not in the way.

Okay. So if, if you just watch in the next couple seconds here. Watch down at the far end with the goalkeeper. Okay. The umpires walking towards the goalkeeper. There's something going on there.

I sure as heck hope that it was an injury

because if you're stopping time because a goalkeeper has an equipment malfunction at this juncture right here, not the great greatest management.

Okay, but unfortunately we don't see exactly what happens. Hi, A player went to ground on the goal. Thank you. So we know for sure excellent and for safety reasons because of the, because they were directly in the line of where the ball was coming down their throat that needed to stop. It's good to see you, Michelle, Cat.

You're not sure how you deal with it. You feel your blood pressure rising, thinking about being in that situation, very, very difficult.

But perhaps you would have them retake the bully and insist they take the bully correctly. No passes other than that, getting that passing agreement close together, face to face with the players and just reset it. They don't do as agreed, no fouls. That's just not their agreed. That's not what we agreed was it?

What do you have, Lou? This is a player problem, not an umpire issue. If the game is high stakes, red should have assumed he had to play. The rest seems called properly. Why? In all kinds of high pressure games at all levels. The culture of our sport says that when we agree to an uncontested bully, we don't contest it.

So I do not accept any argument that Red should have assumed that there is a possibility that blue was gonna run off.

No way. End of story. This is the biggest piece of

cheater pants behavior I've seen caught on camera since the last time I saw Christopher Replay. I am just kidding. I don't think Christopher, the very last time I saw him did anything. Red Carnival. It was all the games before that.

Morning on par is a big role to play. What is said over the radio is key, both during and immediately after the stoppage. Um, I don't know what the supporting umpire could have done in that situation because their job was to look after the injury. And this controlling umpire, clearly by their positioning, believes that the ball is going to be handed back to blue to red.

They're still a little high. Anyway. I, personally, I think you don't need to be, nor should you be that high, you know, in that moment. Look where blue is. And anyway, mission control people. Michelle, I wanna talk to you about mission control positioning. Okay, Jenny, as an umpire, we can't c a foul on non hockey after a bully, so we have to play on question.

Mike would reset the bully immediately.

I don't, I don't want it to, to say what I'm about to say too early cuz I want y'all to churn it. Richard, good hand if you're new.

The blue player felt agree for not getting the foot. Absolutely. Absolutely he did. There was a clear foot and for whatever reason Karen missed it. Okay. We don't know why. Probably a case of miscommunication between the players. It wasn't, it wasn't a case of miscommunication. The blue and the red player agreed what was gonna happen and the blue player lied and went and played.

That's the way that I read the article. That's what everybody's informed me, who can read Dutch and translate into English For me, there was an agreement and one player broke it.

And just because you think you missed a foul in the middle of the body park doesn't mean you get to pull that kind of bullshit. That is incredible. Are you starting to sense what I, what you think I would've done, Cat? You think resetting the bully immediately is easier to fix them later and you wonder if the umpire knew exactly what was happening?

I bet this has never happened to this umpire and I bet it's not happened to almost any of us. So this is absolutely not a drag on Karen cuz boy like, what the heck? What the heck do you do?

Because every half second, that ticks by after the moment that the blue player does the cheater pants. Behavior. Things get harder and harder and harder to fix if there's an agreement made between the players at the umpire allowed to enforce it. If the agreement breaks down, the officials were not involved in the agreement.

Who's fibbing? Red or blue? Blue. Blue. Blue. It's blue. The facts are clear, Lou. Okay. Get on board with this and get to the next step. Alistair, you agree completely with me. You're having trouble finding the rule. One comment in the discord mentioned that umpires need to ensure favor. Play is at the basis of resetting the bully for me.

Yes. Yes, and I will put myself out in the streets. I am willing to lose whatever position I have in whatever association, umpiring in whatever league. As soon as I see that ball going the wrong way, I stop play and I go, whoa, whoa, whoa. Something happened. Don't know. I don't know. My watch is broken. I broke a shoelace, or You are an asshole, but we're gonna do this again.

And since y'all can't agree one of you's a liar, this will be a contested bully.

I would be so tempted. So tempted to card that player.

Because the rules explicitly say that you can card a player for any reason. It doesn't have to be for breakdown play. That's the grounds upon which we card players for dissent. There is nothing in the rule book that says that we can card players because they swear to us or they. S issue, a homophobic slur or any such thing.

But we sure as hell do it, don't we? Because the integrity of the game is the most important thing, and this is a very, very overt

breach of that integrity. It is very obvious to everybody in the stadium. That's why there's all, you couldn't hear it, but there's whoa. Like there's a big yell as that's going on, and that's why there's a fight that breaks out afterwards. That's how bad it is. And if you don't feel that you don't know enough hockey, you haven't seen enough of it.

This is the spirit of the game that I'm talking about here, friends, and this is part of our job.

I'm really getting going. Oh look, Jenny. Hi. Spirit of the game. Perhaps a stern. You've agreed. Now it better happen. That's what I would do. Um, 6.5 B. Let's look at a rule.

I did have it queued up. Uh, it states

that the play, the players of defending should be on the right hand side. If you look at the bully again, the bull blue player played his bully with the back to his defending box. Nah, not, that's probably one of the, of the 99 problems. The direction of the player's. Shoulders ain't one. What you can't have is the blue player on the other side of the ball closer to the attack in gold than the red player.

That's really what that means.

Um, You mean, does she know the agreement because she moved backwards, not dragging it all? No, I, I think she was just repositioning herself. But there's no way if that's a contested bully, if you actually think that there's gonna be a contest there, that's not good positioning. You're way too close to that way, way too close.

You are front side. There is no reason for you to be, I don't know, seven meters away from the ball whatsoever, because you will get cooked. How far away is she? Yeah, she's moving backwards, but she's maybe seven. Maybe seven meters away.

No way.

As a disagreeable bully, we are restarting with Sharpish Whistle. Whistle. Whistle. Yes. The key thing is to make sure is saying you they're with, make sure you're involved in the agreement. Yes. Will, you're giving to red. Correct. Thank you very much. Fair review. Yes. Proactive communication. So one of the steps that we can ensure happens, I don't know, we, none of us know whether the controlling umpire, you know, was a direct witness to the communication between the two players.

The two players were witnesses though and spoke in the media about it. Tenement, yell card for attempting Premier League shit. Howie. It is very un sports person. Like you can, I'm just, I'm so riled up watching this because this has set up a situation where now two players from each team are going off the pitch for five minutes, probably maybe 10.

In a very important match because one player cheated. Think about that in terms of impact on the game. And of course, of course the red player shouldn't have gone and chested up and done all that, but who lost control of the game? Not a drag, but who lost control of the game.

He, vanvan Blue team told one of our players who would return the ball after the bully. That's how it always goes. But he took it himself. Thank you Alster, for bringing that back from the article. Um, she had time to have a chat. Yep, absolutely. And it's, I mean, who would expect this? I'm sure I would've effed that up very thoroughly as well.

And the good news is, is that. This is why we communicate, this is why we do this publicly. This is why we come onto YouTube and we look at these plays is so that we can accelerate our learning. Learning is, is through mistakes. So we learn through our peers mistakes so we can get better faster so that we don't have to make the same mistakes.

The next time you have a bully, what do you think you're gonna do? You're gonna make sure this doesn't happen. You are never gonna forget this moment That makes all of us better. So we are grateful and thankful that we have access to these discussions and access to these footage. I'm not happy that this happened.

None of us are, but this is how we benefit and this is how we grow and this is how we do it better and faster. Why doesn't she penalize the foot? I because she didn't see it. If you're talking about the foot at the center line, she clearly didn't see it. It's very clear to us, but angles, angles. Angles.

Right. I'm even looking at the playing of the ball off the end line and I was wondering if there was actually a touch off blue, but you can't see it clearly. So I didn't wanna confuse matters, but part of the problem is because Karen's been caught by surprise. She's chasing the play. She's not in a great position to see things.

So what if there was something else?

Would it saved by the goalkeeper? I don't know. Is it really saved by a goalkeeper if it doesn't hit the umpire in the forehead? Asking for a friend? As an umpire, you need to be aware of the agreement. Yep. Otherwise you can't interfere. Yeah. If you don't know,

I dunno, I struggle with this because we're not talking about a naive level of play.

The body language of the players is clear and there's absolutely no harm. Like I've seen bullies reset all the time. Time is stopped. You can redo it all. Tweet start. Oh, sorry, everybody. We're gonna do it again.

And it's not technically by the book because the book doesn't have uncontested bullies in it,

but a bloody well should. This is why I hate bullies. Friends

shots fired. Ooh. And again, shots fired. Okay. Lots of things to learn from everyone. And, um, it, who can tell me what the results of the series was? Y I know you can Y Astair probably as well. Oh, you's busy asking questions. Let me wait until I can bring it on the screen. Let's say you gave a card for this.

Do you restart with a bully again or would it be a free hit defense? For me, it's misconduct because a foul has not been committed, so you would have to restart with a bully again, which is bullshit. Sorry. It's just not, I hate bullies because it puts players in close contact positions very likely to get more, commit more fouls, and if anything, if there's any bad temper going on, you're just putting them back together again so that they can be really close to each, the person that they're mad at.

Go again. Let's see what happens. It's dumb.

I've always been a tennis player, but at some point in my university years, I was dating a guy who played a lot of squash and he thought it would be a great idea for us to spend time together by playing squash. What a mistake that was, because what he learned was, if I'm that close to my opponent in a sport, there's gonna be trouble.

You're gonna see the looks on my face. You're gonna be very physically close to me within arm's reach. That is not a safe place for you to be. Tennis is great because there's a net that separates, and I have the opportunity to turn my back and walk away.

I don't have a temper problem. Was the umpire also expecting the red team to get the ball back? Yes. Yes. That's the way I see it. If I'm wrong, somebody can correct me if somebody has better knowledge of that, but every read of the body language tells me that's what happened. I need a Mike Kurt sound clip.

I don't know who Mike Kurt is, but I bet that was funny. Okay.

Every week I think I'm gonna be faster and every week I'm wrong. Let's go on to this scenario. We're only gonna get three of these done today in the server. Our new friend Steven Diver, very graciously provided us with this question, which was filmed by one Chris Brown. Oh, Mike Myers. Okay. And I think I might have, I'll just put the link to the channel because it was important to, um,

I do have it. Excellent. Uh, that's a link to the channel. Um, thank you very much. Mr. Brown for providing us with this footage. And the question that Steven raised was regarding whether this should actually have been called as a dangerously played ball. It was an unintentionally raised off a hit. Okay? So this is not gonna be that.

That's not gonna be a topic of discussion. And if you wanna bring it up, you're gonna be alone. But whether this should be called as dangerous, and we had a very interesting discussion about it. So Cat, if you want a two pull, two option pull, dangerous, not dangerous, that'd be great.

Oh, you saw this match? My goodness. Well, you and Steven must be best friends then.

Very cool. Shayne, thanks for joining in. It reminded you, uh oh, it helped you deal with the thoughts from your difficult game once weekend. Oh, good. Okay. I, I don't know how I helped, but I'm pleased that I did Shayne, so that's great news. Okay, so let's see. Is there a poll running yet? Let's see what happens.

Okay. Dangerous, not dangerous. Excellent. Poll is running. Please vote. Please vote quickly because I only have 13 minutes left in my arbitrary time zone, and oh my gosh, I think my eyelashes are gonna fall into my eye. This is very awkward.

This is not helping.

Hi,

so, oh, you were playing the next match. Yeah. Yeah. But if you saw the match, then you've gotta know Steven. Like, don't y'all know each other? I know Stephen from Toronto. It's a running joke for Canadians that every American says, oh, you're Canadian. You know Stephen Toronto. Anyway, Mike's comment right off the bat, show me legitimated evasive action and I'll show you danger.

Let's go people. Let's go. Time's a wasting. You must have seen it about five times. Now. I knew what I would call right off the bat, which is what I said in the server. First watch, second watch, fourth, sixth. Every time I came to the same conclusion, what was interesting for me when I started reading through the comments, I started doubting myself, wait, did I see the same thing?

Did I, what did I miss? So I went back and I looked again. Oh no, nope. Same thing.

William. No danger for you. 20 plus meters away. Clear view of the ball all the way.

Good comment.

So Mike McCartney started us off with what we're looking for, for danger. Okay? Legitimate evasive action. Now, there are cases where players don't even have the time to take a legitimate, evasive. Form of action. Okay. When a player just gets smacked with a ball from close range, or it's coming that fast, or they don't even see it, just because they didn't try to get out of the way doesn't mean that they weren't put in danger by that ball.

So that isn't the only sort of way, but if a player has enough time that they could take legitimate evasive action if they needed to. They did. And if they did, that's what we're looking for. Richard, hi again, not dangerous for you as the first player the ball goes towards is on his own team. Absolutely.

The second player is no longer dangerous. Okay. I wouldn't. I wouldn't say that just because the first, um, okay. Sorry. Now, now I'm, I'm just piecing together your sentence and I think Richard, what we, what I'd lead you to is the next part of the discussion, which is what are we looking for to determine what things would constitute legitimate invasive action or otherwise be dangerous regardless of that.

Okay. Uh, Jenny, you voted for no danger. Even the old player close, but not danger. Americans won that joke. Yeah. Okay. There is a deeply contested call in an area ball a few minutes later on the game. Interesting. Okay. Don't distract us with a squirrel. Don't you dare. It's called a pmo. Oh, geez. No time for legitimate invasive action.

Okay. So was it a PMO situation? No, it wasn't a palmore. Okay. Steven lives just on the road. Oh, that's very cute. And oh my God, you guys are like in a club. I'm so jealous. Okay, so when a ball was played towards a player, in order to determine what danger is at all levels, we're looking at the skill of the players.

We're looking at how far that ball is traveling before it reaches the defending player. We're looking at whether the defender, defending player is in a crowd or is in open space to themselves. Do they have an, do they have an unobstructed view of the ball? Are they facing the ball? Can they see the ball as it's being played towards them?

What pace is the ball going at? Is it still, it it, looking at the trajectories, it's still rising. Or is it dipping? Indicating that it's slowing down? What motions, movements does the player take as the ball was approaching them?

And that can include their stick coming out to block and protect them. Or can you see, can you interpret their movement as a positive attempt to play the ball using the skill that the player has and maybe simply missing?

Those are the things we're looking at. Okay, so principle dangerous sucks. We want nobody dying on the pitch, spirit of the game. We also don't wanna intervene on things that actually aren't dangerous because that's dumb. No fun.

Legitimate evasive action is one of the criterion spelled out in the rule. So now we've looked at the rule. Now we're looking at what facts are we gathering in order to agree. So how far away was that ball played? More than 20 meters between where the attacker played it and where the defender was. It looks to me about 25 meters.

It's a full, it's a full quadrant. So 23. Let's go 23. It's 23 meters away. Okay.

Did the defender have an unobstructed view of the ball as it was coming? I see now, and I, I'm sort of just readjusting that a little bit, that there was, uh, an attacking teammate somewhat in moving towards the lane of that ball. Did they obstruct the view of the ball? I don't think they did. I'm just, that's how I read those facts.

What direction was the defender facing? Had a full view of the ball the whole time. Okay. They were facing the ball. Were they in a crowd? Nope. Totally on their own. What was the trajectory of the ball as it was reaching the defender? It was dropping, so the ball was mishit in the first place, which is why it popped up, and then it was dipping and slowing down as it arrived.

So in terms of pace of the ball, it wasn't super fast, not for this level of play. I watched a few minutes of this level just so I could make sure I understood, and I was like, yeah, these dudes are pretty good. They've got decent skill.

And staying. The defender did have sufficient time to move outta the way, but decided to play it and yes. How much time did the defender have from the time that the ball was struck to when the ball reached the defender? He took three steps.

Okay. Three steps in which he could have moved himself away now. No. And and it was mentioned the server, Don said it's not incumbent, it's not a requirement for the defender to keep themselves safe when a ball was played dangerously. Absolutely correct. But what we're seeing is there was an opportunity for legitimate evasive action.

If it was necessary, they, they could have, you know, they had time. It wasn't up hell, more. So, but instead the players stayed fully blocking in the lane of the ball and attempted to play it.

Rock your hamster wheels going crazy. Oh, let, let's, let's settle that down. If the player took evasive action deliberately, would it be dangerous, legitimate, evasive action, taking it to try to show that something was dangerous, that's not legitimate. That's how we answer that question. Sorry, what was the rest of your phrase?

It was probably very important. Still play the ball. Does it cancel at danger? It's, it's not that it cancels out the danger, it's that it shows you that the choice of the player was, I'm gonna try to receive this. It wasn't a reflex to protect himself. It was hit enough time to go, oh yeah, I'm gonna take three steps back and I'm gonna.

Arrange my stick in front of my body, which somebody said, who receives a ball that way? And I'm like, everybody who receives a ball that is in the air. I know I'm an old, okay, but when I played on grass, that's how you receive a ball because the ball is gonna be jumping up and down. That's why you don't lay a flat stick on the surface.

So if a ball is flying towards you like that balls are in the air like that, if you're trying to tackle a 3D skill, what do you do? You don't hold your stick like this. You'll your stick like this if you wanna have any success. Hmm. Um, particularly at higher levels. Mike McCartney says players still may try to play a ball even when it's dangerous.

Should always still judge danger on danger, not assume. Yes. Thank you. So another sort of. Flip of, of what I said, very effective. Steven, stepping up to the plate. Well done. You were the engaged umpire. You actually thought the ball was going faster and it traveled less distance. And I don't know where your position, Steven.

I have a course called Mission Critical Positioning. You might wanna look at it because you may have been in a different position that might have given you a different perspective on where that was. If you were in the train tracks of this ball being played and looking at where the player is yelling at you, I'm, I think you're hidden behind the dugout and you might have been a little train tracky here.

Okay. No drag. Just stating, you know, what was there and why it may have been difficult to get a better perspective on the pace and the distance of the ball. So that's the way it goes. Um,

Let's see. There you go. Yes. Due to the distance. That's the thing. It's not Chris, it's not the pit worth rule, but you'll take it. Be Gregory, be new. Sir, take an air horn. Very warm. Welcome. I'm glad you're here. And these scenarios are exactly why the starter umpire is here. I like you already, gut said yes.

Danger as your decision making isn't quite as fast as it needs to be yet getting there and the tiny screen doesn't help. Absolutely. And you know what it really, it is B, can I call you B? It's about repetitions. So what we are able to do the more times we see hockey at all levels is we're able to develop kind of like a, a database of scenarios.

This angle, this ball, this crowd, this level of skill, this and all these sort of things. And we're, we're just shoving data into our brains. The more matches we see. And when you're just starting out, that's why hockey is hard, because unless you've had a long history of playing behind you or you've had, um, a long history of coaching or something like that, if you're just newer to the game and you're picking up the whistle, it can be very difficult because you don't have that vast array of experience that tells you already.

You can draw inferences as to what is likely about to happen because of what you're seeing. I have watched hundreds of matches a year over the last five years, which has increased my ability to understand the game. So much. I'm really mad. I didn't know I should have done that before. So I have a database of visual information that's come to me where I've been able to categorize it with all these little neuron connections as to what is a, a correct call and incorrect call, which, what's good management, what isn't, timing of interventions, all that sort of thing.

And I will put that up against anybody now because of the number of reps that I've put in. So you are on the beginning of that journey of shoving in as many reps as possible. And we do this work here on this live stream and in the server when we discuss scenarios, hopefully with the benefit of videos.

So we're doing this similar work where we can go through the processes and we can start to build our databases and we can properly categorize things, we can tag those pieces of information properly as that's afl, that's not a foul, that's danger, that's not danger. Okay, so hi.

Oh, let's see. Very helpful. A very much younger looking woman is telling you to go there. Cat gets to tape as me during live streams. Just if you're wondering, sometimes it's me, sometimes it's cat. You'll never know. Rock. Let's see. Um, this board is on your question of the game today. When a ball de flex off a sticks safely with a path looking the same as an overhead, although an overhead action was not the instigating movement, do you judge that ball the same as an overhead, especially on the receiving side?

No. No, you do not. An aerial pass is an intentional motion of the ball, the rule, the spirit of the rule. It's there to encourage the development and the safe play. Around that particular skill. It's something we decided we wanted in the game because it's cool and it's fun and it's made our game way more interesting to watch, more skillful, more awe-inspiring.

So a set of rules quickly sprung up that were very, very regimented and very strict as to how the ball could be received and what everybody around the ball should have to do. And over the last 20 years, that rule is being progressively relaxed as the culture of our sport and our community starts to understand how do we actually do this?

We're not gonna be dicks about it. Basically is, is is what informs the whole relaxation of the rule. Deflections should not be treated the same way because it is not planned and we can't impose the same level of. Responsibility on any of the players to be able to process that information. Now, when it's a long deflection, we can impute more responsibility on who is actually creating danger.

If it could have been received safely and then somebody decides to be an asshole about it, we handle that differently. That could be about fi it. It could appear to be about a five meter distance, but it's not. It's simply about danger. Okay, so no, we do not apply a rules. Great question though. Rock. Come on in and uh oh, Mike, come on.

My explanation was so glamorous, though. It's not an aerial. Yep. Small deflections sometimes are too.

If we're comfortable, this is an unintentionally raised hit. We are. Look, Steven, he called it. Okay. And this was another one of those situations. Speaking of the umpire, calling it, as I alluded to back in the first scenario, is that, let's, let's see why. Let's look for reasons why the umpire was right in the situation.

Instead of immediately going, oh, they must be wrong.

Hey, because that umpire Stephen had been on the pitch for that entire game. He'd intimately seen the level of skill around the players. He'd seen the pace at which the ball was traveling. He'd seen the way that the players were respecting each other, that he had seen how much space that the players needed in order to execute the maneuvers.

They could. He knows more about this game than we do. And we have to take that into consideration.

You don't keep up as well with the rules. Steffan,

Stephen. We also don't drag our technical friends cuz they are part of our third team as well as I'm reminded on a regular basis. Okay, so this was a scenario. Thank you very much again, Steven, for bringing this out to us. I really appreciate the opportunity to look at video. That is pretty decent video from a level that isn't at the top level.

Some people ask me, why is it always f i h stuff A, I have the right to it. I'm not gonna get copyright strikes for using it. That's one reason. The other reason is it's usually very clear and we have multiple angles and so we can have a more informed discussion even though we don't get multiple angles when we're on paring, we can.

Use that information to talk about what angles we could be at and why positioning's important and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. So, and we have hopefully decent resolution and frame rates at that level. So all of those things help us in having a meaningful discussion where we're not arguing about the facts.

So we work through the facts as that segment of our process. But if we're sitting there going, oh, it hit his foot. No, it didn't hit his foot. And that's what we're stuck on. That's not an interesting discussion, and we're not gonna learn anything from that because we're just seeing different things. Okay.

So that's why we use that. And having the opportunity to look at, you know, a scenario where things looked fairly clear and, and that sort of thing. That's a, that's a nice privilege and I really appreciate that to Steven and to Chris Brown for filming that footage. And allowing us to use it. Hi. Okay, so take the scrubber all the way to the beginning and then put me on two time speed.

I'm sure they'll be fine. B parent turned umpire after watching for six years. Junior field. Work ahead of the outdoor season to build your database. Oh, police. Hi. Good to see you. It's very warm. Welcome, and we're glad you're here. Where you, uh, ahead of outdoor season. So where are you? Where's your outdoor season?

Are you in the states? Seems weird. Could be right though. There you go. You appreciate the feedback. Yes. Okay. And, hey, look, don't, don't you worry. Positioning is my obsession. It's, I believe the foundation of everything that's going on. And you're, you're newer to the community, but everybody here knows, oh, I forgot to end the poll cuz I'm a terrible human.

Let's grab this pole.

I got my music going. Do, do, do, do, do, do, do. And pull. Okay. 60, 64% of you so far from what I can see from the poll said, not dangerous. So let's see what's going on. Good to see you. Thank you as always. Oh, I managed to end it twice.

22 votes.

Where's my. There it is.

Ah, you are in the States. Okay, I'm trying to drag it on screen, but it's failing on me. So you're just gonna have to believe. Just believe. Just believe me, not dangerous. 63% dangerous for 36%. That's pretty good. That's, that's pretty good odds. And hopefully, again, we go through the facts. You apply them and then you go, oh, it wasn't just about how high the ball was, I had to take into account all these other things.

Alright? So I reached my decision based on not taking in all of the information that I needed. Oh, it's not just about whether the player was mad afterwards or they were able to receive it. Okay. I based my decision not on all of the correct factors, so I hope that helped. Okay. Um,

I don't get paid for extra time either you and you're in the states. Okay, thanks Rachel. Uh, the raise ball mostly limit to a hundred millimeters. Yes, cuz you're gonna be doing indoor hope. The under tens won't be need to taught how to do a bully. But if they, if any of those little kids, I was about to say a bad word, if any of them cheat, you know what to do.

Stop that right away. And then you go turn to the coach and say, you take that player off and you tell them how to play this game.

The more you see, the more you learn, the more you condition the subconscious. Absolutely. Mike McCartney. Excellent. Thank you everyone for all of your great. Help assistance discussion points. I hope it was useful. As always, make sure you head into the discord server, fhm pars.com/ds. That is where we have these discussions just like this, and we're able to work through lots more scenarios that take us less than an hour and 40 minutes to do.

And we are gonna go and have a little bit of a tailgate. Now we have teas in the local together where we all sit around and talk about how the show went, and everybody gives me feedback and we talk about our lives and stuff. And that happens in the Discord server. So make sure you get in there, blaze.

I'm gonna see you in the, in the tees. Okay? Uh, Mike's got seven games of hockey, so you're gonna have something to say in the huddle, that's for sure. Staying. Thank you as always for being here. See you very soon. Enjoy your hockey weekend. Bye.

#hockeyumpiringvideos #fieldhockeyumpiringvideos #hockeyedumpiring #hockeyumpiringrules