 |
TalkRollerHockey.net
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
PhilMcVey
Joined: 12 Dec 2002
Posts: 138
|
 Posted: Wednesday, 28 October 2009 10:31 Post subject: |
 |
|
| KenPughe wrote: | | 3.1.1 Contact fouls are described as being those that are considered ‘intentional’. Since the original issue of the rules in October ’08, the revised new rules, issued in June ’09, have sought to clarify this issue, as well as many others. It is deemed that a contact foul should be ‘intentional’ to be considered as a Team Foul. Therefore hitting the shin padding, a hand ‘on’ the back, without pushing and general, but light physical contact, if made while attempting to win the ball, or effected without intentional and undue force, is acceptable and is not a Team Foul. You must observe this interpretation until further advice is provided. " |
For the record I would just like to point out that I never intentionally hit a players shin pads and I have never intentionally put my hand on a players back when tackling. So for all you referee's out there, if you see me do either of these things in a game you will know that they are UNINTENTIONAL, so you won't need to blow for a foul.
Referee's (me included) have enough problems trying to spot infringements in the first place, on top of that we will now also have to use our judgement as to whether or not the infringement was intentional. That will be hard enough for me to do, and I have played the game for over 30 years. There are ref's in this country who have never played the game at all. What chance do they have of getting it right?
In my opinion as a referee everytime a players puts his hand on an opponents back when tackling it is INTENTIONAL, if a player hacks at an opponent and misses the ball and hits the attackers shin pads, it is irrelevant if it is intentional or not, it is still a foul. The attacker has used his skill and has been fouled in the process. TEAM FOUL.
As a coach I do not want the ref's to play the advantage if one of my players is fouled. I would rather have the team foul awarded against the opposition. The only time I would want a ref to play the advantage is when my player is through on goal, if he doesn't score then the ref can then award the team foul and pull the game back to where the infringement took place. (I notice there is no directive on this so I am going to the rules that were issued by CERH a few weeks ago).
Come on Derek, give us your own personal interpretation for us to follow, something with your name on the bottom.
Phil
HBU (player, coach & referee) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
daz
Joined: 06 Nov 2007
Posts: 339
|
| Posted: Wednesday, 28 October 2009 11:20 Post subject: |
|
|
And then of course you could also have the added complication of spotting 'simulation' where a player takes a dive to try to give the impression of intention.
Like I say, at present the rules directive leaves me clear as mud on what is or is not allowed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KenPughe
Joined: 24 Nov 2004
Posts: 37
|
| Posted: Wednesday, 28 October 2009 16:00 Post subject: |
|
|
Please be aware that the Directives are the Chairman of Referee’s words, issued subsequent to a full discussion between all six members of the Committee ( there is a position vacant if you wish to participate in the debating process ) and full discussions held with the NRHA, our rule making body, who drive these issues forward. These are then simply framed in a particular format for general issue. It is the CRHR’s opinion that the Directives, to be read in conjunction with the New Rules document, issued September ’09, clarify most issues beyond misinterpretation.
The Chairman may respond directly, on Talk Roller Hockey, to your requests, or may, as would be normal, request that the CRHR issue a communication on his behalf. As soon as this is available you will be made aware.
Regarding what is considered to be ‘intentional and with undue force’, this issue was never imagined as being easy to establish, however this is where the skill, expertise and judgement of the Referee will become paramount. It would be disappointing if a Referee were unable to display and employ these attributes.
It does not assist the process of learning if anyone states, that they will do as they please, attempt to assist all of us, Players and Referees alike, during what will be a difficult transitional period for the game. We are all learning and there is little room for intransigence by anyone.
Ken Pughe.
Secretary CRHR |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PhilMcVey
Joined: 12 Dec 2002
Posts: 138
|
| Posted: Thursday, 29 October 2009 09:55 Post subject: |
|
|
| Ken Pugh wrote: | | Regarding what is considered to be ‘intentional and with undue force’, this issue was never imagined as being easy to establish, however this is where the skill, expertise and judgement of the Referee will become paramount. It would be disappointing if a Referee were unable to display and employ these attributes |
My response: "Exactly!!!!!" The players in this country are continually disappointed.
For the record it has always been a foul if you put your hand on someones back. (Sorry obviously not your hand, you have never played the game) I should have said "If one puts ones hand on an opponents back whilst tackling".
When is a foul not foul? When it was UNINTENTIONAL in the eyes of the ref. Following this to its natural conclusion, if a very skillful player comes up against a not so skilled player, and in the process of beating him, he gets fouled, the defender might well have been intentionally going for the ball, but due to lack of ability, played the man not the ball. The attacker is actually penalised for being more skilfull than his opponent. I thought the new rules were brought in to aid the attacking team, and to promote attacking play.
We need to get away from putting additional pressure on ref's. We need to simplify the rules so there is uniformity across the board.
If we continue down this path, no 2 games will be reffed the same way. Every ref will be interpreting the rules their way. For example, I have said that I will blow for a team foul if the defender puts his hand on the attacker's back in the act of tackling. In my eyes it would almost certainly be intentional and also it would be with undue / excessive force, because any force at all, even the slightest resting of the hand on the opponents back is in excess of the amount of force allowed under the rules (ie NONE).
I am not doing as I please. I am following the rules as per CERH. The directives given out on this website are unclear, unhelpful and in my mind actually complicate matters. Brendan's email at the start of this thread is probably the most sensible, and clear bit of information to be issued by anyone in this country.
Your comments do nothing other than strengthen my opinion. Whilst you mean well, you are a secretary, please can you have a word with your boss. We need something from him. Perhaps as his secretary you can pass him my email adress, so he can email me directly.
P.s. You say it is a difficult time for everyone getting used to the new rules. I disagree, the players that I have seen so far this season all seem to have adapted to the new rules easily. I will admit one of our coaches has queried a couple of the rule changes with me, he is 72, and he understands them, and he doesn't have the internet, so has had very little info on them. So as far as I can see if the players at the top level in this country and the top coaches of this country understand the new rules, the only uncertainty lies with the referee's, and all these confusing, contradictary, and in my view incorrect directives that keep being issued.
Phil
HBU Coach |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
daz
Joined: 06 Nov 2007
Posts: 339
|
| Posted: Thursday, 29 October 2009 11:15 Post subject: |
|
|
| KenPughe wrote: |
It does not assist the process of learning if anyone states, that they will do as they please, attempt to assist all of us, Players and Referees alike, during what will be a difficult transitional period for the game. We are all learning and there is little room for intransigence by anyone.
|
That comment worries me a great deal.
We recently commenced a Premier League in this country, and the Secratary of the Referees Association in the same country admits that a process of learning is going on.
The Premier League can be won or lost on the outcome of only one or two games.
So, on that basis, should we have commenced that league, or should we instead have been playing many friendly games between local clubs such that those referees supposedly up to the task of officiating at those Premier league games had then completed their learning so that they could referee the games to the best of their abilities. Surely to do otherwise is doing a great dis-service to the game, the clubs involved and the players who are spending hard earned money travelling up and down the country to play. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PhilMcVey
Joined: 12 Dec 2002
Posts: 138
|
| Posted: Thursday, 29 October 2009 11:40 Post subject: |
|
|
Daz,
I'm looking forward to the response.
Should be a classic!!!!
I'm trying to remain positive, but it's damn difficult sometimes!!
Phil
HBU coach |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
daz
Joined: 06 Nov 2007
Posts: 339
|
| Posted: Friday, 30 October 2009 15:18 Post subject: |
|
|
24 hours later there is still no response.
Surely even a no comment is better than silence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KarlWilson
Joined: 23 Apr 2005
Posts: 243
Location: Barnsley, South Yorkshire
|
| Posted: Friday, 30 October 2009 15:35 Post subject: |
|
|
None of the people who can answer tha question come on here, you would have have to ask them yourselves
_________________
Karl Wilson
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
daz
Joined: 06 Nov 2007
Posts: 339
|
| Posted: Monday, 02 November 2009 12:09 Post subject: |
|
|
| KarlWilson wrote: | | None of the people who can answer tha question come on here, you would have have to ask them yourselves |
Sadly Karl you are incorrect with that.
Ken Pughe signs himself as Secretary CRHR, surely on that basis he should be taking the comments to the CRHR meetings for further information to be put in the public domain after approriate discussion by CRHR.
Over the weekend I played in two Premier league games. The 'team foul' issue, from my perception was handled differently between the two games, despite one of the referees being common. OK some could suggest that the standards of play were such that team fouls were not justified, but for a game to go for 23 played minutes before a team foul was given is somewhat hard to believe.
All that is being asked (or my perception is such) for is better clarification on how this rule should be applied, and that referees are put in a position (through training if necessary) that they can apply the rules consistently |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
daveg
Joined: 09 Feb 2005
Posts: 19
Location: Ramsgate (nr Herne Bay) Kent
|
| Posted: Monday, 02 November 2009 12:32 Post subject: |
|
|
In the two games HBU played in over the weekend the refereeing was fine but the team fouls issue is not consistent. In the Herne Bay v HBU game there were 18 team fouls each but on the Sunday Manchester v HBU there were only 6 team fouls in the whole game?!
Looking at game stats from Portugal and Spain it wood seem that Saturdays team fouls total would be the more correct way of implementing this rather confusing new rule, until yet another new directive is issued of course!
Enjoyed both games anyhow! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PhilMcVey
Joined: 12 Dec 2002
Posts: 138
|
| Posted: Wednesday, 04 November 2009 08:41 Post subject: |
|
|
Daz,
In Karl's defence I think he meant "No one who knows what they are talking about who are in a position to answer use this website".
Phil |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KarlWilson
Joined: 23 Apr 2005
Posts: 243
Location: Barnsley, South Yorkshire
|
| Posted: Wednesday, 04 November 2009 11:21 Post subject: |
|
|
I meant the people who decided when the Premier Leage started do not use this website.
_________________
Karl Wilson
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
daz
Joined: 06 Nov 2007
Posts: 339
|
| Posted: Wednesday, 04 November 2009 12:42 Post subject: |
|
|
| KarlWilson wrote: | | I meant the people who decided when the Premier Leage started do not use this website. |
It was more of a rheorical question Karl, than directed at any one (or few) people.
Although I do know that some of the NRHA Exec do actually visit here occasionally.
Regardless, I still feel my comment valid. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
brendan
Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 77
Location: HBU
|
| Posted: Wednesday, 04 November 2009 14:41 Post subject: |
|
|
As mentioned over the weekend we have played two very differently refereed games not so differently played. Though most of us players seem to feel that the games we played with between 15 and 20 team fouls each felt and played how we all feel it should and makes more sense the two games I have now played in with less team fouls is what I believe is the English interpretation and from the latest update I believe this to be the case as described on the NRHA website. So this is what we should expect.
So considering this, if we now keep the ball while being fouled and the referee plays on whether in advantage or in effort to keep the game flowing no team foul to be given.
So all you players out there hack away just don't win the ball and in the unlikely hood of getting a team foul your never going to get enough team fouls to get punished with a direct, so lets get ready to rumble cos the game just got a whole lot dirtier.
The one rule I would like clarity on is the stopping the ball. I believe now I can STOP the ball with my foot leg body out side the penalty area, this means I can physically make a motion to stop it as long as I am standing on my skates, not lying or resting on the rink with a knee or a hand down. Yes in the penalty area this is a penalty as the rule changes for this.
What I am saying is this the rule states that you can not make a play with the ball, I interpret this as when you already have the ball as a stop is a stop and a play is a play. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KarlWilson
Joined: 23 Apr 2005
Posts: 243
Location: Barnsley, South Yorkshire
|
| Posted: Wednesday, 04 November 2009 18:06 Post subject: |
|
|
Not neccesarily,if the hack is bad enough there is no need for advantage.
You can control the ball with any part of your body, so long as it isn't your hand or you are in your penalty area.
_________________
Karl Wilson
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
