Attacker Offences During PCs | How to Apply the Rules of Hockey | RuleyTuesday Ep. 16

Подписаться 3,3 тыс.

Просмотров 2,1 тыс.

50% 1

Keeping track of the various offences attackers can commit during penalty corners and what each of their remedies are is a bit of a challenge. Burrow down to the key points in this handy #RuleyTuesday episode so you won't be caught by surprise in your next game!
Find all of our #RuleyTuesday videos: fhumpires.com/media/videos/ru...
And more umpiring resources on our website: fhumpires.com
The FHumpires Third Team (fhu3t) membership platform is now open! Access 100s of searchable clips, moderated discussion, private mentorship and so much more: fhu3t.com
Instagram: / fhumpires
Facebook: / fhumpires
Twitter: / fhumpires
Please subscribe for more videos on field hockey umpiring, managing and officiating.
#thirdteam #fieldhockey #hockey #umpire #umpiring #FIH #FIHumpires #umpirelife #hockeyumpiretips #hockeyumpiringvideos #fieldhockeyumpiringvideos #hockeyedumpiring #hockeyumpiringrules
© 2020 FHumpires Ltd.

Спорт

Опубликовано:

1 ноя 2020

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 15

@MrNjama Год назад

What happens if attackers move after whistle like from one castle to another but before injector puts in the ball

@FHumpires Год назад

Hi! So, if 13.3(j) says "until the ball has been played, no attacker other than the one taking the push or hit from the back-line is permitted to enter the circle...", does moving the castle violate the rule?

@erroldcruz 3 месяца назад

Why not allow the injector to have both feet in the playing area, as was the case before the rule came in decades ago? So what if the injected ball travels faster? You want more goals, don't you? Field hockey has so many restrictions on the execution of setpieces awarded. The PC exemplifies this

@FHumpires 3 месяца назад

The timing of how the PC proceeds isn't just about providing more or less of an advantage to the attacking team, it's about safety. Everything would need to be examined.

@Brondahl Год назад

What's going on in the clip at 2:24? What is being interpreted as a feint? The injector settles into his stance ready to go and then the defenders break early? The injector never moves his weight or body mass?

@FHumpires Год назад

The umpire viewed the injector as set and then took a separate motion getting deeper in his stance, which induced the defenders to break.

@Brondahl Год назад

@@FHumpires Interesting; that's not how I viewed it at all, and it would seem very odd technique to me :) But likely there's context of having watched this player inject repeatedly over the course of the match.

@Brondahl Год назад

Re the addendum at 3:22. Why would an early injection be something to penalise? There can't be any reason to do it intentionally, since obviously the umpire won't allow them to continue the routine, and they can't gain any other advantage by it. So why penalise an accidental misunderstanding of whether play was active? We don't penalise a player who takes a free hit whilst time is stopped?

@FHumpires Год назад

It's not penalized, as the attacking team retain their penalty corner. They're just reset and the attackers are required to replace the injector. Free hits aren't carefully timed goal-scoring opportunities, and there's little point in replacing a free hit taker since it's not a specialist position. That said, I've certainly warned players who ignore time stoppages.

@Brondahl Год назад

@@FHumpires Re: "It's not penalized" I don't really see how you can argue that. What's the purpose of sending away the injector if not to penalise the attacking team? :) Or alternatively, if you wish to argue that it's not any form of penalty to the attacking team ... then why doesn't the attacking team get penalised for breaking into the circle early? ;)

@Brondahl Год назад

@@FHumpires "That said, I've certainly warned players who ignore time stoppages." I can definitely imagine that - but only if I judged the player to be doing it maliciously. Thus, I imagine a situation where the player is hoping that the umpire will allow them to play on and gain an advantage over flat-footed defender. (Or a situation where the player has done it repeatedly, so as to lose the benefit of the doubt). In this case, I think you're saying that the rules declare the consequence must be applied on the first transgression irrespective of any perception of mal-intent? (Perhaps I've mis-understood that aspect?)

@FHumpires Год назад

@@Brondahl I don't care if they do it maliciously. If they play before I'm ready and all the rest of the players know time has restarted, they could be putting players in danger and causing me to miss things I need to control. So yes, I warn them if it's "an accident" because I don't want "an accident" to turn into a problem.

@FHumpires Год назад

@@Brondahl The attacking team doesn't get penalized as in a team penalty awarded against them, because it's also a re-award. Yes, I'm being picky about language because it matters. All of this is getting very messy to reply to, so I invite you to come into the Discord community and continue the discussion there. fhumpires.com/ds