Polo Rules

where i live, vertical surface 'leaning' has always been ok, whether that vertical surface is a wall, chain link, or goal post. dabbing is supporting yourself on a horizontal surface, whether it's the floor, a link in the fence, or the crossbar. therefore, a flat palm on a fence is fine, but once you stick your fingers in it, you're using the horizontal part for support. same applies to crossbars, or in europe, the tops of goal posts

Well, in Cambridge I was able to shield the ball in the corner for a good 15 seconds, simply by putting it inside my frontwheel, and leaning against the wall, and using my mallet to block my BB. My steering hand was on the bar at all times.

It's perfectly legal, but should be banned, IMO.

Ha Ha ! Time wasting....... poor form, were those 15 seconds ( it was more like 5 ) worth it ?

I'd prefer the occasional fall onto a bar that'd probably tip forward than an upright to the chest/stomach/face. I think it was at the open that one of cosmic went flying and from the angle I was at it looked like he was going to land belly 1st on the upright, thankfully he didn't but it made me wince thinking about it.

Yeah, that was me. I just managed to move out of the way of the post at the last min. Sure was a close one.

Personally, I think goals with just up rights are very dangerous. A padded cross bar would be worth a test. The goal ref would call any holding / leaning.

There should also be a lot more space behind a goal in order to allow a player to ride round them more safely.

Also, after what happened to Todd at Newington, having the opening in the fence is very unsafe. We should either put a board waist height across the gap or atleast pad the posts.

It was you, I could see a hospital visit coming in slow motion almost, actually breathed a sigh of relief when you just landed nastily on the floor.

Reading back through the topic of double/triple goal keeping and whether rules should be put in place to ban or restrict, I think this is stupid. I agree it's not pretty, but it's just a tactic. As Bill said...

The history of tactics in team sports shows that defensive innovations are often negated by offensive innovations.

Basically, you just have to learn to deal with it and progress your own game to beat that tactic.

It was you, I could see a hospital visit coming in slow motion almost, actually breathed a sigh of relief when you just landed nastily on the floor.

Yeah, I remember that moment very clearly, like it happened in slow motion.

Ha Ha ! Time wasting....... poor form, were those 15 seconds ( it was more like 5 ) worth it ?

I'd say so. I know you hated it.

As amassada said: no top bar or a lower than na standard one is the way. Padova get top bar, excellent net, because of 80 cm around height, euro standard. All nah tourney I went with 90 cm or more with top bar was messy with nets, of your handlebar was touching, or you can gk a hips on bar, so more easy.

About pos injuries issues, our net have big post, I gonna hurt I you fall on them, but not really more than the same sized toP bar.

About board and nets, that's not the same surface. Vertical generality can't be relevant.

Also put mote rules as hands on fence, hips on goals, hand on nets... Is not a solution, we are unable to enforce right now the basis of the ruleset, add more stuff now wouldn't work I think. And I never saw major issues with hands on fences...

About double goalies. Go between them push with forearms and shoulders, play mallet, this gonna work way more than any unenforced rule who never gonna exist.

If someone can tell me the size of the nets used in Padova, could be interesting according to this picture. Looks enormous, even if I'm not against this idea.

About double goalies. Go between them push with forearms and shoulders, play mallet, this gonna work way more than any unenforced rule who never gonna exist.

This weekend, when I wasn't shouting at my teammates to do this, I was actually doing it myself. Got a few moans from people, but we also secured our best ever tournament result and avoided our usual downfall of drawing or narrowly losing games.

Our opponents who didn't rely on the double/triple goalie thing all left the court with grins and compliments, too.

This is going to be the bee in my bonnet for years to come I reckon.

So what do people think of unlimited goals, after 2 tourneys?

Anyone not happy? Anyone deliriously happy?

Happy.

In the games we got whooped (SB, NT) we really valued the time on court to try and take our game to more experienced players and learn something from it. And both of those games were fun. Not all drubbings are boring!

Playing first to 5 in Hannover reminded me how shit it is.

So what do people think of unlimited goals, after 2 tourneys?

Anyone not happy? Anyone deliriously happy?

Each scoreline showed what truly happened in each game giving a better reflection of each teams performance. It gives more time on court for the newer/lesser teams. It keeps the focus on the more evenly matched teams to keep pushing for that extra goal. I think overall a success.

+1

For me it makes a lot of sense in theory and way more fun in practice.

So excited to see unlimited goals being used in the UK champs, would now just love to see it being included in the London Open so that it could be experienced by a more diverse audience.

LO2012: Unlimited goals, untimed final.

(Unlimited goals games are ace.)

against.

against.

Played in a tourney with unlimited goals? Care to explain, as I'm genuinely interested in the case against.

Yes to unlimited goals. Even if you get beaten 12 nil by a team, next time you play them you aim to lose by less. If you always have 5-0 scorelines you don't have any measure of your performance.
Unlimited time and goals ? How does it end ?

Mechanicals.

LO2012: Unlimited goals, untimed final.

Don't understand how this works. Untimed, unlimited goals?

Mechanicals.

Or death

I'm for it, although not if goal difference is used for tie breaks, might be a little unfair if you get hammered by a couple of good teams and get some close wins.

Don't understand how this works. Untimed, unlimited goals?

I think it was a joke Billiam.

I don't think I can remember a tournament when goal difference has been used. Median-Bucholz is so much better, but yeah, we should stick with the latter if we're going to unlimited goals.

I've seen a few untimed finals, and thought they've been poorer for it. The play can get a bit cagey, defensive and slow. Even untimed throw-ins are inferior to timed ones IMO. Too much fucking about.

15 mins seemed like plenty. As Mat said, the format was perfect this weekend.