Polo Rules

I tend to agree, time-wasting/stalling is a horrible tactic, there are many sports that freeze the clock when the game is "dead" to avoid such scenarios.

An alternative would be very harsh game delay penalties, but with 3v3 this is going to have a huge impact on the game which doesn't seem ideal.

Agreed for 3vs3, for short games, stopping time is clearly best.

I'd rather see shorter games (45 minutes) that actually take an hour to play (NFL style) than an hour long game where the "live" play is anywhere from 30 minutes to 55 minutes long.

Why leave something up to the ref's discretion & interpretation? At a BM, it shouldn't be hard to recruit a time-keeper.

Well yes, for the BM league (where it may be harder to get a timekeeper out), I'm effectively saying it's a 45/50 minute game (I think your lower boundry of 30 mins is way out, but that's just my opinion).

I realise this is about general BM rules, not the league itself, which is more what I'm concerned with right now. For a BM tournament, with lots of potential timekeepers? Sure, I don't mind either way. My only concern (with my organisers hat on), that not stopping time is more predictable for the schedule, and would encourage less longs break in play (IMO), with time stopped there would be no motivation not to have long breaks (I'd like to keep the game moving, not lots of lame timeouts).

We were robbed in Cambridge... a goal every 30 seconds before Cambridge started dilly dallying, tsk.

Whatever, we should have let in less, scored more. If the ref wasn't calling it, what they did was then a legitimate tactic (now I'm trolling a bit).