Polo Rules

Shit this thread rocks, i miss the whole stuff since 2 months.

I think for Worlds in GVA we gonna try to take the better from NAH new draft rules, with some small tweak as the euro Ball joint rules (half court version is weird), no solid top bar nets (same as red ones ehbpc 2010 and main court in berlin in worlds 2010).

Is anyone using the draft NAH rules? I heard that the whole re-write had been postponed until after the tournament season.

What's the ice for?

The ice is to keep the balls cold in warm weather. As the balls get warm, they start to get get tacky & less easy to play, thus reducing polo satisfaction.

Solution: 2 balls in the ice box, 1 on court, change balls over after each game.

"postponed" what does that mean?
They used this draft for some tourney i think, in ESPI nyc for example i would check with kev.

"postponed" what does that mean?

Postponed means they decided to do it sometime later.

Link to google doc of referee's kit: https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=10X8SV1Q6fNgEuR-8yP5rfNlSA8ZMWj-hMW2hI9QAKSs

The NAH rules draft is being used by some people for tournaments, but the final version may not be complete until late summer...

It would make sense for the Worlds, Euros and therefore Euro Qualifiers to use the same ruleset. Obviously that's up to Geneva and Paris, but I need to ask Greg what ruleset he is using.

It would make sense for the Worlds, Euros and therefore Euro Qualifiers to use the same ruleset. Obviously that's up to Geneva and Paris, but I need to ask Greg what ruleset he is using.

IMO, it's too late for the World's to use a draft rule-set, but if they really are going to use it, I agree that we should use for the Euro qualis. Still wouldn't want to use it for NS, as I don't really understand it or feel confident that I could ref it effectively as it is.

I can run through it with you (or anyone) if you want Bill? It's better than what we currently have, but still has a few omissions.

I can run through it with you (or anyone) if you want Bill? It's better than what we currently have, but still has a few omissions.

I'd be grateful. Maybe have a workshop on a court somewhere this weekend?

Yep, cool, I'll print a couple copies out.

Not strictly rules, but about reffing, an article on the widely observed phenomenon of "swallowing the whistle":

http://www.freakonomics.com/2012/01/31/swallowing-the-whistle-a-guest-post-by-tobias-moskowitz/

Note: the David Tyree Superbowl play is here, and it shows the 'in the grasp incident' very clearly.

Helmet Catch Eli Manning to David Tyree at Super Bowl - YouTube

The football equivalent is only giving nailed-on penalties & not sending players off in really big games (finals etc). I'm pretty sure that I call less stuff in final games, than in earlier rounds.

Interesting article.
Especially since there are so many un-experienced refs at the moment in polo, I think this effect is really amplified:

officials are systematically more worried about making wrong calls than wrong non-calls

Absolutely, I feel that all the time when reffing.

So Bill, Jono, some ref opinions.

I'm really conscious that every minute is valuable this weekend, we simply can't afford to waste time. So, a couple of points.

12.2 – Each team gets one time–out per game.
12.2.1 – The referee may award a you a second "mechanical" time-out if the mechanical was caused as a
result of a foul by the other team.
12.3 – Time–outs are 5 minutes long maximum.

I rarely see this enforced. In Cambridge DR had two timeouts in their game against us (which weren't caused by fouls). I didn't see the point in raising it with the ref then, as we had plenty of time, and I didn't want to be a dick.

But we are so short on time here, I want to see this called. 1 timeout per game per team, no more than 5 minutes. If they aren't done, or need a second one, tough luck.

Secondly, I've seen Bill and Jono call the same thing very differently at Hell's Belles and the LII.

If a player is injured and can't carry on in the short term, the game can be stopped for a long time. At Helles Bells the call was made to postpone the rest of the game when a player was injured, and play it on later. I remember Jono saying we shouldn't have done that, and made them play on.

But at the LII I raised this with Bill when Johanna dislocated her finger, and mentioned the precedent, but he said he would not force them to play on at that point.

So can we make a decision. Should a game be stopped, and postponed until later, or should the team be forced to play on with 1 less player, after the timeout has run out.

We simply can't afford to wait around 20 minutes while a player has medical treatment, when we could be playing other games.

thoughts?

Another one, again important with the time constraints. In some tournaments, if you aren't there for your scheduled game, it's forfitted. Generally I take a more flexible approach, if another game is ready I start that one, and give the teams a chance to get back to the court, until it can't be delayed further.

I'm happy to retain that approach, from an organiser point of view, as long as we have a game on court, that's the main thing.

But we still may reach a point where a game has to be played. How are we going to handle that? The (old) NAH rules have a 1 penalty goal every 2 minutes rule. I don't think we have a specific rule. Do we award a win to a team that is there? How many goals? What if neither team are there? A draw?

Remember that goal difference may affect things.

A final one. Challonge uses number of wins to decide order in RR, not 3 for a win, 1 for a draw. So 1 win and 13 losses is better than 14 draws.

Last year I did the RR on paper, so did our usual 3 points for a win, 1 point for a draw.

Personally I prefer that method. What are your thoughts? I'm happy to do the results manually again (Can do it in a google doc spreadsheet, so it's still online).

Re: Time outs.
I'd suggest that if a team can't restart within the 5 minutes allowed, then the rest of the game is postponed. If this is not possible, then the game restarts with all players who are available.
Obviously this is not going to be ideal in all situations, but it should be unambiguous which I feel is a desirable factor in officiating.

Re: Deciding order in RR
I agree with John, do it on points (W=3, D=1, L=0) rather than by number of wins.
(I could be wrong, but I've a feeling there is an option on Challonge that allows this...)

I rarely see this enforced. In Cambridge DR had two timeouts in their game against us (which weren't caused by fouls). I didn't see the point in raising it with the ref then, as we had plenty of time, and I didn't want to be a dick.

One time out and the second time luca put his chain back on after you guys scored a goal, it wasnt a time out.

We definetly did not take the ball and pin it against the wall for 45 seconds in the last minute of the game. That really would have been a bit dick like.

I remember Jono saying we shouldn't have done that, and made them play on.

Harsh! The rules state you can choose a sub, but obviously this takes time, so delay the game if you can, but if it's the last game of a round (SR) then I'd state that they need to finish the game with 2 players or make a quick decision (their sub cannot be in the tournament and they must keep them for the rest of the tournament).

Really there are no LHBPA rules that cover what happens when games can't start/restart, so you're free to choose an approach as the organiser.

If we're doing RR then I'd suggest delaying the game until it can be played, maybe give each team one of these lifelines before issuing forfeits

If one team are on court and you're feeling harsh then set the ball in the centre and start the game... ensure all missing players tap in as they enter the court. As the full team scores then the other team could delay the game under the LHBPA rules but I would take a clue from the NAH set and would give then X amount of time before a ball turnover is issued (so in theory a team can beat another team without them on court). Or just do the one goal every two minutes thing for ease.

Use your organiser's prerogative, just make sure you brief everyone in the morning.

If a player is injured and can't carry on in the short term, the game can be stopped for a long time. At Helles Bells the call was made to postpone the rest of the game when a player was injured, and play it on later. I remember Jono saying we shouldn't have done that, and made them play on.

But at the LII I raised this with Bill when Johanna dislocated her finger, and mentioned the precedent, but he said he would not force them to play on at that point.

So can we make a decision. Should a game be stopped, and postponed until later, or should the team be forced to play on with 1 less player, after the timeout has run out.

Edit: In RR, postpone if possible! If it's not possible to postpone, then play on with 2.

We simply can't afford to wait around 20 minutes while a player has medical treatment, when we could be playing other games.

thoughts?

I am really unhappy with the rules on subs, which is why I wasn't comfortable either a. making them play on with 2 or b. making them take a sub, which they would then have had to play with for the rest of the tournament. In Johanna's case (dislocated finger), it was pretty obvious that she needed about 15 seconds of treatment, and would then have been able to play on - so it seemed very unfair indeed, seeing as we didn't have medical courtside, to make them play with 2 or a sub.

In Swiss, a postponement is not alway possible, so I think we have to play on with 2. I honestly can't see a fairer way than that; if it's RR, then postpone.

TBH, the tournament sub rule is so manifestly unfair, and unhelpful that I am amazed that no amendments have been proposed in the current NAH re-draft.

IBut we are so short on time here, I want to see this called. 1 timeout per game per team, no more than 5 minutes. If they aren't done, or need a second one, tough luck.

This is absolutely the rule. There is a provision to penalise a player who deliberately forces a mechanical on an opposing player, but I have never seen the situation arise. Refs should also be careful to make sure that restarts after goals are prompt.

TBH, the tournament sub rule is so manifestly unfair, and unhelpful that I am amazed that no amendments have been proposed in the current NAH re-draft.

It hasn't been looked at yet Bill (as far as I know). Substitutions are currently missing from v2 (apart from Bench Minor sub section). I believe NAH v3 is not coming until August now (everyone's burnt out/busy).