Polo Rules: Shot blocked by a footdown

So this is quite the debate amongst rule discussions at the moment.
What to do in tournament play in the situation of a shot that was obviously dead on target but blocked either accidentally or intentionally by a foot-down player?

Opinions?
Remember that for tournament play, referees will be around and time-out penalties may be introduced.

accidental then play should just carry on, the footdown player clearly has to tap out.

deliberate - well that is just bad form - maybe a goal should be awarded

whole team tap out?!

Penalty shot - ball placed on top of D, player gets a flying start.

i think you should refer to rule 46.7c...

seriously the dont be a dick rule should be enforced.

...interms of tournament game play, maybe it should be similar to a hand ball in the area of a football pitch. A penalty shot?

I'm with Jonny on this.

accidental then play should just carry on, the footdown player clearly has to tap out.

deliberate - well that is just bad form - maybe a goal should be awarded

In tournament play it may be difficult to tell whether or not it was intentional.

I say, its down to the referees discretion but a goal should be awarded if the shot is definitely on target.

This may encourage players to move out of the way quicker to allow one of their team mates to cover goal.

accidental, play goes on, shit luck....
intentional, goal is allowed, no questions asked. it's a show of unsportsmanlike conduct, the player should be hung.

chop his/her hand off?
handcuff their hand to their bike?

if its clear it was going in, it shouldnt matter if it was deliberate or not. i think a goal should be awarded.

yes.
bottom line, goal is allowed.

if its clear it was going in, it shouldnt matter if it was deliberate or not. i think a goal should be awarded.

what i meant but more concise.

Possible solutions and drawbacks:

Penalize the footdown if it blocks a shot regardless of intention - offense can take a pot shot at any footdown player in front of the goal and hope for the penalty.

Award goal for blocked shot regardless of intention - offense can take a pot shot at any footdown player in front of the goal and hope for the point.

Award goal for blocked shot deemed intenional - Should it be more than one ref needed to make that judgement call?

Award goal for blocked shot deemed intentional if both foot down and shooter are within a certain distance of the goal, say a bike's length (65 inches) - Again should it be more than 1 ref?

Award goal for blocked shot regardless of intention if both foot down and shooter are within a certain distance of the goal, say a bike's length (65 inches) - Could this be enough factors to be a deterrent from pot luck shots at a foot down player?

I'm sure there are more that I've heard, that's all I have for now...

if its clear it was going in, it shouldnt matter if it was deliberate or not. i think a goal should be awarded.
So what would you do in the case of a player decking it somewhere else on the court and accidentally getting in the way of a clear pass between two players on the other team?

Stop play and give the ball to the player who should have received it?

The free-shot at goal introduces too many new factors to bike polo. Such as a designated goalie. It requires standard court markings such as the 'D' line which is not available on all courts. Was there one in Rouen? It's also bringing the game too close to football in my opinion. Most people tend to want to stay away from being too similiar (in rules) to both hockey and football.

Guys, there is no way of telling whether an action was intentional or not (and it's asking rather a lot of a ref to make a call on what the intentions of a player are), and in fact, it's sort of irrelevant. If a shot which is clearly on goal is blocked by an 'out' player, then the ref must call it a goal. There isn't another solution.

This actually happened to Maudites Plottes, but Bianca knocked the rebound in so quickly that it wasn't an issue.

I think that too many rules will fuck the game, keep simple

accidental, then play should just carry on, the footdown player clearly has to tap out.
deliberate, then play should just carry on, the footdown player clearly has to tap out, and the attacking team HTFU and do the same in his goalie

in any how I'm completly against the penalty

So what would you do in the case of a player decking it somewhere else on the court and accidentally getting in the way of a clear pass between two players on the other team?

Stop play and give the ball to the player who should have received it?

a pass does not equal a shot. a reception does not equal a goal. an apple does not equal an orange.

a pass does not equal a shot. a reception does not equal a goal. an apple does not equal an orange.
But who's to say that play wouldn't have resulted in a goal?

Just like who's to say one of the other players on the defending team wouldn't have been able to make some ridiculous save. I know we saw some save in Rouen that no one could believe.

i prefaced my opinion with "if its clear".

yorgo actually saving one?

meh. i dont really care.

We've always played that a ball has to cross the line to be counted as a goal.

If the defending team actively fuck that up by being dicks when they're out of play then we should use the rules that we already have. That player taps out, irrespective of whether it was accidental or not as they already had a foot down.

Play continues until an actual goal is scored.

meh. i dont really care.

Stop posting then.

If the organisers & refs of a tournament make the call that a particular team are flaunting the rules and being dickish too much then they have the right to eject them from the tournament and/or exclude them from future tournaments.