Cones versus nets; a discussion

Bike polo.ca discussion.

AND

Why don't we start developing some decent goals, with nets and a defined cross bar height?

Goal set ups are the one point of our game that is still very crude.

Discuss....

i'm not sure about that mat, there is a difference playing with the cones at downham and the plastic posts at mitch, but as long as both teams have the same goals it's fine.

i think mat is right, goals which roll over the base of the cones are impossible to save and pretty lame being my main strife.

Yeah both are crude. I believe it's time we started to experiment and improve the goal set ups.

The boys tried it for the euros, but it was the wrong time to introduce something new.

I'm not saying the design they came up with was perfect, but if we don't try some new options, we're just holding back possible progression to our game.

Why don't we start developing some decent goals, with nets and a defined cross bar height?

Goal set ups are the one point of our game that is still very crude.

Discuss....

i'm not sure about that mat, there is a difference playing with the cones at downham and the plastic posts at mitch, but as long as both teams have the same goals it's fine.

i think mat is right, goals which roll over the base of the cones are impossible to save and pretty lame being my main strife.

Yeah both are crude. I believe it's time we started to experiment and improve the goal set ups.

The boys tried it for the euros, but it was the wrong time to introduce something new.

I'm not saying the design they came up with was perfect, but if we don't try some new options, we're just holding back possible progression to our game.

but how will goal nets and crossbars progress our game?

1)100% goal clarity (most important gain. If for any reason to use nets it's this one alone)
2) no through goal play - inclds. scrappy behind goal passing
3) goal net swooshing satisfaction (ego)
4) sure there's more

Truth is, just think it would make for cleaner game play.

The goal needs to be designed so that the net doesn't go too far deep, inorder to allow players space to ride behind the goal still and the cross bar should stick out from behind the posts just enough so a keeper can still sit in goal post to post.

I'm just putting the subject of goal design back out there.

If everyone is happy to continue playing with different style/condition cones, that's cool with me too.

But if anyone wants to try testing games with nets, where's the harm?

i do agree that better goal clarity would be great, and it would make for cleaner play if the ball is retained at the goal after the goal is scored.

but are you talking about a new design of goal? there are a lot of practical issues that would make this quite an expensive project.

and i've played at a court in manchester with hockey goals, they seemed perfect, a bike width apart etc but after a few close calls it became clear how dangerous it is to play with a crossbar, these goals were secured to the ground, so granted if the goals were freestanding they would be less dangerous. but then they would need to be reset constantly, which would be more tiresome than bashing a cone with your mallet.

i'm kind of for this and against it, i'd love it to work but i just can't see how...

I disagree that netted goals would give 100% clarity. Is the net going to tell you if it was a shuffle or not? no.

I played some throw-ins on Saturday morning at the Euros, and the nets were a total pain, i got my pedal stuck on it once, and they generally reduced the fluidity of the game because the ball gets stuck in the net and you can't ride through.

We do need to agree a goal height though, and the plan with the league to always have a ref present, so he/she can make the calls as to whether the ball was too high or not.

+1

and also think that a marked line for the goal, chalk or otherwise is essential!

yeah, but maybe not in pink!

Netted goals and a cross-bar will not give 100% clarity - if you follow football, you will know this! They may give greater clarity, but given that we play around and back through the goal currently, we need to weigh up the possible down-sides.

Anyway, surely it's too late to start messing around with nets etc now, only a few weeks before start of season?

Seeing as it seems nigh on impossible to get anyone to even sweep the courts properly, what are the chances that we're going to have netted goals organised, looked after, stowed away etc.

They will get destroyed by locals anyway. Fail.

Just because we're starting a new season, it doesn't mean we should not look for ways to possibly improve the game. As long as both teams have equal goals in any given game, we should be okay.

Ok so clarity around 90ish% Nets will only show if a goal has gone in or not. No goal format would give clarity on shuffles, that still needs to be called by a ref.

Agree we need goal lines too. Def helps with calling a goal.

ALao, agree having some kind of netted/crossbar goal could prove more of an obstacle and would also change the riding through the goal aspect of our current game, but wed just adapt our play and possibly become more skillful as a result.

The nets dont have to be made from traditional nets they could be made from a material that our pedals don't get caught in. Perhaps a plastic sheet.

At this stage I'm not for or against netted goals, I just would like to have the opp to test out some options (during throwins not the league).

I look at areas the game has progressed (court & mallet design, rules) but the goals still seem crude.

If no one else out there doesn't want to test goal options or already has and anything different just doesn't work, Im cool to leave this.

Just wanted to raise the issue after matts point on goal rules.

Would you even need a net on the back of the goal, surely just having a frame makes for an easier point of reference if we're still saying that we'll have goal refs. It also makes retriving the ball after a goal a lot less tiresome (Does anyone remember back to the days of Brick lane and perpertially having the ball stuck).

Also the thing to note with having a crossbar between the goal posts is that people will use it to rest against like they did with the wall at downham when we used to play with the goals against the wall. Obviously that is poor form but how would you punish/enfore a rule around it?

Tap out. Any bar resters would soon learn to improve goal trackstanding.

But perhaps we just need to invest in some decent goal posts that also set goal height (mitch posts are the best so far) and use these at all courts to keep consistency.

Small, short cones are a pain to play in goal with and shoot against.

I've also noticed the smaller the cone the more often people tend to ride into them, prop cos you know it's not gonna hurt and they'll move - ie riders get lazy.

Mat, you should start a new thread about the goals to keep it seperate from the league.
Maybe Gabes or Aitch can move the related posts in this thread to the new one?

Top tube height? Utterly absurd.

That's what we played at the Euros. Do you have another suggestion? I take this as an objection, which means we are currently back to the drawing board with no set rules for the league.

I am pretty sure that it was cone-height, actually. Top tube height is absurd, as every players top-tube will be a slightly different height - thus making it even more difficult to judge whether a goal has been scored... Either cone-height or infinity.

If we are going to do another poll, it should have the option to vote for cone height/ top tube height/infinity or other. ... Not just a vote for top tube - yes or no!

...when Slamm is near goal or when Zoe is near goal? !

I guess you'd know better than me about what it was at the Euros. But Mike originally designed it as top tube height. And, yes, a couple of cm difference must make it impossible to judge. Oh, wait, you judge by the closest defensive top tube to the goal? That seems pretty easy.

Also, this absurd variation also exists in goal width (traditionally measured as bike width), but this never has been a problem ...

I'm going offline to get some work done. Someone else can sort out the rules and post a poll of they please.

Invest what? Our non-existent league entry fees?

This is a good idea. How about:

Should we adopt the EHBPC rules (without netting)?

1) Yes, with cone height goals
2) Yes, with top tube height goals
3) Yes, with infinity goals
4) No, something else

I'll post this poll around 5pm today if there are no objections. (Bill: when did you switch me back to "pay attention" mode?)

Also, let me say for the record: Fuck infinity height goals.

+1
they encourage wild shots.

...but i guess we had better give all the options.

Invest doesn't have to be in terms of money. We could just invest in the time to find suitable free cones, perhaps similar to mitch ones. However, if we a few of us agreed on a concept that needed a lil bit of cash to make happen i'd be up for contributing to.

Like em said this issue is not about about the league so maybe if anyone wants to discuss further we should do so on a seperate thread.

Goal height however is, so I would second bill and agree it has to be top of cones. Therefore we need to find and agree on the same type of cones for all league games + include a drawn goal line.

Apologies for the length of the post, I just thought it important to seperate this from the League Survey thread. Can some admin type person delete the posts in the Survey thread?

A nicely criptic, some might say vacuous, post.

Would I be right in guessing that there are pictures in it that I can't see?

vacuous? I'll have you know i communicate through teh medium of pictures and i was saying cones. cones. cones.

Vacuous meaning "blank", "empty", not "unintelligent".

I say this as I can't see the pictures (Work filter) so all I saw was your name with a balnk white screen next to it.

werd. im down with the cones, i can see the advantage of nets, but the restrictions and hassle that come with them arent worth it.

wow that first post made my head hurt. So many quotes.

I think improved cones is the way forward. I'd love some sort of square section column, roughly the size of the mitch cones, with a REALLY heavy base and a really light top (probably even a soft fabric, like neoprene. That way they'd stay put but would not have the "foot" of the cones that deflects balls

nice idea, the 'foot' has always been the main problem imo.

Maybe a stiff wire frame with a neoprene tube over the top would work well as the post. No ideas yet on how to improve the base though.

sounds like goals based on weebles

i'm with yorgo, bigger cones, heavier bottoms and softer shafts.

I also agree with Colonel Chukker (shock, horror) that goal width should be fixed.

This is the shizzle:

Telescopic. So each goalie can adjust it to the height of their top-tube. Innit.

nice!

wow tom where is this from. Looks ace

but that circle base would fuck up the ball trajectory I think. Imagine the same shape with a really heavy base so it just sits on the grounds without the need for a wider base

^^^is it the same site Tom found the inflatable goalposts ages ago?

http://www.ebuyer.com/product/161830

I think you'll struggle to find something similar without the base plate.

Maybe with a slightly wider post it's possible...

wow that first post made my head hurt. So many quotes
Sorry, I just thought it made sense to try and have everything in the same place rather than confusing the other thread.

what about tap out points?

I agree with yorgo or like I said in my last quote we need to invest in new cones.

If nets are not the way forward, then getting some cones that are stable with a suitable base and height (setting the goal height) then we should look to use them as standard on all courts and games. Same goes for a set goal width.

Will this sort of issue be discussed at the LHBPA meeting next week?

Oh and anyone spot those metal framed goals in the Karlsruhe video b posted earlier? Interesting, but maybe too low and would prob be hard to cover goal mouth with bike due to not being able to trackstand right inbetween the posts.

Will this sort of issue be discussed at the LHBPA meeting next week?

LHBPA has no responsibility for, or authority over, the league.

Exactly.

I didn't play in the Euros, but the standard goal width used seem to work.

As far as having standard cones, how practical a suggestion is this? If we play the same court, or courts, for all the league games, maybe, but surely we are still looking at storage/transport issues?

As for goal height, the easiest to judge is cone height.

I think that in the first instance the best thing for you to do, if you have an idea on how the goal situation might be improved, is to construct/buy your goal idea and bring it to a throw-ins session, then see how the players respond.