This week's fixtures & results League III (winter 2010/2011)

if i remember correctly it was

BAD - Degen

5-3
3-1
3-1

sorry, i havent been at the computer
scores from Degen-BAD

***Game 1
D 3 - 5 B
***0.40 Ian
2.30 Brendan
3.48 Bill
4.44 Bill
5.17 Ian
8.00 brendan
8.40 Chukker
9.53 ian

***Game 2
D 1 - 3 B
***0.33 Ian
6.50 Mark
7.20 Emmet
9.30 Emmet

***Game 3
D 1 - 3 B
***4.33 Chukker
7.26 Emmet
8.17 Ian
9.59 Emmet

Each game was a one-point difference until the last 30 seconds.

you guys need to work on that last 30 seconds.

good effort, BAD lineup was tough today.

Well it was a case of us going all three out in the last minute to try and tie it up and getting beaten.

Thanks. Those guys were on fire, making sweet plays all day long. Fun games.

Each game was a one-point difference until the last 30 seconds.

yawn. we smoked you and you know it.

we smoked you and you know it.

Yawn.

you did look tired out there bill.

you did look tired out there bill.

I think you mean old, don't you?

Dogma or Pie v The Team

Game 2
0:09 ed
1:00 john e
1:08 prav
1:45 john e
2:30 prav

5-0 Dogma or Pie

Ha. What that doesnt show is the timeout at 1:00. Ed scores in 9 seconds. Then Prav scores in 8 seconds. Awesome.

did Ed need a time out to tie up his shoe lace again?

what about vidals after game 1 monstrous chainring bolt fail. 5 gone out of a possible 6. wowzers!

did Ed need a time out to tie up his shoe lace again?

No this time it was to put on his helmet.

That reminded me of something yesterday, which I wanted to clarify, as I've seen it happen quite a few time, we've done it too, in our last league game.

Normally you can only call a timeout when you have possession, and surely the moment you score, the other team gain possesion, in theory they can start attacking straight away, and cross/shoot as soon as the opposition cross the halfway line.

By calling a timeout after you've scored you are removing that advantage from the opposition.

Is that legal or not?

Interesting point, perhaps we should decide on one rule.

For the longest time you couldn't call a timeout, until a goals been scored. Which is where the confusion comes from.

But really, is it that much of an advantage? I personally don't think so.

But really, is it that much of an advantage? I personally don't think so.

I don't know, the majority of teams don't seem to be that interested in trying to score off the restart, so maybe not.

I'm more curious than anything else, I felt bad doing it myself, as it seemed to be against the spirit of the rule.

Once a team score, the game stops (I'd argue we also need to start stopping the clock during this time as has now become the standard in recent tournaments).

The game does not start again until the other team crosses halfway, which can't happen until all of the opposing team have returned to their half of the court. During this "dead time" a team may call a time-out (or they can call a time-out whenever they have possession in-game).

Simples. The advantage/disadvantage things is leveled out by the fact that you don't retain control of the ball after your time-out during "dead time" surely? Or I'm confused.

I repeat, if a time-out is called during "dead-time" (after a goal) then the ball should be given to whoever was scored on, not whoever called time-out.

If we wanted a simpler rule we should perhaps argue that the ball should be turned over when a time-out is called, this punishes people for calling time-outs which can be a good thing (more predictable games during tournaments) but can be a bad thing (encouraging players to damage the opponents bike to get a small advantage on the time-out, etc).

That reminded me of something yesterday, which I wanted to clarify, as I've seen it happen quite a few time, we've done it too, in our last league game.

Normally you can only call a timeout when you have possession, and surely the moment you score, the other team gain possesion, in theory they can start attacking straight away, and cross/shoot as soon as the opposition cross the halfway line.

By calling a timeout after you've scored you are removing that advantage from the opposition.

Is that legal or not?

http://www.londonbikepololeague.com/rules/

Time-outs
The referee reserves the right to stop game play for any reason. To do this they will shout “Time out”.
Time-outs will/can be called for the following reasons:

• After a goal is scored, a time-out can be called for a mechanical, etc.
  
• The ball goes out of play. The game will be paused until the ball can be retrieved. The last team who touched the ball will then concede possession of the ball and play will resume. The ball will be placed on court where it exited the court. Play will resume on the referee’s call.
  
• Mechanical problem. The team with the mechanical problem may request a timeout only after they take possession of the ball.
  
• Serious injury will stop play.
  

I don't know, the majority of teams don't seem to be that interested in trying to score off the restart, so maybe not.

I am always interested in trying to score off the restart!

i have always stopped the clock after goals are scored and strated it again when the attacking teams crosses the line or i deem that they have taken long enough.

Everyone should try to do this.

Simples. The advantage/disadvantage things is leveled out by the fact that you don't retain control of the ball after your time-out during "dead time" surely? Or I'm confused.

Well, there is a difference, in that without the timeout the team who have been scored against can shoot the moment the other team have crossed the line.

By calling a time out, the team who have scored have more time to prepare, and get into whatever position they want.

I'm not saying anyone is doing this with that aim, I highly doubt they are, I was simply curious about something I can see as a potential loophole.

http://www.londonbikepololeague.com/rules/

Time-outs
The referee reserves the right to stop game play for any reason. To do this they will shout “Time out”.
Time-outs will/can be called for the following reasons:

• After a goal is scored, a time-out can be called for a mechanical, etc.
  
• Mechanical problem. The team with the mechanical problem may request a timeout only after they take possession of the ball.
  
  
  

In this case it's not the referee doing it, it's the players.

I think the problem is in "After a goal is score", it should be "after you have recieve a goal"
so when you have possesion at any time and when you have recieve a goal, that way the team who just have score cont not break the counter attack from the other team
IMHO

I think the problem is in "After a goal is score", it should be "after you have recieve a goal"
so when you have possesion at any time and when you have recieve a goal, that way the team who just have score cont not break the counter attack from the other team
IMHO

exactly.

Dude. The "possession" rule is way more open to exploitation than the goal scoring. Youve never seen a team a player or two down in their own half take possession and call a dubious mechanical, so everyone goes back to their own half? Rather than take away the teams right to call a TO after scoring, allow refs to penalise calling needless TOs, whatever the situation. (I'd still like to see the end of the "possession" rule though..)

While we're discussing the TO rules, I'd also like to see some agreement on when refs should use their power to call TOs. Refs should be able to call for safety/discipline/disputes, etc, but a mechanical or other issue that doesnt otherwise affect the game isnt the refs problem.

Anyway. Shouldnt this be in the Rules thread?

i have always stopped the clock after goals are scored and strated it again when the attacking teams crosses the line or i deem that they have taken long enough.

Everyone should try to do this.

+1

I'm going to start doing this.