Tourney: WHBPC 2011: Seattle 08-11.09.2011

Discretionary power, yes I agree to that but the refs were NA and head ref was East Van so obviously their discretion falls on the physical side.

'pushing with the hands is not permitted', that's the only thing in that ruleset that applies (unless I'm reading an out of date one). Forearms etc, who knows if that's allowed. The infamous 'buffer zone' quote has blurred everything.

Agree with James, you don't have to subscribe to their style, hopefully next year EU style will dominate and NA style will be shown to be unsuccessful.

The teams that win tournaments dictate how polo evolves, we are very lucky that L'Equipe have dominated Europe.

If N American refs don't call a lot of fouls, or they interpret the rules in a different way, it's obvious that the players will adapt their play to this style of reffing.

Looking at football, even though most top European league games are now televised across the continent, there is still a significant difference in the level of contact which is typically permitted in English Prem League games than in, say, French Ligue 1 games. Players that have come across from Ligue 1 or Serie A (in which permitted contact is significantly less than Prem League) adapt to Prem League 'standards', and are often found to be enthusiastically adopting the Prem League attitudes to permitted contact.

+1

I don't think the ref rose to the situation really, but I have sympathy. I watched the game first from his perspective (or near it) and it didn't look nearly as rough as that mr.do edit. And I totally missed that mallet-drop-to-no-tap-out-shoulder-barge foul, even the second time.

Right now, polo is ridiculously hard to ref, but being standoffish just makes it worse. You have to call what you see in the hope it will make everyone play on their best behaviour/self-police.

In other sports, players have a free hand (or two) to protest. In polo, even when you're clearly fouled you'd be pretty stupid to call attention to it as you'll lose ground on the resulting attack by your opponents. In this case, CMD look really put-upon and heroic in their lack of protesting, but in reality they're just sucking it up and getting on with the game at hand.

It's only a small thing, but post-match bitching about fouls/dick moves and post-match praising of good sportsmanship may have a positive effect, dunno...

The teams that win tournaments dictate how polo evolves, we are very lucky that L'Equipe have dominated Europe. If Bambule had, we would be playing a different game.

+1 That's why we love L'Equipe so much, because they've always provided something inspiring - you'd never really watch a physical game and think 'holy shit, i'll never be that good'.

When I saw L'Equipe at Euros 09 I thought 'holy shit, wizards!'

I don't think the ref rose to the situation really, but I have sympathy. I watched the game first from his perspective (or near it) and it didn't look nearly as rough as that mr.do edit. And I totally missed that mallet-drop-to-no-tap-out-shoulder-barge foul, even the second time.

Right now, polo is ridiculously hard to ref, but being standoffish just makes it worse. You have to call what you see in the hope it will make everyone play on their best behaviour/self-police.

In other sports, players have a free hand (or two) to protest. In polo, even when you're clearly fouled you'd be pretty stupid to call attention to it as you'll lose ground on the resulting attack by your opponents. In this case, CMD look really put-upon and heroic in their lack of protesting, but in reality they're just sucking it up and getting on with the game at hand.

It's only a small thing, but post-match bitching about fouls/dick moves and post-match praising of good sportsmanship may have a positive effect, dunno...

I hear what you are saying, but you are describing an earnest ref. At least one foul would have been called if they ref was the least interested in calling the multitude of obvious and repeated fouls that had consequences, even if they were looking at their shoelaces for most of the time.

Who was reffing, was it Ken who was in London last year?

Discretionary power, yes I agree to that but the refs were NA and head ref was East Van so obviously their discretion falls on the physical side.

Their discretion would also fall on NA/East Van winning.

The rules really shouldn't allow refs from the same city, especially in a final.

Right now, polo is ridiculously hard to ref, but being standoffish just makes it worse. You have to call what you see in the hope it will make everyone play on their best behaviour/self-police.
An argument for more refs per game? More input from goal refs?

WHBPC11 actually had a vice ref who was keeping time and an eye out for fouls not seen by the head ref with the whistle. Probably the best reffing scenario we have seen to date. And goal refs with flags was a great idea.

4:32 - Dabbing t-bone (head but?)
8:24 - Dabbing shove

Both those were by the same player (black Helmet Canuck). The first one, I was thinking, oh, borderline, benefit of the doubt, also advantage CMD, second one, same player, I was thinking, sorry, deliberate, 30 sec penalty.

The teams that win tournaments dictate how polo evolves, we are very lucky that L'Equipe have dominated Europe.

I've never really thought about this, you're right, L'Equipe's evolved game so early on really was an inspiration.

Pass, pass, shoot, goal, eyes of steel, repeat.

I think more refs, or more input from goal refs would be very helpful. Keep an odd number, and keep a 'heirarchy' so that the main ref can overrule if he/she had a clear view.

I totally agree that the onus should be on the players though. My worry is that people are watching this video, seeing that an inferior yet cheaty/aggressive team can win at the highgest level and will adapt their play accordingly. A few voices have already said that we should start playing more aggressively...

I would like to watch that video and make a note of every foul (from both sides of course). Re-watching parts of it, there are loads of pushes with hands, which should be obvious and easy to call as a ref.

Remember this is ONE game and is the WHBPC final. Things are different in this situation.

Sport is not fair, and none of us are clean/fair players.

I don't agree that sport is not fair - I guess I object to the implication that sport is like life, which sport is definitely not, and one of the reasons that I play sport is to put away the cares of real life for a few hours - but I take the point. I do agree with the statement that none of us are clean / fair players although I would modify the statement to 'none of us are inherently clean / fair players'.

Some time ago, I referred to game theory with respect to standards of play. I can't remember exactly what I said, but it amounted to making the penalties for 'dirty' play greater than the benefits. That is, that players must feel that if they foul, they will lose out, as opposed to gaining an advantage. The job of the rule-set & ref, therefore, is to make it clear that this proposition (dirty play will cost goals, and lose you the game) holds.

It's all a bit butch, isn't it?

Both, goal refs could do more.

But in big finals there should also be two refs by tap out points.

All should have a hand signal when they see a foul (pointing in the direction of the fouling team for example, maybe number of fingers indicating level of foul.... 1 means a tap out, 5 for ejection) but it's up to the head ref to make the calls...

Some time ago, I referred to game theory with respect to standards of play. I can't remember exactly what I said, but it amounted to making the penalties for 'dirty' play greater than the benefits. That is, that players must feel that if they foul, they will lose out, as opposed to gaining an advantage. The job of the rule-set & ref, therefore, is to make it clear that this proposition (dirty play will cost goals, and lose you the game) holds.

I agreed with you then and I still agree with you now.

I think more refs, or more input from goal refs would be very helpful. Keep an odd number, and keep a 'heirarchy' so that the main ref can overrule if he/she had a clear view.

I totally agree that the onus should be on the players though. My worry is that people are watching this video, seeing that an inferior yet cheaty/aggressive team can win at the highgest level and will adapt their play accordingly. A few voices have already said that we should start playing more aggressively...

I would like to watch that video and make a note of every foul (from both sides of course). Re-watching parts of it, there are loads of pushes with hands, which should be obvious and easy to call as a ref.

Please do. It's always good to compare notes on perceived fouls...

A good ref will ask for, & get, input from goal refs. Something I have taught myself to do when I am reffing with reliable goal refs, is to watch the off the ball play. If the player with the ball is in space, with no defenders closing, there is no point watching the player with the ball religiously - the goal refs will call the goal - so I try to scan the other players, as this moment (player with ball in space), is when the checks will happen.

It's somewhat counter-intuitive, but it works for me, and once you get into the habit, it's surprising how much you take in with a quick scan of the rest of the court.

Remember this is ONE game and is the WHBPC final. Things are different in this situation.

Finals are incredibly hard to ref. There is lot of pressure on the ref not to call, or to call, and the players get very shouty very quickly.

I thought the finals of the Euros were reffed really well. Lots of fair calls, despite the noise (mainly from lpc).

Well, I don't know if CMD were happy with my reffing (they were called much more than any other team, but at the time it was because they were causing more fouls).

The hardest thing is staying calm and collected whilst trying to avoid "glazed-eyes".

Polosynthese and L'Equipe I meant.

I have no recollection of watching the cmd final games in Barca. I think this is because it was the height of London's short shorts silliness.

edit - actually yes i do! was that the game that yorgo got on court?

I thought the finals of the Euros were reffed really well. Lots of fair calls, despite the noise (mainly from lpc).

Jono reffed the final (best ref in London!)

+1

#givemetrollpointsgranddad

Some time ago, I referred to game theory with respect to standards of play. I can't remember exactly what I said, but it amounted to making the penalties for 'dirty' play greater than the benefits. That is, that players must feel that if they foul, they will lose out, as opposed to gaining an advantage. The job of the rule-set & ref, therefore, is to make it clear that this proposition (dirty play will cost goals, and lose you the game) holds.

Is it worth pointing out that chance of being caught needs to be included in this cost analysis, so if you are only going to catch off the ball fouls half the time the punishment needs to be at least twice the benefit?