As regular readers and commenters may know, The Hook barely entertains comments complaining about umpires and their decisions. However, in an effort to aid players and spectators to get a better understanding of the game, The Hook has enlisted the help of one of the world's great hockey umpires, Ray O'Connor, to answer your queries.
The idea for this feature comes from Skerries man Alan Early and, as a result, he gets the first shot will, hopefully, become a regular on the blog... this time, the murky area of overheads dropping out of the sky:
The Query:
“We queried a decision on a high ball that was played from our midfield into our forward line our striker clearly called for the ball and was given at least five yards by the Navan defender but the referee blew for a free to Navan as according to the ref the striker must give way to the defender in high ball situation.
"As I am sure you are aware this is incorrect and who ever calls for ball first must be given the space to get ball under control."
Ray's response:
"There are two issues here. First of all, there is no such thing as calling for the ball in the hockey rule book. Next up, "according to the ref the striker must give way to the defender in high ball situation." This is not the case.
The Umpire must try to get the ball down safely - this is the most important point. This can only be done if there is no competition for the ball.
So the umpire must decide very quickly who is in the dropping area first. That player should be allowed to have the ball and the other team must stay five metres away.
If the case arises that the umpire can't decide who was there first, the umpire will give the free against the team that put the ball up in the air. The free should be taken from where the dangerous situation would occur - in this case at the dropping point of the ball.
Interpro heroics mask structural deficiencies
7 years ago
20 comments:
If you have other queries you would like Ray to tackle, drop me a mail at stevie_findlats@yahoo.com
This is a great idea and i commend both yourself findo and ray for doing it. Hopefully this will lead to an increased understanding of the rules for both players and refs
Great idea Steven.
Fingers crossed that umpires read The Hook too & stop giving those decisions to people who "called it first"...
Thanks for clearing that up Ray. Have played the game for over 20 years and it's one of two rules that have really bugged me, since being introduced.
This one because of interpretation but the other is that of the ball hitting a defenders foot while it's being passed around the back and play on is waved if the forwards aren't deemed close enough.
It's a distinct advantage to the defender who would be conceding a free outside or even a short corner if done inside the circle.
Whereas, if an over head is thrown to an attacker in similar open space from a defender to the first scenario the free is always given against the attacker if the ball hits his foot.
They both offer clear advantages if play were to be waved on but it is only ever done for the benefit of the defender.
Personally I feel that poor skill should never be rewarded, people can get lucky with mis-traps or other things on occasion but it breeds bad technique if a defender knows he doesn't have to avoid a ball hitting his foot while not under pressure every single time...
Would like to know what Ray's opinion on this is and if others agree / disagree.
Great idea to get umpires point of view shown,the very first question shows that everyone has a different slant on the rules
This is a great idea Stephen.
Fair Play!
I have to say that "The free should be taken from where the dangerous situation would occur - in this case at the dropping point of the ball." is a tad ambiguous and just leaves it open to interpretation for umpires.
To people watching games, it looks as if the defensive team gets the decision as the difference between the defender being in the correct place and it potentially being dangerous are never differentiated between by umpires.
Which, time and time again, leads to frustration amongst players and benches because of the apparent inconsistency & surely this is something the umpires are trying to avoid...
To be honest, rather than being ambiguous, it seems very cut and dried. Where the ball drops, its a very clearly defined area with a margin of about two metres max so where the free taken is very simple to ascertain.
This is a great idea and a wonderful resource for all involved in hockey. Fair dues Stephen and more power to Ray for taking the time to do it.
I would actually take it that they meant that the "where the danger situation WOULD occur" is the ambiguous part, nothing to do with where the free is to be taken after.
Deciding where the free is taken from is pretty obvious as the two players are both usually standing there after, with an attacker scratching their head as no explanation has been given as to why the free has been given against them.
Just the blow of a whistle, an outstretched arm and then an umpire jogging past pretending to catch-up with play but more relieved that the free's been taken quickly and the confused attacker just has to get on with the game or give out & then get carded because of the initial ambiguity in the giving of the free...get it now??
The attacking team raises the ball.
The Ball is then attempted to be taken down by 2 players in the same place.
As this is dangerous, the team who raised the ball in the first place are penalised.
If there is only one player in the area where the ball will land, he can take it down and he gets the advantage.
Pretty clearly spelt out, what is so hard to understand?
what if the defender lets the ball bounce before taking collection from the aerial and the attacker nips in front to steal possession!
Many umpires allow defenders to take the easy option and use the pitch to control the ball and then award the free!!
Has the ball not been grounded?
Well done Ray
All seems pretty clear to me.
People also seem to be giving the 5 yards space to the player as the ball is coming down, but the frustration is when the ball is then miscontrolled towards the player who intially gave the 5 yard space, and then get blown up becuase by the time the ball is undercontrol they are only a couple of yards away from it!!
How is that a good rule that if the attacker is in the correct position to receive the ball a free can be given against them because the defender gets close enough to them and it then becomes dangerous??
Admittedly, that's over-simplifying the rule as 4.58pm did too...but it still doesn't make life any easier for players or umpires.
Maybe the rule is simple but there's lots of scenarios that aren't as black & white (e.g. winger running up line and defender coming in from middle onto same ball etc.). Maybe it's not being implemented properly by the officals...
You see it week-in, week-out...the whistle is blown and neither player involved has a clue which way the decision is going to be given until the umpire points one direction or the other & that's not right.
Teams wouldn't throw the ball if the defender just had to stand next to make it dangerous. You'd just be giving the ball away. It's not given nor explained consistently by officials...sometimes it goes ur way, sometimes it doesn't for the same scenario.
That's what's difficult to understand / stomach as a player.
A follow-up by Ray on a mis-controlled ball or a ball that has bounced would be good.
A defender who is taking a high ball down with an attacker remaining 5 yards away could either by poor skill or abusing the rule allow the ball to bounce before he controls it. Whats the story there?
Otherwise I think Ray explained it very clearly:
"If the case arises that the umpire can't decide who was there first, the umpire will give the free against the team that put the ball up in the air"
Covers pretty much all the follow-up questions we've had.
Here's the follow-up from Ray on the bouncing ball:
- As regard to the ball bouncing, that does not matter because the ball will still be in the air when it reaches the players so the danger may still exist.
- It is also important to remember that a team decided to pass the ball in the air, so if they want also to keep possession it is important get the pass perfect.
- If the player that has been allowed to take the ball down, has a lack skill, he should not be given a second chance. (the opponent must still be five metres)
Cheers Steve/Ray that makes it alot clearer. Can't wait for the next question!
What happens, for example, if the ball is thrown forward and an attacker is standing under the ball as it is coming down and has "called it" and a defender runs in and challenges for it? Does the five yard rule still apply to the defender and he must give way to the attacker?
I think it was made quite clear that it does.
Comment Left February 19, 2009 2:41 PM
Can you go back to the start and read what Ray Said and I think it will answer your question very clearly
Post a Comment