Self pass

 The Field Hockey Forum is the resource for players, coaches and umpires of Field Hockey. Join FHF now to have full access to all that we have to offer! Don't be satisfied with lurking when you can interact with thousands of other FHF’rs, take part in Competitions, win Prizes, download Coaching Papers, discover our vast Photo library and get rid of this message - Register Now!

[Hockeyjon]

This is a curve ball... Not!
http://fihockey.org/vsite/vcontent/content/transnews/0,10869,1181-18543-19728-5331-292931-9644-5039-layout169-19693-news-item,00.html

[keely]

"Mandatory experimental for international hockey"... I assume that means that national associations will have the choice to adopt the experiments or not, while we'll definitely be dealing with them at the tournaments? Think I'd better be watching as much EHL video as I can get my hands on! 

[Hockeyjon]

NA would be crazy not to adopt this in the national leagues, as their International teams in Europe will be using it in the summer at major events.
Keely the game speeds up by about 20-25%. Better check your bleep test score!!!
Its remarkable how quickly the sides took to it at the EHL

[NicfromSweden]

it will be intressting to see if our association adapts it or not personaly i dont think they will but they should since we will play in the european nations championship this summer

[mspice61]

i loved the look of it in the EHL. although it makes the game much faster and no doubt harder on the umpires.

one query though... if someone took a hit quickly... with a defender less than 5 yards away. would that player be able to challenge as they werent 5 yards from the hit to begin with?? i assume that as the ball would be back in play then there would be no issues, that combined with the fact you'd be pretty daft to take a hit to yourself with someone that close.

[mani]

No - same as the tap in Rugby, if you are closer then you cannot engage till youve retired the correct distance.

Just watch the EHL streams online - looked very very good!

[Hockeyjon]

That, I'm sure will be clarified, however if a player decided to use the self pass with a defender less than 5 meters away, the attacher chooses to take that chance. So yes I think the defender should be allowed to contest the ball, assuming he has made some attempt to retreat from the inital FH, similarly to the current FH interpretations. I think the key to the self pass, is the ball must actually movie a metre prior to the attacher taking the second touch.

[keely]

Hockeyjon, that seems to contradict what we learned in this thread, but I agree that this will surely be clarified when the rules experiment is documented in the 2009/2010 copy.

[majwalrus]

What about the second bit?

Free hits inside the 23 not allowed to be hit directly into the circle?

Actually quite like the sound of this, and mixed with the self pass could create a little carnage (read creative play, not danger).

[keely]

It's an interesting combination, in that the indirect free hit towards the circle was a 2007-08 indoor experiment and the self-pass an EHL outdoor rules variation. It makes sense in that, theoretically, the self-pass opens up so many more dangerous options around the circle and mitigates the limitation of not being able to hit directly into the circle. The 2009/10 mandatory experiment will show us exactly how these two as-yet uncombined changes would work together.

[majwalrus]

I can see tap it in and smashing it being a highly effective option (if within 5 of the circle easily doable).

Also tap and then drag flick. Eek.

Hopefully they'll have some sense and say you can't self pass within 5 of the circle or something.

[Hockeyjon]

Keely
In open to interpreting it either way.
However the key to this is the player in posession taking some responsibilty for his/her decision to use the self pass. In a FH situation they hold all the cards so to speak. If they choose to self pass, the umpire only has to determine whether the retreating defender has made sufficient effort to do so (Currently a constant judgement umpires make in every match). If you have determined the defender has tried to retreat as appropriate and the attacker chooses to self pass, they do so knowing the risk of the opposition being able to contest the ball after it has travelled a metre. This in essence replicates what happens in a FH situation currently. If a defender has dwelled over the ball but it has not effected the attacker, who chooses to pass, we ignore the incroachment (at that specfic moment, we may choose to deal with it after the play breaks down). Remember the defender is still at a huge disadvantage as after the self pass has been taken the attacker can simply lift the ball over the defenders stick to pass them. They cant do this deliberatly at a FH

[keely]

Well, what I'm understanding from your explanation that under the current FH rules, we're playing advantage when a defender has failed to vacate the 5m area  - in your words, "[if] a defender has dwelled over the ball but it has not effected the attacker, who chooses to pass, we ignore the incroachment (at that specfic moment, we may choose to deal with it after the play breaks down)." Because it has not affected the attacker, no disadvantage has occurred, so play on. Right?

Now, if the defender is failing to move 5m and it DOES affect/disadvantage the attacker, then a foul has occurred, correct? The exceptions to this situation occur when the attacker is attempted to manufacture a foul by intentionally going straight at that defender for no other reason than to try to get another foul and possible upgrade/personal penalty.

If the guidance to the self-pass is going to be different from traditional interpretations on a free hit, then so be it. Your understanding seems to reflect what goalkeeper expressed as a
looser approach applied in the earlier stages of the EHL but corrected later:

My understanding was that the interpretation at Lille was slightly changed from the previous week in Amsterdam regarding self pass taken with defender within 5m.  It was stated that any attempt to tackle within 5m of the free hit point would be penalised.  Further, players were warned running back "with" (shadowing?) the attacker in order to apply pressure within the 5m before making a tackle outside of the 5m limit would attract a green card.
The reasoning being that the intention of the rule was to give the player on the ball 5m of space to play in, and denying that space was not allowed. A visible attempt by the defender to move to the 5m distance had to be made before engaging the self pass player.

Did you have direct experience with these different approaches?

[Hockeyjon]

Yes. You have more or less summerised what I experienced in Amsterdam. The rule 'evolved' by the next weekend, that was no doubt due to feedback from coaches, player & ourselves. So perhaps it does reflect what they want from it.
I just think it would make sense if the players take some responsibility for decisions they make on the pitch, after all if they are convinced they have the skill and ability to pass a defender and create a goalscoring oppertunity, as long as the defending player is making a genuine attempt to retreat it places the onus on the player taking the self pass to decide whether they can beat the defender, as I said it still is a big avantage to them and it removes the mixed decisions umpires will give on the distance, I found I had to focus on the ball moving 1 metre (as this action defines the self pass) before I determined the retreating defenders distance & actions, as the attack wanted to move the ball on regardless of whether th defender was 5 m or not. That will lead to inconsitsant decisions. As already indicated this will interupt the flow of the game.
I suspect the interpretation on this one has a bit of fine tuning to go through yet before we get the finished article, but interpretational evolution usually demonstrates that the scenario that keeps the game flowing and promotes attacking play is normally adopted

[keely]

Right, I see what you mean. I suppose the next rounds of EHL will provide more "data" as it were for the HRB to solidify how they're going to present the rule in the book. We really won't know until the time comes!