bridge tackling

 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!

[birchall]

This happened o me last week and felt I was unfairly treated.

After some buildup they had a free hit just inside the 23 mark and the guy did an autopass, ran in gathering up some pace and i was in between him and the circle (positioned myself outside) and set up a bridge (kneeling on one knee with reverse stick on ground), my stick would have picked the ball off cleanly but he panicked and ht the to the side carried on and went straight over me. In my mind its a perfectly legitimate tackle because I have got myself in a strong position and he has gone over in his own momentum. A PC was given and when I asked the ref he could not explain it apart from ' it looked bad'

Any Ideas???

[Diligent]

Moderator's note: Interesting move Birchall - opening a topic in the Sin Bin. Maybe you are expecting some flak! Second thoughts it seems a fairly normal Umpiring Corner topic so I moved it here.

Maybe the umpire sensed you had lifted a little to help him on his way?

[justin]

Why is this in The Sin Bin?
 Birchall: Can you pls edit "...he panicked and ht the to the side ...." so that it makes sense? Thanks.

It's largely a matter of timing, IMO, and the umpire's perception that you might have 'spread yourself' unfairly, to 'impede' his run. Were you >5m from the point of offence?

[Goalie64]

As always "you had to be there"

Given that, I can only assume that the umpire thought that in moving into the position you did, that you obstructed the attacker.
As the attacker did not change the direction of their run it could very easily appear to be the case.

[kaiwawao]

If a defender is set and stationary while the forward approaches and the forward simply runs into him, then I would be leaning towards a FHD, but it is not clear from the scenario if the defender dropped a second before the attack got there which I would view as a fair PC on the grounds the defender was setting themselves to stop the attacker one way or another; or whether the defender was static as soon as the attacker's path was clear and was just waiting to position the stick.

A clash of players can always look nasty but if you have time to avoid the static player and choose not to, I think FHD, if you have no way to avoid them due to the defender's actions, the penalty against the defence is fair.

There is no real black & white answer here though and a lot depends on what you see in each example.

[foozbear]

normally if I see a stationary defender and an attacker just barges in...its a FHD ...a "knock that off please" and on our way.

if the defender is moving and suddenly drops at the last second I would award the proper penalty to the attacker.

In my mind the clearest way to know what the intent it...the attacker should make SOME attempt to get around the defender. They cant just run straight and expect a free hit. If the clash is unavoidable then it becomes more about how had primary position...

I might not umpire the correct way but players soon know that just running into each other for obstruction calls dont work on me.

[Magpie]

Note - members should not be able to start threads in the Sin Bin (now have to look at the settings)

I would say that you 'spread' yourself too wide, what would you have expected if the player put the ball onto your foot? What you suggest could be akin to laying on the ground to create an obstacle for the player to go around, correct the player can't 'push' through but are what you doing in the contect of the rules?

G9 yes you will have them

[keely]

Magpie is right. It's one thing to occupy a position on the pitch as a defender first, placing the onus on the attacker to go around you. It's another thing to get to your spot and then make yourself as big as possible such that if you miss the tackle, your body will stop the attacker.

If you're there very early, then that stance will have you committed and likely to get beat anyway, but if the attacker plows into you then it is likely their foul. However, if you're not getting there early, most umpires will understand your body positioning to show that you're stopping the attacker by any means necessary - and warrant an upgraded decision.

It's impossible for us to know which one it was without being there.   

[dodgeyumpires]

I will be able to tell you... was it Mr Bownsey or Mrs Michelson???

[Neo]

Note - members should not be able to start threads in the Sin Bin (now have to look at the settings)

think it is fixed now   

[MedManBiker]

Am new to the forum and don't wish to offend anyone,

We play a game with stick and ball and it is the stick that should be the important part of this.

If you kneel in front of me with the intent of making a reverse stick take, I am likely to;

1.  Lift it over your stick and run into you, you have obstructed me making a fair run,
2.  Turn the ball into you and run into you, you have obstructed me making a fair run,

As a forward I will always run into an advancing keeper, if I jump out of the way, I am no longer in control and surely can not expect any foul in my favour, so it goes that unless I can clearly get round you or move the ball, I need to ensure you obstruct me  

To summarize, if you position yourself large and fixed you are inviting an obstruction play IMHO.

MMB

[Hacker]

Hope I don't umpire your games then MedMan Biker as they both sound like manufactured fouls to me and therefore FHD. As Keeley and others have said the difference is largely in the timing of any putative obstruction.

[MedManBiker]

I will not disagree on either point   just the view of a forward attempting to make something of the situation.

As I have said previously, this is the reason I have total respect for and not qualified as an umpire.

The forward v The umpire = normally 2 opposing views of any situation  

MMB

[justin]

Just substitute 'player' for 'forward', MMB, and you'd often be correct

I was always a forward myself so probably know the 'tricks' they like to use better than the cunning defenders 

But it IS a 'non-contact' game and there is no rule which says that defenders have to get out of the way of advancing forwards....each is entitled to his own bit of space (an over-simplification, of course, not taking into account 'impeding' for example). You are NOT entitled to flatten someone simply because they are on the line you wish to take.

[justin]

Sorry double post, as I have been advised!