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!

[Goalie64]

birchall - football IS a contact sport.
           - hockey is not meant to be one.

[redumpire]

Wow.

It takes some cojones for a 15 year-old to come on here and tell an umpire on the FIH Promising Umpires' list that she's incompetent...

I'm not sure whether to be impressed or appalled, though I'm pretty much decided on the latter.

[mosley59]

Birchall, it might help if you can describe the position clearer. If I understand correctly, this position is the same as when a player crouches low and has their entire stick flat on the ground (either on the forehand or the backhand) to tackle an oncoming player, except that in this case the player is on one knee? Perhaps you could let us know how it would differ from this photo in appearance, so we're all on the same wavelength.

I think I know what you're talking about, but I'm not willing to comment until I know for sure it's what you mean.

[birchall]

Thanks for the edit Birchall.

This comment, when the topic reopened, says it all:It's a risky tackle because when it breaks down play it's a PC and the team plays with one less.

That's not unfair, or bad umpiring, or whatever - it's what 'risk' involves.

I agree with this, there is that element of risk involved if its executed poorly and I would understand if that happened to me or I witnessed that. my problem lies with a legitimate tackle where the ball is won and it is penialised as since you are crouching the player may topple over you. The umpire sees this topple and penialises you.




[/quote]

[birchall]

Birchall, it might help if you can describe the position clearer. If I understand correctly, this position is the same as when a player crouches low and has their entire stick flat on the ground (either on the forehand or the backhand) to tackle an oncoming player, except that in this case the player is on one knee? Perhaps you could let us know how it would differ from this photo in appearance, so we're all on the same wavelength.

I think I know what you're talking about, but I'm not willing to comment until I know for sure it's what you mean.

yes, sort of. His right hand would be on the bottom of the grip with the stick face (flat side) facing to the ball and his left knee on the ground. After thinking about it I think a better way to explain it is a sort of 'brace' position when an attacker is running and has the ball loosely in front. You then can challenge and safely take the ball in a trap knowing the player running with the ball won't ball you over. If someone was running full pace at you in an open dribble people often are scared off at tackling as they don't want to be flattened and often you see people try it on their forehand, similar technique where a little drag to the left beats the defender. This tackle allows the defender to be able to confront the runner. The risk involved is that if the attacker is smart he will run in an arc leaving you there bracing like an idiot.

I do know the implications of this when it is done badly and agree with you all but I think it should not be punished when done well.

[mani]

Did you get the ball?

[keely]

yes, sort of. His right hand would be on the bottom of the grip with the stick face (flat side) facing to the ball and his left knee on the ground.

Well, that's a far cry from "lie down", isn't it? Those were your words.

I think we had everything covered pretty well in the first page, where, for example, I said:

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.   

I hope that helps.

[birchall]

Well, that's a far cry from "lie down", isn't it? Those were your words.

I think we had everything covered pretty well in the first page, where, for example, I said:

I hope that helps.

sorry that was a typo 'lie down' in the sense of submitting and allowing them free run.