Відео

1092. Legal or not ?

Common application of Rule 9.11 ball body contact

Explaining part of the Explanation of the Obstruction Rule where it has been written with incomplete sentences.

Match played in 2004/5 Give a reason for your reply.

Interpretation:- Impeding the goalkeeper

This was posted on UA-cam as "a clip that helps us understand and interpret the rules of hockey." "As this aerial goes up, two opposing players may have been within 5m of each other in a receiving area. However, from where the ball is heading there is an initial receiver from the attacking team who starts in front and could have safely received the ball but for the two players attempting to cut...

Two incidents from the time before we had imposed the inane prohibition on playing a free ball awarded in the opposing 23m area into the opposing circle. Without thinking, the umpire twice awards a penalty corner for a ball body contact that was not an offence. This 'automatic' penalising of any and all ball-body contact has been common umpiring practice for at least 65 years that I know about....

A video produced for the FIH Umpiring Committee on the Dartfish platform. It was declared in the provided 'Interpretation of the Action' that there was no obstruction because the ARG player made no attempt to play at the ball. The interference and physical contact as well as the third-part obstruction should be obvious to all viewers. The Interpretation given appears to have been given because ...

Shield the ball , feint in one direction and then another, then turn with the ball while lifting it into a leg of the unbalanced defender. Umpires have never been dissuaded from rewarding these fouls with a penalty corner.

Yes or no, say why you give the answer you give.

Part of a video I produced four years ago with examples of ball leading, such as the forward spin turn. Not much has changed, idiots are still saying everything is just fine with the way hockey (especiall the Rule concerning obstruction, ball body contact and dangerous play) have 'developed'. The facility to put up video on Internet hockey fora, which I think became available in 2009, was in a ...

1076 Obstruction

1074. Rugby style hand off?

559 Attacker's tackle

1073. Wrong criterion.

1072. Flaws in the framing of the Rule - Obstruction

1069 Backing into AND moving bodily into

1068 Blockturn

1067 Jumpshot and Spin

1066 Spin Block

1065. Explaining obstruction

1064 Stationary ball.

1062. Dangerous play.

1061 Barge

1060 Dangerous play

Right Hand positioning

Right hand position

1058. Ball body contact.

1057. Anything wrong?