![ZigZagHockey](/img/default-banner.jpg)
- 1 865
- 481 529
ZigZagHockey
United Kingdom
Приєднався 3 кві 2010
Video clips relating to the Rules of Hockey and often associated with a blog by Martin Conlon
martinzigzag.wordpress.com/2012/12/21/3214/
martinzigzag.wordpress.com/2014/01/04/field-hockey-rules-muddling-the-advantage-rule-with-gains-benefit-2/
martinzigzag.wordpress.com/2012/12/21/3214/
martinzigzag.wordpress.com/2014/01/04/field-hockey-rules-muddling-the-advantage-rule-with-gains-benefit-2/
1094. Now this passes for hockey
Attacking side breach Rule 9.12, obstruction, and then 9,9 raising the ball with a flick into the shins of a close defender.
Переглядів: 730
Відео
1092. Consistently wrong
Переглядів 4242 місяці тому
Common application of Rule 9.11 ball body contact
Clarification
Переглядів 1684 місяці тому
Explaining part of the Explanation of the Obstruction Rule where it has been written with incomplete sentences.
1085. Was a penalty corner award correct?
Переглядів 1447 місяців тому
Match played in 2004/5 Give a reason for your reply.
1083. Aerial Interpretation of Rule.
Переглядів 2297 місяців тому
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...
1082. Automatic and wrong.
Переглядів 1667 місяців тому
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....
1081. Third party obstruction.
Переглядів 1107 місяців тому
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 ...
1080. Ten years ago.
Переглядів 2227 місяців тому
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.
1078 Is this obstruction?
Переглядів 1147 місяців тому
Yes or no, say why you give the answer you give.
1077. Leading with the body, blocking, barging.
Переглядів 3197 місяців тому
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 ...
1072. Flaws in the framing of the Rule - Obstruction
Переглядів 1128 місяців тому
1072. Flaws in the framing of the Rule - Obstruction
1069 Backing into AND moving bodily into
Переглядів 1878 місяців тому
1069 Backing into AND moving bodily into