From: dpappas@pdx125.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Derek Pappas)
Subject: Re: Rule changes
Reply-To: dpappas@ichips.intel.com
Organization: INTEL X86 Focus Group
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 00:46:36 GMT

In article <1993Jan5.134014.28523@aifh.ed.ac.uk>, dcu@aifh.ed.ac.uk (Daniel Cunliffe) writes:
|> Well in true rec.field.hockey fashion I find 11 messages and only two that
|> have not expired!
|> 
|> As I have tried to start some threads, if any one has posted anything that
|> they or someone else thinks I should see could they please post it again,
|> or email to me so I can try to keep something going - THANKS :-)
|> 
|> In article <1993Jan4.153152.23559@bcars6a8.bnr.ca> muradia@bnr.ca writes:
|> >I have played competitive hockey for several years but with all these rules being
|> >changed so often now I have lost almost all interest in playing this game. How
|> 
|> That's a very sad thing to say. 
|> 

I can see where he is coming from. There is little incentive for older
umpires and players to keep up with the rule changes. They have done
something one way for a long time and to ask them to change the way
they are used to is unfair

|> >easy will it be for us (who have grown a little older) to adapt to the rule of
|> >Obstruction (where you can do a 360 spin)? I think someone should take a serious
|> 
|> Obstruction is a slightly odd case as I don't believe that it was the rule
|> itself that was changed, rather the interpretation has been modified to
|> try to encourage umpires to enforce it the way the rule was intended.
|> 

It took 70 years to figure out the correct interprutation?

|> >look at all these rule changes. I agree that some things need to be changed to
|> >make this game for interesting for the spectators, but where do you stop.
|> 
|> I must admit it seems that we are still tinkering with some fairly major
|> rules when we might have expected them to be settled by now. At least
|> part of the need to change is caused by the continuing improvements in
|> hockey equipment which is allowing people to hit the ball much harder. One
|> posible solution (which may be under consideration) is to outlaw sticks
|> made from certain materials, or to change the ball. 
|> 

People don't hit the ball that much harder in the '90's than they did
in the late '70's or early '80's. Certain rules such as no more under
cutting the ball 70 yards are for safety and do not change the nature
of the game. However, other rules such as the new interpretation of
the obstruction rule are fundemental changes to the game. And I wonder
if the new interpretation will turn out to be dangerous. Now the
defender has to go through the offensive player to get to the ball. 

|> On the whole the rules are changed to 1) improve the playability of the game,
|> 2) to improve the safety of the game and 3) to improve the game as a spectator
|> sport. I guess it can be hard to suit all three goals at once.
|> 
|> In this country at least (Scotland) each club is asked every year if there
|> are any rules they think should be changed, and clubs are encouraged to 
|> try out new rules (such as no offside) and report their experiences. I am
|> sure if enough people were unhappy about certain rules than there are
|> ways for them to express this to those that decide on the rules and 
|> hopefully keep our game alive and kicking (and some spectators would be
|> nice :-)

People are asked what they think. However, national and international
associations tend to do what they think is best for international
sport rather than club or representitive players.



Derek

-------------------------------------------------------
Derek Pappas                US mail M/S JF1-19
dpappas@ichips.intel.com            2111 NE 25th Ave.
503-696-4546			    Hillboro, OR. 97123
m/s JF1-19
-------------------------------------------------------