From: airdg@castle.ed.ac.uk (Richard Grey)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey.field
Subject: Re: Offside rules OK?
Date: 31 Dec 92 12:57:25 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

Yo !

	I come back from my Xmas hols in Paris to see 13 articles
	awaiting my pleasure, but of course, all but two of them
	are unobtainable because the system junks articles over
	5 days old ... sniff ! And to think that I would have
	seen a dozen new names !!! Oh well !

	Anyway, as to the subject. Although I didn't see the
	original article, but presume it came from Daniel (by
	the dcu username) in Derek's article (the one I could see !)
	I'm not going to offer much on offside. In fact, I'm
	not going to offer anything at all !

	As it happens, my father happens to be a member residing
	on the FEH (European) and FIH councils. This involves
	organising all international tournaments (from home
	country "friendlies" to intercontinental cups and the
	olympic qualifiers and finals. However, this also 
	involves discussion of possible rule changes and enhance-
	ments - of which I tend to get an "airing" as my old man
	rambles on.

	The short corner change had been discussed for the last
	two years, along with the use of rolling subs and the
	360 degree turn etc. But my point is that many things
	get discussed and are tried out in isolated practice
	matches (often friendly internationals) but are never
	sanctioned as FIH rules changes. One good example of
	this has been with indoor, where the is alot of scope
	for change. Two things have been discussed :

	[1] - Putting boards along the backline which can
		be used similarly to the sideboards.

	[2] - Extending the playing surface so that there
		is a five feet (or so ?) zone behind each 
		goal which can be played in - similar to
		ice hockey.

	Now, these give rise to an indoor situation in which I
	would love to play - however, they have yet to be
	implemented as FIH rule changes, and who knows if they
	ever will. Basically, both cause the same problem : the
	ball rarely goes out of play, meaning that super fit
	people (like me - joke !) are needed. This, already fast
	games increases in pace, detracting from making it
	TV viewable which is needed to give the game, as a whole,
	necessary exposure.

	These views are as a player, but now an umpires dilemma
	on the 360 degree turn. How exactly is this to be 
	interpreted when, it seems perfectly logical to hold the
	ball up with your back to a player, and then commence
	to rotate one way - the opposing player notices and goes
	to tackle correctly - so you stop and rotate back the way
	you came and hence away from the oppostion. All the time
	this is done without backing into the tackler.

	This is quite a nifty trick, one which I have perfected
	playing centre forward or half. If I turn once, then I
	can in the same move turn back, and then back again and
	then back again etc etc. ie. keep swiveling until I can
	get clear of the opponent. However, the problem is the
	umpiring of such - some seem to allow in others don't.
	Some will allow a turn oneway and then back the other, but
	not back again in the original direction.

	I would be interested to hear peoples views on this and
	the other bumf above.

Richard.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
  	   	         airdg@castle.ed.ac.uk
          _______   __   ______   __   __   _______   _______   _______
         / ___  /  / /  / ____/  / /  / /  / ___  /  / ___  /  / ___  /
        / /__/_/  / /  / /      / /--/ /  / /__/ /  / /__/_/  / /  / /
       / /\ \    / /  / /___   / /--/ /  / /--/ /  / /\ \    / /__/ /
      /_/  \_\  /_/  /_____/  /_/  /_/  /_/  /_/  /_/  \_\  /______/

	{ Edinburgh University Dept. of Artificial Intelligence }
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey.field