Penalty SHOTS

Yeah, cuz the middle upper leg still has complete flexibility to swipe at the puck so defining the upper upper leg which has no such flexibility (unless maybe your thumbs are double jointed) as a foul makes sense. I think the flexibility ends at the lower upper upper leg which is just a hair above the middle upper leg.

__________________
Just in case you weren't sure, it's official -- CMAS sucks.
Oh yeah, and now they're broke.

Stay where you are, huh? So... you freeze and let them swim past you since they are flicking at your legs?

I recall at worlds in 2002 that the 'staying where you are' technique got our players kicked out for 2 minutes each time.

__________________
Faster than a speeding puck...

You sure they stayed? And if they did were they laying in the bin? That might be part of the problem. That or the gung-ho attitude of the reffing that year. I think at Reffing 101 that year the sub title was "How to play a 7-minute game in 33-minutes".

__________________
Just in case you weren't sure, it's official -- CMAS sucks.
Oh yeah, and now they're broke.

I think a lot of rules interpretation and enforcement happened during or because of 2002 worlds. This is why so many refs are calling a defensive foul anytime the puck touches something other than a stick or a head, no matter how it happens, 'cause that is how it was done in '02. Right now it is still dependant upon the ref in the water at the time and depending on their personal view of reality it may agree with the general population or not.

Might be nice to have the rule written more clearly, but that is a tougher task than it sounds. Try it. Find every instance in the rules where "playing the puck" is mentioned and fouls and re-write them to make them more clear. I have given up every time. I can certainly complain about what is there, but fixing it and making it better can be difficult.

__________________
An aquifer is a water bearing layer of rock or soil. Aquifers are separated by impermeable layers of rock or clay called an aquitard. Aquitard, however may sound a bit offensive to some, and therefore we will be changing the name to Aquachallenge.

[quote=Jols;5676]
Jordan, in your first example... you flicked it into the defenders legs. OK... where was your other attacker? As soon as the puck hits his legs the other player should be there to put it in.
QUOTE]



Haha Now that I look back on the play I remember my player was also on the left where I had shot but he was a little too far behind. This was not the problem though because I wasn't very smart and just figured my shot would go in so I did not follow it up. But that just teaches me for next time. hahah

And I agree with if the pucks going at your body and your are able to move you should do so. Otherwise you could just always put your body in the area and say its the attackers fault for the shot. If your able to move your body out of the way chances are you will do so without knocking the puck down still. And if not its a good shot by the attacker for making everyone think you can.

"And I agree with if the pucks going at your body and your are able to move you should do so. Otherwise you could just always put your body in the area and say its the attackers fault for the shot. If your able to move your body out of the way chances are you will do so without knocking the puck down still. And if not its a good shot by the attacker for making everyone think you can"


....erm. every sport i can think of allows all the participants the basic right to stand their ground. if someone flicks the puck at you, you shouldn't have to scramble to get out of the way... if thats the rule we'll see people just putting shots into peoples bodies and claiming they have right of way... mmmm, sounds sensible doesn't it.

if you can knock the puck down or control it with your stick, that's option 1. if some plonker passes the puck into your shoulder or your leg, irrespective of whether it's your hip or ankle and "moveable" or not... (we're all moveable underwater, where do you draw the line?) ...if your body was already there, it was a bad pass, and if it hits you, it's not your fault as the defender... play on.

to say it's wrong or illegal to place yourself between the puck and the goal or in the best defensive position is... i'll be nice and just say silly. it's quite within the defenders rights to put themselves between the puck and the goal and force the attackers to go round/through them... thats the whole point of the game! it's the basis of every defensive tactic, it's why passing is so effective, it's the same in our game as it is in hockey, soccer, football, basketball... if you can't see that, i'm thinking you're not seeing much.

same rules apply in general play and during penalty shots.

__________________
it's more polite on the grating than on the subs bench

Not this one. Example, on the wall, if the puck is flicked past you and you continue to lie there without moving you will be penalised for blocking the player who flicked and is attempting to reach the puck.
By the way, that sounds suspiciously like the 'everyone else is doing it' argument that I used with my parents when I was 10.

Didn't say you couldn't.

__________________
Faster than a speeding puck...

That is a different case. You are describing Shephearding or Obstruction, which is essentially interfenece, playing the player not the puck. Both Soccer and Ice Hockey have rules against the same thing more or less. Liam is talking about something more akin to incedental handball in soccer. If someone kicks a ball at you point blank and it rockets off your arm it is not considered a hand ball right? Should be the same here right?

What we do have is the right to our little spot of pool space when we are attempting to play the puck, which is different from the issue at hand... er leg?

What we need to clarify is the fuzzy line where someone tries to flick past me, I ATTEMPT to play it with my stick. Hit hits my Fin... foul??? hits my leg... foul?? or my body... foul??? or my shoulder... foul? or my wrist... foul??? or my glove... foul???

Is this something that can be written down black and white or is it always and forever up to the call of the referee? If that is the case it falls back to Jordan's original issue that he is in the same situation in two or three different tournaments and gets three different rulings.

__________________
An aquifer is a water bearing layer of rock or soil. Aquifers are separated by impermeable layers of rock or clay called an aquitard. Aquitard, however may sound a bit offensive to some, and therefore we will be changing the name to Aquachallenge.

Thats why I started this discussion. This brings together everyones ideas and we can see the different sides and show eachothers poing of view.

I am hoping that something can be written down in the rulebook to better clarify this. From what Ive been reading it sounds like this is a very shady area and this is possibly the reason that everyone is "right" in their own way.

Does anyone know what it would take to try and fix this problem?

all of the refs to use the same interpretation.

this can be done at the refs meeting before any major (or minor) comp.

__________________
it's more polite on the grating than on the subs bench