Using the arm? (reff's)

Looks more like a love tap to me.. I wouldn't really call it an elbow to the face with intent (I had also missed it).

I am always in favour of penalising the first offence though, and would still want to penalise the playing of the hand. I think the contact is minimal and not intentional. Although I have been wrong before...

I would be in favour of stopping play and awarding a free puck to black. Then, (if the offence from black is indeed severe enough) explaining quickly that it is being reversed because of a worse foul from black and awarding it to white. Is that allowed in the rules?
That way get some peer pressure within the black team on the guy who fouled after the first one...

__________________
Faster than a speeding puck...

You said you played in NL, right Jols? Maybe that helps explain that Sven has only one minute in the bin in tens years, they just don't call it over there. He clearly "drops" it on him.

You could always award an equal and kick out the elbow

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

But its differcult to make on purpose that fouls.(i.m not used to do that)
I can tell its done on purpose. We do that each year 1 training before the toernaments begin to train new players in the team not to react. But for the rest we dont spend any time in learning them those things. Fouls can happen accidental but not on purpose...
(only most times the reffs see the reaction, so its important not to learn you players to make those fouls but also not to react to them)
That i have so little time in the sin-bin is simple to do. simply by not playing this way.

But as reff you must also penalising the first offence when you see it.
But you have the power also to penalise the reaction.
But how ugly the reaction is. dont reward the first offence.


But for the discussion. 2 photos.
one from the other discussion where you can see number 15 having 2 gloves.
And onother one were you can see number 15 in this movie only a few minuts later.

Attached Images

	2glovesnr15.jpg (47.4 KB, 3 views)
	number15.jpg (54.0 KB, 5 views)

__________________
When you are good, then you are not bad..

I think Duck means these moment by an elbow.
(see photo)

The elbow did hit the white. you can see the reaction. Not intentional but there was an sort off elbow.
the intention was to obstruckt the white and hold him off/push him back to prevent him from playing the puck.
Thats why its so good example. there are more things happening.

So now is the question how to react as reff.
The first action(by the white) deserve an action.
But the reaction (by the black) deserve an reaction also

Attached Images

PDVD_004-2.jpg (68.4 KB, 3 views)

__________________
When you are good, then you are not bad..

I meant the first elbow (while you still had your stick in that hand) where you reached over the guy with your elbow bent and then with effort hitting either his shoulder or his face.

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

If the ref only sees the reaction, it would make tactical sense to learn the foul and use them to get the reaction which the ref would see and penalize. I'm not saying anyone should do that, just pointing out a flaw in the comment of why it's important.

Which is where the equal puck comes in even though you sin-binned the black.

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

yeah i agree with duck cant believe i didnt see it before, i think cos i as watching for a hand swap of the stick.

sinbin black, probably 2 mins. advantage white.

theres no real stick infringement by white before black reaches over and gives him a shot to the face.

you dirty puppy sven! and to hear you talk about clean play you should be a paradigm of virtue. thats like me putting up that vid of stopping a pass and gloving it. except way way worse, hahaha

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

Probably much like many refs -- you look for the things you think are going to happen or that are your pet peeve rather than just looking and seeing as much as you can. That's one of the things that makes reffing difficult and separates the goods ones from the others. The good ones don't focus on one thing.

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

QUOTE: MY BIG FRIEND
You mean that movie made in Rijswijk from me?
But that is one off the most worse things i sometimes do in a real game.(gloving)

But if you have a vid, way way way way worse. please put it out here.
Not for players to learn it. Like i told that is never good to do.
But for the reffs to discuss and learn from it.

QUOTE: DUCK
I hope we agree that nobody must do that. But there are players that do that.
so we find it important to learn our players not how to do it but how not to react to it.
A different angle in vission. but a vission towards more clean play.
It takes the reason away you mentioned in yoor quote.

__________________
When you are good, then you are not bad..

Yep, and indeed, the Dutch are world renowned for their physical play... and the competition allows a lot of it - this example, stick fouls etc etc. Makes it a big disadvantage when you get to Worlds and suddenly the refs from the other countries don't put up with those shenanigans.

Example: Worlds 2002 where in the first game, although our 'assignment' was to play as cleanly as possible from the coach we got 20+ minutes as a team in the bin. Part of that I still believe was refs bias after Worlds 2000, but a large part also how you are used to playing.


Got to disagree with Atapene - I definitely still see the white stick playing the glove of the black as first contact - not the puck.

__________________
Faster than a speeding puck...