Free Subbing at All Times?

So i've been thinking about this for a long time, as a bit of a response to the free subbing after goals. I'm also a fan of Ice hockey and they have sometimes hard to understand rules, their to many players on the ice is one of them as they do allow people to leave the subbing area before the other player has left. I have been previously pretty ademant that it should be ONLY after goals to keep it from getting confusing, especially like during the pause for an advantage puck. But that is based on the idea that 4 players had to be in the sub box when the play started. Would it be possible to improve the subbing as I describe below, now that it is primarily in-water side-subbing?

My thinking is that we could make it so a player may enter the playing area before the person subbing out has completely left the area as long as he is:
a) On the surface
b) swimming toward the sub-box
c) within some distance of the box 3m, 5m to be determined, maybe even different rules for when the play has stopped like 1/2 pool during an advantage puck.
If a player is subbing out from being submerged they would still need to break the surface before their sub leaves the subbing area, so essentially there are always four players out of the play and on the surface, it might be however that they are only heading to the box.

One thing I think this would do is help to rebalance the defensive ability on the side of the pool away from the sub-box. generally it should speed up the game tremendously, and if it were effective enough I might even become an advocate of 5 a side play versus the strong opponent of the silly idea as I am now.
I think concernes about more than one person leaving the box, or players in the sub area submerging to watch the game will be no different than they are currently. As far as making the call, it can be hard to see as it is, we've already hijacked threads other places to hear arguments about how to help the deck ref see sub fouls, all that would need to happen here is a slight delay in the call to make sure one of the surface swimmers actually leaves the playing area.

What do y'all think?

...why?

how will it speed up the game, and what defensive balance are you referring to exactly?

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

can't say i agree.
it will give the defendign team too much of an advantage in the case of a runaway goal. If you're defence lets one through, they deserve to be scored against.

5 vs 5 means also that every player has its own sub, and there would be no more problems in that department. As for your proposition Tuck, I generally agree with you - e.g. if a player touches the side of the pool, or is clearly trying to sub, then the sub should be allowed to enter the field, if the first player continues to exit fully. Why? Because that player in the process of subbing is already out of the game, and that extra time of fully exiting is nothing but "legality" point of triggering the deck refs punishment, while the team subbing is for some short, but perhaps important time, without one or more players. Rules regarding subbing should be liberal, with punishment comming only if there is clearly one player missing from the sub bench area.

I always get a smile on my face, when reff comes to us before the game, and explain that he will take great care to check if our fins are fully outside the water... :-)

Now please everyone, dont get monkey on me again, these are just my thoughts... nothing that we say here will change the rule book, thats for sure. Rule changes are slower to come than evolution of the dinosaur... and for the record - thats bad!

I can appreciate the idea Tuck, but I think that it is impractical because of the nature of the game compared to ice hockey - in the water with difficulty identifying players. When play is close to the subs bench it would be almost impossible to check on subbing correctly.

Also I think that subbing is part of the game, and it can be used tactically. The rule in allowing subbing after a goal is to speed the game up and eliminate an unfair disadvantage for the scoring team. I don't really see any great advantages, and one very large disadvantage to this.

By the way, Flk_de_pk, I assume that 5v5 would mean 3 subs (or so) on the side, not 5 subs.

I would support some sort of subs 'cage' where the subs check into. A chip, implanted in all players allows a player to exit once there are too many players in the box. Problem solved.

__________________
Faster than a speeding puck...

At the BOA Nationals in April in Sheffield this will be implemented on 2 of the courts (though I think its only being implemented due to trying to run 3 courts in the one pool, court one will be using in water side-subbing)

the details in the team brief are

Playing Court TWO and THREE

These court will use Out-of-water side substitution. Again this may be new to some teams, but is an accepted method of substitution and is much safer than end-substitution traditionally used – and it’s really very simple!!. It is slightly different than the method used for playing court one above. Here are some brief pointers:


o substitutes wait in the substitute’s box, which is a 3m long zone outside of the water on the side of the pool to one side of pool half way point, the area is marked out by markers.
o the substitute’s box is OUT OF the water.
o the normal rules about substituting apply – 1 out then 1 in.
o substitutes may enter the water, when the player subbing out touches the side of the pool within the substitution box with both hands. The player entering the water then gently slips into the water feet first from the seated position with one hand on the side (NO diving or rolling into the water). – no chance of being jumped on here! You are deemed to be ‘in’ the subs box when both of your hands touch the side. Once you have touched the side you must then exit the water and sit on the side in the subs box.
o when a goal is scored substitutes may enter the pitch before those they are replacing leave it. As long as only 6 players remain in the playing area at the restart of play then no foul has occurred.
o when a substitute enters the playing area after a goal is scored or following the playing of a penalty shot, they must touch their end-line before re-entering play unless play has restarted and the puck is ‘in possession’.

If there are any operational problems with the Out-of-water side subbing then the pools will be converted back to the traditional end-subbing, at the discretion of the Chief Referee.

I was thinking 5 subs, Jols. Each position with 2 players.

@Tippas - nice to see that at least on a local or national levels, something gets changed.

I know, I wasn't. One of the advantages in 5 a side is that you can make more teams with the current level of players at club level. In a lot of countries I have seen hockey played it is a declining sport, and reducing the team number to 8 with 5 a side would help get more teams in a tournament.
Also, I think that you should reward the team that trains, and giving everyone a 50/50 sub doesn't do that.
And finally, to reduce the numbers on the bottom, which is one of the arguments for 5 a side, it would not help to give everyone a 50/50 sub.

__________________
Faster than a speeding puck...

a basic tenet of ALL rules/regs is enforceability, and all rules and regs come down CONSITENT enforcement or rules/regs agree upon.

I don't know about you, but in US we get lots of rules/regs that are unenforceable. Idea behind rule is great and good but how to enforce and enforce equally across the board. (ie fisherman must carry fishing license on person - hmmmmm what about spearfishers?) (ie no lead in the water; what about divers weight belt?) Do you enforce the rule strickly or realize it doesn't fit all situations. This shouldn't happen in sport, but it does.

I know there are some on this forum who think deck refs are unimportant, uneeded and irrevelent, but we do exist in the rules, so we need to try to keep rules written clearly, concisely and without too many sub parts: ie what Tuck described is a triffle tricky - Tuck, ask Keri if she wants to implement your suggestion?

If a rule/reg needs to be changed or a new one implemented, please consider the ramifications beyond mere desirablity - can it be enforced? what effect does it have on other rules? does it actuality impede the activities of the ref? can it physically be attained? how does it help the game?

I totally support the 'free subbing' after a goal rule change but not for all play unless the change can be better written.

__________________
Carol Rose

Carol, that what you wrote about enforcing the rules sounds really needed, but its really not. The key to this is - common sence!

Upon implementing common sence into reffereeing, a lot of rules can be implemented without trouble. I cant help not to point a finger at US refferees when it comes to nit-picking the rule book. There are several cases, one of them is that Mareh is now making gloves specially and only for US market, as your refferees seems to be without common sence when it comes to glove colour. Black is good, red is not....??? And whats that story about US players needing to wear t-shirts in the game without a serius sponsor demanding it becouse of a commercial or outside reasons??? Whatta drag! I hope that none of US refs will come up with rules about fin-colour..... ( decided not to comment further...)

Regarding the direct text of the rules about subbing, one can easilly write and enforce the rules correctly, while allowing what Tuck has proposed. Again - common sence beats problems of unforceabillity. Example: How can anyone prove that you drove your car without a seatbelt? And most of us had to pay it at least once in a lifetime. Thats the authority of policeman. The similar authority is carried by refferees... end of story!

It looks to me, that some refferees think that players are in the pool becouse of them, not the other way arround. Again, thats the problem of common sence!