Umpire controversial decisions: Stroke or no stroke?

This clip from EHL (found at FieldHockeyRef), shows a penalty corner where a long rebound is given and a discussion between the umpire and the defenders occurs.

  1. The attacker that picks the rebound smashes the ball into the goal
  2. The ball impacts on the body of the defender that was on the line.
  3. The umpire blows a stroke.
  4. The defenders complain that it was a dangerous play.
  5. What do you think?

 


 

By Pablo Mendoza

Pablo Mendoza is an FIH Hockey Academy Educator and the owner of A Hockey World. Contact: pablo@ahockeyworld.net

5 thoughts on “Umpire controversial decisions: Stroke or no stroke?

  • May 12, 2016 at 4:49 am
    Permalink

    On danger, it’s low enough and far enough from the drag flicker to not be an issue.

    On the issue of the umpire being slightly late on the call. Was it “good” enough advantage to the attacker to shoot point bank at the keeper, when a Stroke was on offer?

    However, I believe the second umpire should come into action here, as the ball could be travelling wide of the post on the initial shot at goal. If wide, then short corner.

  • May 11, 2016 at 2:38 am
    Permalink

    You cannot expect the umpire to blow before danger occurs – getting hit in front of goal is part of the hazards of playing the game. Imagine he blew for a stroke to try and prevent the player from being hit and the attacker missed the target? Then the defender would have been just as upset or even more upset. I agree that it’s dangerous, but you cannot legislate for defenders lying in front of goal otherwise I would just lie there all game and the attackers could never shoot without it being dangerous. Correct blow in my opinion, thanks for the interesting clip.

  • May 10, 2016 at 2:58 am
    Permalink

    The initial drag flick was on target, and then hit the defender on the line. Correct decision was a stroke. HOWEVER, due to the umpire not blowing immediately for that offence, it gave the attacker time to exercise his advantage. By the second attacker taking a shot at goal, he exercised his advantage, therefore “cancelling” the stroke. Advantage is deemed over. The stroke should NOT then be awarded.

  • May 10, 2016 at 2:56 am
    Permalink

    Stroke!!

  • May 10, 2016 at 2:50 am
    Permalink

    Legitimate show at goal, it’s a stroke, not dangerous if the shot is on target.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *