ICF rules adaptation this season

[vish]

Well, we’re nearing the final stages of the National League competition and I thought I would take the time to put forward my opinions on the application of ICF rules in New Zealand. I’ll be honest- my faith in the consistency of refereeing has been severely shaken.

I don’t think the rules were made available soon enough.
I don’t think there was an adequate lead-in to their application- there was little education of the canoe polo community in NZ apart from simply sending the rules out.
I think these factors have lead to an increase in misunderstandings between referees and players, and personally, I am frustrated by the entire situation.

I thought that it was the heavy support for centreline restarts which lead to the adoption of ICF rules in New Zealand, so it totally confounds me that we are still using goal line restarts. It annoys me when people state that we were using ICF rules beforehand, and that nothing has changed, because if that statement were true, the NZCPA wouldn’t have had to send out a new rule book in ICF format, with a whole range of statements from the ICF rules crossed out or modified with additions. If we were using ICF rules before, there wouldn’t have been such a push for ICF rules to be adapted in New Zealand by international players.

I have had quite heated discussions with players when I have reffed their games. This wouldn’t surprise many of you, I admit, but I have been astounded to hear them argue a version of the rules that doesn’t exist.
“There isn’t such a thing as an illegal kayak tackle on a boat.” (It actually says you can penalise any tackle with the potential to break a kayak.)
“I was holding the ball first so any body contact is the other person’s fault. ” (There is such a thing as shared possession in the rules, so you don’t actually have ‘sovereign rights’ to the ball just because it’s in your hand first.)
“You can’t put your paddle across the bow of a boat.” (You can actually, but you can’t hold their boat or put it within arm’s reach.)

I think when the rules are changed or the public has a perception that the rules have changed, then it is doubly important to intensify education of those rules. We must have faith in referees, and they should be backed up by players actually knowing the rules instead of getting frustrated because they are getting penalised in a way they don’t expect. I sincerely hope there is an increased attempt to get the intent and interpretations of the rules out before the tournament in Christchurch.

[becks.c]

I agree with Vashti that the roll out of the National League rules could have been more carefully thought out.

There is a huge amount of confusion amongst referees and players, as many have bought into the assumption that the new rules are ICF... when clearly they are not.

Vashti mentions a number of examples above, they particularly highlight players confusion at what rules they are playing. (icf OR nz?)

The kayak tackle example:

In current ICF, the clause states:
"Any hard tackle to the side of the kayak if it is at angles between eighty (80) and hundred (100) degrees and by momentary contact"

Whereas the corresponding NZ NL rules state:
"Any hard tackle to the side of the kayak with the potential to break it on impact, particularly if it is by momentary contact." (p.11)

he-male or she-male?? An observer may not be able to tell the different, but there are fundamental differences!

Please take the time to read over the NZ NL rules, don't be fooled into thinking that if you have a copy of ICF rules you'll be halfway there.

On NZ NL rules, of particular note are the intensive editing efforts that have gone on around kayak tackles, jostling and illegal use of paddle. The focus of the editing here has completely changed the rules from their ICF cousin, changes in this area have the most dramatic affect on the way the game is played as they directly impinge on the way a defender may attempt for the ball.

e.g. NZ NL Ilegal jostle, actually has more text edited, than is left from the original ICF!

Have a careful read of NZ NL rules, and if you can't be bothered, view the file at 10% and get an idea of the edits by the yellow highlighted areas - and if you can't be bothered doing that, quit whinging.

http://www.canoepolonz.org.nz/rules/2004NL_playingrules.PDF (NZ NL 2004 Rules)

http://www.canoe-polo.com/Rules%202003.htm (ICF Rules)

The 2004 NL Chief Referee is Sean Thomson, and he is incredibly receptive to specific feedback, so if you have something in particular you are confused about - get in touch with him.

[vish]

And herein lies the confusion- the fact that everyone thought they were getting the ICF rules, with NZ interpretations, and instead, we have neither. We have "National League Rules". How does that clarify the issues? (Apologies to the people that wrote the rules, but my discussion isn't about you.)

Several people have spoken with me about my opinions, particularly my support for centreline restart, and I have this to add to my previously stated opinion: I am committed to seeing both centreline AND goal line restarts being used in NZ, but I am opposed to the use of goal line restarts in the top national competitions.

Firstly, it discourages NZ players from committing a fifth player into an offence even when it would result in a certain goal. (And this opinion has been offered by a qualified Australian coach and several players with International experience, including myself. How many teams learn to play with at least 2 on the back line, or someone coming out to cover it? Would this receive the same emphasis if centreline restarts were in place?)

Secondly, it makes it difficult for referees to communicate with the score bench in order to assure that the recorded information is accurate.

Thirdly, goalline restart isn't played in any international competition, and that, essentially, is the ultimate test of New Zealand players- their performance overseas must indicate the success of our development at home. (How do we adequately prepare domestic players for International competition? Do our rules reflect the reality of overseas competition? Are players sufficiently prepared for alternative interpretations, or are those obscured by a layer of New Zealand rules that do not allow ICF to be presented in its existing state?)

In my opinion, even if players read the new rules, they may still be confused. The fact that people are confused, and still don't have the opportunity to play ICF rules, is doubly wrong. Maybe people in NZ think they can write the rules better, but in that case, submit the altered version to the ICF and let the ICF put it to the litmus test, rather than unleashing it on an unsuspecting domestic player base and an increasingly vulnerable National squad.

When I was first taught about the rules, I was told the three main principles were safety, fairness, and spectacle. Confusion about the rules decreases safety and fairness. As for spectacle, well- I watched the finals of the 2002 Worlds (with centreline restarts) and I continue to enjoy watching them on video from time to time. The International game, played according to ICF rules, by different countries with varying interpretations, remains spectacular.

[James]

I would just like to offer my personal opinion with regards to the playing of Goal line restarts vs. centre line re-starts.

Firstly what is the reason for having goal line restarts? To speed up the games......allow the defensive team to launch an attack straight away after being scored against (As in Basketball). Also with the increase in the speed of the game, their is more spectator interest.........I can understand that the polo purist may disagree.......but if you look another sports that have taken steps to speed up their games through rule changes ( or just interpretation) eg Southern Hemisphere Rugby and NBA (which is played under different rules to the inter-national versions).

I would argue that our attacking fast-break desires (born from years indoctrination of Goal line restarts) is actually an advantage......isn't the fast break and secondary break the most common (and easiest) way goals are scored???

Now to tackle the flow-on effect this had on our Inter-national representatives. What adverse effect have our rules had on our players? Would any of the teams travelling overseas in the last 5 years been able to have placed better if they had player under different rules in NZ? I don't think so......though I must admit to having not been in Brazil to see the women in 2000.

Personally I do not believe the my play (or my teams) has been affected by our lack of playing under ICF rules. Maybe it's because I have always been lucky enough to play with smart adaptable people????

Now onto the not being able to score because we don't commit 5 on offence?? Having just competed in Australia at the Inter-state Champs with the Vikings..........we were able to score relatively easily against set defences....(and yes I have looked at Video footage of the games since to correct my aging memory). And to put these games into context, we were playing against teams that had 6 months earlier beaten NZ and Japanese senior rep teams.


On a supportive note......I do agree that the way these rules have been rolled out leaves a lot to be desired! As I understand it the Rules are ICF with clarifications that clear up ambiguities that the ICF rules have. Also as many of you know some of the ICF rules are totally ignored depending on the referee and their country bias.

[Owen]

hehehe James I seem to remember the vikings paddling back to goal(after scoring a good goal it must be said), having the opposition take a centre line restart, dribbling once and shooting a long shot, which went in, to the dismay of your team.... guess by the second comp, you were used to centre line restarts eh!!!!!!!!!
Well done and see you next weekend!!!!!
Eoin
Ps don't start me off on the rule change!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[James]

Yes well our press on the cntre line re-start left a bit to be desired!! especially trying to sub at the same time!!


hehehe James I seem to remember the vikings paddling back to goal(after scoring a good goal it must be said), having the opposition take a centre line restart, dribbling once and shooting a long shot, which went in, to the dismay of your team.... guess by the second comp, you were used to centre line restarts eh!!!!!!!!!
Well done and see you next weekend!!!!!
Eoin
Ps don't start me off on the rule change!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!