Fouls for thought
Winter refs whistling to keep warm?
It would seem that the season in Argentina has been a reasonably incident free one, though I note that in the last issue of Polo Times Frankie Dorignac comments that “some Open matches lasted too long with too many penalties.” The same could be said of our showpiece matches in the arena. It has to be said that players must bear some responsibility for making stupid plays and, as a discouragement, should be progressively more harshly penalised. However, on the other hand, the umpires too are inclined to blow for minor infringements which perhaps they could let go. In arena polo, the second umpire on the side may see too much but it is, as ever, a fine balance between keeping the game safe and fair and letting it flow. Maybe this summer we could be a little more lenient.
Ensuring a penalty which fits the crime
Continuing on the theme of the Argentine Open, covered by Polo Times in the January/February issue, I was struck by Carlos Beer’s proclamation that “there was the most unusual umpiring decision this journalist had seen in 15 years at Palermo.” Reading on, it transpired that in the last two minutes of a close match, a player was fouled in his opponents’ half whilst in possession and heading for goal. The umpires awarded a 60-yard penalty, which it was argued should have been closer (a 40-yard hit at the very least). Their arguments seem to have been valid. The notes to our rules state that ‘the penalty should be made to count, being moved up the ground if the defending team fouled.’ In particular, of course, umpires should also use their common sense and bear in mind whether the attacker had a clear run to goal. After all, a penalty gives the side which committed the foul a chance to regroup and face the ball with all four players.
Settling the row over ROW
We have been asked about rule 33L – ‘If a player in possession changes the line suddenly towards an opposing player, that player must clear the new ROW immediately without making a play on the ball. In this case it is not a play if a pony kicks the ball.’ In this rule, a player changing the line (normally to turn with the ball) must hit the ball for an appreciable distance to establish his ROW. An opponent finding himself on the new ROW must clear immediately and, in doing so, must not play the ball. However, if his pony should kick it, he should not be penalised and, if by chance he is on the new line thus caused, he may play the ball.
Turn off the tap
I have frequently referred to the ‘one tap’ rule which has done something to speed up the game. However, this year umpires are going one step further to make the rule apply to the whole team. Thus, should a player tap the ball once – when at walking pace and challenged – and then leave the ball for a teammate, that player must hit the ball away or run with it without the option of a tap at the walk. In this way it is hoped that the practice of two pros advancing up the field at a slow pace with one circling behind the other will be curtailed. Umpires are to be encouraged to increase the penalty to at least a ‘hit from the spot’ for consistent infringement of this rule.
Save the chit-chat for tea-time
I was interested to read that the Football Association is to try out a rule that permits only the captain to speak to the referee, with a view to introducing the rule into the professional game next season. We have had this rule in place for some time in polo, though watching some matches you would certainly not think so. As is so often the case, it is easy enough to make a rule; much harder to enforce it. However, we must do so during the coming season, at least so as not to be upstaged by the FA.
This article was first published in The Polo Times.
