Polocrosse Worldwide Forum  
  Polocrosse Worldwide Home

Go Back   Polocrosse Worldwide Forum > Polocrosse Discussion > Polocrosse - The Equity of Defence
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 26th March 2007, 04:04 AM
xpolox's Avatar
xpolox xpolox is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: new zealand
Posts: 15
Default do u mean defence ..........

do u mean defence by number 3 or like coaching?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 9th April 2008, 07:19 AM
Kenrick Riley Kenrick Riley is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2
Default kenrick

I guess I'm thinking about enhancing the No 3's ability to defend against goals.

Nowadays, polocrosse is becoming too much like basketball. You score, I score, you score, I score, I win. There needs to be more change of possession between goals to make polocrosse more interesting. After all, an entire game of soccer may result in only three goals for the match.

I'm an old, ex-player who now commentates a bit -- so I probably get a better feel for how spectators are now seeing the game. Unfortunately, except for big carnivals, those on the sideline are mostly other players between their own games.

Polocrosse needs to appeal visually -- fast, skillful etc. But it also needs to create some tension in the crowd to become a really great spectator sport. Therefore, more change of possession of the ball, less goals, more excitement when one is finally scored.

Thanks for contributing. It's just an idea. But I would like to see a club somewhere try the idea at a practice day -- just to see what happens. Maybe a printout of the bits of my article which modify the rules would help?

Regards

Kenrick Riley
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 25th April 2008, 06:32 PM
Kenrick Riley Kenrick Riley is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2
Default Less exasperation for the No3?

The idea to modify the playing rules slightly, is to enhance the No 3's ability to defend against goals in the area. In a "one-on-one" in-goal, the No 1 is going to win 99% of the time. It's pointless a No3 expending all that defensive energy for a 1% margin.

Polocrosse has become too much like basketball. "You score, I score, you score, I score, I win". There needs to be more turnover of possession between goals to make polocrosse more interesting. After all, an entire game of soccer may result in only three goals for the match.

I'm an old, ex-player who now commentates a bit -- so I probably get a better feel for how spectators are now seeing the game. Unfortunately, except for big carnivals, those on the sideline are mostly other players between their own games. The general public do not see an interesting contest -- so they wouldn't want to watch.

Polocrosse needs to appeal visually -- fast, skillful etc. But it also needs to create some tension in the crowd to become a really great spectator sport. Therefore, more change of possession of the ball, less goals, more excitement when a goal is finally scored.

It's just an idea. It's a great game. But I would like to see a club somewhere try the idea of more equal defence at a practice day -- just to see what happens. Maybe a printout of the bits of my article which modify the rules would help?

Regards

Kenrick Riley
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 18th July 2008, 01:48 AM
Chimimbo Chimimbo is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4
Default

The easiest solution is to restrict the depth of the net making it far harder to control the ball and allowing the ball to be dislodged easier. It used to be a rule in Zimbabwe and South Africa that the ball had to be visible over the top of the stick - a flat edge placed over the net frame had to make contact with the ball lodged in the deepest part of the net. In my opinion this was unfortunately changed when Australia began playing the two countries and wielded their greater voting muscle.

I recall A Division games where less than 10 goals were scored by the winning side and the ball used to change possession regularly. Rarely were scores in excess of 15 registered in evenly contested games, this in 8 x 8 minute chukkas unlike the shortened version used now.

Having watched the recent test between Oz and the UK, the line out was KING. Fail to win that and fail to score. As a spectator I found it quite boring really.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 5th August 2008, 05:18 PM
Chimimbo Chimimbo is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4
Default

God, this must be the doziest forum on the web, either nobody visits or they have no opinion!!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 5th August 2008, 05:57 PM
Chimimbo Chimimbo is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4
Default

Kendrick,
I've only now found your article and read it. I'd like to make a few comments and maybe we can stimulate a few comments from other forum visitors.

Narrow the goal posts: 8 feet is not terribly wide in comparison to other sports and narrowing will make it harder for players of lower/younger capability.

Take away a goal post: Cant really agree with this. The 3 will stand in front of the post and prejudice weaker/junior players. It couild also cut down the speed of play as the 1 will not be comfortable shooting at pace. That would be detrimental to the spectator value of the sport.

Increase the 10-metre semi-circle: Not a bad idea- could work as the 11 yard circle is seldom transgressed and a shot from outside it is easy.

Abolish the centre-field lineout: I can't see this being popular since the Lineout has for so long been KING It is also an area where contact is made and emphasizes the claims that Polox is "Rugby on Horseback" Rather mimics the scrum. It does need to be cleaned up however.

Abolish the pass into the area: I see where you are coming from with this and I agree it is feasible, however, what is to stop 3 players preventing a pass and a stalemate occurring. One player holding the ball and not being touched as it is impossible to dislodge the ball from the sack on the end of his stick and the attacking 1 being hounded by 3 players preventing a pass.


Abolish the bounce out of the area:
I don't recall the majority of 3's ever routinely passing out of the defence zone. So again it is feasible and possession may be lost here. The only problem is that it will result in 3 players concentrating on 2 if the 3 is forced to pass to a team-mate -he will be left alone.

I'm going to reiterate that the easiest solution is to restrict the depth of net. It has been tested extensively and was law in Rhodesia and South Africa. It was only changed when Australia began to play the 2 countries in the 80's and 90's. The ball becomes very much harder to control and catch. Throwing is admittedly easier but the long throws common from the back line and scoring shots from the edge of the field are very spectacular.

Lets have some debate.

Last edited by Chimimbo : 6th August 2008 at 04:46 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 6th August 2008, 05:46 PM
short_fry's Avatar
short_fry short_fry is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Deniliquin, NSW
Posts: 27
Default

well ok, heres my thoughts-
im sorry but i dont like the take away a goal post or get rid of the line out ideas; that would make things a bit too difficult.
The widening of the 10 metre circle and the abolishing the bounce out of the area ones are alright, though i dont think abolishing the pass into the area is the right way to go. passing is a big part of the team play i think.
maybe you could bring in a rule about having to pass more in centre field? although i guess that would be pretty hard to umpire.
anyway theres some feedback for you, lol.
__________________
~.:! Short_Fry !:.~
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time now is 04:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.