x13

International Hockey Federation

By Anand Philar

About a week back, the International Hockey Federation (FIH) tinkered with yet another rule with less than three months left for the Athens Olympics in August. The amended rule (the FIH euphemism is: change in interpretation) concerns penalty corner hits comes into effect on June 1 and it will be implemented at the Athens competition.
I cannot recall off-hand an instance where a rule change/amendment was straightaway given effect at the Olympics without first being experimented with at lower levels of the game.

The amended rule now prohibits the defending side to unleash its charger directly in the path of the penalty corner attempt. Ostensibly, this is to prevent injuries to the rusher who these days charges headlong at the hitter with a clear intention of blocking the ball either with his stick or increasingly, with his body (check it out with young Jugraj Singh).

Not for a moment am I questioning the intention behind the new "interpretation", though the balance now will tilt heavily in favour of the side taking the penalty corner and perhaps, could lead to more conversions.

Having said that, I thought that the FIH could well have introduced this "interpretation" on an experimental basis, as has been the practice, instead of implementing it directly at the Olympics itself.

The FIH reasoning is: "The Olympics is an excellent time to showcase the best in hockey to the world, which is why we are introducing this new interpretation in June."

If preventing injury to a player is the primary concern, then the FIH's Rules Board could also look at other tactics employed by the team taking penalty corners. The Europeans employ a player to deliberately run across the goalkeeper with the express intention of distracting if not unsighting him. I have witnessed tactics where the player runs directly at the goalkeeper.

By any stretch of imagination, such tactics amount to unfair play. The FIH has stated, in defense of the new interpretation: "...this action (defender running directly at a shot at goal at a penalty corner) is contrary to the spirit of the game and considers it unacceptable that players intentionally put themselves at danger of injury."

Talking about safety to players during penalty corners, in the past year or so, there have been calls to even ban the penalty corner that has been quintessentially hockey. The argument in favour of such a radical change was that the drag-flick in particular posed grave danger to the player/s defending on the post.

Such reasoning is not without logic, though the purists might abhor the very thought of it. Over the years, I have spoken to several Indian players who have stood on the post during penalty corners. Most of them confessed that it took a bit of foolishness to even volunteer for the job.

"It can be quite scary and you just cannot drop your concentration. The ball comes at you at great speed, especially when the Dutch are taking the shots. Of course, I did fear for my life on occasions particularly when you are standing up to guys like Bovelander," former India captain Jude Felix had confessed once. In fact, after suffering a career-threatening hit at one of the training camps, Felix declined to be on the post during penalty corners.

I vividly remember the afternoon in Sydney on the eve of the 1994 World Cup. I took up position behind the safety of the net to watch Dutch specialist Taco van den Honert practicing the drag-flick that he had invented. Only then did I appreciate the speed at which the ball travelled and thanked good fortune that I was not manning the post!

Similarly, drag-flick exponents like Sohail Abbas, Taeke Taekema and Bram Lomans pack quite a punch in their penalty corner shots. The ball screams past the nose of the defender on the post and usually, he takes a reflex evasive action. It takes a brave man not to flinch.

With these shots executed from less than 16 yards, the threat to the man on the line is omnipresent. The defender, without the benefit of protective gear, save an abdomen guard and perhaps a mouth protector, is literally putting his life on the line.

"I hope we do not see a day when a defender is felled by these drag-flicks. It is the most dangerous exercise in hockey and that is one reason why I feel that we must give due weightage to the safety of the players on the line. If need be, even abolish penalty corner and replace it a less dangerous routine," the legendary Ric Charlesworth had told me recently.

Abolishing penalty corner itself would be an extreme step. I would rather that the FIH reintroduces the old rule that demands the penalty corner hit strike the 18-inch high board at the back of the goal for a legitimate conversion. Also, prohibit the goalkeeper from deliberately falling across the board and insist that he remain on his feet during penalty corners.

If the safety of the players and fair play are of paramount importance for the FIH, as it should be, then merely changing the interpretation of penalty corner defense and worse still, implementing it without experimentation, is hardly the way to go about. It's time, the FIH looked at the bigger picture.

Rate This Article

Select Here  5 Stars  (Best Rating)   4 Stars   3 Stars   2 Stars   1 Star  (Worst Rating)

Your opinion counts.
Rate this article or enter your comments below.