More own goal confusion (for a worried keeper!)

Discussion in '2013 Official FIH Rules Book' started by sturu, Sep 2, 2012.

  1. sturu

    sturu FHF Newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    1
    Oh, dear. I'm now getting very confused. Take this scenario: PC injection doesn't leave circle, attacker strikes it on the fly but below 460mm, ball glances off postman trying to get out the way and ends up in the net. Goal?
     
  2. NicfromSweden

    NicfromSweden FHF All Time Great
    FHF Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    9,668
    Likes Received:
    243
    Location:
    Göteborg Sweden
    Interesting! Does the ball actually have to leave the D during a pc to be counted as a goal?
     
  3. sturu

    sturu FHF Newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    1
    Let's be even more daft - sneaky injector decides to play trick shot by bouncing ball off keeper (who is running out facing the shot...). Goal?
     
  4. Nij

    Nij FHF All Time Great

    Joined:
    May 22, 2012
    Messages:
    1,676
    Likes Received:
    632
    Yes, it does, and has had to do so for as long as I can remember. Rule 13.3.j in the 2013 edition Rulebook tells you that exactly.

    No, none of these situations would result in goals. At best a long corner (if off the goalkeeper) or a PC (if off e.g. a defender's foot which affected play).
     
  5. sturu

    sturu FHF Newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ah, good. Also, I remember a discussion that the (normal or end of half) PC is only over once the ball has gone outside 5m from the circle (amongst other reasons), not just when a defender touches it. The deflection from the defender is still a no-goal since the PC is still underway and the ball has not yet left the circle for the first time? Interesting that the concept of an illegal own-goal has been created!

    Otherwise, I could foresee some pretty big changes to how I would deal with shots from the top of the D, since a ('dummy'?) hit before the ball had left the circle would still need to be saved... I think I'm happy again...

    Cheers!
     
  6. Nij

    Nij FHF All Time Great

    Joined:
    May 22, 2012
    Messages:
    1,676
    Likes Received:
    632
    Correct.
    There are seven (7) events that mark the completion of a penalty corner within continuous play; an eighth (8th) event is added for the purposes of substitution and marking halftime/fulltime. Refer rule 13.5 for a listing, and note that "... the ball is played by a defender" is not one of them. The penalty corner continues.
    Basically: if neither of these things has happened (viz the PC is completed or the ball has left the circle) then no goal should be awarded.
    It can't be an illegal goal of any kind, since "illegal" means it's against the rules, which would mean it's not a goal in the first place.
    Either it's a goal, or it isn't. It can't be a goal and not a goal at the same time!
    :confused: cue the fabric of spacetime crumbling

    Unless you mean something that is not a goal, but was awarded as one. :oops: In which case: silly umpires...

    To be clear: if it's hit from within the circle, but has not left it previously, then you don't need to save it 'cause it won't be a goal. :) Which is fine by me, too.
     
  7. sturu

    sturu FHF Newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    1
    :D

    It was shorthand for "an 'own goal' which should be disallowed," but I like the logic!
     
  8. Diligent

    Diligent FHF All Time Great
    FHF Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    4,192
    Likes Received:
    927
    Location:
    Hampshire (South Coast of England)
    That bit disappeared many years ago (not sure when, as I don't have the books to hand), but otherwise you are correct..
     
  9. Kersim

    Kersim FHF Starter

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    57
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    NSW Australia
    What about the "converse" scenario to the OP... PC awarded and injected, received outside the circle the cracked into the circle (from outside the circle) at a height greater than 460mm (no danger for arguments sake) hits a defenders stick and goes in to the net... Is this still a goal?

    Having said that, is this going to be a tactic from the attack? Are they just going to crack it into the circle from a PC in the hope they get a defenders deflection? There is no real need to see where the ball was orginially hit from now (appart from making sure it leaves the circle in the first place), the criteria (one of that is) is that it just has to hit a defender's stick on the way in?
     
  10. Nij

    Nij FHF All Time Great

    Joined:
    May 22, 2012
    Messages:
    1,676
    Likes Received:
    632
    A deliberately raised hit: no. Immediate FHD.
    An accidentally raised hit, and dangerous: no. Immediate FHD.
    An accidentally raised hit, and not dangerous: yes. Goal.

    The rule regarding 460mm height only applies to a shot at goal. A ball hit from outside the circle is by definition not a shot at goal. So we apply rule 9.9: was the ball deliberately raised, or dangerous, or neither? One is sufficient to result in a penalty. If neither then play on.

    Choose between hoping a defender is silly or unskilled enough to not move their stick out of the way or mess it up, or take the ball an inch or three closer and score the goal directly? Hmm, I wonder.
     
    DavidBurns likes this.
  11. sturu

    sturu FHF Newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    1
    I recon (hope) we'd struggle to find an umpire that would allow a first PC hit above 460mm as non-dangerous with defenders on the line. However, this does beg the question:

    If the first shot on goal is a hit it must be below 460mm. Can a hit from outside the circle really be counted as a shot on goal? = theoretically could be raised to any height if no defenders in the way...

    If below 460mm and hit from outside the D = goal! Don't think it'll change the way I play though. Would never leave a ball hit from outside the D in case ump missed it (we're all human after all, some of us less than others!).
     
  12. DavidBurns

    DavidBurns FHF Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2011
    Messages:
    621
    Likes Received:
    102
    Location:
    Lytham St Annes UK
    im just waiting for someone to ask if a stray dog carrying a hockey stick in the d counts as a defender!!

    I dont get the confusion, the rest of the rules are still the same. if its dangerous then it should get blown as that. I cant really picture a scenario at a PC where a ball is raised from a hit outside the circle towards the goal and it not being dangerous
     
  13. Nij

    Nij FHF All Time Great

    Joined:
    May 22, 2012
    Messages:
    1,676
    Likes Received:
    632
    I can imagine several. But that's the thing as you said yourself: the rules regarding all of them are still exactly the same. Only now if it clips off something inside the circle and goes in the goal and isn't a FHD, then it should be awarded as a goal instead of a PC or long corner.
     
  14. DavidBurns

    DavidBurns FHF Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2011
    Messages:
    621
    Likes Received:
    102
    Location:
    Lytham St Annes UK
    you would allow a uncontrolled hit into a crowded d at waist height and not class it as dangerous?
     
  15. Nij

    Nij FHF All Time Great

    Joined:
    May 22, 2012
    Messages:
    1,676
    Likes Received:
    632
    Uncontrolled ≠ Dangerous.

    It is not directly against the rules to be unskilled or to make a mistake. If the ball goes through a two metre wide channel between players without anybody having to get out of the way, then no, I wouldn't call it dangerous. If it's barely missing any number of players then yes, I would call it dangerous.
     
  16. DavidBurns

    DavidBurns FHF Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2011
    Messages:
    621
    Likes Received:
    102
    Location:
    Lytham St Annes UK
    No your right it doesn't always make it dangerous, and i totally agree with your take on danger.

    My point is that at a PC where you have 4 defenders and usually 3-4 attackers in the circle moving rapidly in opposing directions expecting any hit to be below backboard height, that anything above that height has a very very slim chance of passing on its path to the goal without being dangerous.
     
  17. Kersim

    Kersim FHF Starter

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    57
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    NSW Australia
    If you read my post I am not talking about danger... For the sake of the argument, let's assume there is no danger! My question is simply at a PC, the attack hit the ball towards the goal, from OUTSIDE the circle, at a height where the ball is or would be greater than 460mm when it crosses the goal line. During it's flight it touches a defender's stick and goes into the net. Goal, yes? As the first "hit" at goal rule doesn't apply in this instance as the attack hit it from outside the circle and therefore no "shot" has occurred...

    This is certainly a scenario that happens regularly at club level. Often the attacking team miss-trap at the top of the circle, the ball "bobbles" away to another attacker who then creams it into the circle from a meter or so outside the circle...
     
  18. Nij

    Nij FHF All Time Great

    Joined:
    May 22, 2012
    Messages:
    1,676
    Likes Received:
    632
    I know you weren't talking about danger, Kersim, but I did cover all three possibilities in the very first reply.
    The discussion moved on from there between David and myself.
     
  19. Kersim

    Kersim FHF Starter

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    57
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    NSW Australia
    Fair point Nij... my bad? :(
     
  20. Nij

    Nij FHF All Time Great

    Joined:
    May 22, 2012
    Messages:
    1,676
    Likes Received:
    632
    Not at all. It was a bit hard to see - I went back and boldened the only part that was relevant in the reply.
    Easy to lose the point amongst some superfluity, and we did drop a flurry of posts into the thread very quickly!
     
    Kersim likes this.

Share This Page