The new hockey
Earlier, hockey games could not begin till a goal keeper wore a helmet and a face guard. Forget the helmet and face guards. Hockey games can start even without a goal keeper in the near future. DNA has more:
In order to make hockey more attacking, the International Hockey Federation (FIH) has recommended some drastic changes in the goalkeeper’s role in the game, even giving teams a choice of not fielding a custodian.
“We’ve set out three clear options: playing with a goalkeeper wearing full protective equipment; a goalkeeper just wearing protective headgear; or no goalkeeper at all,” Wolfgang Rommel, Chairman of the Hockey Rules Board (HRB), said.
The piece says that the rule has been enacted to bring in more attacking flare into the sport. It is a misplaced perception that attacking = more attractive. Be it basketball, football, cricket or hockey, bigger scores or goals is unrelated to the quality of a match. A good contest is much more fascinating than the scores which finally come up on the score board.
The defenders can now play a larger role as the article goes on to say:
The other important change in the rule book is that the defenders can now stop a high shot at goal with their sticks.
With this rule in place, you can expect to see most of the players looking to score a goal with only a few holding back as and when necessary. The community of goal keepers will no wonder be a bit saddened by the development.
I am all for improvements in sport. However, I see the current changes as unnecessary. Hockey is a tactical game and at the centre of the tactics lies thwarting the goal keeper and the defense around him. Things will be very different if there is no goal keeper present.
If you want to bring in new audiences to a sport, you can try with forming fun games - like cricket is going with Twenty 20. It is essentially attracting people who found the older versions of cricket uninteresting. With the changes like the ones proposed, you only lose a few of your already established followers.
There is the big question of how many teams will use the new options also which can be pondered over. Despite more options to the defenders, a goal keeper is some one who is tough to replace to stop goals. So would teams really take such a big risk? I love the way hockey is and don’t think the new changes are adding much either way.
Tags: No Tags.
August 17th, 2006 at 2:36 am
changes to attract new viewers at the risk of antagonizing your existing fan base??? i don’t think so
August 17th, 2006 at 2:52 am
Yeah that is never the right way to go about things. I am saying the same thing in the para:
If you want to bring in new audiences to a sport, you can try with forming fun games - like cricket is going with Twenty 20. It is essentially attracting people who found the older versions of cricket uninteresting. With the changes like the ones proposed, you only lose a few of your already established followers.
So we agree..
August 17th, 2006 at 4:21 pm
I can’t imagine a hockey game sans GK. It’s quite atrocious. If they want to make the game popular, FIH must scap bookings inside the ‘D’, allow dangerous play to an extent, etc. These rules will end up in Europeans dominating the game, and Asians no where in sight.
Even I have mentioned about this in the blog.
August 17th, 2006 at 4:22 pm
I can’t imagine a hockey game sans GK. It’s quite atrocious. If they want to make the game popular, FIH must scap bookings inside the ‘D’, allow dangerous play to an extent, etc. These rules will end up in Europeans dominating the game, and Asians no where in sight.
Even I have mentioned about this in my blog.
August 19th, 2006 at 2:45 am
Good point Kishor.
September 7th, 2006 at 4:22 pm
I think this(no goalkeeper) will make the game more competitive,more exciting.
September 14th, 2006 at 9:03 am
Too many rule changes have ruined hockey. FIH are aing it too complicated and even hockey fans end up losing interest.
September 14th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Well its really sad to see the depths to which Indian Hockey has plunged to with the bottom not yet in site. A lot has been said about the need for a revamp from the top . But one of the things that has stuck me is that reports about baised umpiring though it may sound like a case of sour grapes maybe not so off the mark after all. Indian teams are discriminated against. For all that our coaches may complain no one will take them seriously. What we maybe in need of is a foreign coach of strature - of the strature of an R Chalesworth , someone who the hockey world will take seriously and get us out of the rut we are in. Let’s face it. India has not produced a champion coach in decades.
September 15th, 2006 at 8:37 am
India has been pretty poor in hockey for many years now. Just bringing a foreign coach wont do much good as the problem is much bigger. There is politics in team selection, beauracracy, lack of infra structure (very few astro turn stadiums for example)…
It will be a long time before Indian hockey comes up to the world level because we have been left far behind.
December 1st, 2006 at 7:12 pm
[…] Sportolysis - The World Sports Blog Blog Archive The new Too many rule changes have ruined hockey. FIH are aing it too complicated and even hockey fans end up losing interest. Nick Says: September 14th, 2006 at 5:21 pm […]