I’m just curious what people think of this. My initial reaction is that having only 1 ball turn over penalty and every subsequent penalty being a 45 second 2/3 seems quite harsh.
In my experience there are many 50/50 calls when I officiate or play polo. I’ll be much less likely to call something if I’m going to burn that players 1 ball turn over.
i’m only gonna talk about the “penalty” , imo the change give more options for the defending team and will increase the risk of foul,
it’s “better” to make the foul, you have more chance to stop the goal on a penalty shot
i like the bigger crease too
I believe your assessed the penalty shot and if there’s no score then the same 2/3 you would have had otherwise.
I guess your right an automatic goal would scare the defense more.
I think it’s too harsh as well. We’ve all been called for stuff that seems questionable, considering we were the ones in the play called foul, hence having the best perspective most of the time. Dangerous players should be penalized, but the sport itself is dangerous, and I think there should be a distinction in the foul system to reflect that. I think it’s the right direction but the numbers need to be tweeked.
Accepting that a sport is dangerous is not good enough. Working to make it safe is the best way forward. Always.
Bike polo is inherently dangerous because we’re riding bikes that we can fall on, and swinging stick around. I agree that we should work to make it safer, I just think we should work from both ends of restricting players actions and reducing the impact of actions, i.e equipment.