What do you see?

Discussions Rules
#1

9:36…

What, if any, is the correct call?

Some people believe that if you are not in possession or contesting a ball you cannot be contacted legally. However, it would appear that the NAH ruleset has a clause designed to permit contact with someone who has executed a legal screen but is neither in possession nor pursit of the ball:

§7.3.2.3 – If a ‘screen’ is set that is stationary or momentary a bike interference penalty is not assessed, however legal bodily contact as described in §7.3.3 is allowed.

I believe that without this written exception we introduce a defacto “right of way” to the person executing the legal screen.

1 Like
#2

Have you addressed this yet on Facebook?
I don’t think NAH players are much on Poloverse.

1 Like
#3

I was hoping this part would inspire conversation among those using the euro rule set. Clearly I was wrong! :no_mouth:

#4

Well, meanwhile you and others have already discussed and dissected the situation on FB.

I think the discussion ended with some calling for coincidental penalty (8.4) for screening (6.1.3.1) and flagrance (6.3.8)

Others have disputed screening (6.1.3.1) by argument of “moving at a predictable and constant speed”(6.1.3.1.2.1) and/or “natural impedance” (6.1.3.1.2.3.)

Probably not helpful at all… Since this is all based on the euro ruleset.

2 Likes