Machine Politics vs Beaver Boys, May 2011. Photo by Bruce Carver
i'll start this one...what do we think of the nets? i think that they were well crafted and with some tiny tweaks could be a good thing over all. i wont say too much else for now, just getting the red ball rolling
The roller hockey rinks in St Louis all have permanently mounted goals made from chain-link fence. I was really afraid of them at first, but I got used to it. There is a bit of danger in having an immovable object (besides the Philly goalie) on the court, but I think if yer paying attention you can mitigate that. Having goals with backs and nets solves more problems than it creates. Which is why I think they were there in Chicago.
Chicago Bike Polo 2003-2008
St Louis Bike Polo 2008-now
even tho they're a big part of the reason we placed 4th not podium.
Wrong Fucking Color
God Damn Mother Fucking ORANGE!!!
who does not know goals are orange???
Chicago sucks!!!
Doug D
Brooklyn, New York
http://www.hardcourtbikepolo.com/
"Which one is Doug?" -my girlfriend asks me, courtside, late on Sunday.
"The one who's screaming like a drill sargent two days from sending kids to the front." - I says.
Chicago Bike Polo 2003-2008
St Louis Bike Polo 2008-now
shouldn't be too hard to fix that.
I wasn't at the big show, but from the pics of the nets, i think there great! No matter what color they are.. Well done ottawa!!!!!!
yea, its hard for me to comment much about them due to the role they played in my last game. but they are less obtrusive than cones.
I like them too. Also I agree with Doug that either the netting or the rails or both need to be a brighter color. There definitely was no doubt that the ball was in.
Other than a few issues, namely what happens when a shuffle goes in the net and when they get dislodged. I do really like the fact that you know when a goal goes in and you can't sneak a goal through some cones, where someone could miss it. Thank you to Chicago for taking the chance and making us play with them.
Playing with nets is great! I love them! I want them in New York! I think that might not go over super well with the rest of our club here in NYC, but maybe I'm wrong? Every time I think I have an awesome idea, everyone else thinks it sucks... so my ideas might actually suck, or those people might actually be dumbshits, who knows... but, not to get sidetracked... the nets are rad! Let's use them more!
Also, Doug is right. The pipes need to be either red or orange. White netting is probably fine. Maybe black?
Our standard is usually the wheelbase, which I guess can vary. I have never heard of an actual measurement.
Interesting that this should be brought up again... When Doug and I measured the length and width of the pit before the 2007 ESPI in NYC, we marked the faceoff spot in the middle, and measured distance for the goal lines from the end boards. We also marked off little X-spots 150cm apart for the inside edges of the goalposts. I remember this bit specifically. Then I flew to Chicago to see Naked Raygun play the night before the ESPI, arrived back in NYC just in time for the start of the tournament Saturday morning to find that new lines had been painted "one bike length apart"... The particular bike whose length was used remains a mystery... I can confirm, however, that the length is slightly shorter than 150cm and the goals are not centered at the pit because the lines weren't painted equidistant from the center point we measured. Interesting trivia, I suppose, if you've played here in pickups or tournaments. When I wrote the rules for ESPI 2007, I specified 150cm as the distance between goalposts.
I would be interested to hear what the distance was on the Chicago nets, as I did not measure them.
I feel like there should be some standard defined here and stuck to at tournaments. It's not a huge deal but it does go some distance toward lending credibility to our game if we can at least agree on how wide the net is. That 'one bike length' thing always annoyed the shit out of be because of how variable and half-assed a measurement it is.
I've always had a tape measure in my bag 100% of the time... maybe that's from being a messenger, though. Seems logical to me, it's not like they're enormous or heavy, and they do come in handy! 'One bike length' is bogus. It's not standard, it's totally half-assed. How do you determine -which- bike's length means 'one'? If we use mine, can I let all the slack out of my chain and draw the wheel up to the front of the dropout so the net is smaller? Clever!
I don't see why the nets should be proportional in width to the (variable) court dimensions. IIHF ice hockey rinks are bigger than NHL rinks but they use the same size net. As long as it's in the center, the same size should be fine. Making it variable seems kind of wanky, particularly since there's no good reason to do it. Court size/dimensions are understandable, since we can't simply build polo courts, we have to use what's available... but we can figure out a standard for the nets and stick to it, and I think we should.
It is definitely frustrating, you're right about that. You're also right about it being nice that having nets stops people riding through the goal to defend, and especially after scoring. I've always hated that, and I've even played in places where they disallow goals if you ride through the net after you shoot it (or at the same time). Having the crossbar on the net eliminated any questions about shots being too high, so that's a big bonus. Also, it's fun shooting the ball into a net! Hooray for nets! Let's get some more damn nets! Seriously.
I'm all for nets in DC too (but I agree that we're probably a minority). I hadn't thought about the issue with retreiving the ball after a shuffle, but overall, I think they would make the game better in a lot of ways.
I really liked the nets. More nets
3...2...1...GO!
Mallets Of Mayhem
I personally prefer something more substantial like a netted goal, but the problem is portability. I would bet good money that as soon as we contructed something like a PVC goal for our courts, and even if we tried locking them to the fence to keep people from messing with them, some little hoodrat kid would set them on fire or some bullshit like that.
At least cones are easy to come by, and pretty inconspicuous.
{}------- lexington -------{}
Drew Likes the nets but i like the old school style of cones for safty reasons and transportation along with durability but the nets you guys made top notch great job
Sweet-T
Aka Team wreck
i would have liked to make the nets more stable, but that would have taken away from their portability. they were 170cm wide, 85cm high, and 60cm deep. i am glad you mostly all liked it.
I'm for the cones, it's traditional in polo. Nets seem like a "new" way of playing the game. And like Mark asked...What happens when a shuffle gets into the net?
Brian and i were dreaming on the weekend about this kind of solution, inspired by 1980s table hockey, but on a much larger scale. No more "1-2-3 polo!" Instead, when the ball drops from above court, (after a goal is scored, or if the ball goes out of play), you charge.
just take the ball out of the goal and start behind the net. its not that hard to do.
Yeah, just fish it out and play. Not a big deal. Certainly not something that would make me think using nets is a bad idea because it is a FUCKING RAD IDEA. Seriously I like the nets more than I like... shit, I don't know... delicious candy. For breakfast. And you know I love that shit! Damn!
Anyway... what was I on about? Oh right, nothing, as per usual. One other thing I want to say regarding the size... 170cm wide, fuckin' hell... no wonder we let in so many goals! haha... Whatever, it was pretty sweet. Good job Chicago!
And I agree with this...shit I was the one that suggested it to Ben (hmm, that seemed a little arrogant). I guess like Brian said there will be arguments NO MATTER WHAT.
no i don't like them. they're probably the reason my team didn't make podium.
I like being able to ride through the goal. I saw the pictures of the nets I'm not sure I'm sold.
Some people mentioned that the nets caused them to miss the podium... how so?
----------------------------------
Moooooo!
I didn't get to make the trip to Chicago, and would like to know what size the goals were. We always used cones one bike length apart (usually my large bike) for our games. But, then one day a pair of nets showed up at our normal polo spot and then someone stole our cones. So we started using the nets which seem to be a standard hockey goal. They are taller than the nets @ Chicago at least from the pics. They cut down on the usual passing through the goals arguments. The one bad thing about ours is the height is tall so we have become lazy and grab one hand on the net and play goalie. It has lengthened our games because of better D, but it seems like many of us have improved their shooting accuracy because of the goalie. We don't have any rules about how long you can stay in goal, but I think we should.
I'm still not sold. You would need a real hockey net so that it wouldn't move, even perhaps fixed to the court. Those pvc nets look too mickey mouse, they would get knocked around too much. So one problem i see is that the hockey net has a cross bar at mouth level. We all know how tournaments get...some one would loose their teeth sooner or later.
If a shuffle does go in, can a offensive player fish it out and just put it back in? Or, so now you have two, three, players maybe, all at the goal line fighting to pull out a ball like its stuck in a corner. Desperation is going to end up with someone eating that cross bar again.
And what if it is stuck? Stop the play?
Last point...you cant fuck with a goalie from behind the goal line. Which is a great way to interfere with out being in the way of your teammates shot.
The cones have never failed, THEY WORK, and they also allow for games to happen anywhere you need them to.
Cones make it difficult to call goals sometimes Ange. Its happened at just about every tournament I've been to. Setting goal height at the top of the cones (which can vary in height) or the top of handle bars (which probably have more variability) is always a hard call.
I'd like to triail nets and see how they are. I have the same stability concerns: will they fall over all the time, what a pain in the ass to straighten them out, where to store them...
We'll have a storage area when Grandview park is renovated, though I don't think it will be large enough to store nets.
I was thinking about those soccer practice nets and having pins in the court just like hockey nets have pins that can be displaced if hit hard enough.
As for the cross bar, well, I've never been a fan of riding across the goal line when scoring, and most tournaments require helmets now, maybe mouth guards are next...
Thought I was going to be annoyed, but I liked the nets. They were breaking a lot though (or coming apart and needing to be put back together). Metal or fixed nets are a terrible idea: Angelo is right, eventually someone's gonna get curbsided or something equally horrific.
was I clear before?
Cones are my choice.
Doug D
Brooklyn, New York
http://www.hardcourtbikepolo.com/
Who the fuck cares what Angelo thinks. He's a brittle old man who should retire from the game. HACK!
3...2...1...GO!
Mallets Of Mayhem
Ange nobody is selling! You missed it, nets were great. Cut out so much crap. The nets are part of the evolution. Just like the bj shit you started. Deal! You haven't played with them have you? Don't you have a dental plan? And Texas brittle as he may be he still wants to win. He gets out there and he wants to win. Ya know.
I've played with them in TO Brian and that's when i concluded (in my opinion) that they are inferior to cones and impede the flow of the game. You watch, nets wont make the cut.
I'm going to break your glasses Alexis....
I'm going to buy you some glasses and then break them!
You played with hockey nets in T.O. These were polo nets. Collapsable and SAFE
3...2...1...GO!
Mallets Of Mayhem
btw congrats again guys
I actually like the fact that you can't ride through the net.
I have heard that out west it isn't considered a goal if you score through cones and then ride through. I'm not into that. If it has to be that way I will take the net.
One thing I will say regardless of the net/cone issue, is that we need more people watching the goals. One ref isn't enough. There should be a person assigned to each goal, each game.
I agree. It's happened at most of the other tournaments, either by assigned goal judges or by behind-goal peanut-gallery.
My memory is that at other tournaments, even WITH goal judges, there is a lot of confusion and inconsitancy re. pass-through-the-back-of-the-goal rules. The nets eliminate that. I like 'em, at least for tournament play.
i gotta say, i didn't *mind* the nets, but i still like cones way better. the nets created as much controversy when they moved around as they solved, and i missed seeing the plays right down to the cone where the defender flattens it or comes through the net. anchoring the nets permanently is a no-go because they'll just break, injure, or get in the way.
I thought the nest were fine but I do think it made the game a little slower. If there were no nets I think the flow of the game would have been a little better and I also think that it would have been more exciting to watch.
Maybe we can do cones with a cross bar on top so you can have a frame but no actual net.
Just a thought we can do what we want we don't have to follow other sports lead. Think out of the box.
That's what I originally thought the nets were. I like this idea, because it prevents people from going through the goal.
BUT....I really like that fact that you can't pass the ball through the back if there are nets there. The nets eliminate a good amount of controversy in this way.
You could use a Cricket style Bail type setup. That would work.
Also having something solid at the line means that be ball bounces in or out of the goal. Not over or through.
Chicago Bike Polo 2003-2008
St Louis Bike Polo 2008-now
i like the nets.
and i think that the "riding through the goal... isnt a goal" is totally bull.
*some* west coast plays that way.
i do have to say... i saw some people *clears throat* (joe burge) make goals in chicago and ride right into the goal... and it seemed to slow him down a bit... instead of just ramming into the fence.. this is kind of a safety bonus... i think..
i dig.. plus it looks way more organized
also it looks sweet when the hard hitters just nail the ball and it flies into the net.. goal no questions asked. SWEET!
Bicycle/cykel/自行車/das Fahrrad/polkupyörä/bicicletta/bicicleta/reiðhjól/fiets/يَرْكَبُ درّاجة هوائ
I think i would miss the occasional field goals. Splitting the uprights feels pretty cool.
im all for local rules. I vote for LESS standardization! Part of the joy of visiting a place is seeing how they do it there. More differences = more different innovations. who remembers when Vancouver used a chain laying on the ground? Is seemed silly but it worked fine.
--
Like the Care Bears said, "sharing (bicycles, F/OSS, alcohol and Josh's Mom...) is caring"
oh the chain days... you wanna talk about needless controversy? man, the day we replaced the chain was the day maitland stopped coming to bike polo because there was just so much less to bitch about.
yeah sorry about that kev, should have looked through before I fired up a new one. Soooo, does anyone feel like talking about this or everyone cool with cones?
i love the nets. i even love the 100-pound iron nets we use in toronto, basically regulation ice hockey nets, though i would never want to use them in a tournament where a breakaway chase could lead to a split skull the crossbar is also way too high.
the only time i wouldn't want nets is on a small court where the net's depth would take away some crucial court-length, either in front or behind the goal.
i'll add that as everyone's shot is getting faster and higher, nets will be indispensable for determining whether the shot went top corner, or high, or wide.
i also hate the random luck factor involved with hitting the bases of the cones--what would otherwise be a goal results in goals only about 1/2 the time.
the one thing I hate about cones is that they are angled, when a ball hits them it always goes up, and then is often ruled too high. With a net a goal post is straight up and down, if the ball hits it it will bounce either in or out....no questions.
Nets are great in general, but they are ideal for tournaments. We don't bring out the nets from NACCC for our pick-up but you can bet if we had a tournament they'd be back on the court - with more glue and something else beside sandbags to hold down the back.
Imagine no arguments (well, almost). Infinite height? Gone. Did it go in? Yeah, there it is in the net. Passing through goal? Solved. And as far as running into the goals: At the NACCC with our PVC goals, people hit them and the goals either moved or (and this would be corrected) gave way and had to be reset. With a slight design improvement, golden. And, as kev mentions above, annoying shot rejecting bases are gone.
Lastly, I've also played on the courts in Dayton and St. Louis, both of which have permanent hulking metal goals and I had no problem. If you're running into the goals perhaps the goals being present isn't the issue.
Besides, if you had Dumptruck to run into on the regular, metal hockey goals don't faze you.
To Sean: whatever your idea, try it out and let me know how it works. Sounds like a step in the right direction.
chicagobikepolo.com
i have been thinking about this a lot lately I like the nets but i also see their weak spots i wouldn't mind a cone that was as wide at the top as it is at the base and say just over my top tube in height. in tourneys there has to be a goal judge be hind each goal. with this sort of reference point i don't think there could be much argument about the shot being to high. it rules out the rocket shots that fly up the cone and behind the goal. it also keeps the pace of the game fast. and for passing through the back of the goal we all know that its bull shit so don't do it maybe there should be a solid rule against it unless its your own goal. and fix those fuckers to the ground.
MKE!
and to really start an argument what about blocking a shot from behind the cones? you know when you take a shot theirs no goalie the ball is totally going in and out of no where a mallet comes in from behind the goal and blocks the shot. i defiantly role through the back of the goal to position my self as goalie but is it the same as that last second block?
MKE!
ok, we have big heavy metal nets here, but we don't play with them... I can see all the plus sides already mentioned, but they do get in the way more than cones and definitely pose a bit of a hazard especially on a fast breakaway. if we play with them on the painted lines (roller hockey rink) they also cut down on the room behind the goal.
would leaning on the goal be the same as a foot down?
1. Playing with nets on the court doesn't change the breakaway. You know the thing is there, you avoid it. We all know how to ride our bikes.
2. Leaning on the goal is a foot down. Go tap in.
Chicago Bike Polo 2003-2008
St Louis Bike Polo 2008-now
1. Playing with nets on the court doesn't change the breakaway. You know the thing is there, you avoid it. We all know how to ride our bikes.
that's just about the stupidest thing i have ever heard, certainly since the last time i said that anyway, which is often. are we playing the same game? having a solid metal object as the focal point of the court is just asking for someone to run into it, that people 'know' how to ride their bikes is irrelevant. people 'know' the wall is there and ride straight into it all the time. people fall off their bikes all the time even though they 'know' how to ride them. every polo player has had a crash they didn't see coming.
the real point, however, is that you eliminate all of the best net-crashing plays with a hockey net. or any net for that matter. a break with chase is just about the most exciting thing in polo and you raise the potential for serious accident or pull the plug on an exciting play with a hockey net.
How many times must I say this to you all? You're arguing, with voracity, the hypothetical effects of nets on the court as if your fears mattered at all. I play on courts with big, honkin', metal nets every damn week. It looks just like the bike polo you play. There are breakaways, there are charges, there are attempts to "turtle" the goalie.
Players are not haplessly running into these things. Nor is our game significantly different from polo as I've played it in nearly 10 cities now. Except that we always know when a goal is scored, and no one has ever passed it backwards through the net.
Try it for a couple of weeks and then talk to me about what it means to your game. What you assume will happen is not my concern.
Chicago Bike Polo 2003-2008
St Louis Bike Polo 2008-now
i've played with hockey nets and hate them. i feel safer when robbie boards is on the ice than with hockey nets. you're missing out on charges right over the post.
Pieter, Grandview Park has six massive posts down one side. I can count on less than one hand how many times someone has hit those posts in the three years I have been playing polo.
Pieter, Grandview Park has six massive posts down one side. I can count on less than one hand how many times someone has hit those posts in the three years I have been playing polo.
maybe you haven't been watching all the time? pick-up in east van is not the only polo being played nor is it tournament polo when players are less concerned about their opponents.
the first thing is that those posts are down the side of the court, not at the focal point of the nets, making them less dangerous because people aren't generally racing toward the sidelines like they are toward the goals or end boards.
secondly, i have seen many many people get taken out near or at the poles, both here in east van and elsewhere. rory v soren in pdx this spring for example was a very close call.
just because it doesn't happen very often doesn't mean that it is safe or shouldn't be changed. one incident is more than tragic enough, i vote for safety number one.
I shot this video. Let's qualify it. She was always self-injured, as is the case here, and she no longer plays (at Grandview anyway). This is one of two incidents I recall. Rory v. Soren involved boards more so than posts as I recall.
Yeah, I go to polo with my eyes closed.
if you shot this video, then how could you say that you can count on less than one hand how many times people have run into the poles.
that being said, pieters a dick, and a reckless player, and big and uses his body to push people down. but he likes frisbee.
good luck with that one
ciao
are you arguing about nets versus cones lisa, or just arguing with me for the sake of it? because i really can't tell what your point is.
lucky i would hardly call what you play competitive bike polo. sure if you play in the pee wee leauge in st louis then i guess it doesnt matter cause you guys probably dont ever sprint. but some of us actually play polo to a degree that is on a god like level, and yes the jackass is one of them, and if he is saying that the nets will change the way we play, maybe you should think hes not talking about how it will change how you play, but actually those of us who compete on a high level.
OK then. This is the first I've heard that you've at least tried it. I will now respectfully "agree to disagree" and stop riding you so hard about it.
Ben, the internet can't see you smirking when you type.
Chicago Bike Polo 2003-2008
St Louis Bike Polo 2008-now
ben wasn't joking.
I'm sorry. I must have missed the post where it was said that only people who podium at tournaments are allowed to have an opinion about the game.
Chicago Bike Polo 2003-2008
St Louis Bike Polo 2008-now
i was definitely smirking when i wrote that, i also think the internets conveyed the smirk to allot of other people who read that too.
I am all for big metal goals, in toronto and i think that real persons will not let them effect their games or at least be able to play around them. bitches like motanna and capriotti might complain but you always got to put up with that. long story short its all about the court that the club has, and i am happy to play with whatever. see you at the midwests?
I'll give you that all bets are off during competition and a stationary metal post should be regarded as an increased risk. But I personally don't agree that it necessarily eliminates break/chase on goal scenarios.
I'd still go for it.
If I'm interpreting your concerns correctly, a more structurally sound version of the PVC goals we used in Chicago would eliminate your thrill/safety concerns and still bring very important parameters to bear on competitive play.
chicagobikepolo.com
>people 'know' the wall is there and ride straight into it all the time
:)
the nets aren't your problem.....This does support the argument that people "know" the wall is there and yet ride straight into it.....that said I'm still all for nets personally....though not big heavy metal ones.
Ben i would very much like to give you a horsey ride on uncle clobbers knee.
make a net out of laser beams. polo-tron.
I vote for laser beams. Leave the nets to David Beckham and Ice Bunnies.
time to revive this thread again i think. i think the the german engineers have figured this out in time for the Greif Masters weekend. More pictures. Perhaps we can commission some from them for an NA tour circuit.
180x80x45cm (see http://leagueofbikepolo.com/forum/rules/2009/05/21/goalies-and-goals for goal width debate)
i'm excited to see this, except it's unclear to me what holds them in place.
More photos here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/fixie-inc/sets/72157623294721310/
Those are definitely well crafted, portable goals, and I commend the Karlsruhe crew for commissioning them. However, as a defensive player who has been checked into the goal more than a few times, I would like to express my concern for falling A) onto a post and B) falling into a net.
I don't believe it'd be easy to extract my handlebars/levers/pedals etc from the mesh without fouling whatever play on the goal is coming behind the check or moving the whole goal.
I think there's a "hands off" goalie rule in Europe, so it'll be less of an issue, but I would all but demand a top bar on a North American version.
Otherwise, those are bad-ass.
There would not be poles sticking up for people to impale themselves upon.
*edit* granted, corners are no fun either, but it's a different sort of impact. Also, it looks like they used a pipe bender, and curved corners could be made instead of right angles.
I've been in four man/bike pileups in goal before. In a tournament, if you're playing "goalie" and blocking goals good enough, eventually the other team just starts body slamming you. If you have two pikes sticking up, probably not too safe.
At our home court (our hockey court anyway), we have metal goals, but they aren't secured to the ground. They have substantial weight, but they definitely move if you slam into them.
Lucky,
a) The posts were well protected and no more dangerous than a pylon or the corner of a hockey net.
b) no bikes got tangled in the net during three full days of polo this weekend. I can see this happening, but i would take the safer setup of no crossbar over any delay of game issue.
I'm glad to hear that no one fell into the netting. But I still don't see how a crossbar is less safe than open net and two (even well capped) uprights. Further, if there were a crossbar, stand-offs could be welded to it to push the net back from the face of the goal, making bounce-outs less likely.
I still think they did a hell of a job with those goals and the entire tournament, from the looks of it.
I read that if the diameter of the pipes on the bottom were smaller then it would have allowed the ball to roll up the and over the pipe instead of bouncing straight back out.
Is that your opinion too?
Those germans are so crafty. Rubber on the bottom would probably hold them just fine. I'm not sure if a top tube would be better or worse. Nice design.
I don't have any more of an issue crashing into a set-up like this than a pylon. That being said no one really wants to crash into either. I've played with big, heavy and solid hockey nets with no issue either although there is that potential. Any net is still better than a wall.
I like the idea of an elastic along the top of the net for both safety and to keep a goalie from balancing on it. If the poles on the side were somehow collapsible in the case of someone falling on them but still being relatively stable during play it would be the cat's ass.
Whether they're checked or not, someone will eventually fall into the goal. If there is no top bar to brace against; they will fall into a net, their bars and levers and such will become caught in the net, which will increase the amount of time their foot-down ass is blocking the goal trying to clear the play. If they get really knotted up in the mesh, they might move the goal while trying to pick up and clear their bike.
Further, if the uprights were collapsible, when you fell into the center of the net, they would swing down and smack you. Bad idea.
^this! And I speak as a person who has fallen/crashed into many cones and goals alike.
Others have already listed the benefits of goals over cones, so I'll just add that I too am a true convert. I thought cones were the cat's meow until I actually had the opportunity to play regularly with goals. Better in ever way. Plus it's fun to shoot for the 3 & 4 holes (which would someone would prolly contest the validity/height of if it were just cones).
Maybe it's cause i'm in the Midwest, but I almost expect goals at this point. Cones are only for convenience or because you have no access to goals.
Yah know, I've never played polo with anything but cones, I am kinda curious to play with something like the net above that is polo specific in width and height. It would save a lot of questions about was it to high or not, and I probably wouldn't get frustrated when some one wails one off my top tube and then calls it a goal.
x2 These "polo specific" goals should not be much taller than wheel height. The height of hockey goals has always bothered me.
Right on Timtim.
Yes, goals are the thing. The future.
Kev, good idea revitalizing this thread- I hereby throw down $5 that 2010 will be called The Year Of The Goal or The Year The Pylons Died.
Also, the year polo blew up, but we all know that.
YES Nets for 2010!!!
i am tired of guessing if it was a goal or not, or someone who is 80 feet away telling me it was a goal, when i'm 5 feet in front of the goal and clearly was NOT a goal (u know who u are ) I think nets are a great idea and people will get used to avoiding them..
Does anyone have pics of the nets in europe that they just had, they look super pro.. Or better yet send me the blueprints and i'll try and get them made over here.
What are thoughts about how high they are?
PYLONS ARE DEAD!
X2 I see polo specific nets in our future.
x1,000,000
Never again will a stupid call determine the fate of our team at a tourney. My bad play should be the only thing that does that...
nets are defiantly it. I think those german nets are a little short and could be a few inches deeper.
I thought their height was perfect--top tube.
The only problems with the nets is that they were expensive and a slapshot on the ground would bounce back out pretty quick. A little on the inside of the footprint would have knocked bounced such shots upwards and made the net swish around...
One thing you can't see in the photos is the velcro that was holding the goals down.
There is nothing more satisfying than sending a slap shot up over the handle bars or top tube of a bike for a goal. That is not possible with these nets.
x2
Hitting a shot into the 'upper corners' is awesome- eliminating that possibility with no apparent advantage seems....well, not awesome.
as someone who plays with tall hockey nets regularly, i agree that these look awesome. but most places play and will continue to play with pylons, and so most people are used to playing with pylon-height or top tube height limits, that's basically the standard at this point. i guess there are a few places that play unlimited height.
also, i'm guessing that mallets and techniques will evolve to make these shots way more common, and potentially too easy. but that's hard to predict.
The net also seems really wide compared to current conventions.
photo is misleading, cause the goalie in this photo has her back wheel well behind the post. the nets were bigger than one bike length, but not by much, just 180cm.
Brilliant. This is it.
I just renamed this thread cause it's not so much about chicago anymore....
this has always been my hate of hockey goals for polo was the height that it obstructed players uperbody movement defending around the net.
do you think the top sides of the posts could have another post going back and then connecting down to the back of the net making topself pocket instead of just a straight line of netting.
what was the call if there was a (guess best way to describe would be a tennis term) let, with the ball hitting the net but traveled over the back of the goal? did this happen?
the height seems perfect. i had been thinking about these goals i saw from some other euro tournament that were smaller than hockey goals and didnt get in the way of uperbody movement around the net.
i will be fine with this size nets. get rid of the damn hockey size goals.
so how high are the posts? what would be the length between posts?
I'm gonna try and make something out of PVC and see what happens..
Has the fed, come up with dimensions for net size/width/height?
Look out pietard.. nets coming to a court near you,
I see a set up like this being a good compromise between hockey goals and cones. I'll honestly play with whatever, it has never really bothered me. I do, however, like the ease of identifying goals with nets...that's major for me. When we play with cones, we are always questioning what was a goal or not...especially with lifted slapshots that you can't even see when they're traveling.
one goal scored in Kalsruhe went like this: slap shot at goal hits goalies flat mallet and jacks up into the air. ball jacks up high, over goalies head more or less and comes down just inside the net and rolls into the goal. definitely a goal but I dont think it would have been called a goal if there were just cones, it looked too high.
One of my goals was like that. Gotta say, I was very thankful for the nets in that case!
I'm pretty sure there were a few more similar situations that may not have been called a goal if there had been no net.
nets are OK but in Karlsruhe they slowed down the game a bit: sometimes the ball would get stuck inside them after a goal, thus taking a few seconds to get fetched out. Sometimes it would land on top of the net in the back, where it had to be scooped out. And although Kev maybe didn't see it, at least one player (hassan, my teammate) got his bike (pedal I think) tangled in the net whilst riding behind, resulting in a crash that could have made me (I was goalie at that point) fall when he hit me.
I personally still prefer thin pylons (not cones). The only advantage of the nets seems to be the validation of goals by the refs...
And although Kev maybe didn't see it, at least one player (hassan, my teammate) got his bike (pedal I think) tangled in the net whilst riding behind, resulting in a crash that could have made me (I was goalie at that point) fall when he hit me..
That's a bit of a diferent issue, Lucky was worried about goalies getting tangled up by being checked or falling into the net and getting tangled.
I would prefer more than 1m behind the goal, which would reduce the chance of what happened to Hassan. Fact is people are going to cut close to the goal no matter what, i've seen pylons and cones take people down in a similar way.
I think 3 meters behind the goal should be a minimum.
yes! when will people realise that more space behind the net provides more space for playmaking, *especially on smaller courts*. otherwise all riding lines converge in front of the net creating a big boring bottleneck, even more so in this age of permanent goalies.
bike polo, like hockey, requires flow and flow requires space, especially around the net. it's similar to why angled corners are better than square or round ones because the game keeps flowing instead of slowing down all the time as players fish the ball out.
the pictures i've seen with the net right up against a back wall in some places must be the least fun polo there is.
i actually look at this the opposite way and love defending from behind the net. it's not poor positioning to ride through the cones, it's perfectly legal and makes for great and exciting plays-- the space is there, use it! i love seeing someone stop a shot with a mad cut-off from through the goal, and feel that the move to nets will take away some of these great plays, even though i am coming around on the whole idea.
you could also look at it and say "if i can't defend through the net, i'm just going to post up in goal permanently." being able to play through the net frees players from staying in the net all the time, at least me anyway. being able to ride through the pylons both offensively and defensively gives another lane to riders and plays, unjamming the perpetual bottleneck in front of the goal.
i know that i am fighting a losing battle here, i just see nets as they have existed creating more problems than they actually solve. the karlsruhe nets appear to be a big step forward in design. i am also concerned about guinea pig "net trials" at major tournaments like the north american's when they should be tested at smaller, less consequential events first.
the pylons at COG, with their posts on top, were great and there were no complaints about them.
I think the Karlsruhe goals are great. Basically all they need is a ramp on the bottom so fast balls that hit the bottom pole don't bounce out.
Otherwise they play great and are not really a problem at all. Better than cones.
I liked the extra width too (a couple inches wider than a bike on each side).
Yep, the karlsruhe goals were amazing, as a ref, the clarity of whether a high shot was in or not was brilliant. The only problem, like kev said was ground-level shots being reflected straight out, a small vinyl lip at the back of the goal to flick the ball up would solve this easily.
On the falling/crashing note, I don't see how these are any worse than cones, I tore the fucking ACL in my knee riding over a normal traffic cone which caused the bars to whip out on me and fall on a knee twisted 180º. I'd much rather have proper goals.
Recep just posted a bunch of photos, including some blueprints: http://www.flickr.com/photos/fixie-inc/sets/72157623294721310/show/
i like em