and we in east van are going to pioneer a ball joint solution. details to come.
Machine Politics vs Beaver Boys, May 2011. Photo by Bruce Carver
Ball Dragging
Ok...I don't get why ball dragging is legal...I mean, it just seems like a lame way to move the ball up court...to me takes away some of the fun as those with faster bikes seem to benefit from this strategy more than anyone.
Is there any reason why it hasn't been called illegal?
Is it legal in tourney play?
Do people use it regularly?
August 19, 2008 - 2:44pm
#2
August 20, 2008 - 10:29am
#3
My vote is to see it outlawed entirely.
I think the range of choices are as follows,
1. everything goes (goals etc)
2. can't shoot with it (leads to the "bj till a foot away then score" bs)
3. have to pass it before a score ("bj till a foot away then pass")
4. some sort of "traveling" rule (2 seconds, two rotations or something)
5. outlaw it
I like rules that are clean, simple, easy to explain and enforce and don't slow the game down. My strong preference is for outlawing it.
3 or 4 are just to appease folks without real ball control.
August 19, 2008 - 11:22pm
#4
Will it be in effect at the Terrible Twos?
We're getting our shit in order for the long drive.
----------------------------------
Moooooo!
August 20, 2008 - 7:11am
#6
I put forward this: any player using the Ball Joint MUST pass the ball to a teammate BEFORE that team scores a goal. This would prevent a player from riding all the way up court, releasing the ball a foot from the line, and tapping it in.
3...2...1...GO!
Mallets Of Mayhem
August 20, 2008 - 7:28am
#7
i think if that is the rule then we should just make it illegal. Or limit the time used to 2 seconds. I have found that too many players are using it instead of learning how to control the ball here in madison. It is the first thing our new players are trying to master.
August 20, 2008 - 9:38am
#8
I agree with Jonny....Too many players are starting to use it, and saying its only good for passing is gonna make it way too hard to monitor. Especially, in pick up games with no refs.
On a side note: Since it is still legal...How do you defend against it?
August 20, 2008 - 6:49pm
#9
In Ottawa it is being used less and less any way. It is more of a quick grab and pass cuase it's really easy to defend against. sorry you will have to figure it out for yourselves
August 20, 2008 - 8:29am
#10
I put forward this: any player using the Ball Joint MUST pass the ball to a teammate BEFORE that team scores a goal. This would prevent a player from riding all the way up court, releasing the ball a foot from the line, and tapping it in.
3...2...1...GO!
Mallets Of Mayhem
Easier said than done in my experience. If you can get by three people with out anyone being able to tap the ball/your mallet, you've probably earned the goal.
August 20, 2008 - 8:52am
#11
it's unfortunatley a lot easier with the smaller lighter street hockey balls than the field hockey balls you play with in England.
August 20, 2008 - 9:52am
#15
I agree ryan, time limits or pedal strokes...WAY to hard to monitor. I like the idea of only using it on a defensive side of the court...that would make it easier to watch. Plus if there is a shot at the goal, less likely to score.
August 20, 2008 - 10:50am
#17
alright, here's the solution we are pioneering in east van: ball-joints in the defensive zone only. you can ball joint up to centre but that's it. simple, enforceable, takes away the ball-joint freight-training to the net but still allows for the nice flip-pass ottawa taught us in toronto. timed carries won't work, it's too complicated and you need a rule that's easy and can be used in pick-up without a ref. we've only played with this new scheme for a couple of games now, but it seems to work really well. banning the ball joint entirely might be a bit over the top, and i like the dimension that the flip pass lends to the game. giving the ball-joint free reign changes the game a lot and might be too much. making it so that you can take it out of your end but not go offensive with it seems to satisfy both worlds. having it be that you just can't score off of it will see the same barrelling toward the net to set up the easy pass. what do you all think?
August 20, 2008 - 11:08am
#18
A reasonable compromise. Presumably the full rule includes the current "no shots" sub-clause?
August 20, 2008 - 11:31am
#19
yep, no shots. this was invented by rory in east van by the way. he is the man.
August 20, 2008 - 11:23am
#20
I really like that idea...
I havent been playing as long as most of you guys, but I really feel that Ball jointing takes away from the skill of the game and Frankly...to the fun of the game. To me, it would simply be like traveling in basketball. Up your skill level by working the ball. It also discourages passing (something that I admittedly need to work on)...nonetheless...I do get why some people like it and support a compromise.
August 20, 2008 - 11:29am
#21
the one element i love is the flip pass, it is so skillful and great. it would be cool to keep the flip.
May 6, 2010 - 9:38am
#22
alright, here's the solution we are pioneering in east van: ball-joints in the defensive zone only. you can ball joint up to centre but that's it. simple, enforceable, takes away the ball-joint freight-training to the net but still allows for the nice flip-pass ottawa taught us in toronto. timed carries won't work, it's too complicated and you need a rule that's easy and can be used in pick-up without a ref. we've only played with this new scheme for a couple of games now, but it seems to work really well. banning the ball joint entirely might be a bit over the top, and i like the dimension that the flip pass lends to the game. giving the ball-joint free reign changes the game a lot and might be too much. making it so that you can take it out of your end but not go offensive with it seems to satisfy both worlds. having it be that you just can't score off of it will see the same barrelling toward the net to set up the easy pass. what do you all think?
I like that. F'n pisses me off when someone drag the ball fullcourt.
August 20, 2008 - 11:34am
#23
I can live with the only in the defensive zone thing. But I will never see anything wrong with getting the ball out of a corner by bj'ing a snap pass through your wheels to a teammate in front of the net. This is one of my favorite plays and often results in a goal scoring opportunity.
3...2...1...GO!
Mallets Of Mayhem
August 20, 2008 - 11:36am
#24
i love how ball-jointing shortens down to "bj'ing". so dirty.
August 20, 2008 - 11:37am
#25
yeah, but you are barely BJing if you are simply scooping the ball for an immediate pass. That I have no problem with. I am talking about when people simply drag the ball from one side of the court to the other at a high speed.
August 20, 2008 - 11:22pm
#28
I agree with Alexis. If you are in the offensive zone behind the net for example and lock in on a bj for a centering pass that shouldn't be illegal. Only the defensive zone thing is not a good rule. The issue is ball travel with the bj. It seems the majority want less or no time traveled with a bj. It going to be up to us to teach this etiquette to the up and comers who are not learning the basics and just ball jointing everything.
I don't think you can straight up ban the bj. It's used in many good ways in the sport.
How to regulate it? i don't know.
What if you "dribbled" the ball up the court, made a quick scoop over your opponents mallet and went on the score...was that a ball joint or just a scoop? isn't a scoop just a quick little bj? In that example should that player have to pass it before scoring?
btw a good way to defend the bj is too just keep driving your opponent to the out side until they run out of room and are force to do something. Re: Alexis' profile pic.
August 20, 2008 - 11:35am
#30
And I stay stationary while making said pass
3...2...1...GO!
Mallets Of Mayhem
August 20, 2008 - 11:39am
#31
Ryan and Jonny and Dumptruck and Angelo and I are going to print up shirts. I HEART BJ's. All proceeds go to support the Coalition to Protect the Sanctity of the BJ
3...2...1...GO!
Mallets Of Mayhem
August 21, 2008 - 3:34pm
#32
i actually have been for outlawing the ball joint from the beginning. I used it a bunch in ottawa as a way to annoy folks so they would then have a discussion about banning it.
August 21, 2008 - 4:07pm
#33
Too bad, you're getting a shirt anyway
3...2...1...GO!
Mallets Of Mayhem
August 20, 2008 - 11:40am
#34
i Think that the ball joint should be either illegal or legal, we don't want too many rules here.
August 20, 2008 - 11:47am
#36
Personally I would like to see a rule book as long and complicated to understand as your standard, professional sports league, salary cap
3...2...1...GO!
Mallets Of Mayhem
August 20, 2008 - 11:53am
#37
If we outlaw the ball joint then we should outlaw the closed end mallet head.
3...2...1...GO!
Mallets Of Mayhem
August 20, 2008 - 12:08pm
#38
i agree with that as well, i think the shots from closed end mallets will take away too much difficulty.
Also maybe not a salary cap yet alexis, then you and i can never play on the same team.
August 20, 2008 - 12:36pm
#39
what would we do without east van?
too many rules. it's still not clear to me why the bj should be illegal. one of the main reasons given for outlawing things -- mallet hacking, contact, bj -- is something to the effect of "because less skilled players use these tactics, and they will get better if they can't use them." who cares. good players learn good skills, and included in the skill set should be the ability to defend against mallet hacking, heavy contact, and bjs.
don't be a dick, don't be a pussy.
August 20, 2008 - 12:39pm
#40
How do you defend against a BJ then?
(jeez what anyone can do with THAT one....haha)
August 20, 2008 - 12:44pm
#41
Block the player's line. Hack or hook the mallet.
August 20, 2008 - 12:54pm
#42
Everyone is talking about what to do with the BJ not just East Van...we didn't start the thread. I am all for a few rules as possible. I have picked up the BJ quickly but it does require some skill. However, enough people in all jurisdictions have expressed disgust with the move that a compromise is required. When the discussion started I shared the same view of the BJ is a great innovation and everyone needs to adapt...but I am slowly moving away from a stringent BJ supporter to limiting the scope of its use in the game.
August 20, 2008 - 12:57pm
#43
I was referring to the post about east van pioneering a solution for the rest of us. i should have replied directly to that. just talking shit. and trying to play devil's advocate a bit.
August 20, 2008 - 3:50pm
#46
the problem that people have with the ball joint is that it is too effective for driving to the net. yes, it requires skill and time to perfect, like all polo skills. those that have a problem with it are not concerned about whether they can do it or not, they are more concerned with the impact that the maneuver has on flow of the game. unrestricted ball-jointing leads to players going coast-to-coast with the ball, which in their opinion is not as interesting as watching passing and ball-handling skills develop down the court. the other cons they see are the side issues of obstruction and mallet-whacking that tend to occur around the b-j in a game that already has a healthy amount of contact. what people are worried about is that the ball joint, in a few month's time, will become the dominant play and lead to end-to-end rushes by both teams, thus taking away from some of the flavour of the game. lots of sports have restrictions on offensive maneuvers to improve the flow of their game; offsides in hockey and soccer, travelling in basketball, bat corking in baseball. what rory proposed (defensive zone b-j only) seeks to address the beauties of the ball joint (control and flip-passses) with the concerns (coast-to-coasting, less passing). in my personal opinion i don't think the ball-joint argument has much to do with player skill levels or the ability to learn, i think it is more centred upon how the move affects the flow of the game. watching ball-jointers go coast-to-coast is less interesting to me than watching them make a nice flip-pass. there are a million rules in polo already, having one to address a very crucial aspect of the game is a good thing, not a bad one. as i have written many times before, good rules help to free the game from controversy and un-sporting play far more than they restrict it.
August 20, 2008 - 12:33pm
#49
I am a big fan of the flip pass and the 1/2 court rule mentioned above allows for this innovation (thanks Ottawa and Leon). This is a serious skill move that adds to the game...unlike the drag the entire court to tap the ball in. However, it is too bad that a quick pass using the BJ in the offensive zone wouldn't be allowed but we need a compromise. I think the stationary BJ pass would be hard to enforce. My thought is if a BJ occurs in the offensive zone on purpose or by accident (because they do happen by "accident" in the oops sort of way) the ball is turned over to the defensive team and play continues without stopping.
The other option is the BJ can go full court drag but a pass is required before a score can be made. Again easy to enforce because if score happens without the requisite pass the goal is not counted just like a shuffle is not counted.
Lastly, I am not a fan of banning the BJ unless the game goes to a standardized ABS piping size (1.5 inches) that makes the BJ basically impossible.
August 20, 2008 - 5:11pm
#55
I think there needs to be some thoughts shared on lifting the ball to score, WITHOUT the use of bj'ing. My understanding of the bj is that it involves putting pressure on the ball and dragging it on the court, which would exclude a shot which is lifted through a sort of scoop (given that it was not preceded by bjing).
I think this is a move that will be easily mistaken for a bj, but is different. It's fairly easy to do if the ball is stationary, and very difficult if the ball is rolling.
Next, how far off the ground can a shot on goal be? In a Boston tournament a spectator yelled "below the shoulders!" and the lifted (not bj'd) shot was counted as goal. Certainly a shot 5 inches above the ground should count, but over the goalie's head would not. New discussion for this?
legitbikepolo.com
August 21, 2008 - 2:39pm
#57
I think that anytime that you intentionally cup the ball with the mallet, it should not be a shot, and therefore you cannot score with it - sorry Pieter. A shot occurs when the mallet hits - impacts - the ball. While sometimes this raises the ball, this is different than a scoop which focuses on cupping the ball before the energy is delivered to move the ball. This may sound vague but it doesn't look vague and I've never seen any one who could scoop so well that you could mistake for a shot (not to say that there aren't good scoopers out there, Robbie, Alexis, Leon, Rory, you guys rule, and you know the difference between a scoop and a shot). Allowing scoop shots to score but disallowing bj drags gets into a huge amount of grey area that I want to avoid.
That said, I favour the must pass bj rule, since I like the offensive zone scoop pass, though I'm interested to try the defensive zone only bj this weekend. I'm going to assume that this means no scoop passes in the offensive zone? If not, good luck enforcing it - I can already hear it, "you dragged the ball before passing it... not I didn't I was just getting it onto my mallet,..." and on and on. While I would never pretend that we really only have 3 rules, I do favour rules that are easy to explain and understand.
In regards to Pieter's post on another page about closed end mallets being good enough to make the bj obsolete, while they don't end it, the accuracy they offer goes a good way towards getting people to move on in my opinion - and I don't think they should be banned Jonny, I think they should be encouraged.
August 21, 2008 - 1:00am
#59
It sounds to me the BJ is an offensive evolution of the sport. The BJ defense just hasn't evolved as quickly yet. Eventually the defense to the BJ will be developed to the point that no one will even remember why the tried to outlaw the BJ in the first place.
Let the game and tactic evolve, keep the rules simple.
----------------------------------
Moooooo!
August 23, 2008 - 7:08pm
#60
Yes. See, this is exactly what I was gonna say. And I was gonna make it all eloquent sounding. But you fucking beat me to it. Jerk. Thanks a lot.
So yes. I agree with KG. The BJ is an evolution. People are getting great at this sport, and figuring out ways to be even better at it. The idea of banning a BJ is completely counter to the idea of evolving bike polo. All we've got to do now is come up with an effective defense against the BJ, when necessary. By the way, we still have not yet "outlawed" outright aggression in the sport. So if you see someone dragging the ball across the court, knock the fucker over (if you can't knock the ball out of his or her mallet). It's still technically "legal".
As far as I'm concerned, polo still only has two essential rules: dabbing and no shuffling.
********************************
Does not apply at Los Marcos Madness
August 21, 2008 - 1:46am
#61
I just want to let the world know that I like the way this is going and at the same time remind East Van it wasn't very long ago that they wouldn't let me do the b-j at there tournaments. They called it B.S. but it sounds like were working it out here.
Good work everyone
August 21, 2008 - 2:39pm
#62
you rule leon
August 21, 2008 - 6:42pm
#64
I would counter the thought that the offensive bj has just been quicker to evolve than the defense against it. A proper bj allows a player to cruise at virtually any speed with full maneuverability and the ability to quickly pull off a dead accurate shot or pass, all while being able to move the ball freely enough to avoid mallet hacking. Maybe defensive play will suddenly evolve to the point where anything but a bj offense would be a joke.
legitbikepolo.com
August 21, 2008 - 8:29pm
#65
This is why ringette and hockey are different sports. Bike polo is neither, but it is going to have to decide which direction it wants to go and I for one am more in favour of the hockey style than the ringette style. This is not to say that ringette isn't a great sport, it is. And it is very tactical, difficult, exciting to watch and play from what I'm told, all in its own, quite different way than hockey. But I don't want to play bike ringette, I want to play bike hockey style polo. Maybe a few ringette style moves can enter the game, but I am not in favour of letting them dominate the play such they are the only way to play.
August 21, 2008 - 7:20pm
#66
this is boring
August 22, 2008 - 6:48am
#67
The bj has been around here longer than anywhere else and has prety much been declining in use. It is not hard to defend against. nobody gets very far with it. now it is more a quick scoop pass than anything else. deal with it people.
August 22, 2008 - 2:23pm
#68
You're boring ben. Stir up some more shit already
3...2...1...GO!
Mallets Of Mayhem
August 22, 2008 - 8:31pm
#69
ok but i got to wait for the tension to really be hot. for intance the play jonny and i worked on today with totally make all yall wet yourselves. and im going to be rea clear about this, the ball joint is legal or not, what the fuck is this about where you can use it on the court. fuckin defence or stop bitching. the only reason you cant score with it is cause of the shuffle rule. i hear that jonny made you all bleed with his joint. and i thought you all were stonners.
loosers,
August 23, 2008 - 1:22am
#70
yeah, jonny sure was hot in the final with that b-j. i was wetting myself.
August 23, 2008 - 11:13am
#71
I only noticed his BJ's as my team was beating his.
3...2...1...GO!
Mallets Of Mayhem
August 23, 2008 - 1:40pm
#72
Of course, if you're really are skilled with the BJ, you wouldn't use it with any head that had an inner diam of over 1 1/2 inches.
Otherwise you might as well ride your bike with training wheels. BJ with a fat pipe isn't very skillful.
There, I said it.
----------------------------------
Moooooo!
August 29, 2008 - 2:15am
#74
i say ban the bj. it's an illegal carry.i was very anti bj and was doing just fine playing without it.. untill i went out to madison earlier this summer and jonny bj'd the shit out of me up and down the court. well, i gotta keep up with the jones' and i've adapted my game to incorporate the bj. but i feel kinda dirty about it. i use it mostly out of lazyness. plus, it has serious downfalls offensively too. (if you can't connect on the fly or drop a bj'd ball you're totaly fucked and better hope you have a teammate on your 6) also, alot of milwaukee's up-and-comers and noobs are relying on it too much. it's too easy. and it's RUINING BIKE POLO. bjing requires little skill. why not design a better bj mallet? why not build one with a little spoon on the end and we can just scoop the ball up and throw it down court... there's no rule against that. the reason we don't is because then it would be bike la crosse. i think a line needs to be drawn very soon. i say fuck the bj... it's time has come to an end.
August 29, 2008 - 10:26am
#75
I think this is a really great articulation of why the ball joint should be illegal. It takes away from the game. I think that we should not have specific rules about how it can be used, that is silly and kind of pointless. I really think the game will develop so much better without it. The style of play with the bj is really lazy and boring. I will continue using it though until it is banned.
jonny
August 29, 2008 - 2:47pm
#76
yep, i second that. after all of the logic and the rationale, to me it just comes down to the lameness factor. i just find it boring to watch, play with, and play against. will the latest crop of polo-istas as 'the lost generation' because of lack of ball handling skills from an over-reliance on the ball joint?
August 29, 2008 - 2:19pm
#77
What is that... over 70 posts and still no consensus? Personally, I think the BJ is cheap. I would rather see tha ball passed and see some ball handling skills, but the BJ can be defended against. You'd have to outlaw dragging the ball into the goal because it is a shuffle,not a shot. I think beyond that you're adding too many rules.
Defensive stagety will catch up to th BJ.
Maybe this will all get worrked out in Chicago?
August 29, 2008 - 9:31pm
#78
I'd still be interested in setting up a poll on the bj.
Poll feature please...
----------------------------------
Moooooo!
August 29, 2008 - 2:33pm
#79
Ball dragging!
Personally I can do it well. If you can’t and your playing against someone who can I am sure it feels like you are being teased by your bigger brother. I think it should be legal for passing but not shooting.
August 29, 2008 - 4:06pm
#81
i think the scoop should be fine but any carry should be banned. besides that as soon as kev gets the polling shit together we can take real votes on shit like this. but we might still need to start in each city making are decision for ourselves, but the reason we use it there is cause it is an advantage in games and we like to have it for tournys. so lets ban it tomorrow, or this thread is mute, or at least silent till another day.
August 29, 2008 - 4:43pm
#82
i never actually responded to lucky's "extra special" feature request for polling, partly cause i didn't want to have to explain that i don't want polls on bikepolo.ca cause they'll get taken too seriously. this is not the official bike polo jedi council. (that's in los marcostan, and they don't have internet there.) ok fine, i'll let y'all vote on voting, how's that.
August 30, 2008 - 10:14am
#84
why would you ever turn down a jk
September 2, 2008 - 7:42am
#85
So we ban the ball joint and someone uses it. What's the penalty? Tap out? I'll just use it to make my pass and then tap out.
3...2...1...GO!
Mallets Of Mayhem
September 2, 2008 - 9:17am
#86
we're not banning the ball joint.
********************************
Does not apply at Los Marcos Madness
September 2, 2008 - 12:35pm
#87
during the NACCCs, I personally didn't see any uses of the bj that I objected to. In fact, I thought it was being used effectively, but with restraint by most players. Perhaps all of this controversy is the reason. I know I used it a hell of a lot... especially to whip a fast accurate pass around my front wheel whenever I needed to.
I did see a few ball scoops that were being batted at once they went high, and that could definitely bring a more dangerous element that is unnecessary IMO.
{}------- lexington -------{}
September 2, 2008 - 12:37pm
#88
I can live without the scoop up in the air. I felt bad when I launched one and Joe MKE deflected it right into his eye.
3...2...1...GO!
Mallets Of Mayhem
September 2, 2008 - 12:46pm
#89
ben and i were planning a play all up into naccs where i would swing around the goal and scoop it up in the air in front of the goal and ben would race in and smash the ball like a tennis serve. Unfortunately, our games were too hard to fuck around and ben was so sick on saturday that he couldn't really pedal his bike past half court.
Alexis, i was wondering how you beat mke, now it all makes sense,
September 2, 2008 - 2:34pm
#90
yeah, the ball-joint was not controversial at all at the naccc's. and i don't mind the scoop at all-- in fact i kind of love it, it's such a great tactical play. we can't stop the ball going up in polo as it stands, mad aerial deflections happen all the time even without the scoop. i think the real solution is in people controlling their mallets and keeping things within the mallet-on-mallet contact rules, keeping everyone's eyeballs intact, just like they do 99% of the time right now.
September 2, 2008 - 3:20pm
#91
I've gotten some welts from taking a slapshot to the body, but it's nothing compared to the actual and potential damage done from high sticks.
Chicago Bike Polo 2003-2008
St Louis Bike Polo 2008-now
September 2, 2008 - 8:33pm
#93
vigilantee justice just takes you out of the game and hurts your team
September 2, 2008 - 8:35pm
#94
Even though Robbie got away with it Sunday night
3...2...1...GO!
Mallets Of Mayhem
September 2, 2008 - 9:40pm
#97
yea robbie was able to do it, where i wasnt with alex. i think my problem was givin him warnings. but i was talking more about when someone does something to you and you go after him to get back. i dont htink robbie did that, unless i missed somethin
September 2, 2008 - 9:45pm
#98
No, nothing was missed. Robbies seemed wild but he wasn't mean spirited
3...2...1...GO!
Mallets Of Mayhem
October 21, 2008 - 1:40am
#99
I just found this thread. I say ban BJing or whatever COMPLETELY. No dragging, no passing, no shooting, and let the initials go back to their original meaning.
October 23, 2008 - 9:07am
#100
although i love a good bj , i wouldnt cry if they dissapeared and you guys are takeing this to a ho nuvva levoh.
October 25, 2008 - 9:12pm
#101
if yo uwant it banned then ban. if people rely on this site to create rules for thier local cities, then compleate duche bags from ontario are going to set the rules you play by. make your own rules, and compromise for tournys
October 25, 2008 - 11:31pm
#102
BJ or no BJ, stay out of Ben's way at tournys. INSANE!
Doug D
Brooklyn, New York
http://www.hardcourtbikepolo.com/
October 26, 2008 - 12:41am
#104
should i book a flight for NYC??
Doug D
Brooklyn, New York
http://www.hardcourtbikepolo.com/
October 26, 2008 - 12:39pm
#105
NAW I just wanted to see if anyone else felt this strongly about it but I think peeps WANT the BJ to pass and stuff and they feel if it was taken away, mebbe they wouldn't be as good so they don't want to completely ban it. Wish this website had polls we could take. KEV must know how to set that up. BAN that shit 100% lets see who rises to the top...
October 26, 2008 - 1:43pm
#106
el joker, please reread this thread to see my take on polls.
October 30, 2008 - 10:44am
#107
Why the hell is it called ball jointing? Just so you can say BJ?
October 30, 2008 - 8:08pm
#108
We here in Ottawa, where this move started, as far as I know, can use this move. Or we can not use this move. We will beat you. Just because a player uses the Ball Joint to move the ball DOES NOT automatically mean they are covering up for a lack of skill. Yes some new players seem to use it as a crutch, but don't assume that is the case for everyone.
Doug has used it
Robbie has used it
Leon has used it
Rorybear has used it
Jonny Hunter has used it
I have used it
Angelo started it
These players, and many more, could play circles around any given player in the world
3...2...1...GO!
Mallets Of Mayhem
October 31, 2008 - 9:35am
#109
im no good at it but i play a key part in a play utlizing it. jonny swings behind the goal through gretzeys office comes around wide lobs the ball up to me who is TOP CENTER and i smash the ball down ( obviosly in a manner that poses no danger to any one else on the field) through the goal at knee hights fast enough to break a frame bike or body in the way. so i cant ball joint but i can catch the load from a bj and smash back in another players face. we call it the snowball if you can pardon my french
October 31, 2008 - 1:43pm
#110
We never really used the BJ much it here in LA, save for some people who do use it as a crutch, because it just seemed so lame, and I know it can be effective in the hands of good players. If this is the 'evolution' of the sport, then I guess I'll just have to adapt. I would like to think that if I held a Tourney (in LA) and if the rules excluded the BJ good players from other cities would still show up and play well anyhow without it. I may be too selfish in the desire to see it banned from game play everywhere, and judging by this thread I doubt it ever will be. I guess I just wanted to talk trash on that move where people would listen.
November 3, 2008 - 3:17pm
#112
Timothy don't give me that jive you added the biggest friggin scoop attachment to your mallet so you can BJ all day! Did you forget that the ball gets stuck in yer mallet because of this? That mallet won't be legal for the tourney, count on it. I <3 u too Ginger
November 3, 2008 - 4:32pm
#113
word joker. no monster mallets. if the ball fits the mallet doesn't.
TOP CENTER 4-EVA
November 3, 2008 - 5:01pm
#115
The bracket for the tourney will probably be seeded with teams decided after group play. Still dont have a firm number yet on ho many are coming down. You may able to modify your mallet to make it legal for the tourney, I know it's your only one. You called me Stalin like 5 times yesterday. When you throw your own tourney you can make all the rules you want, but the Mallet rule stands in my game. No one else in LA BJs at all anyhow.
November 3, 2008 - 5:18pm
#116
tyranny is the only way shit gets done in the polo world...
TOP CENTER 4-EVA
November 3, 2008 - 6:40pm
#117
well in that case: a new rule for the polo picnic: anyone from the 310, the 213, or the 818 has to bring their best california chronic for us out of towners!
spazzlocos is coming
November 3, 2008 - 6:50pm
#119
:( ....
November 3, 2008 - 11:00pm
#120
I truly think the BJ shouldnt be banned... when i started playing i tried it but just slowly stoped doing it.. I have no problem with people that do it.. If u have skills when playing then they shouldnt be a problem.. But i do think it shouldnt be used as a shot. Also bout the Tourney in L.A Joker we should get all or most of the Players that are gonna play and discuss the rules couse We Are L.A and its out of respect.. seriously
November 3, 2008 - 11:26pm
#121
though i think it's dumb shit and promotes more lame play we did come to a compromise for tourneys here in east van. the ball joint may only be used up to half court at which point it must be disengaged. also, no scoring off the bj. ball must be disengaged and then hit in. but, you guys have yer own decision to make. i say get rid of it...
TOP CENTER 4-EVA
November 3, 2008 - 11:01pm
#124
HEy tim when i u having yours..heheh thats fucken funny....
November 3, 2008 - 11:34pm
#125
there's no way a BJ can be all that significant or detrimental to the game... as long as it isn't be used to shoot a goal and isn't counted when it goes in.
I'll go ahead and say that if your team is allowing another team's player to carry a fucking BJ all the way up the court and school you with it, then you're not playing hard enough to go after him and break that shit up.
{}------- lexington -------{}
November 4, 2008 - 1:13am
#126
you've obviously never played against rory. trying to stop a b-j freight trains does not make the game better.
March 7, 2010 - 11:20pm
#127
We just got our big hockey rink back today and it seems in such a big space stopping people that are streaking up the court is a hassle. Quite a few points were scored by dragging the ball right up to the goal then tapping it in. Perfectly legit I guess.
I was noticing some differences in tournament rules last year. I've seen no BJs past half court, if you BJ you have to pass, and you can BJ all you want just tap it in to score. What's going to be the popular rule in tournaments this year?
March 8, 2010 - 7:08pm
#128
i think people who joint all the way up the court to the goal are pathetic. do people really feel good about themselves when they do that shit?! i think if we ridicule them enough they will finally realize how lame it is and they wont dare do it in a tourny.
March 8, 2010 - 9:18pm
#129
I think deriding people that are playing within the rules is a bit lame. On the other hand, it would be easy to convince my club to play by the rules we expect to see at tournaments this summer. I would love to see something that brings balance to this issue added to the general rules this year.
March 9, 2010 - 1:08pm
#130
In any tournament that doesn't have a BJ rule people will not get away with that twice. Just sayin.
Hard to feel sorry for a guy who gets knocked to the ground cause he didn't see the check coming because he was too busy staring between his legs to see if he still had control of the ball. And I'm not describing anything illegal.
March 9, 2010 - 2:24pm
#132
Sveden you're such a toughy! All the people I see ball jointing aren't looking at the ball at all, thats one of it's advantages. Hard checking is just part of the game as long as it's done with a mind towards safety.
March 9, 2010 - 5:14pm
#133
Hard checking is just part of the game as long as it's done with a mind towards safety.
And please don't forget about the whole reciprocity thing either.
March 9, 2010 - 7:08pm
#134
I totally agree with like contact if that is what you mean.
March 15, 2010 - 6:10pm
#135
Well, I have to say I try to deal as I receive, checking to me equates to body on body- If I'm playing against someone who never checks me, I don't touch them (purposely anyway)
If they're hard checking, I don't mind giving back so much. That's what I mean by reciprocity.
both hands on the bars is cool- I start getting pissed when people are raising their arm off the bar to intentionally push me with their fore arm. I caught a shoulder in the noggin once that was pretty intentional- still like contact but pretty weak play in my book.
March 8, 2010 - 7:14pm
#136
just hook/whack their mallet or give them a good body check. i don't bj, but i don't mind it because defending against it is so easy.
March 8, 2010 - 9:52pm
#137
oh ramman, how i miss thee.
March 16, 2010 - 3:42pm
#138
totally. i just re-read this entire thread up to here and nothing was as good as ramman. where the fuck is that guy?
March 9, 2010 - 12:15pm
#139
Since this thread got brought back from the grave of 2008, what are everyone's stances on this now?
We've been allowing it, but discouraging it. Still using the counts as a shuffle mentality, but I'm seriously thinking about pushing the you have to pass it to another player rule.
I don't think it should be banned or made in to a half court issue since its a pretty good way of getting the ball out of a stuck corner on either side of the court.
March 9, 2010 - 2:15pm
#140
I'm seriously thinking about pushing the you have to pass it to another player rule
What I like about this is that is is easy to regulate. If they shoot it you just don't count it just like a shuffle. The half court idea is harder to regulate and what do you do if they do bring it across?
March 9, 2010 - 2:54pm
#141
it's not that hard. they bring it over half with a bj and it's a turn-over. the rules and regulations for what happens after a goal are more complicated.
March 9, 2010 - 1:58pm
#143
There is some really cool and skillful shit you can do with the BJ, or that starts as a BJ.
*snicker snicker*
March 12, 2010 - 1:44pm
#147
Too many rules takes away from teh fun of the game. i say that alot. we've been plying more pick up games by more strict rules, and they're becoming a little less fun. i think that BJ are easily to defend against, easy to steal from and all in all is some b level shit, so the more people that do it the better, because it just makes turnovers that much easier.
March 12, 2010 - 2:10pm
#148
Maybe so in your neck of the woods but when good players start ball jointing it's wicked hard to stop.
March 12, 2010 - 6:24pm
#149
a little engage-pop-up-release-flick-pass is highly effective.
March 13, 2010 - 1:11am
#150
Maybe so in your neck of the woods but when good players start ball jointing it's wicked hard to stop.
i think when good players do anything it's wicked hard to stop. we suck here.
March 12, 2010 - 7:33pm
#151
My mind has been opening up to the possibility that a goal is counted when the ball goes between the cones. That is the way it works for soccer, hockey, basketball. Goal = point, barring an egregious foul.
Ball joint the ball in = goal. Shuffle the ball in = goal. Fumble it in your own goal = goal. The world starts to sound much more straight forward and direct.
Would this allow too many goals? I doubt it. Against some teams in some tourneys I have not been able to get off a shot. Being allowed to bj or shuffle it along would not have made a difference. I've also been on the other side where my team is dominant. Shuffling, bj's are just techniques to get us there.
One may say too many goals will be counted. What is too many goals? You say ugly goals would be counted. Not if the defense is doing their job.
I abhor bitching about technicalities. Any bitching about the technicalities of ball handling prior to the ball going in is too much.
Food for thought people. SF is currently playing no shuffle, bj must be released prior to shot to count a goal.
March 12, 2010 - 7:54pm
#152
maybe you have a problem with bitching and shooting in SF? food for thought.
March 15, 2010 - 2:56pm
#153
I won't be satisfied until it becomes legal to shoot people who bitch.
And yeah, I like artful redirects & deflections. Nice if they were legal while disallowing points on shuffles & scoops. Not easy to codify.
March 15, 2010 - 4:10pm
#154
And yeah, I like artful redirects & deflections. Nice if they were legal while disallowing points on shuffles & scoops. Not easy to codify.
examples? i haven't seen much in bike polo that is too controversial.
March 15, 2010 - 6:14pm
#155
i haven't seen much in bike polo that is too controversial.
Any deflection off a friendly bike/player/mallet is what I'm talking about. In general we count deflections off defenders and disallow off offenders.
We could end up seeing some exciting radball style goals if the rules opened up.
March 15, 2010 - 7:18pm
#156
i think SF is playing by some slightly different ruleset then joel-y. just about everywhere i've ever played deflections of a shot count. it just has to be a shot, coming off the end of the mallet, to be a goal. if it hits my team-mate's wheel off my shot, it counts. if it hits off your wheel it counts. the only time it doesn't count is when it goes off my team-mate's shuffle, because it then ceases to be a shot, as it was shuffled. my team-mate should have just fucken shot it if he wanted it to count.
March 15, 2010 - 7:28pm
#157
Or you shot it into the side of your teammates mallet and it went in from there. Either way, still a shuffle.
March 15, 2010 - 7:41pm
#158
i also haven't played anywhere that allows bj-to-self shot goals like you have in SF either. everywhere has pass-first rules now.
March 15, 2010 - 8:19pm
#159
everywhere has pass-first rules now.
Not so. What do you like about that rule?
March 15, 2010 - 8:42pm
#160
true, polo is growing so fast now and there are places i have no idea what the rules are, i somehow didn't think there was that much variation any more.
i like the no ball-joint-to-shot rule because the whole maneuver is too easy and basically promotes bj'ing the ball coast-to-coast up the court. boring as hell, a different skillset. it's like some weird mix between ringette and hockey, when really each sport is just better by itself.
everyone is entitled to their opinion on the balljoint. i think it brings serious flow problems to a game that would perhaps rather see more passing and less ball-joint 'freight-training'.
there is lots written above about this.
March 15, 2010 - 9:08pm
#161
We played like that last year and it was great but after we went to the mid-west where the rule was coast to coast was fine just tap it in, ball jointing became a thing with some players in our club. Large tournaments make the rules even for our out of the way club. We want to play and compete so I guess we play by the rules we expect to see.
March 15, 2010 - 7:58pm
#162
okay, how about a shot off the wall and into goal, ricochet stylie- Kim got very close the other day ...
March 12, 2010 - 10:02pm
#166
i really like your points. jackel is bitching so, maybe he has a problem with that.
March 13, 2010 - 12:50am
#167
i know you'd love to dumb the game down ben, maybe you can slip it into the rules for the north american's without anyone noticing and walk away with the thing.
just about every team sport on earth has rules that are far more complicated than bike polo-- the rulebook for a simple game like ultimate frisbee is seventeen pages long. soccer also has a relatively complex set of rules for goals to count, i don't know why we would think bike polo couldn't survive with a few rules of it's own.
personally, i think that polo would be too easy and boring with shuffled goals and ball-joint shots-- games are already pretty short as it is. do we want to play a game that showcases skill or do we want a goal-fest? take your pick.
March 13, 2010 - 1:22am
#168
i know you'd love to dumb the game down ben, maybe you can slip it into the rules for the north american's without anyone noticing and walk away with the thing.
just about every team sport on earth has rules that are far more complicated than bike polo-- the rulebook for a simple game like ultimate frisbee is seventeen pages long. soccer also has a relatively complex set of rules for goals to count, i don't know why we would think bike polo couldn't survive with a few rules of it's own.
personally, i think that polo would be too easy and boring with shuffled goals and ball-joint shots-- games are already pretty short as it is. do we want to play a game that showcases skill or do we want a goal-fest? take your pick.
i said before i don't like to many rules, but there needs to be rules. when i first started here, the games were ball through cones= point. shuffles, bjs, shots, off the wheel, kicked in. for the people new to it, it was fun. i always played to a higher standard to myself, but if i had a cheap shuffle goal i took it, i won't lie. but as everyone progressed as a player, the games would just go on and on and became boring. so playing by more strict rules became more fun. we still do shit i know would be frowned upon (mallet throwing to block break away shots being a huge one) but we have fun. as a club, thats how we play, but as a sport, to actually become our own, we do need a set of rules beyond "don't be a dick". but i don't know if i think this is one of those places per say.
but what do i know, i'm just a nerd from a shitty little town.
March 15, 2010 - 2:27pm
#169
I hear what you're saying. I would love to see redirects become part of polo, but that would be almost impossible off the tip, so it would require allowing shuffles.
On the other hand, I remember back in the day when we played with shuffles, and the game would never have reached what it is today without disallowing them.
March 15, 2010 - 3:01pm
#170
I've had two "goals" "scored" with off-the-tip redirects. Both times they have been called shuffles and disallowed because, I guess, it's tough to judge and without seeing it look like a "shot" with a shot-like motion it looks like a shuffle.
It doesn't require shuffles it just requires a bit of skill, luck, good eye and judgment.
March 16, 2010 - 6:11pm
#171
the accepted notion in east van-- as in a lot of other places-- is that the shooter calls the shot. or the shuffle. the shooter decides whether it was good or not. i trust you bottles. i may not want to, but i do.
March 12, 2010 - 10:51pm
#172
Lately I feel that the more touches you can get on the ball to dribble it through various situations the better, light subtle taps and a great use of finesse seem to work more effectively over all. This is given to the fact that every time I try to use a ball joint to go from point a to goal there is always someone on my ass and on my mallet, ball jointing only works when no one is able to reach you. You might as well be playing by yourself if you want to ball joint unaffected in Portland. The only time it proves useful is a short movement round the back pass up court or cross court. If you try to run the line someone is just gonna steal it form you. Yet if you are able to dribble, oft times you can juke one or two players easily and leave yourself open for a shot or pass to an open player. That is what aids in effective play IMO.
March 13, 2010 - 4:13pm
#173
x2 on all that Tim.
March 15, 2010 - 9:27am
#174
This is given to the fact that every time I try to use a ball joint to go from point a to goal there is always someone on my ass and on my mallet,...
Truth. There's always someone there to break up your good game.
March 14, 2010 - 10:53pm
#175
we have had some discussion of the bj'n in Sea, and Some like to "lob" it up court for a pass. Some like it just to get it off the wall. a few are looking for the fancy trickery they can do with it. others feel that as long as the ball is hit with the end of the mallet, then its a goal. I personally don't like the drag and can't really do it. I do like the drag from your side of court only if it became a rule, but would not miss it at all. Like in grass polo some guys can juggle the ball on there mallet while riding, then pass it or shoot. talent and finesse that it is. so it shall be seen.
March 16, 2010 - 11:37am
#176
Hey Messman I hear some rumor of an All-star originators of polo team in the works for the Oregon Champs. I am waiting for you.
March 16, 2010 - 4:04pm
#177
I'm hearing some variations on the BJ rule:
- No bj past [half court] (vs. bj full court, or bj OK in front of opponent's goal)
- No shot from bj, must pass before shooting (vs. release and shoot OK)
I'll say that no bj past half court, no shot from bj works for me. I'm sure it will annoy people who like to bj all the way down the court and shoot, of which there are many.
SF is currently allowing full court, release and shoot. That could change any day. Anyone care to reply what their club allows so we have it in one place?
March 17, 2010 - 1:25am
#178
We currently play no balljoint scoring. You can release and shoot but you can't just toss it in.
March 16, 2010 - 5:14pm
#180
well, the rumble strip did make it harder to maintain a hold on that joint
yush yush yush
March 16, 2010 - 5:23pm
#181
the major rules enacted have been the "no shooting with it" and the "must pass before shooting" provisions. they appear to effectively stop the bj from taking over the offensive portions of the game, though it is difficult to really tell if this is why. these rules may not be in use everywhere but were, to the best of my recollection, enforced at all of the tournaments i went to last year, some twelve or so larger events.
the half-court bj carry rule has never been in effect at any tournament i've been to.
this is not to say that the ball joint isn't still in use or has fallen out of favour, it still remains a force in the game. i would certainly say that more skilled players are using the balljoint more effectively than ever before. too bad it looks so goofy and lame, but there's just no accounting for taste these days.
often the courts themselves play a role in the use of the bj. rougher courts, like those in use at SESPI, make the balljoint more difficult and less effective. very smooth courts, like those in boston, seattle, philly, and portland, are much more conducive. smaller courts make balljointing harder and less useful, larger courts the opposite.
it seems like we've floated into an area of "more balljoint rules if necessary... but not necessarily more balljoint rules."
March 16, 2010 - 6:02pm
#183
well i'm not sure what you said but i'm going to disagree with it anyway. isn't that how these consensus forums work?
June 14, 2010 - 9:51pm
#185
Here in Melbourne, ball jointing is still not the norm. (unless things have changed in the last 3 weeks...I've been sick) We have a couple of players who like using it and as far as I can tell they're playing the "release then shoot" variation on the rules. We have a few wicked-skilled players here who control the ball so well they're very hard to defend against without ever using the BJ. The evolution of the game is one thing, The evolution of the equipment is another. Perhaps it's just the difficulty in getting larger pipe for mallet heads here in OZ but when I first saw then started playing the game a mallet had no chance of trapping the ball in any way. Retaining possession of the ball offensively of defensively required particular skill and careful mallet guidance. People are gonna joint and it's here to stay but as a player and spectator i'll always prefer the use of the mallet as a mallet rather than the mallet as a cup on a stick.
June 14, 2010 - 11:10pm
#186
Was anyone else surprised that ball jointing to shot was allowed at the Midwests this year? I don't think it makes too much difference in actual play, but I just thought they'd go with ball joint to pass.
June 15, 2010 - 11:54am
#187
Was there a rule against bj-release-shoot? Or, was there a rule not enforced?
June 15, 2010 - 12:09pm
#188
Not really. It doesn't make that big of a difference, plus "release to shoot" makes a lot of sense to me. A shuffle is not a shot, and no one would argue that you must "pass to shoot" after shuffling. Likewise, why should i have to make a pass after balljointing? A bj doesn't offer that much of an advantage, it's just another way of moving the ball around the court.
I like simple rules that are clear to everyone. A shuffle is not a shot. A scoop is not a shot. A ball-joint is not a shot. Why are we complicating things with "pass to shoot"?
/opinion
June 15, 2010 - 3:23pm
#189
Yeah, I've seen people get peeved when told they can't use their favorite bj-down-the-court-and-shoot move.
I agree it doesn't make that big of a difference. Even when really skilled people do it it's not like they've got some magic. I read way above where Jonny said he noticed it's one of the first skills newbies try to master. Yes, I've seen that too and it's sad.
I am in favor of some bj restriction. It's boring to watch someone drag the ball around behind their bike while they circle the offensive zone looking for gawd knows what. The only way to stop their wanking is to literally block them from riding any further since they have a lock on the ball. Defensively it means you have to play physical with an aggressive block, or do a reach-around bj breaker.
The main nice thing about the bj-release-shoot prohibition is that it forces new and intermediate players to learn a pass before they come to rely too much on the bj.
June 29, 2010 - 1:19am
#193
BJ pass rules become a standard in europe. no difference between offensive zone or defensive. I can bj where you want, but you need a pass.
A think that's a great rule, cause the easyness of Bjing is well balanced with the fact that when it's done, every player know that a pass gonna comming soon. It make the opponent play more predictable.
July 28, 2010 - 8:25pm
#194
we've played with this rule in east van (and maybe cascadia) for a long time. it's a good rule and really works to limit the offensive potential so the ball carriers still need to have handling and shooting skills.
the bj is so yesterday though, i'm surprised people are still talking about it.
i'm willing to bet that there won't be a single bj worth talking about in the final game of the world's.
July 29, 2010 - 3:46am
#195
i'm willing to bet that there won't be a single bj worth talking about in the final game of the world's.
If all games were played like the last game of the worlds there wouldn't be a need for a lot of rules that we're discussing currently.
July 29, 2010 - 4:47am
#196
there isn't any need for all of those rules, people are making the sport far more complicated than it has to be. implications of things like ball-joint and release goals or scoop goals or games to time instead of five aren't being properly understood right now. i hope people can figure out how not to kill this sport.
watching the ten minute preface on the ruleset before the north american championship final with both teams that had each won previous championships before was pretty indicative. how was it that these players needed to be told what the rules of bike polo were? had they not been playing long enough to know? some of those players were among the oldest players in the sport and even they didn't understand the rule set or the reffing. something is wrong here.
i'm always amazed at the desire to change the game seemingly for the sake of change.
July 28, 2010 - 7:43pm
#197
Rory has the right idea, no bj-ing past the half court. Plain and simple. Way to go rory and east van folks classy polo club.We are using this rule now at our home court.
July 29, 2010 - 1:52am
#198
What's the clear definition of BJ?
We had a argue last day in Geneva about a move like a lil' control when player is moving, like a ball joint on 80 cm or 1 m long. I was thinking that the guy need a pass, but he shoots, arguing that it was only a control move, not a BJ....
July 29, 2010 - 5:34am
#199
I've been wondering about that ambiguity lately. To me, a ball joint implies fully engaging the ball in the mallet end and dragging it. A lot of people in our club, including myself, will do moves in which the ball is somewhat engaged in the end of the mallet, but the mallet and ball are out in front of the bike and the mallet head is sideways. It's almost like a partial scoop or something...I don't know how to explain it. We don't call short moves like that a ball joint. If the ball and mallet are to your side and/or behind you and you're clearly dragging the ball about, that to me is a balljoint, nothing else.
July 29, 2010 - 7:24am
#200
how is pushing a ball-joint different than pulling one?
July 30, 2010 - 4:53pm
#201
It just seems inevitable that doing a side to side dribbling motion with an open ended mallet head will lead to the ball being "engaged" into the end a tiny bit here and there. I mean if you're going to call shit like that a balljoint, then we have to all start playing with double capped mallets to enforce the ban of it.
A simple example of what I mean : When you sling the ball under the bb and up to avoid a defender on your strong side. You are engaging the ball in the end of the mallet for a split second. That is totally different than dragging it across the damn court. Now you can compound a bunch of these little moves in a series to get around defenders. You're not consciously trying to entrap the ball and gain an advantage, it's just ball handling in the thick of play.
July 29, 2010 - 1:33pm
#203
No. At the espis this was discussed as not a BJ, even if it's on your offensive half. Not saying espi is a model for a rule set or anything, but majority of people will say no to that if they have any common sense.
July 30, 2010 - 4:56pm
#204
Right, this is the kind of thing I'm talking about. Just the act of engaging the ball into the end of the mallet head alone should not be conidered a BJ. Because, as pointed out above, there are situations where there is a clear difference, even if on paper it looks like it might be a BJ.
July 30, 2010 - 5:39pm
#205
I've been wondering this myself lately, and am very glad to hear this. I was one of the most vocal anti-dragging guys out there, but I love the use of it for 1-sec flips and passes.
Total agreement with Tim's last two posts.
July 31, 2010 - 5:59am
#206
x2.
For me ball joint is clearly pushing the ball from top to ground with any open side of the mallet to make the ball trapp, then travelling with it. The only matter for me is in the grey zone between a long control when the player is moving and a short travel in BJ mood. We were arguing in geneva about finding a way to rule this, like in Baskeball for example. You can move during Half a bike long, a bike long, 1, 2 or 3 seconds etc...
It's complicated to know exactly if this sport deserve such precises and technical rules.
For me the simple way is common sense in pick up (like seeing an opponent make a BJ, scream it "NEED a PASS" or "BJ"!). For tourney, the most simple is a ref who scream loud when he see a player who make controle a lil bit too long, who are looking like small BJ. Then he need to scream to the player " X warning for BJ".
In europe we play with the BJ then pass rule, and during the EHBPC 2010, when i was reffing game with people with side cut mallet, the difference between a Side BJ and a simple control was pretty clear for me (see if the player push the ball to the ground or just touch it), When i was seeing ball join, i screamed BALL JOIN, NEED a PASS, and i never saw a player don't make the pass after a clear wistle-scream.
Just another question about the US rule of BJ, when a player make it in the opponent half court, how the ref rule this? stopping the game? how and where does he give the ball back to opponents etc...?
November 7, 2010 - 4:06pm
#207
Last weekend we had some confusion about the ball drag rule. Ben Ruckus told people on Saturday that ball drag in offensive zone meant TURNOVER. We subsequently had some on-court shouting about it. I was pretty adamant that drag = PASS. In the mallet hole thread someone cited NA'10 rules that clearly say TURNOVER.
Turnover seems harsh and unnecessarily disruptive. Some people make good passes from a ball/side joint. Some (all?) scoops start out as drags. Playing head-on defense against a ball-dragger is challenging, sometimes you can poke it free and sometimes they'll whip it past you. I like playing against these moves. As long as drag = pass, all is well in my book. Based on what Uolmo says above, that's common in Europe. It was my recollection from Euros. At least I never saw drag = turnover enforced.
Did drag = turnover in Madison? Was it enforced? Is anyone playing that rule in weekly games?
I thought everything went fine after shouting a clarification last Sunday. I apologize if the confusion was a hassle for anyone.
Who's new
- polophil - Hamburg
- axlissel - lima, Peru, Miami FL
- Deguerrilla - Landover MD
- AndrewMBP - Miami
- thecatman - fresno, ca
- kona29ermtb - eugene or
- Jamie Edwards - Sydney
- malletheadz - Florida
- KCJ - Jacksonville FL
- orange26kitty - Pomona
Recently added polo bikes
Great discussion on this question here http://www.hardcourtbikepolo.com/?p=190
More/less dissolved to "It’s OK for passing but not for shooting. (in a nut shell)"
It's been called the bj (ball joint) here on the forums.
legitbikepolo.com
Boston/MPLS/Elsewhere
currently running Photo Blog www.gustavHoiland.com
formerly of http://legitbikepolo.com