Jump to Navigation
LOBP is now in archive mode... read more at leagueofbikepolo.com/goodbye.

Double Goalie/Addition of a Crease

As I said in the sticky thread, if I got an email requesting a discussion about a particular rule I would make a thread and link it to the sticky. Someone emailed me about the double goalie/crease issue and so here is the thread for it.

It's a big discussion! But if anyone wants to have it, here is the place!

we used it for the german championships last weekend and it was really hard to ref. The rule we used was from the LO2012. It was really hard to determine when a player was stationary for over 2 sec because everything happens too fast and there are too many things to look for as a main ref in a situation in front of the goal.
Besides this i think a crease rule should ban any stationary (offensive or defensive) players except for the goalie from the crease.

Yeah, I don't really like the crease implementation at LO2013, and GHBPC13

It's hard to ref, and I think to a large extent it's not needed. There are tactics for getting rid of double defenders. It's not pretty, but they are there.

I kind of like the idea of a crease. I'm not fond of turtle goalies, and the practise of ramming the clustered defenders seems reasonable but just as ugly as the defence it's trying to overcome. Basketball must have dedicated refs to apply countdowns to players in the key? Would it be easier to ref if only a single player were allowed to be stationary (any other player must be in continual forward motion) at all within it? Or perhaps no other player whatsoever, moving or not, were allowed within it? And rather than "any part" of any player (not acting as "goalie") being excluded from the crease perhaps any tire contact patch being the specific points of exclusion.

No crease. If teams want to double goalie, let them.

Combination of choice: Smash + Bang

Can you remove an extra defender with standard body to body contact legally? It would cause a bit of a pile up, but it can be done, right?

Of course but is this the kind of game we want to create? Part of the point to make rules I think is to guide the game in the direction we want it to go so while there is a reasonable counter to this style of play, it might create a game we don't want to see.

What is polo if it's just turtle D, physical contact resulting in pile ups, and then a tap in with the occasional fast break thrown in? Lame, man.

I'm not in favor of trying to institute a rule like this in 2014 but it's something to think about. Where do we want the game to go? You'll also get arguments that if it stops working because everyone knows you just need to go in and break it up, then people will stop doing it and it will be a natural evolution. This is a decent argument. But look at the teams that have dominated Europe the past couple years and look why they have done so. Skill, no doubt. But also, strategy, and a very particular one.

That's why I was asking. I think two goalies in the crease is pretty lame, it's totally different when a guy is rolling through and a shot comes and he blocks / deflects it, but a second goalie just sitting there is asking to be removed by contact, at least in the Midwest region.

I just don't see Turtle game being the future of bike polo. It's not invincible (even without a bulldozer teammate clearing them out with shoulder checks). Such a strategy has it's own trade offs, and I'm willing to let the the move be it's own tactical penalty.

Combination of choice: Smash + Bang

so why hasn't stacking led to this tactical penalty yet? it doesn't seem to have influenced the outcome of the euro championships or the world championships a year ago?

ramming and dislodging stackers isn't just incredibly lame to watch its an incredibly boring game to play. you want there to be one play in polo...send a bludgeoner forward to topple stackers and then shoot as hard as you can at the pileup and hope that the ball doesn't bounce toward a tap out for a breakaway?

I'm inclined to believe that the success of this tactic last year was anomalous. In the 2013 circuit in both NA and Yurp, have we been seeing *this* as a distinct style of play? I've watched a good number of matches, and I've not seen it.

The tactical penalty for assuming an overly defensive posture is that the offense dictates the terms of the match, and you are in a reactionary position. This sort of behavior is not unique to polo, and in other sports, when it happens, it's usually to the peril of the team on defense.

If we see an actual trend develop, the idea of a crease might be justified. I'm just skeptical that any such actual trend has been observed that warrants rule creation.

Combination of choice: Smash + Bang

I'm pretty sure they're talking about this:


Legalize Hand Throws - 2014

YUP! almost exclusively shit play and crap goals...IMHO. they're better players than that but why risk it when stacking is so effective.

jason f-off wrote:

almost exclusively shit play


Yes, there's double goalie, especially by CMD, but Edisons find some great ways of breaking it up. And after three days of exhaustion, sure there's going be some clusterfucks aroudn the net. But there's a lot of great polo here. It's been so long since i've seen so many knee jerk continental biases as this video has surfaced.

you injected continental bias...I watched two games and both consisted of MOSTLY shit play and crap goals so I said that they (those two games) consisted of MOSTLY shit play and crap goals. I don't care what continent crappy polo is played on its crappy polo. I don't subscribe to polo-tural relativism. there were brief moments of decent ball handling and bike handling but it gets ground out of your consciousness by the moronic shitstack of idiotic hopping (and this is coming from a gratuitous hopper!). I also think screening, ramming, can-opening and toppling in the crease is weak sauce as well...I guess we just have different ideas of what good polo looks like.

My read on that is different. That CMD used double goalie, and it didn't work and meant more ball possession for Edisons.

Admittedly at more than one instance Edisons did use it as well.

Combination of choice: Smash + Bang

double goalie righty righty vs double goalie lefty righty...Edison's just got luckier with their ricochets. watch the final rematch...at one point Edison's have the ball and then shoot and then instead of chasing the loose ball or pressuring the offense up court they literally all sprint back to their half to stack and arrange their set defense. it was liking watching polo die a little. people copy what they see working...think about the for the future of polo.

the future of this rule right now should be based on who wins worlds, and if a rule like this would have arguably stopped them from doing that, then we can talk about how to implement it. otherwise, no crease.



I think what I was saying is... I think there are plenty of teams who can score at will despite double goalies, so a crease is pointless. sorry i'm illiterate at bike polo.

since when are there legit goalies in polo? are we going to create a specific goalie position then? and give them specific rules like other sports? if not why create a goalie title and add specifications to the spot. i think that they already have too much special rules.

we are already half way there, there are rules about who on the offensive team can touch the goal tender dealing with the possession of the ball.

Keep your standards low, and morale high.

There is not. I took this out on purpose for the 2012 ruleset because it gave a goalie permissions without defining who he/she was on the court. Currently there are no contact rules with a goalie that are different from with any other player and that's how it will stay unless we define a crease.

It's either/or.

I really hate the double goalie style, and constantly moan about it on lfgss. In Birmingham, we often try out different rules to prevent people from relying on it, and we have used crease rules at tournaments in the UK. In my opinion, it works.

The 'it's too hard to ref' argument is totally spurious - there are so many other rules that are too hard to ref that we just accept as flawed, but the best we can do right now. I don't want to unnecessarily complicate things, but you can't dismiss a new rule because it's hard to ref. Also, I don't think it is that hard, especially if you make it so that only one defensive player (the goalie in that moment) can stop in the D. And polo being amateur and played amongst friends, most people abide by the rules because they don't want to be seen as a dick, not because they fear being spotted by the ref. That's probably way more true at throw-ins than tournaments and especially the later stages of tournaments, but still....

I'm not wedded to a crease rule, but really think something needs to be done to discourage double-goalying and the 'fuck the goalies' response that it encourages. If we want to grow polo and attract new players then it needs to look nice from the outside, and (drama and glorious Mo shots aside) those CMD/Edisons games are just horrible.

Polo is still young. There's plenty of time to make significant changes like this, and logistically it isn't that hard to at least try out.


There is a fair bit of shit talking about the Euro Championship finals in this thread. I think these remarks are mostly emotionally based. I was there. To call these games "horrible", or "shit" is not at all accurate. These were intense games with good polo being played. The double stack may set off some temper tantrum reactions in certain individuals, but to under estimate the skill of these teams is an error. I don't like the double goalie strategy as many of you do not, however let's be fair and recognize the talent of these athletes. I like Brazilian soccer, but I don't get mad at the British for the ole 'dump and chase'.

The game evolves in all the free space where the rules don't apply. If you want a certain style of play, create rules that tailor that game; but above all don't hate the player, hate the game.

Double or triple stacking goalies is not poor play, it's just boring play.

Okay catfish, I'm going to move my mouth like this...


The only reason anyone does anything.
For the lulz.

Remember when everyone started using facebook instead of LOBP? And all the old lessons we learned here were forgotten? Now double goalie history is repeating itself. Great work everyone.

You mean you didn't see the sticky thread? Bro?

As they say: what has been, will be again... except this time we're canceling tournaments because people don't give a fuck. Badabing!

It happened in three games at most. I wouldn't burn it all down just yet.

Can you specify what you are talking about for people who weren't there?

There was about 6 total minutes of people stacking outside of the crease. Nothing illegal.

Nothing illegal, for sure. As you can read above (from the pre-crease days) the double goalie tactic was looked down upon as boring and therefore detrimental to the sport. It was happening to the extent that a rule was made to discourage it. Still folks continue to employ the tactic, albeit farther away from the goal.

Just because it's not against the rules doesn't make it ok. Same as cheating on your partner, NOT illegal but you really shouldn't do it.

So basically your point is whether the crease should be bigger. Because that will be the way to resolve it. I personally think the crease is big enough and clustering has mostly stopped. Especially in Europe when comparing the past few EHBPC's

Short version: Team B is on defense against a very pass and big shot centric team. Team A has a goalie in and two people out side of the crease on each side so the goal is covered. Team B moves ball around and eventually pulls defenders out as they are down in the game. Team A wins eventually.

It was a failed tactic. There is no such thing as a zone defense foul, not sure what else can be done about this.

raddison wrote:

Just because it's not against the rules doesn't make it ok. Same as cheating on your partner, NOT illegal but you really shouldn't do it.

What about cheating with your partner? Get it?

Changing the angles of the crease and making it a bit larger will help.

Raise your hand if you've ever been in a double stack. Also, what Hams said ^^^.