14B.9.5 Penalty box: Termination
Comments about this discussion:
Started
In the previous rulebook (https://iuf-rulebook-2022.committees.unicycling-software.com/discussions/45) and at EUHC2023, we had the discussion about terminating the penalty box. The suggestion is that 2-minute penalties should end immediately if the opposing team scores a goal. The motivation behind this change is to increase the game’s pace and allow for stricter enforcement of fouls.
Here's a very brief summary from the previous discussions:
Several participants argued that 2-minute penalties are rare and significant in unicycle hockey, unlike in ice hockey, where such penalties are more common for minor fouls. Some expressed concern that allowing players to return early after a goal could diminish the seriousness of penalties and encourage more fouls. Others suggested that more frequent 2-minute penalties could be beneficial, allowing for a clearer distinction between minor and major fouls.
It was agreed that this rule would only apply to 2-minute penalties and not 5-minute penalties, which should still be served in full (similar to ice hockey).
Additionally, I will start a separate discussion about making the rules stricter, focusing on enhancing penalty enforcement in general. Although these discussions are related, I would like to keep them apart.
Comment
I agree and think this would be a good change and also improve referee's ability to call infringements without the fear of "drastically altering the result"
Comment
I go with "2-minute penalties are rare and significant in unicycle hockey, unlike in ice hockey, where such penalties are more common for minor fouls. Some expressed concern that allowing players to return early after a goal could diminish the seriousness of penalties and encourage more fouls."
There needs more training of the referees. They should more dare in using 2-minute penalties.
Comment
Lets say the there's a attacking player who would score a goal now and i just push him off the unicycle. 2 mins because intentional but not dangerous. Good for my team because, the goal didn't happen. But then 30 secs later they still score a goal (because we are only 4 now it's of course easier for them) and i get back in. So my intentional foul would only lead to a 30 sec penalty.
I don't think that thats a good thing. If i get a 2 min, it is well deserved.
Also i wanna shine a light on mismatched games. It's often the case, that there's one better player among beginners. The better player now get's a 2 min. The whole team crumbles, maybe 10 seconds later it will concede a goal. Then the better player can go back in and was basically not penalized at all.
In the two examples you could argue, that still the team was penalized, as it conceded a goal while the 2 min was active. But i don't think that that is what a 2 min is existing for in the first place. A 2 min is there to penalize a player for very bad behavior, it's not there to penalize a team for anything. In my examples the player doesn't get penalized much.
When the rules get stricter on the other hand, i would see that it might have merit, as maybe even 2 or more players would get sent off and because a 2min penalty then maybe shall not be worth more than a goal, but as stated in the other discussion, i am not a fan of that.
Comment
Referees do not send people off because it is is hard to make a decision that could change the game so drastically. So play (at high levels) gets more and more dangerous, until too many things have been allowed and nothing is called.
Two minute penalties makes it easier to penalise players for fouls, as they should be, which keeps the game in check.
Being sent off and having the opposition score against your team is a large penalty in a close game, so I don't think it is an issue that players would be allowed to come back in after a goal is scored, Your team is still one goal down, which is hard to get back, and if you keep fouling the opposition it will happen again.
Currently, close to zero 2 min penalties are given. Players getting zero penalties seems worse to me than someone only getting 30/60/90 seconds. If 30/60/90 second penalties mean that penalties are actually given when deserved then I think that is a positive change.
Comment
You're talking about mismatched games. However, with the current rule, that better player would have a penalty over the full 2min and the other team could score 3-4 goals which would probably decide the goal. Would you as a referee dare to give that 2min penalty if the foul was in the grey zone of the current rules? Based on my experience in the Swiss League, only very few referees would give the 2min in such a situation (and only a few more would give the 2min even if the foul is clearly dangerous).
If you feel that a player should be penalized more, this player should be sent off for the remainder of the game (or get a 5min). In the end, the entire team is also somewhat responsible that all players behave. It's in the end a team sport.
As I wrote in the other discussion, I think both changes should be implemented and they make most sense together and I see that there may be an imbalance if we only implement one of the changes.
Comment
I agree that together the changes are most useful
Comment
I agree with you that rules should be enforced stricter which can lead to more 2min penalties.
But I oppose to an early penalty box termination when the opposing team scores a goal.
Like in the last times discussion i think a penalty time should be more valuable than just one shot goal. We often have 10 or more goals per game! Sometimes the penalises player also needs to cool down and reflect on ita behaviour (hopefully 2 mins are enough then).
Ciao Ole
Comment
I think i is a good change. But the 2min only should end if the not panalized team scores a goal and i tink it makes only sence in combination with stricter penalties.
@Ole if the cool down of the player is too short the same foul will be happen a few moments later and then its a 5min penalty and then he had enough time to coom down.