Saturday, April 20, 2024

Tomahawk Rule

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • Author
  • #12188
    Robert Kroeze

    Regards the Tomahawk / low reverse /Argentian backhand, I think it would be good to provide the umpires with a Rule, that on safety grounds a player who is deemed incapable of playing the backhand in a controlled fashion could be punished with a free hit against, if the player persists, a green card, and so on.

    In a Badger game one of the youngsters played badly executed and technically flawed, yet hard and high, Tomahawk shots wherever on the pitch. After 3 efforts I blew up against the player and after effort number 4 I expressly told the player that it would be a green card next. The player grumbled strongly, but after the game his coach thanked me relievedly and owned up that the player wouldn’t listen at training on how to do it properly. Such a Rule in the Rule book would help the position of the umpire and safety on the pitch tremendously.

    Chris Butler

    You can already blow for danger and/or back stick if appropriate.
    Repeated offences of any type can already be penalised with personal penalties in the rules, so I’m not sure what a new rule would achieve that proper use of the current rules can’t.


    Agreed that the rules for danger should accommodate what Robert correctly did in the game he umpired. What is needed is widespread advocacy on applying the rules by umpires and education of coaches before the start of each hockey season so that the Tomahawk / Low Reverse Side Hit technique that is dangerous to both opponents and teammates is dramatically reduced and eliminated at all levels of hockey. For example, when indoor hockey changed and firmly applied the rule that stops the ball being blasted through an opponent who is within 3m with a flat stick, that element of danger was eliminated in indoor hockey.

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.