14D.3.2 Goals
Comments about this discussion:
Started
At the past unicons we had multiple times the problem, that it was difficult to have correct and good goals. The height (120cm) and width (180cm) of the goals matches the dimensions of the goals used in ice hockey. The goals used for floor ball are a bit smaller (160cmx115cm). These goals would probably be easier to organize and also of good quality.
I don't want change the rules to the smaller floor ball goals but maybe it's a good idea to make the possibility that floor ball goals can be used. This should only be possible in the case no (good) goals with the larger dimensions can be organized.
Comment
The problem is how do we word it in a rulebook to say "ice hockey sized goals should be used but if you cant find them you can use floorball goals"
How do we stop every competition organiser saying "ice hockey sized goals were too hard to get because i) I had to buy them online ii) they were $45 more than the floorball goals iii) they wouldnt fit in my car.
Ideally we don't want crap goals but are we also going to allow the organisers to take the easy way out and not try?
Specifically for unicon (where there is a decent budget) you can always buy a pair of fold up hockey goals from amazon and have them shipped to the venue for $500 so ice hockey goals should always be an extremely viable option for unicon/european champs.
Comment
I think the main question here would be why we would want one size of goals and not the other. There are a ton of smaller competitions and clubs where the goals used are the cheapest. There are often also floorball goals available in gyms already.
Personally I think it could be specified that either can be used and the organizers should simply announce if the big or the small goals are used. Organizers already need to decide how big the court should be, which barriers to make, if a centerline needs to be made with tape, etc. For example the court in Korea used freestanding low barriers that moved a fair bit, whereas in Germany typically a wall is used on one side and in Denmark we use the indoor soccer barriers. This is all just part of the game.
For me explicitly allowing softball goals seem to just be a way of moving with the times. There's still the option to use ice hockey goals if that's wanted/is what there is, but this change recognizes how the game is actually played. In the past the rules have been amended to specifically allow floorball sticks, since there were teams who chose to play with those.
Comment
I have had a look to my old photos, in New Zealand (2010), Italy (2012), Canada (2014), Spain (2016) the provided goals were okay or perfect, only in South Korea there were small soccer goals in wrong dimensions with fly nets provided. Therefore "Goals" were only once a problem within the last 5 UNICONS. I have asked Rolf, he mentioned that there was a similar discussion in 2005 and the goal dimensions were kept. Besides I had a look into online shops for goals, cheap ice hockey goals costs similar as middle pricing little smaller uni hockey or floor ball goals. It is a question how many effort the host is doing. And ice hockey goals have as real dimensions 6 x 4 feet or 183 cm x 122 cm!!!
A short question, did someone complain to the results or the championship due to provided wrong goals in South Korea? Was this only a fun tournament without a world champion 2018 in unicycle hockey?
I had a good look at Magnus second section above and compared this with 14A.1 Preface "...These rules cannot cover every situation. Teams have to agree on a specific amount of elbowroom before playing. The different backgrounds of the players and the conditions of the location have to be considered...."
Maybe there is only a need to change one/two words to be more flexible with the dimensions of our goals:
old:
14D.3.2 Goals "... The inside dimensions of goal openings are 1.20 m high and 1.80 m wide. ..."
new:
14D.3.2 Goals "... The inside dimensions of goal openings ought to 1.20 m high and 1.80 m wide. ..."
Goals with similar dimensions to 180 x 120 cm are for my point of view okay, more important should be the following sentences "... The goals must be made in such a way that the ball cannot enter through the rear or sides. The goals must not have sharp, pointed or protruding parts."
Comment
14D.3.2 Goals "... The inside dimensions of goal openings should be 1.20 m high and 1.80 m wide. ..."
14D.3.2 Goals "... The inside dimensions of goal openings ought to be 1.20 m high and 1.80 m wide. ..."
Either of these work. No on complained about Korea not being an official result, both teams used the same goals after all and the rules state that there is an amount of elbow room.
We did complain at the lack of effort made by organisers to get the correct size (which can easily be done on amazon)
Comment
The effort made by organisers, normally the host, to get the correct size is and it will be a matter of money. Our volunteer, called hockey director arrives probably 1-2 days before start of UNICON, then he has only a little chance to change the order by the host. If known this would be a matter of protest.
The players arrive, what is the amount of elbow room we have to suffer? E.g. 183cm x 122cm or 160cmx115cm or?
Is the wrong dimensions within the elbow room or do need a little change of wording from "are" to "should be" in 14D.3.2?
I have no problems with each of both versions.
Comment
I think the question that should be asked is if it's more a problem if the goals are smaller or bigger. Saying 'should' doesn't really indicate what should be done in the case where the goals in the correct size can't be found. I think a lot of places may play with floorball goals which are tiny bit smaller, so it makes sense to allow those too. Since the organizers may not be hockey players themselves it makes sense to make it extra clear for them which goals to get.
I think it's better to be very specific that ice hockey goals should be used (1.8x1.2), but that floorball goals are allowed as substitutes (1.6x1.15) and that in all cases the dimensions should be between the two sizes.
It could be phrased as:
"The inside dimensions of goal openings may be:
Height: 1.15m to 1.20m
Width: 1.60m to 1.80m
The smallest goal size corresponds to a floorball goal and the largest goal size correspond to an ice hockey goal. The goal ought to be 1.20m x 1.80m (corresponding to an ice hockey goal)."
I think we all know which goals should be used, but the rules are also used in clubs around the world to figure out how to play hockey along with watching videos of hockey online. Being extra specific helps ensure everyone get the right equipment.
Comment
.. ice hockey goals have as real dimensions 6 x 4 feet or 183 cm x 122 cm!!!
Comment
But they're the goals that we've played with? So a tiny bit too big?
Given that no one will make goals specifically for whatever size we choose, isn't it easier to say we use the other ones? Again, there may be organizers or clubs who read the rules to figure out which goals to get – being extra specific seems to be an advantage.
Comment
Yes, ice hockey goals are a tiny too big. And who cares?
As a kind of mass production you can buy soccer goals with bit meshes in the net (see UNICON19). As first choice I like to have goals with robust frames and strong nets with small meshes. Ice hockey goals would cover this and they are only a tiny too big. For organizers and host should this as well first choice. Due to problems with transport, store, money or ... organizers and host will look for a second choice. By reading the rulebook they will find "... the conditions of the location have to be considered." and "Teams have to agree on a specific amount of elbowroom before playing." Organizers and host generally speaking will find the easier solution and buy floor ball goals.
Nicolai: "I don't want change the rules to the smaller floor ball goals but maybe it's a good idea to make the possibility that floor ball goals can be used. This should only be possible in the case no (good) goals with the larger dimensions can be organized."
I would not point on this possibility, the second choice.
Comment
I'm unsure we should allow for two possibilities of sizes, but rather have a guideline as proposed. I think the wording Steve provided is currently best for this:
14D.3.2 Goals "... The inside dimensions of goal openings should be 1.20 m high and 1.80 m wide. ..."
In my opinion, we should avoid the shortcut option to use floor ball goals, but of course this is better than having no goals at all.
Comment
old:
14D.3.2 Goals "... The inside dimensions of goal openings are 1.20 m high and 1.80 m wide. ..."
new:
14D.3.2 Goals "... The inside dimensions of goal openings should be 1.20 m high and 1.80 m wide. ..."
@Nicolai, would this wording give you enough flexibility?
Comment
by saying "should be" you automatically give flexibility saying ideally this is the correct size. But previously our rulebook states that these rules cannot always be 100% adhered to.
14A.1 Preface
Teams have to agree on a specific amount of elbowroom before playing.The different backgrounds of the players and the conditions of the location have to be considered
This means that if the competing teams agree to use floorball goals they can, if they agree to use soccer goals because there is nothing else given then they can.
I believe as long as both teams have the same sized goals and they are agreed upon by the teams competing then within our rulebook wording a championship can take place.
Comment
One thing to take into account is the rule that the goalie can raise their stick to the top of the crossbar, so maybe it makes sense pointing out here that that's something that should be considered if the choice is using a bigger or a smaller goal.
If the consensus is not to change something here I'm not going to fight that consensus, but I do think it's a shame if the gist of this discussion won't make it into rulebook. While it's true it's equal for both teams if different goals are used, it's equally true that one team may have never player with a goal of that size giving them a disadvantage. If we believe it doesn't make a difference if you use floorball goals or ice hockey goals, why not allow both? If we believe it does make a difference, let's spell that difference out.
Regardless of the outcome here we're going to explicitly allow floorball goals for Danish tournaments (we have a few alterations to the regular rules to make the game accessible to more players), simply because that's what most clubs already invested in. We can then look to get the other goals later to prepare for international tournaments.
Comment
It is a good point that if in theory we can use any goals as long as the teams agree it raises issues with the rules of being able to bring your stick to the crossbar, as then you may be hitting higher than peoples faces.. This and our other rule about crossbar make this more tricky
Comment
"Regardless of the outcome here we're going to explicitly allow floor ball goals for Danish tournaments ... what most clubs already invested in..." and if your national league would decide to use gym hall hockey goals with dimension 3m x 2m > I would have no problem with, it will be a national rule.
In both variations the height of the crossbar is not the problem because (please see my last suggestion in discussion "High stick near goal") " ... and as an exception only for defending ...the lower end of the stick can be raised as high as the crossbar of the goal but never be higher as the hips of all players in the vicinity who might be endangered.
For international rule (IUF) I would prefer this mini change: 14D.3.2 Goals "... The inside dimensions of goal openings should be 1.20 m high and 1.80 m wide. ..."
Comment
"Should be", "ought to be" and "are" are all pretty similar in meaning.
What I ultimately am afraid can happen is that we allow some flexibility here and there and then expect teams to work things out. If you announce two weeks before that you only have floorball goals, someone could potentially offer to bring ice hockey goals and there's no problem. So perhaps it should be noted in the rules that if there are no goals 1.2 x 1.8 it should be announced X time up front so other teams can offer to bring theirs?
Comment
"that we allow some flexibility here and there and then expect teams to work things out." We discus on rules for UNICONs, the host has to provide goals, I would not pay in advance as competitor when I have to expect my team and myself have to work things out after arrival. It is not one of several national tournaments.
"So perhaps it should be noted in the rules that if there are no goals 1.2 x 1.8 it should be announced X time up front so other teams can offer to bring theirs?" > never ever! This would open doors you never get closed again. We talking about "Event Organizer Rules".
Comment
"Should be", "ought to be" and "are" are all pretty similar in meaning.
Interpreting with English as first language "should be" and "out to be" are suggestions while "are" is a statement of fact.
That is why I feel "should be" gives instruction that goals can be different from the dimensions given. "Goals are" or "Goals must be" is saying they cannot be anything except what is stated.
Reading it with English as first language the following sentence implies that the inside openings should be those dimensions, not that they must be. I really think this allows you to use floorball goals while encouraging people to try and get larger ones where possible.
14D.3.2 Goals "... The inside dimensions of goal openings should be 1.20 m high and 1.80 m wide. ..."
Comment
I've thought about this further. If we want to continue to allow goalkeepers to raise the stick to crossbar height we will have to have a maximum size of goal in the rulebook. I imagine that allowing defenders to make stick saves is more worthwhile than using floorball goals for a world championship...
Therefore do we want to just implement a range as Magnus suggested. Clearly including floorball and hockey goals means there are two sizes of goals that can be easily purchased online which have:
1) Small enough netting
2) sturdy metal frame
3) (in floorball case) can fit in regular cars
I would imagine that we should change Magnus' range slightly to include actual hockey goals which means 183 x122cm. Otherwise we have to buy junior soccer goals and change the netting often.
This would make the range 1.15-1.22m x 1.60-1.83m
Comment
Steven, I absolutely agree we should expand the range so ice hockey goals and floor ball goals are both allowed. I also think we should add wording suggesting using ice hockey goals. We don't define which hockey sticks are allowed in play, except to defer to the ice hockey and floorball rules. I know a couple of clubs in Denmark have bought floorball goals because they were "close enough" to the actual size, even though ice hockey goals would cost the same. We have many different readers, and this is something that can really make it easier for new clubs to get started.
Apart from that, are we getting to a point where we can make a formal proposal about this? Is a consensus developing?
Comment
Ho, Ho, Ho,
what is going on here? Should we changing from unicycle hockey to floorball hockey?
"Regardless of the outcome here we're going to explicitly allow floorball goals for Danish tournaments (we have a few alterations to the regular rules to make the game accessible to more players), simply because that's what most clubs already invested in. We can then look to get the other goals later to prepare for international tournaments."
Just above I read this: "I know a couple of clubs in Denmark have bought floorball goals because they were "close enough" to the actual size, even though ice hockey goals would cost the same." > Do I get it right? Danish clubs have already bought floorball goals and now it is up to Magnus to get these buys afterwards legitimated by changing IUF rules?
"Is a consensus developing?" > No! > It is up to the national Danish clubs to invent floorball hockey "(we have a few alterations to the regular rules...)" and test it. This facet of unicycling could be presented on next UNICON and probably could be requested as a new IUF unicycling discipline.
Comment
This discussion was proposed by multiple world champion and european champion player who does not play floorball (not Magnus). This suggests that hockey players would quite happily play with a sturdy floorball sized goal over a badly constructed hockey sized goal.
In the Australian league one venue has floorball goals so they are what is used for those competitions.
At the previous world championships we had bad hockey sized goals purchased by the organisers that were not sturdy and the ball constantly got caught inside the sides of the net. The venue also had floorball goals but we didn't use them.
I think there is general consensus that we should be allowed to use smaller goals if they are a better option? I count 4 not including Herbert as I am not sure where he stands on this. Most of the disagreement is about the wording of this..
Currently we should change the rule anyway as ice hockey goals that are most commonly used don't meet the dimensions in the rulebook...
I suggest
Old Rules
14D.3.2 Goals
The posts are 2.50m in from the ends of the playing field (ground lines), ensuring that the players can go behind them. The inside dimensions of goal openings are 1.20m high and 1.80m wide. The goals must be made in such a way that the ball cannot enter through the rear or sides. The goals must not have sharp, pointed or protruding parts.
New Rules
14D.3.2 Goals
The posts are 2.50m in from the ends of the playing field (ground lines), ensuring that the players can go behind them. The inside dimensions of goal openings are 1.15-1.22m high and 1.60-1.83m wide. The goals must be made in such a way that the ball cannot enter through the rear or sides. The goals must not have sharp, pointed or protruding parts.
Pros: The dimension allows ice hockey goals that are commonly used in our sport. The dimension allows a greater range of goal size meaning if a better quality goal exists that is not 180x120cm it could be used. We know that two types of quality goals exist in both floorball and ice hockey dimensions.
Cons: It allows the use of a smaller dimension goal and doesn't necessarily force organisers to search for an ice hockey goal (which currently we assume unicycle hockey players would prefer) Ice Hockey goals are 2.96m squared, floorball goals are 1.84m squared. The lower size is 64% of the total area of the upper size.
Likely Changes to game/tournaments due to rule change: If both teams are playing with the same size goal minimal differences are likely to occur in game outcome, the better team is still likely to win. There is the possibility of lower scoring matches due to smaller goal size to shoot into. Unlikely to result in 0-0 draws as goals are still a reasonable size and a 640mm (24inch) wheel covers 0.32m squared. Tournament changes, you may see more tournaments using smaller goals.
Can we have everyone assess these pros and cons and give their opinion on this and in response we will either make a proposal or not bother.
Comment
One more Pro: that I forgot. This puts in a maximum height instead of having "goals SHOULD be" improving safety if we keep the rule allowing goalies to lift their stick to crossbar height.
Comment
I’m all for it.
Comment
Have you forgotten what you had written 20 days ago:
"The problem is how do we word it in a rulebook to say "ice hockey sized goals should be used but if you cant find them you can use floorball goals".
How do we stop every competition organiser saying "ice hockey sized goals were too hard to get because i) I had to buy them online ii) they were $45 more than the floorball goals iii) they wouldnt fit in my car. Ideally we don't want crap goals but are we also going to allow the organisers to take the easy way out and not try?
Specifically for unicon (where there is a decent budget) you can always buy a pair of fold up hockey goals from amazon and have them shipped to the venue for $500 so ice hockey goals should always be an extremely viable option for unicon/european champs."
Have you forgotten, we talk about 2 or 4 goals at a UNICON. And it is in first line up to the host of the UNICON. Only on the last UNICON bad goal were in use.
"At the previous world championships we had bad hockey sized goals purchased by the organisers... The venue also had floorball goals but we didn't use them." + "This suggests that hockey players would quite happily play with a sturdy floorball sized goal over a badly constructed hockey sized goal." And why you haven´t used the floorball goals? Haven´t the teams agreed on a specific amount of elbowroom before playing? Or?
It seemed to be something wrong with the interpretation of the rules prior and during the last UNICON but this should not be the starting point to eliminate 1.8 x 1.2m.
Comment
Have you forgotten what you had written 20 days ago: Ideally we don't want crap goals but are we also going to allow the organisers to take the easy way out and not try?
Not at all, I think we would definitely prefer larger goals when possible, however I talked to more players, considered the fact that elite hockey players would prefer smaller proper goals over poorly made goals and the fact that we specifically use floorball goals in our league at one venue without anyone questioning it and realised perhaps it is not actually as big an issue as we are making it into.
And why you haven´t used the floorball goals? Haven´t the teams agreed on a specific amount of elbowroom before playing? Or?
They weren't used because they were owned by some floorball group at the university who had not given permission for us to use them. But it was clear from both the current world champions and other top A teams that they would have preferred to play with smaller well constructed goals than poorly constructed goals.
It seemed to be something wrong with the interpretation of the rules prior and during the last UNICON but this should not be the starting point to eliminate 1.8 x 1.2m.
I do see a benefit to at least putting in a maximum size, and currently I think 183 x 122 makes sense more than 180 x 120.
Comment
For compromise I try to bring bad argued suggestions (dummy arguments) back in line. Some of you like to have a variation of goal sizes and this ended up with exact the dimensions of ice hockey goals and floorball goals. I assume nobody from us really likes to play on huge goals as e.g. from outdoor hockey (3 x 2m) and not on tiny goals e.g. 1.4 x 0.8m. You expect to aggry to range of dimension of goals.
The goals should suit to the dimension of the used playing field which can vary in length 35 – 45 m and breadth 20 – 25 m; therefore the goal size can vary in the range of 1.00 - 1.40m x 1.50 - 2.00m.
If we do so I aggry with Steven. "Likely Changes ... tournaments due to rule change:...Tournament changes, you may see more tournaments using smaller goals."
If we write some with a range for goals in the rulebook how can we make clear to the host on UNICONS the 2 (4) goals should have a dimension of XX.xx to XX.xx meter?
Comment
I don't see the problem here. The reason we want to write the dimensions exactly as floorball and ice hockey goals is that those are easier to get for teams. We also refer to the floorball and ice hockey rules to define which sticks can be used.
There are multiple audiences reading the rules. For us it might be perfectly clear that the rules intend us to play with ice hockey goals, but other people have bought differently sized goals in the past. If we believe certain sizes of goals are better to play with we should specify that, and I see no problem writing that the bigger goals should be used for unicon – we had a ton of problems at the past unicon, not only with the goals. If we write ice hockey goals should be used, I'm pretty sure the next organizers will find them.
As for all the other people reading the rules, it's good that the rules have enough flexibility that if you have to borrow equipment (say from a school) you have a range to choose from, even if the rules also state clear preferences.
Comment
My opinions:
1) As long as we have the rule which says that "teams have to agree on a specific amount of elbowroom before playing", it seems difficult for me to define goal-dimensions.
2) In general, I don't like different goal-dimensions in the rulebook (goals are a central element of the game and for me it looks a bit funny to find a range for the goal-dimensions in the official rulebook)
3) I generally prefer the current goal-dimension compared to floorball goal-dimension (they are larger than floorball goals and therefore more goals can be expected) but I see also a lot of arguments for floorball goals
4) I prefer good goals with „wrong“ dimensions than bad goals with „correct“ dimensions.
My additional thoughts:
In the last ten years I had to learn, that at UNICONs we often "have" to accept some conditions which are not really good or not in accordance with the rulebook. Sometimes the goals, sometimes the hall floor, sometimes the size of playing field and another time the available hall times. Most of them could have been prevented by investing more time BEFORE the start of the UNICON. I do not want to be misunderstood: At the end we usually had a great UNICON.
However, due to this fact, I would not open the range of goal-dimensions in the rulebook. Otherwise, the organizer would not even have to make an effort to find the "normal" goals. The aim of the hockey-director must be that the organizers can offer good and correct goals. If there are really good reasons why it is not possible to find such goals, then the organizer may refer to the "elbowroom". (To be honest, I don't think that it is not possible... take the startmoney from 5 hockeyplayers and you can buy a new goal :-)
long talk short sense:
Currently, I would not change the rule.
Suggestions:
However, I would suggest to discuss about this topic on the next large event. Maybe we should also collect the following facts from different countries:
- What goal-dimensions are usually available in hockey gyms?
- What goal-dimensions do hockey teams use in regular trainings?
- What goal-dimensions are used in official matches in the national leagues?
If we afterwards come to a conclusion, that floorball goals make more sense - then maybe we have to be open for such a change.
Comment
You make a good point Christian and I doubt any other team sports have rules that a goal can be different size. It really can’t be that hard to find a correct size goal especially with Amazon nowadays. It could also be made out of 2x4’s or pvc pipes for pretty cheap.
Comment
I am happy to discuss this at the next event if people want to.
A range in court size makes more sense than a range in goal size since it is easier to get goals than specific floor size.