Reorganized Rulebook
This discussion has an associated proposal. View Proposal Details here.Comments about this discussion:
Started
This discussion is meant as a place to ask any questions about the reorganized rulebook.
In case you missed it, this is from the welcome email that was just sent out:
Reorganized Rulebook
Over the past year, as decided upon by the IUF Rulebook Committee 2014, Mary and Steve Koehler have reorganized the material in the IUF Rulebook. This reorganized rulebook will be the starting point for all proposals and rule changes. All Rulebook Committee members (that’s you) are required to read the blog post on the IUF website detailing the reorganization process.
All proposals must refer to the section numbers in the reorganized rulebook, and not from IUF Rulebook 2015.
Comment
In most cases, the rules were not changed during this reorganization but
only moved from one place to another. However, a couple of new rules
have appeared in the hockey section. I created a document that shows the
changes:
http://www.rolf-sander.net/tmp/diff-rulebook-reorg.pdf
A few notes about the new rules:
- Chapter 1, Rider Summary: We already have a short summary of the rules
(http://www.rolf-sander.net/uni/topten3e.pdf) in several languages
(English, German, Spanish, French). I suggest to use it here instead
of the current text of 14A.2, which is a bit strange. I don't think
that wearing shoes is the most important rule you have to know when
you start playing unicycle hockey.
- Chapter 4: The Event Organizer Rules are new. After our experience in
Spain, I think we should add requirements for a suitable gym surface
here.
Comment
I think your top ten rules are a good Rider Summary.
About the translation: I hope this reorganized rulebook will also be translated in at least German. In Switzerland we have some people who are not happy with only the English version of the IUF Rulebook 2015.
Comment
Requirements for a suitable gym surface would be nice
Comment
> I think your top ten rules are a good Rider Summary.
Thanks. I will open a new discussion for this.
> About the translation: I hope this reorganized rulebook will also be
> translated in at least German. In Switzerland we have some people who
> are not happy with only the English version of the IUF Rulebook 2015.
I will translate the next rulebook into German as soon as it becomes
official. The 2015 rulebook has always been called "preliminary" even
during the Unicon. This was strange. I never translated it into German
because I was waiting for the "final" version.
Comment
> Requirements for a suitable gym surface would be nice
Yes, we should really put this into the rules, especially after the bad
experience from last Unicon.
Also, I think we should add a requirement for practice time into the
Event Organizer Rules (14D). Such a practice time is already mentioned
in the freestyle section of the IUF rules (7D.7), and I think hockey
should have it as well. Only if it is in the rulebook, we can expect
that the next Unicon host will remember it.
Comment
I'm not sure if practice time is a good idea. I would rather introduce a warm up time. If every team wants to practice they need space and time, therefore much playing time would be spent for practicing. As a player I prefer if we have less practice and therefore play more hockey in competition. If the players have one hour to go into the gym before the tournament starts I think they have enough practice.
Comment
It's fine with me if you want to use another name, for example "warm up
time" instead of "practice time". In any case, the hockey director will
have to find the best way to use the available time.
My only reason to add this to the rules is that the Event Organizer is
aware of the fact that some additional time is needed.
Comment
As an A-level-player from an A-level-team you bring all your kit with you and you know each over very well, yes here is only a warm up time required. But think about the bigger group of teams playing in the B-tournament. Here partially they have to play with the sticks the host should provide and partially they will form up from Mix-players to a team at the beginning of the UNICON. For this players would be more than nice to have practice time.
Comment
In the discussion here, two ideas were mentioned but then we forgot
about it again (probably because there were so many other
discussions...):
1) A suitable gym surface is necessary.
2) At a tournament, practice time and/or warm up time is necessary.
Do we want to put this into a proposal? If yes, this needs to be done
soon.
Comment
In my eyes it would make sense to introduce both points in a proposal.
Comment
I have created a preliminary proposal now. Let me know if you would like to make any changes.
Comment
Only a "suitable" gym surface" is not sufficient. I think a conditional claim for "suitable" should be a "sprung floor".
1) The gym hall should have a spring floor provided to use for the playing field.
Comment
Good point. I added the sprung floor.
Comment
We play in sports halls that I am not sure are "sprung floors" they are rubberised cement of some type but very good to play on. They tend to look like this http://www.americourtusa.com/images/gallery/gallery-indoor-basketball-project-1.jpg
Comment
I found this floor: http://www.americourtusa.com/mondoten/. "Pre manufactured shock absorption layer provides for maximum consistency. ... Suitable for both cement and asphalt surfaces."
If we had had something equivalent in Spain in the ice arena we had not the problem. Usually sport arenas have the possibility to cover concrete surface with something similar. This is up to the host to book this.
It is a claim against the host!
Maybe we should say "sprung floor or cover with similar effect" to give the host more options.
Comment
The issue was that it was plain concrete with no smooth surface. I had no real issue with that floor being hard or dangerous if I fell off, we used to play on an outdoor basketball court that we called the "cheese grater". My issue was playing with a $230 stick that would get worn away in 4mins of play.
As long as a court has a surface that does not destroy my stick then I am fine with it.
Comment
What if the court is super slippery?! I'm thinking like the trails/street arena in Italy.
Comment
Perhaps we should just write something like
"A suitable surface is necessary. Roughness and slipperiness of the surface should be considered with indoor sprung or synthetic rubberised courts usually providing optimal surfaces"
Comment
Steven, the sports halls that you like and the associated picture
(gallery-indoor-basketball-project-1.jpg) of the "rubberised cement"
look good. However, when I google the term "synthetic rubberised court"
I mostly get pictures of tennis courts which I think is a very different
surface.
Comment
Yes perhaps it should be left out purely for confusion reasons. perhaps just leave it as indoor sprung floors. The sentence is still a suggestion as it states that these "usually provide optimal surfaces" so it does not rule out someone using a rubberised surface if it is adequate.
Comment
OK. What about:
"A suitable surface is necessary. Roughness and slipperiness of the
surface should be considered. A sprung floor usually provides an optimal
surface."
Comment
Status 4: still needs some fine-tuning
Comment
What about.
"The surface should be smooth without slipperiness but with a kind of shock absorption (e.g. sprung floor)."
Comment
"A suitable surface is necessary. The surface should be smooth to protect stick blades while still allowing traction for tyres. Indoor court surfaces that provide some absorption of falls such as sprung floors are ideal to reduce injuries."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprung_floor#Requirements
Looked sat some of the requirements of sprung floors.
Comment
I have revised the proposal. More comments? If not, are we ready to vote?
Comment
"should be played" not "should be play"
Comment
I already corrected this in revision 4 in the NEW text. It needs to stay wrong in the OLD text because that's what's there...
Comment
Ok, from my point of view. Go for voting.
Comment
Thanks Rolf. I read it too quickly.
Comment
I'm moving this to a vote. If there is anyone (Steven?) that disagrees with the revision, just let me know and I can move it back out of voting.