(NPUA = National Panel Umpiring Association)

At their annual meeting a large number of umpires requested that NPUA visit the issue of player/ bench/ coach discipline. Below is what has come out, but I think resonates at all levels of hockey and could be used as a reminder/ guide to all.  Margaret Mcloughlin.

 

Game Discipline and Behaviour

 

It has been reported from a number of sources within and without our domestic structure, that the general demeanour of teams within our sport has declined markedly.  While this is not something unique to Hockey, it is nonetheless an area for considerable concern.  Therefore, at the recent NPUA Annual Conference, a session was dedicated to recognising areas of conflict and suggesting tools for managing them effectively. After the formal part of the sessions, a few scenarios were discussed and disciplinary procedures suggested.

 

The key focus is one of performance. How can: a player, coach, or umpire be fully focussed on their task if they are ‘distracted’ by other factors.  If our game is to continue to develop, we need to be able to perform to the best of our abilities.  Decision making by players and officials is generally of a higher standard when we are focussed on the game.  So, let’s cut out the peripheral elements that can be so distractive and destructive.

 

What are we looking to do differently (or better)? 

 

Rule 3.4 ‘Captains are responsible for the behaviour of all players on their team and for ensuring that substitutions are carried out correctly. A personal penalty is awarded if a captain does not exercise these responsibilities.’

 

The emphasis of the Captain’s responsibilities and entitlements is one key element.  The Captain is there for a reason, and one of those is that he/she should act as the intermediary between the team and the officials.  If a Captain fails to control the players/management in their team, they should be disciplined.  That may be initially as a verbal request/warning, but we should not be frightened to increase sanctions if the Captain fails to control the situation.  We must emphasise that this procedure should not be taken instead of dealing with any other individuals concerned, but may be in conjunction with.

 

Situations where a number of players advance on or surround an umpire will not be tolerated.  This must result in further disciplinary action to the player(s) concerned, and possibly the captain as well.

 

Verbal abuse comes in many guises, be it between players, to umpires, or to others around.  It should not be tolerated.  If a player chooses to talk to an umpire, they should do so in a civil manner.  If they fail to do so, they cannot be surprised if they are then disciplined or penalised.  It is not a player’s role to question decisions, although it can sometimes be a natural reaction.  Incessant questioning and derision must be eliminated from the game, and so we would advise that we should, and support officials who decide to, reduce the tolerance of this. 

 

The role of the team manager is one that tends to be overlooked.  It is their responsibility to submit elements such as team sheets to the Match Official (MO), and perhaps many other logistical tasks before and after the match.  However, they are also responsible for the management and control of the members of their team who are on the bench.  Therefore, they can and should be approached to manage any issues that arise in that area, be it substitute players or team coaches etc.

 

This may also be the time to remind everyone of the experimental EHL regulation that was put in place last season, where the coach and or manager may be issued with warning cards in the same way as any player.  If it is necessary to issue a yellow card, then a player must be removed from the pitch to serve the suspension. This rule is to be continued until further notice.

 

What do we hope to achieve?

 

The ability for everyone within our sport to have dialogue is vital if we are all to continue to develop.  In many cases officials benefit from players knowledge, and hopefully visa versa.  Long may this continue, however it is apparent that the line between communication and derision has become somewhat thinner in recent years.  What we hope to establish is a more focussed approach within the sport at the highest level.  If we can all concentrate on our jobs, we stand more chance of performing to our ability.

We are not suggesting that we have a ‘zero tolerance’ approach, more a tightening of the reins in a hope of retaining control before it goes too far.  This is a delicate balance, and may take a while to gain equilibrium. 

 

However, we believe that this is an issue that needs urgent attention and is most certainly something for which umpires and officials cannot shirk responsibility.

 

 

Andy Mair – Chairman NPUA