When the Divisions I, II and III Field Hockey Committees approved two new experimental rules recently, the groups accomplished a couple of significant things.

First, because the NCAA does not administer playing rules in field hockey, all three divisions had to approve the changes that already are being experimented with at the international level. Second, the move keeps the collegiate game closely aligned with the International Hockey Federation, field hockey's governing body.

One experimental rule eliminates the requirement that the ball be completely stopped on a penalty corner before it can be brought into the scoring circle. Under this rule, the ball only has to travel outside the scoring circle before it is brought back in for a shot.

While that rule favors the offense, the other supports the defense. It states that a defender is allowed to raise her stick above her shoulder in order to stop or deflect a shot on goal unless it is dangerous to do so or is likely to lead to dangerous play.

Cheryl Bruttomesso, who as chair of rules for the U.S. Field Hockey Association serves as a liaison/rules interpreter for NCAA schools, said implementation of the first new rule could effect ball movement as well as how penalty corners are defended.

"Now that the ball doesn't have to be stopped, I think the ball is going to move left and right quicker so the defense is not going to go screaming out there," she said. "The way it used to be, they would have a battery of a stopper and a shooter and everyone would just fly in and try to get a touch. Now it's going to be more passing."

Jan Hutchinson, head field hockey coach at Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania, said the experimental rule will redirect the point of attack, which could create some havoc for the defense.

"I think the deletion of the dead stop on corners will certainly create more scoring opportunities on offense," she said. "If the purpose of changing the rule is to create more scoring, then I think this will certainly help."

College of New Jersey head field hockey coach Sharon Pfluger agrees that the offense could benefit from this change.

"It's quite a skill to be able to stop the ball dead before shooting a goal from a corner," said Pfluger. "But I do think that not having that enforced, and being able to do what we can now, can possibly lead to more goals."

Fairness for the defense

Bruttomesso believes the rule change allowing defenders to raise their sticks higher than the shoulder level may have come from the men's side of the sport.

While field hockey is played primarily by women here in the United States, the sport is extremely popular among both men and women internationally.

"What they were doing is throwing it, literally, at the person's face and the person was making these brilliant saves yet was being penalized for it," Bruttomesso said.

Bruttomesso said the change will not only bolster the defense, it also may introduce more excitement into the game. "It's going to allow a little bit more excitement because the defense raises their stick, makes a brilliant save and instead of being a penalty against, it's nothing. It's just a great save."

For Pfluger, it's a matter of fairness that the defense be allowed to defend the high shot.

"Shots are coming in high now and I think it's a credit to the players on the field who can shoot a ball like that," she said. "I think because the shots are coming in like that, it's only fair to allow that the sticks be raised to defend it and attempt to save it."

Due to safety concerns, Hutchinson is taking a wait-and-see approach to the issue of raising the stick to shoulder level.

"I believe the effect of this rule will depend on the officials and whether they can control the dangerous aspect of playing the ball above the shoulder with the stick," she said.

Hutchinson isn't the only one taking some time to simply observe. Nance Reed, senior associate director of athletics for internal operations at Towson University and chair of the Division I Field Hockey Committee, said she believes both rules will be beneficial to the sport, but that she hasn't formed a "complete opinion" just yet, preferring to wait and see how it plays out through the year.

In step internationally

The experimental rules went into effect internationally January 1, 2003. Bruttomesso is certain the two changes will retain their experimental tag next year as well. She said that generally, once rules make it to the experimental stage, they are most probably on their way to becoming permanent rules changes. The international body is just taking the time to observe and tweak before finalizing.

Although NCAA field hockey competition is guided by international rules of play, regulations adopted at the international level are not automatically adopted into the college play. Hence, the NCAA Field Hockey Committees need to voice their approval in situations like the introduction of experimental rules.

The fact that the collegiate game plays under the international rules doesn't seem to be an issue among the college coaches, however. The collegiate ranks are strongly committed to staying in step with the international game. Bruttomesso said it is vital that the college game continue to mirror the international version. Doing so provides continuity for players and officials.

"The NCAA agrees with that because they've really aligned themselves with the international rule book," she said.

She noted that the NCAA does incorporate some modifications into the college game that deal primarily with technical aspects of the game, such as timeouts, overtime, substitutions and coaches' behavior. In international play, there are no timeouts and no coaching from the sidelines, and things such as substitutions and managing coaches' behavior fall to individuals staffing a technical table.

"There are no NCAA modifications that actually change a rule that's in the book," Bruttomesso said. "There are many changes that have been made for technical reasons that I totally agree with, but if you look at the game of hockey that we play in the States and the international game, they are the same. There are no rules differences between the two other than overtime and timeouts."

From a committee standpoint, Reed said a goal of her group is to assist coaches in implementing what they think is best for the sport. And right now, it appears college coaches feel it's best to stay in line with the international game.

"If the coaches feel strongly about it, then we also feel strongly about it and we want to support the coaches and what they feel is best for the sport," Reed said.

Hutchinson is content with the status quo, too, but she emphasized that coaches should continue to maintain some autonomy to do what they feel is best for the game.

"I do believe that we should be trying to stay as close as possible to the international rules," she said, "but I still believe that we, as NCAA coaches, should have the avenue to alter a rule if the constituents feel it is in the best interests of the collegiate players and the college game."