|
Post by stokesj on Nov 22, 2010 12:39:58 GMT -6
After years of playing dodgeball I have grown to greatly dislike the opening rush. We brought this up at the last captains meeting, but only a select few seemed to agree with me. The only benefit to having an opening rush is that you get a ball advantage at the beginning of the game which can be very advantageous, but you have to weigh the benefits against the consequences. I have received my fair share of bumps and bruises from the opening rush, but I on my team I have witnessed a horribly broken nose, concussions, a torn ACL, and just recently at the GVSU-SVSU game we had another collision. The object in dodgeball is to throw and dodge balls, not to run full speed into each other like rugby or football.
Since people love the opening rush so much it probably won't be completely removed so I have an alternative idea. Instead of lining up all 10 balls in the middle line up only 4. The remaining six will be split evenly amongst the teams, but they will be placed on the free throw line. This way it still incorporates passing it to the baseline in order for it to become a live ball. I can think of a couple advantages with four balls instead of ten balls lined up in the middle: 1) Fewer bodies running full speed into each other to grab a ball 2) More space between the balls allowing you to more easily dodge or move out of the way of the oncoming runner 3) Still gives fast teams a ball advantage
Another alternative is a simple coin flip and the winning team can choose to get a 6-4 ball advantage in the beginning and then this alternates between points. People might not like that, but it is by far the safest and fairest way of doing this. Many sports deal with play this way: football, soccer, volleyball, and has been used in baseball to determine which team has home field advantage.
|
|
|
Post by trippiedigv12 on Nov 22, 2010 12:44:24 GMT -6
Actually the XFL utilized the "scramble for the ball" race to decide which team had a leg up to start the game. The Scramble is one of the many reasons that the XFL is still a very prosperous football league today and totally lasted more than just a year.
Seriously, opening rush = scramble for the ball. Except with people running into each other at the end. And lowing shoulders, usually.
|
|
|
Post by mccarthy55cmu on Nov 22, 2010 14:42:20 GMT -6
The people who want to change this rule are the ones with broken noses, torn acls, and concussions. I've had my shoulder almost dislocated, my ankle rolled, and my head colliding with another player's head. If you don't want to get hurt, don't run.
|
|
|
Post by stokesj on Nov 22, 2010 15:01:04 GMT -6
Conversely I can say that the people that want to keep the rule are the ones who constantly win the opening rush. I think it's unfair to ask your players to sacrifice their bodies in order to get a 6-4 or 7-3 ball advantage. The opening rush isn't what's important in dodgeball, it's not the defining feature. That's why I think it should change. It's unnecessarily reckless for 20-ish bodies running headlong into each other. All that you're asking for to happen is a permanent injury for something that's just not worth it. It's not an accident like twisting your ankle or breaking your finger, because those things just can't be avoided in sports, but the injuries that happen from the opening rush can be avoided by a simple change in the setup of the game. With the compromise that I suggested you can still get a 7-3 advantage by using your fastest players and I think it would also greatly decrease the chance of injuries. Best of both worlds. Think of it this way, many schools have issues with the fact that dodgeball is a dangerous sport. So why not think of a way to remove one of the greatest injury prone activities in dodgeball that frankly, isn't necessary to have. If we altered this facet of the game, then when dodgeball becomes a bigger deal, schools might be more okay with having a dodgeball team.
|
|
|
Post by woojumbo on Nov 22, 2010 15:06:53 GMT -6
Lets be honest here, dodgeball is a sport about violence, and I for one have been sent to the hospital during an opening rush getting 8 stitches to the dome. This is dodgeball not dance class, people know the risks about playing this sport. Taking the rush out of the league is like fining players in the NFL for hitting to hard.
|
|
|
Post by mccarthy55cmu on Nov 22, 2010 15:33:15 GMT -6
Hahaha, My team doesn't have fast players, so lets take out the opening rush. So lets make it fair so that everyone can play. This isn't elementary school.
I don't have a tall guy on my basketball team, lets take out the jump ball.
I don't have a good kicker, lets take out extra points and field goals.
I don't have a good base runner, lets take out steals.
The game shouldn't be changed in order to accommodate players who are not as fast as others. This is how the game has been played for as long as any of us can remember. Why change it so people who aren't as fast have a chance?
|
|
|
Post by stokesj on Nov 22, 2010 15:47:53 GMT -6
I don't know if you're using sarcasm, but they are fining players for "devastating hits" mostly the hits leading with the helmet...
But there's a big difference between a sport like football and dodgeball. You hit each other in football with your bodies to stop the movement of the ball. In dodgeball you hit each other with dodgeballs to stop the movement of the body. If you have a broken ankle, or broken hand, or your eye got screwed up from getting hit THAT'S something you should expect from playing dodgeball, not from running into the opposing team. The whole reason why we got rid of the strip rule was so there wouldn't be people just running at the other team trying to strip the ball, it's reckless and unnecessary. I'm not even saying we need to get rid of the rush in it's entirety, I think it just needs to be modified for the fast paced intense game it has become.
In the first couple years of dodgeball, teams were mostly comprised of people that were not the most athletic people so the speed at which their body collided was not as high thus decreasing the risk of injury, but now varsity squads are made up mostly of people that played varsity sports in highschool. So the collision is going to be that much worse.
|
|
|
Post by stokesj on Nov 22, 2010 17:45:32 GMT -6
Thanks for taking my thunder a minute before my post Bomis. But with the idea I proposed you could do some interesting things with this. Instead of putting your fastest guys on the balls in the middle put them on the balls closer to you. They might be able to relay the ball back and forth before anyone even gets to mid court, that way enabling a person to single handedly get 6 balls.
|
|
|
Post by Josh Raymer on Nov 22, 2010 18:33:18 GMT -6
These are the types of discussions we need to be having prior to April. Regardless of your feelings on a topic like the opening rush, it's important that we address safety concerns, especially when they come from the captain of the NCDA's reigning champion. Stokes, I encourage you - and everyone else who has a rule they'd like to change - to type up a one page outline of what you've said in this thread (why you want to change the rule, what advantages the new rule would have, how it would be enforced, etc) and we'll make sure to pass it out at the captains' meeting. You can give a quick spiel while the captains look over the outline, and then once everyone has presented their proposed changes, we'll vote on each issue. This seems to be the fairest way to handle something as important as the opening rush. What does everyone think?
|
|
|
Post by stokesj on Nov 22, 2010 18:56:45 GMT -6
Okay, I'll do something like that tomorrow when I'm bored at work.
|
|
|
Post by woojumbo on Nov 22, 2010 22:44:05 GMT -6
There is no need to punish a team for having better athletes, its been mentioned that players are getting more athletic and faster, thats advancing the sport. During our recent game against GV im almost positive on every opening rush we ended up with a ball advantage, so why punish a team for having faster players?
|
|
|
Post by Stein 1 on Nov 22, 2010 23:54:26 GMT -6
Gettign rid of opening rush would be a travesity.....
Get rid of people who throw over 65 so I don't get anymore concussions.... That is much more of a problem. People have gone blind because other people throw to hard...
GIVE ME A BREAK
|
|
|
Post by Stein 1 on Nov 22, 2010 23:56:13 GMT -6
GVSU lost last week because they couldnt get balls at the start just saying
|
|
|
Post by woojumbo on Nov 22, 2010 23:59:59 GMT -6
this is DODGEBALL. Whats next using foam balls? No more neutral zone?
|
|
|
Post by Dylan Fettig on Nov 23, 2010 1:26:18 GMT -6
There is no need to punish a team for having better athletes, its been mentioned that players are getting more athletic and faster, thats advancing the sport. During our recent game against GV im almost positive on every opening rush we ended up with a ball advantage, so why punish a team for having faster players? The proposed idea does not punish teams for being athletic, there is still running involved for the last 4 balls. And actually if your team is athletic enough than you should be able to get to the first row of balls and have them activated in time to get the people running for the middle balls out. Also, the run up as it is now punishes faster people more than anyone if you really think about it. Most of the injuries happen when a faster player lowers his body to pick up the ball while the slower person on the other team comes a moment later and runs into him.
|
|