0
0
Recent developments in the water polo world have seen World Aquatics, the sport’s governing body, enforce new rules without prior testing or consultation with stakeholders. These unilateral changes have sparked significant debate among players, coaches, and fans. One of the most notable alterations is the reduction of the standard water polo field length from 30 meters to 25 meters. While there are concerns about the lack of trial periods and potential unintended consequences, we have tried to assess the impact of reducing the field by 25 m.
Infrastructure: It’s common in countries where water polo is well-known to see pools built to fit the 30 m field perfectly. In other countries, reducing a 50 m pool to 30 m field is the most common option. Now, more pools around the globe will be eligible for men’s water polo. Even 25 m pools (although the field will be slightly shortened due to the depth of the goals) could be used, which is a positive effect if we think about the promotion of our sport.
Reduction of Turnaround Time from Defense to Offense: If we assume that the average professional water polo player swims 100 m in 55 seconds, the attacking team will be at least three seconds earlier in the offensive zone. This would not only reduce the “boring” swimming time from one side of the pool to the other, but we will also see more plays per game due to the reduced attacking time of 25 seconds.
Impact on Counterattacks: The biggest concern is that counterattacks will cease to exist on a shorter field. While we don’t see as many counterattacks as before at the professional level due to players’ physical preparation and especially due to the zones played by most teams, we all agree that this is an aspect of the game to protect.
On the other hand, we might see exactly the opposite, i.e., more counterattacks when the offensive player is able to have an early start. Not only will the defenders have less time to catch up, but the decisive pass will be shorter and, therefore, more precise.
Impact on Physical Preparation: Reducing the field by 25 m will definitely benefit physically stronger players and disadvantage players who are exceptional swimmers.
If we compare this with other sports like ice hockey, where the NHL field is 85% smaller than the European hockey rink, we see that the bigger fields allow for smaller but faster and more technical players, who otherwise struggle to have an impact in the NHL.
As the swimming time will be reduced in favor of playing time, we expect to see a shift towards stronger players versus faster players, while swimming will still remain a big part of the sport and its preparation.
