Changes to the Laws of Association Croquet
(published 31 December 2007 by the International Laws Committee and available at http://www.croquet.org.uk/association/6th/amendments/amendments_2007_12.pdf)

Notes by Fergus McInnes, February 2008

Material Amendments

The changes intended to make a substantive difference to the game are summarised in the table below.  They are classified here on two dimensions: by whether they simplify or refine the distinctions in the Laws (or, intermediately, just alter them), and by whether they relax or tighten the requirements on players (or, in the intermediate column, have a mixed effect).

Some of the changes in the table lead to amendments to other laws.  In particular, Law 14(d)(3-4) is changed so that the restrictions on starting or completing the running of a hoop apply to any ball that becomes a ball in hand in preparation for a croquet stroke – which may be either the striker’s ball or another ball affected by the new provision for in-court cannons.  The revision of the law on interference includes not only the changes to Laws 31(a) and 33 but also a change to Law 22(g) on errors, so that dealing with an error takes priority over dealing with any interference under Laws 30-35; and simplifications to Laws 27(a) and 27(i) on playing when a ball is misplaced (the interaction of Law 27(a) and Law 33 now being specified within Law 33).

Also listed under “Material Amendments” is a recommended procedure for dealing with impasses, i.e. positions where neither player is willing to make significant progress.  The effect is to make Law 53(f) more prescriptive, by having the procedure specified in the governing body’s Regulations for Tournaments rather than left at the discretion of the Tournament Referee (if not advertised in the conditions for the event).  Under the recommended procedure, once a referee has declared an impasse, play continues normally for 10 turns (20 if there are only two balls left and both are for the peg); then if the impasse still exists the balls are removed from the court and played back into the game, and at this point if there are only two balls and both are for the peg they play a tie-break of the last four hoops and the peg, or if there are only two balls and they are not both for the peg they play with no roquets (as in Golf Croquet) until after the first 10 turns or until after a turn in which a hoop has been scored other than by peeling, whichever is sooner.

Drafting Amendments

Some of the amendments are designed to clarify or simplify the wording of the Laws, without changing their intended effect.  The main points are summarised here.

Laws 5 and 6: definitions of a stroke and ball in play.  Law 5 is rearranged to improve clarity and reduce circularity in the definition of a stroke.  It now refers specifically to “a ball in play”, to indicate that hitting a ball that is not in the game (e.g. a double-banker’s ball) does not constitute a stroke.  Declaring an intention to leave the ball where it lies is now treated as playing a stroke (rather than under a separate category of “when a stroke is deemed to be played”).  Laws 6(a) and 26(b)(2) are changed to ensure that a ball played wrongly in any of the first four turns of the game becomes a ball in play at the appropriate point.

Use of the terms “replaced” and “replacement”.  Throughout Law 12 and at relevant points in other laws, balls placed on the court but in new positions are now referred to as being “placed” rather than “replaced”.  The terms “replaced” and “replacement” are retained only for balls that are put back in the position they previously occupied (e.g. after a fault).

Law 13(b): responsibility for position.  This now specifies that a player is responsible for the position of any ball involved in a croquet stroke or cannon that he plays, even if it does not move; and that if he started a turn by playing an adversary’s ball, or by declaring that he was leaving his ball where it lay without specifying which ball, he is responsible for the positions of both his balls.  The wording on balls replaced after interference is simplified, with no change in its effect.

Law 22(e): limit of claims in handicap games.  If a limit of claims, specified in strokes, is not reached because a turn ends, the limit of claims is the first stroke of the next turn even if it is a bisque turn, i.e. the word “adversary’s” in the second sentence of this law is deleted.

Law 27(e,f,g,h,j): end of turn after non-fatal errors.  In each of Laws 27(e,f,g,h), clause (2) is deleted (being redundant in view of Law 22(f)(1)).  The last sentence of Law 22(f)(1) is deleted accordingly.  Law 27(j) is deleted, and the references to it in Laws 27(e,f,g,h) are replaced by the proviso “unless his turn ended under Law 4(d) during a stroke in error”.

Law 28: faults.  Laws 28(a)(7) and 28(a)(8) are rewritten so that only visible double taps or humanly observable maintenance of contact will be faulted, except that in scatter shots any contact between mallet and ball after the striker’s ball hits another ball is prohibited.  Law 28(d) now states that the exemption for a double hit after a roquet does not apply if the striker’s ball has hit another object after making the roquet.

Law 34(c): special damage.  The instances listed are now examples rather than an exclusive list.

Positioning and steadying balls.  Law 19(f) is moved to Law 3(c) so as to apply to any stroke, the prohibition on use of a mallet is deleted, and grass clippings etc must be removed after use.

Partnerless doubles.  Law 40(b) now allows a player to declare a stroke played by his partner.

Tolerances for equipment.  Hoop uprights and crowns of larger diameter are now allowed.