Report Mint Polo In The Park, Hurlingham X
“panto” element that has so-dominated our letters page in recent months was largely eliminated and the whole project appeared to have stepped up a gear to something considerably more formidable and professional. “They really seemed to have learned from last year’s teething problems,” said zero-goaler
definitely made it a more accessible format. I didn’t hear negative comments from anyone I spoke to, though it’s a shame that they only ended up having one girl player in the whole tournament. It would have been a better exhibition and more representative to have had more ladies involved.”
“The small field, large grandstands and the razzmatazz all made for an accessible format” – Charlotte Christodoulou
Charlotte Christodoulou, who lives in Fulham. “I took the kids on the Friday and Sunday and it really worked as a family day out. Glen Gilmore’s commentary was fantastic and the changes made to some of the rules, the size of the field, the razzmatazz and the large grandstand areas
HPA chief executive David Woodd explained: Polo In The Park founder, Daniel Fox-Davies Comment The Polo Timesview: what went right? ‘
MANY POLO PEOPLE have
been critical of Polo in the Park and its aims, writes James Mullan. But why?
Perhaps because the event so unapologetically shakes the traditional form of the game to the core. Polo people think you need to earn the right to make the big decisions that tamper with the game as it is. And it’s true, people feel that Polo In The Park trades off the cache that polo has created for itself over generations up and down the country. Many believe the
42 July 2010
www.polotimes.co.uk
new format prostitutes the game, as it’s designed largely to please the public. However, ultimately I believe the wider game will be the winner. The comparison with Twenty20 cricket has been one over-used. Yet it does seem apt. Polo In The Park introduces the basic principles of the game to a broader audience, without stealing spectators away from its traditional form.
It may pinch some sponsors, which clubs won’t like, but it also raises polo’s all-round profile, and that will surely end up benefiting everyone. Of course, the quick, thrill-a- minute nature of the games means
they will be less memorable or emotive than a brilliant six or eight- chukka high-goal encounter, in the same way that an epic five-day Test Match in cricket will always live longer in the memory than even the biggest-hitting Twenty20 clash. But in terms of showing off the pace, bravery, horsepower and skill involved in polo, and shelving the stigmas that still surround the game for the uninitiated, I think it certainly serves its purpose. And, for what it’s worth, I thought it
was pretty good fun. The atmosphere was good and I enjoyed myself.
“As well as recommending a decent handicap standard to ensure the tournament was of a high quality, we also felt it was important this year to have just three players on each side. This meant none of the sides could afford to carry anyone if they wanted to be competitive. So only a couple of players under a three-goal handicap took part and I’m afraid none of the lady players except Nina got a look-in. The lack of female players was a shame, but was a symptom of the pleasing news that each side this year aimed to create their best side possible to try and win.” There was still plenty of showmanship that suggested there were still instructions not to forget it was primarily designed as a spectacle for the uninitiated, but the majority of players genuinely seemed totally determined to win their fixtures. And why not? Since none of them have a Queen’s Cup team, Polo In The Park will have been the biggest audience they will play in front of this summer, with the exception of any players who feature on Cartier Day. “It is bigger, better and way more competitive than last year,” said New York’s Jamie Morrison in the aftermath. His superb arena ability as a goal- scorer from seemingly any angle was his decisive
X
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100