Swimming is a well-known, simple sport. It has rules that spectators and competitors can understand without difficulty: jump in, swim straight and swim fast. Make sure Speedos do not restrict, too. The same can be said about hockey as well, albeit the latter is slightly more complicated; simply sprinkle in the offside rule, a couple of sticks and a ball. Aside from those trivialities, hockey is a sport that people grasp with relative ease.

With this in mind, perhaps the founder of Octopush – a hybrid of the two aforementioned sports – was a strong swimmer with a fantastic penalty stroke.

At first glance, second-guessing the sport itself rather than its creation would serve better. The image on the website’s homepage treats people to the sight of two players with small sticks pushing a puck along the floor. Quite bizarre and outlandish; and that’s before the scuba-diving equipment and underwater arena are taken into consideration. So is it as, ahem, simple, as it appears on the photographs?

‘Octopush is a non-contact sport in which two teams of six compete to manoeuvre a weighted puck across the bottom of a swimming pool into goals while wearing a snorkel, mask and fins’ states Martin Hill, Oxford Octopush secratary. So far, so good. It appears the moniker of ‘underwater hockey’ derives from the equipment used to push the puck: a hockey stick without the stick. Known as ‘pushers’, they’re no longer in length than a standard school ruler. Close control is an absolute must in this game; a slight flick from an opponent’s pusher can free the puck from the attacker’s possession. Distance shots may be an option however; there are no goalkeepers in Octopush.

Invented in 1954 by British Sub Aqua Club member Alan Blake in an attempt to stop club members abandoning the new club during the winter months (when it was too cold to dive in the sea), Octopush’s original rules were tinkered with to make it more accessible and it finally established itself as the sport it is today. It took Oxford University fifty-two years to form their own club; interest levels have risen steadily ever since. Attracting between fifteen and twenty regular enthusiasts, Oxford have entered two University Nationals tournaments, impressively finishing 6th in a ten-team league in their first ever season. Despite finishing one place from the foot of the table this year, enthusiasm hasn’t degenerated. ‘We are always looking for new players whatever their experience’, says Martin Hill.

Octopush is fun and different; substitutes splash into the arena as opposed to the usual slow jog seen by footballers. Despite sounding like Chris Eubank exclaiming his love for eight-legged sea creatures, it is a sport which will hopefully gain more fanfare and members in the coming years.

What did you think, in general, of the game?

I thought it was excellent game of football, and a great occasion. Obviously we were desperately disappointed not to win, as the result of the Varsity Match will slightly overshadow the success that we have had during the course of the season.

On the day, things just didn’t go our way. We conceded bad goals at inopportune times that meant we were chasing the game for the majority of the match, but having got ourselves back into the match for the 3rd time at 3-3 we looked by far the stronger team and had the chances to win the match. It was just unfortunate that our captain miss-hit a backpass at such a crucial moment, which allowed their striker to score the decisive goal.

Did you ever think we couldn’t get back into it?

The only point at which I didn’t believe we would get a result was when they got the 5th goal to give themselves a 2-goal cushion when we were already into injury time. The team have shown incredible strength of character throughout the season, having got results from losing positions on at least 5 occasions, most notably when coming from 2-0 to draw with Oxford City just 2 weeks before the VM. We had put in an incredible amount fitness work in advance to ensure that the players had the platform to perform for the full 90 minutes, but I was actually surprised at just how much fitter than them we were going into the last 20 minutes, as we had spent the majority of the match chasing the game, which inevitably takes more out of the players.  During this period their keeper made a couple of very good saves and we perhaps lacked that ruthless streak to push home our advantage, but our real problems were at the back.

 Every time we seemed set to forge ahead a defensive error cost us a goal. For example, having equalized so soon after half time, to concede again straight afterwards was extremely naïve. I felt that we caused our own problems at the back as much as they created them, and were caught out by a straight ball over the top too easily. Their striker had a terrific game to score 4 goals and finished them all superbly, but I would still choose Alex Toogood, who has had an excellent season, ahead of him.

Were the players thinking about penalties at 3-3?

We had practised them beforehand, and would have been confident of victory if it had gone that far, but the team’s focus was on taking advantage of our superior fitness to win the game in normal time. On the sideline we had been making a contingency plan, and there was the possibility of bringing on our substitute goalkeeper [Nicola Ielpo, St. Edmund Hall], who has had great success in shootouts for his college this year.

What did you say at half time to elicit that goal one minute after the re-start?

I tried to emphasise that they would be sitting in the other dressing room knowing that the first half had gone as well as it possibly could for them, whereas we had not really started playing yet. The quality that we possess all over the pitch had not been reflected in the play, but I had every confidence that when we got the ball down and passed it through the team, the goals would come. Obviously, I was not expecting to score so early in the half, but it could have proved a decisive moment had we preserved the lead for a longer period. To concede so soon afterwards meant that the momentum swung right back their way, so to get another equalizer 25 minutes later showed great character.

Are there any players that you would mark out for special praise?

I am normally reluctant to single out a player’s performance as there has been such a strong team ethic within the squad, but Homer Sullivan gave such an exceptional performance that he deserves the extra recognition. Every time he got the ball he caused them problems, and for a period just after we conceded the first goal he was the only player who really took the attack to Cambridge and got his reward with a very good goal. He has been in the squad for three years, but has been injured for the last two Varsity Matches, so it was great to see him finally grasp the opportunity to fulfil his potential on the big stage.

Did Sam Hall and Tom Howell change the game when they came on?

Niko had hardly trained due to injury for 4 weeks prior to the match, but had been so effective during the season that he merited selection despite this. It was a very hard match to go into short of match fitness, so I took the decision to replace him after 55 minutes. Tom came on and held the ball up much better, and gave us more of a cutting edge up front which took the attention off Toogood, allowing him more space.
Sam Hall had been very unlucky not to start the match, and it was always in the plan to bring him on for Leon at about the hour mark – though obviously the injury to Leon forced us to make the change that bit earlier. We were fortunate to have three such talented central midfielders to call upon, and all three performed admirably despite the hectic nature of the midfield battle.

I think the performance of all the substitutes represents the strength in depth that the squad possesses.

How would you reflect on the season?

Understandably a great deal of attention will be paid to the result of the Varsity Match as it is our highest profile game, but inside the club we can take great pride in a very successful and enjoyable season’s campaign.
I have thoroughly enjoyed my year with the squad. It has been excellent to work with a group of players for whom football is not their main priority, but nevertheless bring a very professional attitude to every training session and match. It has been an excellent learning experience for me, and I hope for the players as well.

With thanks to Nik Baker

For the past eight years Slavia have played in the Sparta Krc’s Stadion Evzena Rosickeho, in the Strahov sports complex, having been forced out of their original stadium by a statue of Josef Stalin.

The Blues have a long-standing connection with the Czech side; they were the first English club to play Slavia, in 1899; a record 4,000 crowd witnessed a 3-0 win for Oxford. Thirty-seven years later Prague won a re-match 8-2. In the spirit of this tradition, Martin Keown’s side have been invited to compete in the first-ever game at the 21,000 seater Stadion Eden on May 7. Slavia will be familiar to English fans, having played both Arsenal in the UEFA Champions League and Tottenham Hotspur in the UEFA Cup this season. Slavia Prague are currently second in Gambrinus Liga, so are in line to qualify for next season’s Champions League second qualifying round. They have won fourteen Czech league titles, the last in 1995/96. Premiership stars of the 1990s Karel Poborsky and Patrick Berger both started their careers at Slavia.

Blues players will get to compete against Liverpool legend and Champions League winner Vladimir Smicer, amongst others. Weeks after playing at Craven Cottage, they are said to be thrilled at the opportunity to play at another top class stadium. They will be hoping to repeat their nineteenth-century triumph. 

Last year’s Cuppers winners St Anne’s started the new season with a win in a high-quality contest. Pembroke were first in to bat and began slowly, with openers Mike Hills and Geoff Baines amassing just eight off the first five overs.

However, a slow, wicketless start usually favours the batting team in college cricket, and Pembroke soon picked up the pace, reaching their half-century within the next ten overs.

This wasn’t before the first wicket of the game, though, with Mike Hills adjudged LBW to a Hollingdale delivery, although the ball may have pitched outside leg stump.

Just two overs later, Shephard had his stumps knocked out after a wild attempt at a hook, with Owen taking the plaudits.

Pembroke steadied their ship for a while, offering Baines the chance to reach an assured half-century off some slacker St Anne’s bowling.

But just as it seemed the batters might start scoring freely, the flow of wickets began again, with Dahwan doing the damage.

First Finch went to a good catch, before Baines’ innings came to an abrupt end at 69, perhaps sloppily forcing the ball all the way to deep mid wicket.

The remainder of the innings consisted of an alternation between bursts of runs and the odd wicket. Puxley picked up what could have been a useful 12 before being run out, and ‘Jig’ Patel hit a measured ten before being bowled by the effective Hollingdale, who picked up figures of 3 for 24, almost as good as Dahwan’s 5 for 27.

Pembroke ended on 165 for 9 after batting out the 40 overs, and whilse the St Anne’s team were fairly confident of matching that score, Pembroke had certainly become favourites temporarily.

Finch opened the bowling for Pembroke in the second innings with a maiden over, and the sense that they might keep St Anne’s at bay was growing. However, Hollingdale and Alexander soon broke into their stride, despite the odd occasional scare for both.

As St Anne’s settled into the innings the batting became more promising, and although they rarely broke through the Pembroke field, an imminent rise in the run-rate was on the cards.

Gradually Anne’s began to grab hold of the contest, and the score started to accelerate. With the help of some new-found shoddy fielding, St Anne’s suddenly found themselves on 62 for none off just 15 overs.

Hollingdale and Alexander were looking on awesome form as they pushed their side heavily into the ascendant, before the former was eventually caught for 36 after a decent Finch delivery.

The ‘tourists’ still looked on course however, reaching their hundred within 24 overs, and increasingly there seemed only one possible outcome for the match.

Harindra looked less than pleased when he was given LBW on just 6, Oakes claiming one of his side’s two wickets, but Alexander and Sykes proceeded to bat their team past Pembroke’s total with ease. Alexander, who had looked calm and assured throughout his innings, finished on 94 not-out, and would have been well deserving of a century.

Ultimately the better team did win, but the same performance from Pembroke would probably have seen them beat many other teams in the league.