ProLaxShop

DeFran's weekly installment

Come here to see the mens lacrosse rules, and discuss things concerning rules. ie. wrong or right ref judgements?

Moderator: Moderators

Forum rules
Before posting on the forum please ensure you read the Board Wide Rules

A full list of men's rules can be found here
User avatar
the pom
Posts: 815
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2005 3:28 am
gender: Male
Location: the moor

Re: DeFran's weekly installment

Postby the pom Tue Dec 06, 2011 1:28 pm

So in the game the big issue was safety

The long strings were noticed then you waited for that player to score before calling the stick check???

And safety was the big issue why would the stick check not be called as soon as the issue was noticed as this would be the safest thing.
so the stick check was called to cancel the goall

"Coaches/captains have a responsibility to ensure that their players are using safe and legal equipment. If they are ignorant enough to ignore rules that are in place for safety I would question their ability to coach as they are willingly subjecting opposing teams to dangerous equipment. God forbid if something did happen to another player I would like to see them tell the players parents that their son has been blinded because they thought it was a stupid rule they didn't think was worth abiding by and like to see them deal with the court case that would shortly follow."

what about the court case where you witheld important saftey information to gain a competive advantage i would question your ability to captain

Any one getting caught with strings that are to long is an idiot as it is against the rules and is current flavor of the month to try to get a goal cancelled.
League restructure I told you so 10/3/2011(looking good on this one)
Prem division to two leagues will result in the prem division failing and being combined with Nemla 22/3/2012
the proposed restructure to 8 teams in each prem league will only last a couple of years until it has to be restructured again due to teams dropping out. 13/12/2012
User avatar
Mat P
Posts: 523
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 7:47 pm
gender: Male

Re: DeFran's weekly installment

Postby Mat P Tue Dec 06, 2011 2:06 pm

the pom wrote:So in the game the big issue was safety

The long strings were noticed then you waited for that player to score before calling the stick check???

And safety was the big issue why would the stick check not be called as soon as the issue was noticed as this would be the safest thing.
so the stick check was called to cancel the goall

"Coaches/captains have a responsibility to ensure that their players are using safe and legal equipment. If they are ignorant enough to ignore rules that are in place for safety I would question their ability to coach as they are willingly subjecting opposing teams to dangerous equipment. God forbid if something did happen to another player I would like to see them tell the players parents that their son has been blinded because they thought it was a stupid rule they didn't think was worth abiding by and like to see them deal with the court case that would shortly follow."

what about the court case where you witheld important saftey information to gain a competive advantage i would question your ability to captain

Any one getting caught with strings that are to long is an idiot as it is against the rules and is current flavor of the month to try to get a goal cancelled.


Reading this discussion this comment pretty much sums it up for me.

It is a rule of the game, it should be adhered to. The 'safety' argument goes out of the window if the check is conducted after a goal unless this is the first time you notice the strings may present a danger.

If a stick check is called because you think they have a bucket and have got through several heavy checks or it's illegally pinched etc fine, the stick holds a competitive advantage - long shooting strings provide no competitive advantage.

I think it's poor that this should lead to a disallowed goal in the rules due to the fact it offers no advantage to the offending player and if this is such a safety concern then checking all players shooting strings before a game is a five minutes job (if not checking stick dimensions etc) and should be carried out.
User avatar
oldman
Posts: 259
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 4:23 pm
gender: Male
Location: Cranbrook, Kent
Contact:

Re: DeFran's weekly installment

Postby oldman Tue Dec 06, 2011 2:10 pm

UKLacrosse wrote:Well, Susie Ganzmuller, the Chair of the FIL Rules Committee, told me otherwise! She stated quite clearly that they had to waiver the rules on pocket depth .... the central pocket was unadjustable, and too deep. I don't recall claiming they were dangerous?


Interesting suggestion, but certainly not my understanding. I was umpiring out in Hannover at the Festival and was pretty much up to speed with this. I have also just checked with a couple of umpires who officiated at the U19s to see that my recollection tallied with what had happened.

The teams in Hannover were told that they could play with those incorrectly thonged de Beer sticks but the pockets still had to be tight enough to be legal, and the umpires were applying the same standard to them in stick checks as to any other pocket. Maybe Susie was explaining that the concern with the shortened thongs was that it is much more difficult to keep the pocket legal, but that in the interests of having a tournament we had to waive the strict rule about thongs being directly attached to the head top and bottom. They were not "unadjustable", just more difficult to adjust and keep in place.

As to the safety question, as the much of the tenor of this thread seems to be about safety it was not, I would suggest, unreasonable to add the comment about the dangerous sticks. It certainly seemed implied in your reply. However, please accept my apologies if you felt that I had, in any way, misrepresented your position on this.
Kent Lacrosse Development Association
Cranbrook Lacrosse Club
Maidstone Lacrosse Club
User avatar
davidmcculloch81
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2070
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:45 pm
gender: Male

Re: DeFran's weekly installment

Postby davidmcculloch81 Tue Dec 06, 2011 2:36 pm

I would have absolutely no problem (as a captain or coach) in exploiting others’ ignorance of this rule to our competitive advantage. Break the rules – deal with the consequences.

In fact, this was a tactic that we discussed before the Senior Flags semi-final vs Stockport last year (when the rule was fairly fresh). Unfortunately Mr Blacklock ruined this by asking all players of both teams to ensure that string lengths were legal and safe prior to the game.

From a safety point of view this is clearly the right approach for a ref to take.

Finally, if I got caught on it twice in one game I wouldn’t go on the National Governing Body’s website to broadcast to everyone how stupid I was.
Jedi Lax #9
CEng MIMechE
_______________

My views are not necessarily those of Clarendon Road Primary School Pop Lacrosse Team
User avatar
UKLacrosse
Posts: 747
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 2:44 pm
gender: Male

Re: DeFran's weekly installment

Postby UKLacrosse Tue Dec 06, 2011 4:46 pm

oldman wrote:
UKLacrosse wrote:Well, Susie Ganzmuller, the Chair of the FIL Rules Committee, told me otherwise! She stated quite clearly that they had to waiver the rules on pocket depth .... the central pocket was unadjustable, and too deep. I don't recall claiming they were dangerous?


Interesting suggestion, but certainly not my understanding. I was umpiring out in Hannover at the Festival and was pretty much up to speed with this. I have also just checked with a couple of umpires who officiated at the U19s to see that my recollection tallied with what had happened.

The teams in Hannover were told that they could play with those incorrectly thonged de Beer sticks but the pockets still had to be tight enough to be legal, and the umpires were applying the same standard to them in stick checks as to any other pocket. Maybe Susie was explaining that the concern with the shortened thongs was that it is much more difficult to keep the pocket legal, but that in the interests of having a tournament we had to waive the strict rule about thongs being directly attached to the head top and bottom. They were not "unadjustable", just more difficult to adjust and keep in place.

As to the safety question, as the much of the tenor of this thread seems to be about safety it was not, I would suggest, unreasonable to add the comment about the dangerous sticks. It certainly seemed implied in your reply. However, please accept my apologies if you felt that I had, in any way, misrepresented your position on this.


Well I'm baffled by these two versions which do not match in any way. There is an issue with deBeer strung heads and has been for a long time. That is where the two outside leathers have been cut off part way up, and attached to the throat using nylon. That scenario would immediately provide an illegally deep pocket at the throat end, because there are no cross-strings, and with thin nylon replacing the leather, it is easier for the pocket to become deeper. However, this is not new! deBeer have been stringing their top heads this way for some time, and there must be hundreds in use in this country. So, why did this come as a surprise to the officials of women's lacrosse at a World Championships? In addition, it was stated that eventually a supply of new 'Gripper Pockets' were available, so the heads could be restrung. However, all that would have been necessary was replacement of the two outside leathers, not the complete pocket. I guess this is way off topic and should be the basis of a new thread - women's stick rules!
Warrior Lacrosse Equipment & Apparel
Brine Lacrosse Equipment & Apparel
www.uklacrosse.com
User avatar
UKLaxfan
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 4109
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 1:36 pm
gender: Male
Location: Heaton Moor, Stockport
Contact:

Re: DeFran's weekly installment

Postby UKLaxfan Tue Dec 06, 2011 7:26 pm

I've read the article on the ELA site and don't have any problem with it.

It's good that an LDO is willing to be honest about his observations on the English game and contribute every week on the game in the North.

There is a different culture in the USA where quite often coaches are professional and there is a professional courtesy not to embarrass a fellow coach either by running up score in a mismatch or by calling stick checks which are seen as cheap or "bush league" I've never quite understood this philosophy as an illegal stick is an illegal stick whatever rule it is breaking.

As for getting called twice in the same game, you would hope that after the first call that all players would adjust their sticks but that simply isn't the case.

I had a situation this season where a goal was disallowed due to a shooting string being too long and players wanted to argue the toss rather than adjust their sticks, I had to call a timeout to emphasize to my team that all players need to sort the sticks out before recommencing the game.

As it turned out we won the game and the stick check call didn't impact the result of the game, had we lost by a goal my views might have been different.

storm in a tea cup

10p
User avatar
rpowell
League Mod
League Mod
Posts: 410
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 6:58 pm
gender: Male

Re: DeFran's weekly installment

Postby rpowell Tue Dec 06, 2011 7:30 pm

UKLacrosse wrote:
oldman wrote:
Then again, having heard that they chose to ignore illegally deep pockets at this summer's World U19's on the basis that users were unable to correct


Actually, I don't think you are correct there UK Lacrosse. The issue was, I believe, not illegally deep pockets but how the main leather or leather replacement actually connected to the head of the cross. Some manufacturers, and I can't remember who, had a leather which terminated in a string or cord and it is this string or cord that runs through the wall of the head making contact. For some reason that was declared illegal and all of a sudden a large number of sticks were effectively illegal. There was no way of correcting that at short notice and so the sticks were allowed for the event.

While the championships were indeed played with sticks using technically illegal pockets, they were not illegally deep and therefore dangerous.


Well, Susie Ganzmuller, the Chair of the FIL Rules Committee, told me otherwise! She stated quite clearly that they had to waiver the rules on pocket depth .... the central pocket was unadjustable, and too deep. I don't recall claiming they were dangerous?


My understanding (like oldman's) is that it was not the depth of the pocket that was the issue, but the way the stringing had been constructed. All the players involved (and there were many) had been playing with these sticks adjusted to the correct depth for months up until the tournament. The only way to get the sticks involved compliant with the wording of the regulation would have been to restring them. Not what you want a couple of days before a World Championship :)

I was in Hannover - the pocket depth was checked in the usual manner before every match - that definitely wasn't the issue...
User avatar
UKLacrosse
Posts: 747
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 2:44 pm
gender: Male

Re: DeFran's weekly installment

Postby UKLacrosse Tue Dec 06, 2011 8:12 pm

What really amazes me is how a game that is making such strong moves to expand on a global basis, with dreams of consideration for the Olympics, has to waiver its own rules for a World Championships! Not that it was something simple, it was pretty basic! There is such a poor knowledge of the technical detail, and a serious abuse of the rules within the game, aded to a total inability to police the rules. This rule did not magic itself on the day of the tournament, girls have been using these sticks illegally since they purchased them. I could expand even further on women's stick rules, but basically, having FIL rules which the game cannot stick to, makes those rules highly questionable, and irrelevant. Would any other sport get itself in a mess like that?
Warrior Lacrosse Equipment & Apparel

Brine Lacrosse Equipment & Apparel

www.uklacrosse.com
User avatar
oldman
Posts: 259
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 4:23 pm
gender: Male
Location: Cranbrook, Kent
Contact:

Re: DeFran's weekly installment

Postby oldman Tue Dec 06, 2011 8:35 pm

While I have a certain sympathy for you point of view, the situation is clouded by the fact that the sport effectively runs under two set of rules; full international and US college. Even in the US there are variations. There are variations in the rules used in the men's game between the US and everywhere else. Clearly, it is unsatisfactory to have to waive (sic) the rules especially at a World Championships, however, did it make a huge amount of difference? ... I would suggest NO.

Lacrosse is certainly not the only sport to struggle with equipment development and the rules. Table tennis had the glue issue, cricket had aluminium bats, rugby and football have both struggled with ball technology at World Championships. That is not to say that the rules don't need addressing and with some urgency, but just to get things in proportion. Hopefully FIL will seize the opportunity to address the issue over women's sticks and we can move on.
Kent Lacrosse Development Association
Cranbrook Lacrosse Club
Maidstone Lacrosse Club
User avatar
rpowell
League Mod
League Mod
Posts: 410
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 6:58 pm
gender: Male

Re: DeFran's weekly installment

Postby rpowell Tue Dec 06, 2011 10:00 pm

UKLacrosse wrote:...but basically, having FIL rules which the game cannot stick to, makes those rules highly questionable, and irrelevant. Would any other sport get itself in a mess like that?

Oh yes indeedy. Let me give you an example of the sort of issue we are talking about. Jane Bloggs goes to her friendly lacrosse equipment retailer and buys a stick. She makes a special effort and chooses a model that is FIL approved, and even has an FIL-approved sticker on it. But unbeknownst to Janey B. the shooting string has been curled back over itself three times between two thongs, not the regulation two. Perhaps only in one place, all the other crossings are fine. This stick will have passed dozens of pre-game checks, but she gets to the Worlds and suddenly its adjudged illegal.

To my mind, there's too much concentration on the minutiae of stringing, while in the meantime the sticks have been allowed to change from being in one plane (basically flat, like the old Brine Cup) to being "offset". That's a far more serious risk to the balance of the women's game.

But enough of this women's lacrosse nonsense... :)
User avatar
whopead
Posts: 1332
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:34 pm
gender: Male

Re: DeFran's weekly installment

Postby whopead Wed Dec 07, 2011 6:59 pm

UKLaxfan wrote:I've read the article on the ELA site and don't have any problem with it.

It's good that an LDO is willing to be honest about his observations on the English game and contribute every week on the game in the North.

There is a different culture in the USA where quite often coaches are professional and there is a professional courtesy not to embarrass a fellow coach either by running up score in a mismatch or by calling stick checks which are seen as cheap or "bush league" I've never quite understood this philosophy as an illegal stick is an illegal stick whatever rule it is breaking.

As for getting called twice in the same game, you would hope that after the first call that all players would adjust their sticks but that simply isn't the case.

I had a situation this season where a goal was disallowed due to a shooting string being too long and players wanted to argue the toss rather than adjust their sticks, I had to call a timeout to emphasize to my team that all players need to sort the sticks out before recommencing the game.

As it turned out we won the game and the stick check call didn't impact the result of the game, had we lost by a goal my views might have been different.

storm in a tea cup

10p


A good call form you if i may say so!
Nottingham LC
www.nottslax.co.uk
User avatar
dblacklock
Posts: 420
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 9:36 am
gender: Male

Re: DeFran's weekly installment

Postby dblacklock Thu Dec 08, 2011 2:54 pm

davidmcculloch81 wrote:I would have absolutely no problem (as a captain or coach) in exploiting others’ ignorance of this rule to our competitive advantage. Break the rules – deal with the consequences.

In fact, this was a tactic that we discussed before the Senior Flags semi-final vs Stockport last year (when the rule was fairly fresh). Unfortunately Mr Blacklock ruined this by asking all players of both teams to ensure that string lengths were legal and safe prior to the game.

From a safety point of view this is clearly the right approach for a ref to take.

Finally, if I got caught on it twice in one game I wouldn’t go on the National Governing Body’s website to broadcast to everyone how stupid I was.


Thanks for that. Not often I get a compliment on this site!!!

By the referee asking the coach or captain "are all your players's equipment legal" we are really saying legal in every respect to ensure the safety and integrity of the game, we are expecting that when the coach agrees and says yes that it's true. This puts it back on the players and coachng staff to make sure that this happens in every respect.

We have enough problems with players turning up on time and now you want the referees to do equipment checks. Pre game stick checks are a waste of time (how many sticks do you check for each player) and would require a rule change as the book says that there shall be no pregame equipment checks.
Don Blacklock
I'll referee the perfect game
only when you play the perfect game.

Return to “Mens Lacrosse Rules”

Monster Mesh

Monster Mesh

Login · Register