2011 NCAA Coverage

[Mort rotu]

Done, if anybody is in or around Southampton then the semi's and the final will be on in the stags head on highfield campus from 5pm (somebody else had the big screen until then). Please feel free to PM me if you need directions, postcode is SO17 1BJ

[UKLaxfan]

NCAA Men's Lacrosse DII & DIII Finals
http://www.ncaa.com/liveschedule/2011/05/29

Sunday 29th May 2011 - FREE WEBCAST

Div II Time ET
Adelphi vs. Mercyhurst 4:00 p.m.

Div III Time ET
Tufts vs. Salisbury 7:00 p.m.

[Rotisserie]

It looks like ESPN Player will be offering TWO different views of the NCAA semifinal and final games - A regular view and the 'Sky Cam View'. Should be interesting to see what it's like. Yet another reason to sign up and get your £12.99 worth of lacrosse.

For those of you who haven't signed up yet. There are now a total of 33 archived full-length games on the ESPN player.

[davidmcculloch81]

Any idea how long they will be archived for? My lax interest is low at the moment but I might need a boost early September. Can I sign up for one month in September and watch all of these games through the archive?

Ta.

[Rotisserie]

Any idea how long they will be archived for? My lax interest is low at the moment but I might need a boost early September. Can I sign up for one month in September and watch all of these games through the archive?

Ta.

I've no idea how long they'll stay on there i'm afraid. The ones on there date back as early as 12th March, but maybe it's worth dropping them an email and seeing how long they'll stay up for?

Otherwise, you can view the schedule of on-demand games without having to subscribe:
http://www.espnplayer.com/espnplayer/se ... LLEGE_PASS

[6x6]

Borrowed from another forum, Coach Desko's comments after they lost to MD.
http://blog.syracuse.com/orangelacrosse ... e_c_3.html

He's being ripped pretty good and IMO, rightfully so.

[DanSawyer]

I agree with him on both points!

Edit: I don't like the shot clock, at least not as short as mll. I do think teams should play the game more aggressively. Don't know how else to enforce it though..,

[Mort rotu]

I agree with him on both points!

Edit: I don't like the shot clock, at least not as short as mll. I do think teams should play the game more aggressively. Don't know how else to enforce it though..,

Wouldn't widening the heads to make it more rewarding to play a more aggressive defence accomplish roughly the same thing as a shot clock? it would force more turnovers and increase the need to move the ball, speeding up the apparent rate of play even if the players are stood still.

[Rotisserie]

If anything, a shot clock would lead to an even more passive defence. There's no need to go out and pressure whatsoever because you know you'll get the ball back regardless in the next 'x' seconds.

[webby]

Haven't seen the game, but I have nothing against a team killing time, especially in a play off game against a top seeded opponent. It's down to the defending team to win the ball back.

I agree that a shot clock will actually make defending more passive, and getting rid of face-offs after ever goal is a ridiculous idea. It only works in basketball because the court is about a 1/5th the size.

Yes I enjoy watching fast passed aggressive lacrosse, but I see nothing wrong with a coach developing tactics to play to his team's strengths. It happens in football all the time and no one is suggesting a rule change banning teams from defending with 10men behind the ball.

[mishy]

quick - does anyone know if i buy a monthy pass to watch the final 4 on espn can i watch past games (like the quarters?)/ watch games on demand later on in the month???

[webby]

quick - does anyone know if i buy a monthy pass to watch the final 4 on espn can i watch past games (like the quarters?)/ watch games on demand later on in the month???

I believe so.

[UKLaxfan]

A couple of free videos of the build up to FF and preparation for Denver

http://www.denverpioneers.com/newMediaP ... M_ID=18600

you get to see HOF Coach Tierney in action

[UKLaxfan]

Borrowed from another forum, Coach Desko's comments after they lost to MD.
http://blog.syracuse.com/orangelacrosse ... e_c_3.html

He's being ripped pretty good and IMO, rightfully so.

You can actually watch the interview "Desko on Season" free at
http://www.suathletics.com/showcase/#mediaarchive

He answered questions honestly and openly, he didn't bring the subject up

The timing is awful and I don't agree with all his sentiments but he has earned the right to speak his mind.

He should have said nothing until after the NCAA Final about the state of the game but it is obviously a subject he feels strongly about.

In boxing it's in the rules that both boxers must fight and a fight can be stopped as a "No Contest" by a referee that a boxer isn't fighting.

In lacrosse the stall warning isn't having an impact of teams behaviour

Maryland were warned for stalling 11 times in 64 minutes

The warning is toothless, stop or we will ask you to stop again & again & again

I actually think a shot clock would create more problems, what incentive is there for defenders to step out and play their men when they can all just sit in tight and wait for the time to run out.

The game would turn into a shooting gallery.

Likewise getting rid of the face-off would not have the desired effect. They tried this for a season in 1979 or 80, where when you conceded a goal you got the ball at the halfway line.

It was a disaster, Johns Hopkins won the title as they were able to play settled 6v6 defense after every goal and absolutely dominated the season.
http://laxbuzz.com/2010/12/06/lacrosse- ... -creators/

The real issue is the Sticks & Coaching.

They had the opportunity to change the sticks to have an impact but didn't go far enough, so the risk-reward simply makes it not worthwhile to play aggressive takeaway defense.

Coaching, as long as underdogs have the opportunity to cause an upset by reducing the number of possessions in a game and frustrating their opponent within the rules, Coaches will use this strategy.

In the meantime expect to see lots more 5-4, 4-3 and 3-2 games.

26th Feb 2011 - Loyola 3-2 Towson

Something has to be done to change the balance between attack & defense in favour of the offense.

Square Checks (Cross Checks in USA)
These are illegal in Field Lacrosse and legal in Box Lacrosse
Unfortunately they are vary rarely called and so there has been slippage of the rule to the point that now as long as you don't knock your opponent over with a square check you can get away with a cross check hold consistently through a whole game or even season.

SSDMs used to be the weak link in a defense with offensive plays set up to attack the shorty. This is no longer the case, in fact if you can give your best athlete (fast & quick feet) a short pole and tell him no to throw checks, he becomes harder to beat 1-on-1 than a long pole who throws checks

Once you take the ability to beat an individual 1-on-1 out of the game, offense becomes much much harder to be successful. Team don't have to slide as much which means they don't have to communicate or recover as much.

Less Decisions = Less Mistakes = Less Goals

I'm sure there are the purists out there who love nothing more than to see a 1-0 or a 0-0 scoreline but I'm equally as sure that most players would lose interest if they ran around every saturday without scoring a goal, which is the aim of the sport.

It would be like going fishing but never getting a bite, at some point you realise you are just sat by a lake

In lacrosse you would realise that you are just stood in a field while grown men shout at each other, not much fun.

So what are your ideas of redressing the balance between attack & defense or to improve the pace of the game?

[DanSawyer]

First things to pop into my head:

1. get rid of face-offs to restart and play like 8s - goalie steps out the crease and you play;

2. reduce the size of the attack area so it's harder to "keep it in";

3. only 3 longsticks at a time.

Not saying these are good ideas, but discuss...

[dom#10]

First things to pop into my head:

1. get rid of face-offs to restart and play like 8s - goalie steps out the crease and you play;

2. reduce the size of the attack area so it's harder to "keep it in";

3. only 3 longsticks at a time.

Not saying these are good ideas, but discuss...

i can understand the thinking behind the first two points, but why only 3 long sticks at a time?

[davewilliams]

In lacrosse the stall warning isn't having an impact of teams behaviour
Maryland were warned for stalling 11 times in 64 minutes
The warning is toothless, stop or we will ask you to stop again & again & again

I haven't seen the Syracuse vs Maryland game, but I've read comments on another forum comparing lacrosse adversely with basketball as TV entertainment. I don't like the idea of a shot-clock because it puts onus on "star" players and excludes good team play, and it puts the officials and time-keeper at the centre of the sport. Too fussy for most lacrosse being played around the world.
The stall should be recorded as a team/coach offense and punished much as football treats the "professional foul", ie, in lacrosse's case, possession changes and a nominated starting defender takes a 1minute penalty graduating by a minute for each subsequent event. In addition, the stall box should be reduced to take away the space behind the crease.

Square Checks (Cross Checks in USA)
These are illegal in Field Lacrosse and legal in Box Lacrosse
Unfortunately they are vary rarely called and so there has been slippage of the rule to the point that now as long as you don't knock your opponent over with a square check you can get away with a cross check hold consistently through a whole game or even season.

I agree, the ref'ing seems odd. Lacrosse photographs often feature the rigid-arms set-piece square-check; looks as if it is coached. The rule should be enforced, before attackers start "diving" football/basketball style to draw fouls.
(Last summer's WCs surprised me; so many players (not Team England) drawing cheap technicals by falling over at the slightest contact, especially on ground balls.)

They had the opportunity to change the sticks to have an impact but didn't go far enough, so the risk-reward simply makes it not worthwhile to play aggressive takeaway defense.

Not sure about this one any more; I've bought an Evo, life's good.

1. get rid of face-offs to restart and play like 8s - goalie steps out the crease and you play

No; the face-off, if taken quickly and officiated properly, is a major part of the physical contest. Nothing wrong with specialist players at the face and wing.

3. only 3 longsticks at a time.

Great idea, less faffing with boring substitutions and a more open field, encouraging speed of clearing and attack.

In the end, the game of lacrosse has to flow quicker for the fickle, shifting, entertain-me-now American TV audience, whilst retaining the traditional elements of speed, skill and contact. Coach Desko must be riled to have spoken so soon, but I understand why; his team filled with natrual flair players has been frustrated and out-coached two seasons running before getting to the final four. I only hope Tillman takes the reins off his Maryland team to allow expression later today.

[DanSawyer]

I agree that the shot clock is a bad idea, but only because I think they'd set it too short. I don't have a problem with a soft defence: you've got the ball, you attack. The problem is that attacks are too passive.

I'm not convinced by time in the box for a stall, although I can see the attraction and could be persuaded. Another option would be that you get the warning and that gives you, say 30s to attack the goal properly. Difficult to police though. Definitely make the box smaller.

My thinking behind removing the lsm was to encourage offences to attack and get rid of some substitutions. Tbh though, I wouldn't object to the removal of longsticks altogether. They're just a bunch of Neanderthal meatheads who don't have the skills to play attack, anyway

Other ways to deal with the substitution problem:

1. Make it slower. If all players on the sideline had to be 20 yds back and not wearing jersey, helmet or gloves, and they couldn't start kitting up until the outgoing player has removed his kit and sat down (all just an off-the-top-of-the-head example), you might think twice about it!

2. Only the team that is not in possession may sub on the fly. Feel free to play your defensive specialists, but you're stuck with them if you get the ball back.

3. A team may not sub if the ball is in their offensive half. This makes that lsm switch risky because you can't do it until the ball has gone over half way and you're behind the play.

[Rotisserie]

First things to pop into my head:

1. get rid of face-offs to restart and play like 8s - goalie steps out the crease and you play;

The face off is what keeps this game interesting. Without a faceoff, there is no way for teams behind by more than one goal to come back at the end of a game and thus the excitement of the last few minutes is removed.

2. reduce the size of the attack area so it's harder to "keep it in";

This could work, hard to know what's a good size of box though. Also whilst this will lead to more turnovers will it actually lead to more goals?

3. only 3 longsticks at a time.

I actually think removing the 4th pole is a step in the right direction. It opens up so much more than just the extra dodging opportunity but may make it harder for teams to force turnovers when they need them.

I think the ultimate problem is the ball retention. So many hard, clean checks go completely unrewarded because they fail to dislodge the ball. Make the stick heads wider and you'll start to see take-away defenders shine again.

On another note though, is it really that bad to watch a low scoring game? I for one found the maryland/cuse game pretty entertaining, especially towards the end. After all Football has almost 90 minutes of nothing happening, often ending in a 0-0 scoreline yet its the most popular sport in the world.

[webby]

From people's experience is this an issue in the UK or International game?