Change to dive plays around the crease approved in men’s lacrosse | Syracusefan.com

Change to dive plays around the crease approved in men’s lacrosse

OrangeXtreme

The Mayor of Dewitt
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Messages
177,665
Like
279,578

In men's lacrosse, a goal scored while the offensive player is propelled into the crease/goal mouth due to illegal contact by the defender will count, starting with the 2023 season.

The NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel approved the new rule during a conference call Wednesday.

Previously in this scenario, the goal would not count.

Plays around the crease have been a topic of discussion for the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Rules Committee in recent years. Committee members were concerned that defensive players were being rewarded for illegal contact.

The panel also approved a more-defined penalty structure for players who contact opponents in the head or neck.
  • Players who make indirect contact to an opponent's head or neck will receive a one-minute penalty.
  • Players who make direct contact to an opponent's head or neck will receive a two-minute penalty.
  • Players who make excessive contact to an opponent's head or neck will receive a three-minute penalty.
Previously, when players were contacted in the head or neck, it was left up to the referee's discretion whether to award a one-, two- or three-minute penalty.
 

wgdsr

2nd String
Joined
Feb 7, 2019
Messages
600
Like
400

In men's lacrosse, a goal scored while the offensive player is propelled into the crease/goal mouth due to illegal contact by the defender will count, starting with the 2023 season.

The NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel approved the new rule during a conference call Wednesday.

Previously in this scenario, the goal would not count.

Plays around the crease have been a topic of discussion for the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Rules Committee in recent years. Committee members were concerned that defensive players were being rewarded for illegal contact.

The panel also approved a more-defined penalty structure for players who contact opponents in the head or neck.
  • Players who make indirect contact to an opponent's head or neck will receive a one-minute penalty.
  • Players who make direct contact to an opponent's head or neck will receive a two-minute penalty.
  • Players who make excessive contact to an opponent's head or neck will receive a three-minute penalty.
Previously, when players were contacted in the head or neck, it was left up to the referee's discretion whether to award a one-, two- or three-minute penalty.
what's indirect contact to the head? you push the players stick into his face?
 

nyclax

Scout Team
Joined
Sep 9, 2021
Messages
387
Like
513
what's indirect contact to the head? you push the players stick into his face?

maybe when you hit someone in the shoulder and then it rides up and catches someone in the head/neck after. "direct" and "indirect" may not be the best qualifiers. primary/secondary contact perhaps more accurate? are you hitting someone straight in the head with no or little other body contact or is the contact with the head the result/byproduct of what would have otherwise been a legal collision. that sort of thing. dunno. you see guys check in the shoulder all the time and then it rides up and catches the other guy under the helmet. unintentional but still a foul. that shouldn't be the same type of penalty as someone who goes head-hunting.
 

DoctahLexus

All Conference
Joined
Jun 8, 2018
Messages
2,441
Like
4,295
As always the phrasing with these rule announcements is such a headache and they seem too dumb to realize it. They say "it used to be the refs decision if it was a 1 2 or 3 minute penalty" but isn't it still kind of the refs decision on whether or not the contact was direct or indirect and WITHOUT QUESTION the refs decision on if it was just normal direct or "excessive"?? Excessive is such a vague term that it is left open to the refs interpretation completely. That is still the refs discretion and they act like it isn't. These committee people clearly received some excessive contact to the head and neck area in their playing days.
 

dollarbill44

Hall of Fame
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
8,101
Like
12,905
As always the phrasing with these rule announcements is such a headache and they seem too dumb to realize it. They say "it used to be the refs decision if it was a 1 2 or 3 minute penalty" but isn't it still kind of the refs decision on whether or not the contact was direct or indirect and WITHOUT QUESTION the refs decision on if it was just normal direct or "excessive"?? Excessive is such a vague term that it is left open to the refs interpretation completely. That is still the refs discretion and they act like it isn't. These committee people clearly received some excessive contact to the head and neck area in their playing days.
Agreed. I also feel like "excessive" contact to the head should be even harsher, like 5 minutes. Or maybe 3 minutes for the first offense and game for a second. If you're trying to prevent head injuries, really commit to it.
 

wgdsr

2nd String
Joined
Feb 7, 2019
Messages
600
Like
400
As always the phrasing with these rule announcements is such a headache and they seem too dumb to realize it. They say "it used to be the refs decision if it was a 1 2 or 3 minute penalty" but isn't it still kind of the refs decision on whether or not the contact was direct or indirect and WITHOUT QUESTION the refs decision on if it was just normal direct or "excessive"?? Excessive is such a vague term that it is left open to the refs interpretation completely. That is still the refs discretion and they act like it isn't. These committee people clearly received some excessive contact to the head and neck area in their playing days.
the discretion was there, but it was (i think) contact, then excessive, and then malicious or intentional. or something to that effect.

so this is a softening for the most part, and a chance to throw more flags, or at least box them longer.
 

SkyTopBus44

Starter
Joined
Jan 25, 2017
Messages
1,660
Like
1,873
Felt like a big disadvantage to the offensive player around the cage. If it looks like a player will score hit them and the goal would have been disallowed. on the surface the new change seems to eliminate that option
 

wgdsr

2nd String
Joined
Feb 7, 2019
Messages
600
Like
400
Felt like a big disadvantage to the offensive player around the cage. If it looks like a player will score hit them and the goal would have been disallowed. on the surface the new change seems to eliminate that option
you can still hit them if it's legal. the judgment will now be on that. and unlike the thread title and article header, it's not a dive rule. dive's just one subset.
 

DoctahLexus

All Conference
Joined
Jun 8, 2018
Messages
2,441
Like
4,295
the discretion was there, but it was (i think) contact, then excessive, and then malicious or intentional. or something to that effect.

so this is a softening for the most part, and a chance to throw more flags, or at least box them longer.
Thank you I had no idea what the old wording was. Hilarious that the old wording was also vague.

That is what I am thinking as well. A dumb word salad that amounts to them just making the game softer than it already is.
 

SkyTopBus44

Starter
Joined
Jan 25, 2017
Messages
1,660
Like
1,873
you can still hit them if it's legal. the judgment will now be on that. and unlike the thread title and article header, it's not a dive rule. dive's just one subset.
I thought if the player was hit either legally or illegally into the crease and the shot went in the goal was disallowed in the past. Now it is a good goal regardless if you are knocked into the crease. I'm confused :)
 

wgdsr

2nd String
Joined
Feb 7, 2019
Messages
600
Like
400
I thought if the player was hit either legally or illegally into the crease and the shot went in the goal was disallowed in the past. Now it is a good goal regardless if you are knocked into the crease. I'm confused :)
no worries. you may have just skipped thru the reading of the rule. they specifically note illegal contact. which would be late hit, push, crosscheck, ur, to the head or illegal body check, etc.

let's say a guy dives and the defender hits him from the side, not a foul. or he runs down the wing toward the crease and the defender rides his angle without a push from the back. if the att finishes in the goal mouth... no foul, no goal, defense ball. and if the att hits the goalie in goalmouth, 1 minute unsportsmanlike on offense.
 
Last edited:

Hoo's That

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
17,192
Like
39,873
I thought if the player was hit either legally or illegally into the crease and the shot went in the goal was disallowed in the past. Now it is a good goal regardless if you are knocked into the crease. I'm confused :)
Before the change, if you entered or touched the arc, the goal was disallowed and you got a penalty regardless of how you entered the crease. Now they're saying everything is good if you are fouled.
 

wgdsr

2nd String
Joined
Feb 7, 2019
Messages
600
Like
400
Before the change, if you entered or touched the arc, the goal was disallowed and you got a penalty regardless of how you entered the crease. Now they're saying everything is good if you are fouled.
in '19-'20 year, rule was changed to having to make contact with goalie within the goalmouth for it to be a 1 minute. plus, it had to be determined you were propelling yourself toward the goalmouth for it to be called. whether you were fouled or not wasn't the determining factor (though being fouled certainly could influence where you went).
 

SkyTopBus44

Starter
Joined
Jan 25, 2017
Messages
1,660
Like
1,873
Before the change, if you entered or touched the arc, the goal was disallowed and you got a penalty regardless of how you entered the crease. Now they're saying everything is good if you are fouled.
Thanks for confirming, as what you stated was what I thought the rule was but wasn’t clear through in my posts.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
158,789
Messages
4,250,824
Members
5,574
Latest member
Bloder

Online statistics

Members online
23
Guests online
228
Total visitors
251




Top Bottom