Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="OrangeXtreme, post: 5091492, member: 41"] [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/six-topics-the-ncaa-rules-committee-could-or-should-discuss-as-2024-meeting-begins/63583[/URL] [HEADING=3]1. Tweaks to Instant Replay[/HEADING] How did instant replay go in Year One? Certainly there was no play as drastic and embarrassing as the Duke-Penn State play, but implementation wasn’t without some confusion and controversy. McCabe Millon’s goal vs. Johns Hopkins in the NCAA Quarterfinals might have gotten the most attention about the implementation of replay review, but another play with less than four minutes to play in that game might be more noteworthy in terms of the mechanics of the replay. A Joey Terenzi shot with four seconds on the shot clock was reviewed to see if Johns Hopkins goalie Chayse Ierlan deflected it over the crossbar, thus resetting the clock. Just two weeks earlier in the Big East Tournament, a Georgetown shot in overtime triggered a shot clock reset. Replay showed it should not have been called that way, but the refs there said it was not a reviewable play. The difference in how these situations were handled can likely be chalked up to Year One growing pains, but certainly some clarity on which plays are and are not reviewable needs assessment. A few other aspects of the replay worth discussion: Whether or not coaches should be able to use a challenge with less than four minutes or in OT if they still have a timeout. It is unlikely for anything beyond the NCAA Tournament, or even Championship Weekend when better camera angles exist, but is there a benefit to taking the on-field referees out of the mix? For the NCAA Tournament, could a central replay review exist to make decisions so the on-site referees aren’t involved in affirming or overturning their own call. [HEADING=3]2. Face-Off Changes[/HEADING] One of the most divisive stories of the offseason was the discussions around the face-offs at the annual IMCLA Convention. There, the coaches discussed shortening the shot clock to 60 seconds from 80 after the face-off. This would be a similar change to what the Premier Lacrosse League implemented last year — dropping from 52 seconds to 32 after a face-off win. That changed the whole tenor of face-offs in the league, causing some teams to abandon dressing a face-off specialist altogether. More drastic measures were posed as well, including eliminating the clamp altogether. Face-off specialists surely have grown tired of the annual attention on their position at the Rules Committee meetings. One thing leaders at the position have been clamoring for is a return of the physical set from officials, which went away post-COVID. [HEADING=3]3. Plays Around the Crease[/HEADING] It doesn’t seem likely that the Committee will eliminate the goalmouth or the dive altogether, but it’s also nearly impossible to think a room full of people dedicated to shaping the sport’s rules would not come out with some sort of additional guidance around the crease. [HEADING=3][/HEADING] [HEADING=3]4. Sportsmanship, Communication with Officials[/HEADING] There was quite a bit of confusion in early-April’s Cornell vs. Syracuse game. Syracuse offensive coordinator Pat March was ejected from the game after he made contact with the referee when disputing a call. There is a lot to unpack in what was a unique situation, but the Committee can address some actionable items: [LIST] [*]What is the role of an assistant coach when interacting with refs — if any? Should all communication with refs be filtered through only the head coach? [*]Is there an appropriate warning process before expulsion for verbal altercations between referees and any members of the coaching staff? [*]If a coach is expelled, what is the appeals process? Syracuse coach Gary Gait said in the week after the Cornell game that he was dismayed by the lack of clarity around appeal as March was suspended for the following game, as well. [/LIST] Generally, sportsmanship was a point of emphasis last year and detailed in Page 10 of the official rulebook. “Image of the sport is at risk,” it said related to pre- and postgame issues, going onto the field of play during live play. There is also the issue of officials assigning and conflicts of interest that were brought up after that Cornell-Syracuse game; those issues likely lie under the purview of the referees’ association. [HEADING=3]5. Tweaks to Non-Releasable Penalties for Hits to the Head[/HEADING] In the early 2010s, the Rules Committee took significant steps to reduce the frequency of significant body checks and hits to the head in an effort to make the sport safer in the face of growing concerns about the severity of concussions to athletes’ longterm health. While that reaction was comparatively swift and successful, it was about a decade before the Committee readdressed the issue. Again, the implementation was viewed as significant, adding three tiers of locked-in penalties for hits to the head. Additionally, this implementation was part of the expanded video review as officials were allowed to head to the video board to confirm whether their adjudication was appropriate. Again, there doesn’t seem to be much consensus around changes that should be made to the system, but it wouldn’t be surprising to see the Committee make tweaks to streamline the process. [HEADING=3]6. Shooting from Defensive Zone[/HEADING] The 10-man ride — utilizing the goalie to cover an offensive player while the opposing team clears, freeing up an additional defender in the middle of the field — has proliferated since the implementation of the shot clock. Along with the 10-man ride, defenders shooting from their own end of the field has proliferated, as well, because the net is open and, if an clearing player is under pressure and a “failure to advance” call is impending, giving a teammate the chance to back-up the shot and retain possession is about as good of an outcome as possible. It’s produced some highlight-reel 70- and 80-yard goals, but also raised questions as to whether such a shot is in the spirit of the rule. Put another way, such a shot bails out the clearing team and prevents the riding team from benefiting from doing its job well. Asked simply: should a shot from the defensive end of the field (or within the clearing team's own restraining box) be able to be backed up to retain possession? [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?