NCAA Rule Changes

D2 Mens Lacrosse
Post Reply
McLax
Posts: 23
Joined: Sat Mar 23, 2019 3:53 pm

NCAA Rule Changes

Post by McLax »

Thoughts on the new rule changes if we get 2021 lacrosse?

Listing of 2021 changes with rationale:

https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/champi ... hanges.pdf

1. Goal mouth markings and dive rules.

This article has a picture of the goal mouth marking:

https://www.uslaxmagazine.com/college/m ... dive-alive

If an offensive player, in possession of the ball and outside the crease area, dives, jumps, runs or makes contact with the goal mouth, the goal shall be disallowed. In addition, should the offensive player initiate contact with the goalkeeper while the goalkeeper is within the goal mouth, the offensive player shall be penalized with a minimum of a 1-minute foul. The penalty may be releasable or nonreleasable at the discretion of the referee. Defensive contact legal or illegal may have has no effect on this play as the offensive player may not enter the goal mouth in any way.
Rationale: To clarify and reinforce that the goal mouth is a restricted area for offensive players. This further reinforces the goal crease prohibitions for the goalkeeper.

My son was a goalie through club, high school and 4 years of D2 so I was not a big fan of the dive rules to begin with (potential injury to the goalie and the shooter). There was a lot of discussion on the dive from the Limestone/Tampa 1/4 final last year and the difficulties with making the right call. This crease inside the crease rule might make it easier to make the call and the penalty for contact inside the goal mouth might take some of the human projectile out of the game. Or they could have just admitted the dive was a bad idea and gotten rid of it...

2. Face off rules.

To prohibit the use of the motorcycle grip during the faceoff.

Rationale: To address the clamping and the resulting long stalemates (thereby enhancing the pace of play), to provide more opportunities for the use of different techniques on the faceoff and to produce more 50/50 ground balls. This change to reduce the power clamp coupled with enforcing the crosse rules, will in turn, reduce the manipulation of the crosse before, during and after the faceoff.

Don’t necessarily agree with this one. The position evolved into what it is by innovative players adapting and dominating. Read someone’s commentary on this as saying something like, * no other player on the field is told how to hold their stick, why should a face off specialists be different? * I tend to agree.

4-3.b.2 Faceoff Procedure
To require that during the start of the faceoff, the players taking the faceoff may only have their feet, gloves and lacrosse stick on the ground.

Rationale: To give players more options and counter moves, while creating a quicker ground ball, resulting in more 50/50 ground ball opportunities. In addition, to reduce the initial body contact between faceoff players, when the whistle is blown to start play.

If you are not a fan of the face off this might be for you. I personally enjoy the battle between 2 dominate fogos. Again, feels like penalizing someone who has worked to dominate his position.

4-4 Faceoff Violating Player
To establish that on the third faceoff violation of the half, the player who has committed the third violation must serve the penalty.

Rationale: To eliminate the use of the in-home (player designated to serve penalties) to serve a penalty and instead require the individual who committed the violation to serve the violation.

No real issue with this.

4. Giving the defense a time out during certain dead all situations.


4-15.c Defensive Timeout
To permit the defensive team to also call a timeout during dead ball situations without having the shot clock reset to 80 seconds.

Rationale: This change would permit either team to call a timeout during dead ball situations and not have the shot clock reset. This simplifies the reset during any dead ball timeout. This change applies only to a dead ball, not a loose ball push.

Another way to slow down the game.
WhiteCarrera
Posts: 379
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2019 5:11 pm

Re: NCAA Rule Changes

Post by WhiteCarrera »

My two cents:

The dive rules will always need to be cleaned up. This is probably a step in the right direction, but it's gonna be a sticky situation for awhile.

Faceoff rule changes always seem a little arbitrary. Whatever you do, you'll always have certain FOGOs that rise up and dominate the other FOGOs -- right to the point that a better athlete with a pole steps up and dominates them. Question:- does eliminating the motorcycle grip mean both hands? or could a player essentially make his bottom hand the underhand, and do a single moto grip near the head? Any officials in the house?

FO violation penalties: I thought the player already served his own penalty. Maybe the in-home was an option, but why would a coach ever take his in-home off the field to serve a penalty that his FOGO could serve. Unless your FOGO was on your Man down D, but would that have been allowed? (I repeat - any officials?)

Final comment -- I wish they'd go to the PLL faceoff rule. Quit worrying about counting to three violations; but if there's a violation, then the offender has to sit out the next faceoff. That seems simple, consistent and appropriate.
It's either a thoughtful comment or smartass sarcasm. Learn to recognize the difference.
Post Reply

Return to “D2 MENS LACROSSE”