NU at UNC 3/25

[GratefulRed]

Maybe someone should start a thread called “Top 10 Taylor flops” with the video clips.

Let's open it up. 2024 Lady Flyng Award nominations

[intheknow247]

Don’t have any inside knowledge and am really just exercising my inherent poster-right to speculate, but if Ingrilli was healthy, wouldn’t she be playing? I thought there used to be a 50% rule, that is, if you played more than 50% of the year, you couldn’t red shirt even if you got injured. Is that still the rule?

I agree, if she were healthy I assume she'd be playing. No reason to believe that Nelson is injured. I don't think there's any set rule on how long you can play before injury to get the year back. It's totally at the discretion of NCAA.

There are set rules by NCAA...NCAA stipulate injury must have occurred prior to the first competition of the second half of your season AND that you have not played in more than 3 contests or 30% of your competition dates (which for women's lacrosse is around 6-7 games).

[GratefulRed]

It's games that are over and an extra goal is scored for no reason such as what happened in last 10 secs yesterday.

I think there was a big reason, however ignoble, for Amonte to rip her FU goal. She was on the receiving end of some brutality during the game. And if you saw Izzy's gestures after she scored to make it 15-10, there were some hard feelings flying around. She rarely ever reacts like that. She was pissed about something. I think the whole team was. Factor the 2022 semifinal into the whole mix and... FU.

Would have been very interesting if the refs saw/coaches challenged since she ran through the goal circle.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Izzy stepped on, not through, the goal circle with her left foot once but was bumped by rushing-to-close-the-gap Carolina defender Gabi Hall after the goal was in the net. Does getting pushed/bumped/checked into or on the crease by a defender get factored into the rule?

[NULax2]

hmmm wrote the following about NU scoring the final goal in yesterday's game : "Especially considering NU has a history of doing this?"
REALLY?

Give this Thread "the history of doing this." Keep in mind the word History. Show that History.

In addition to the Championship game, the following occurred just within the last 1.5 seasons. I think I've proven my point, but maybe you don't consider this to be "History" so you can do the rest of the research yourself.

Just this year:
Scored with 30 seconds left against Albany to make the score 25-8(Scored 3 goals in last 4.5 mins)
Scored with 1:17 left against Central Michigan to make the score 27-3(It was 19-3 after 3 qtrs so scored 8 more in 4th including 4 goals in last 5.5 mins)
Scored with 1:08 left against Marquette to make the score 21-3 (Scored 3 goals in last 4.5 mins)

Last Year:
Scored with 47 seconds left against Vandy to make the score 24-7
Scored with 1 second left against Youngstown St to make score 24-3

Without looking up the actual players that scored. I am 99% sure that they were scored by the bench.
KAH doesn't leave her starters in at the end of blowout games.
And I have NO problems with the bench scoring when they get a chance to play.
Sorry that you have a problem with it.

It's not just scoring in blowouts. As I said, I get that you cant tell players that don't get to play very much to just play catch for the whole quarter. I'm just talking about taking last second shots. And that doesn't just apply to blowouts. It's games that are over and an extra goal is scored for no reason such as what happened in last 10 secs yesterday. KAH could have had Amonte pull the ball out, as SSB stated she expected because the game was over. She didn't.

Other recent examples of non-bench players scoring late meaningless goals:
The aforementioned Rhatigan goal at the final buzzer to make championship game 18-6.
Sam Smith scored a man up goal with the shot clock off with 33 secs left against Cuse to make the game 18-14.
Izzy scored with 1 second left against Stony Brook to make the game 13-8.
Izzy scored with 1:15 left and shot clock off against OSU to make the score 17-10

This is just in last 1.5 seasons. I'm not going to keep going back. I was challenged by Larry on stating that NU has a history of scoring what ONW calls FU goals. I think I've made my point. Of course NU isn't the only team that does this. It is far more prevalent in the women's game than the men's. Maybe because of the more physical nature of the men's game and there are often consequences for things like this in mlax.

Sorry YOU have a problem with last second goals by starters in CLOSE games. I have no such problem.
And after the 2022 Semifinal game, I doubt NU will ever think twice about it.
NU's philosophy is to keep their foot on the pedal until the final horn sounds.

[Laxfan500]

It's games that are over and an extra goal is scored for no reason such as what happened in last 10 secs yesterday.

I think there was a big reason, however ignoble, for Amonte to rip her FU goal. She was on the receiving end of some brutality during the game. And if you saw Izzy's gestures after she scored to make it 15-10, there were some hard feelings flying around. She rarely ever reacts like that. She was pissed about something. I think the whole team was. Factor the 2022 semifinal into the whole mix and... FU.

Kind of funny …you are referencing the 2022 semi with only a handful of starters from that team still there. I think you want to beat every team you play . Some teams maybe you play harder against in conference . I don’t think teams go out seeking to avenge a game from 2 years ago .

[hmmm]

hmmm wrote the following about NU scoring the final goal in yesterday's game : "Especially considering NU has a history of doing this?"
REALLY?

Give this Thread "the history of doing this." Keep in mind the word History. Show that History.

In addition to the Championship game, the following occurred just within the last 1.5 seasons. I think I've proven my point, but maybe you don't consider this to be "History" so you can do the rest of the research yourself.

Just this year:
Scored with 30 seconds left against Albany to make the score 25-8(Scored 3 goals in last 4.5 mins)
Scored with 1:17 left against Central Michigan to make the score 27-3(It was 19-3 after 3 qtrs so scored 8 more in 4th including 4 goals in last 5.5 mins)
Scored with 1:08 left against Marquette to make the score 21-3 (Scored 3 goals in last 4.5 mins)

Last Year:
Scored with 47 seconds left against Vandy to make the score 24-7
Scored with 1 second left against Youngstown St to make score 24-3

Without looking up the actual players that scored. I am 99% sure that they were scored by the bench.
KAH doesn't leave her starters in at the end of blowout games.
And I have NO problems with the bench scoring when they get a chance to play.
Sorry that you have a problem with it.

It's not just scoring in blowouts. As I said, I get that you cant tell players that don't get to play very much to just play catch for the whole quarter. I'm just talking about taking last second shots. And that doesn't just apply to blowouts. It's games that are over and an extra goal is scored for no reason such as what happened in last 10 secs yesterday. KAH could have had Amonte pull the ball out, as SSB stated she expected because the game was over. She didn't.

Other recent examples of non-bench players scoring late meaningless goals:
The aforementioned Rhatigan goal at the final buzzer to make championship game 18-6.
Sam Smith scored a man up goal with the shot clock off with 33 secs left against Cuse to make the game 18-14.
Izzy scored with 1 second left against Stony Brook to make the game 13-8.
Izzy scored with 1:15 left and shot clock off against OSU to make the score 17-10

This is just in last 1.5 seasons. I'm not going to keep going back. I was challenged by Larry on stating that NU has a history of scoring what ONW calls FU goals. I think I've made my point. Of course NU isn't the only team that does this. It is far more prevalent in the women's game than the men's. Maybe because of the more physical nature of the men's game and there are often consequences for things like this in mlax.

Sorry YOU have a problem with last second goals by starters in CLOSE games. I have no such problem.
And after the 2022 Semifinal game, I doubt NU will ever think twice about it.
NU's philosophy is to keep their foot on the pedal until the final horn sounds.

That's great YOU don't have a problem with it. That's certainly your right. And yes, NU philosophy is to keep their foot on the pedal until the final horn sounds, sportsmanship be damned. Was kind of my point, so thank you. Not sure how a 4 goal lead with 1 second left is a "close game", but whatever.

[Seacoaster(1)]

hmmm wrote the following about NU scoring the final goal in yesterday's game : "Especially considering NU has a history of doing this?"
REALLY?

Give this Thread "the history of doing this." Keep in mind the word History. Show that History.

In addition to the Championship game, the following occurred just within the last 1.5 seasons. I think I've proven my point, but maybe you don't consider this to be "History" so you can do the rest of the research yourself.

Just this year:
Scored with 30 seconds left against Albany to make the score 25-8(Scored 3 goals in last 4.5 mins)
Scored with 1:17 left against Central Michigan to make the score 27-3(It was 19-3 after 3 qtrs so scored 8 more in 4th including 4 goals in last 5.5 mins)
Scored with 1:08 left against Marquette to make the score 21-3 (Scored 3 goals in last 4.5 mins)

Last Year:
Scored with 47 seconds left against Vandy to make the score 24-7
Scored with 1 second left against Youngstown St to make score 24-3

Without looking up the actual players that scored. I am 99% sure that they were scored by the bench.
KAH doesn't leave her starters in at the end of blowout games.
And I have NO problems with the bench scoring when they get a chance to play.
Sorry that you have a problem with it.

It's not just scoring in blowouts. As I said, I get that you cant tell players that don't get to play very much to just play catch for the whole quarter. I'm just talking about taking last second shots. And that doesn't just apply to blowouts. It's games that are over and an extra goal is scored for no reason such as what happened in last 10 secs yesterday. KAH could have had Amonte pull the ball out, as SSB stated she expected because the game was over. She didn't.

Other recent examples of non-bench players scoring late meaningless goals:
The aforementioned Rhatigan goal at the final buzzer to make championship game 18-6.
Sam Smith scored a man up goal with the shot clock off with 33 secs left against Cuse to make the game 18-14.
Izzy scored with 1 second left against Stony Brook to make the game 13-8.
Izzy scored with 1:15 left and shot clock off against OSU to make the score 17-10

This is just in last 1.5 seasons. I'm not going to keep going back. I was challenged by Larry on stating that NU has a history of scoring what ONW calls FU goals. I think I've made my point. Of course NU isn't the only team that does this. It is far more prevalent in the women's game than the men's. Maybe because of the more physical nature of the men's game and there are often consequences for things like this in mlax.

Sorry YOU have a problem with last second goals by starters in CLOSE games. I have no such problem.
And after the 2022 Semifinal game, I doubt NU will ever think twice about it.
NU's philosophy is to keep their foot on the pedal until the final horn sounds.

That's great YOU don't have a problem with it. That's certainly your right. And yes, NU philosophy is to keep their foot on the pedal until the final horn sounds, sportsmanship be damned. Was kind of my point, so thank you.

Hah! Always nice to get validation so promptly. Butta-Bing.

[njbill]

This subject, or various permutations of it, has come up regularly (annually?) in the 20+ years I’ve been on laxpower/fanlax. Virtually all of the points being raised now are raised every year.

My own view has evolved. Currently I think the best practice is to put subs in at the end of a lopsided game and that it is perfectly OK for the subs to score, even in the waning seconds. The defenders are still defending, the goaltenders are still goaltending, the refs are still officiating, the know-it-all-fans are still hollering instructions to the players and the refs from the sidelines. So I don’t see any problem with the attackers continuing to shoot.

It gets a little more complicated when coaches decide to leave their starters in at the end of blowout games. My view is that the coaches should pull the starters at that point. But if they choose not to do so, then that is on the coach. I have no problem whatsoever with players whom the coach has put on the field playing 100% until the final whistle. That includes scoring in the last few seconds. I simply don’t understand why it is “OK” for defenders to defend and goalies to try to stop shots, but not OK for attackers to shoot.

Some raise the issue of sportsmanship. Yeah, maybe 50 years ago. But that ship has sailed. Lots of things occur routinely these days that might’ve been considered poor sportsmanship in the past. I have no problem at all with every player on the field playing 100% until the final whistle, regardless of the score.

To the suggestion that defenders might start taking cheap shots on attackers who go to goal — YIKES! — that to me is a really disappointing comment. 100% wrong. Attackers scoring at the end of a game are competing 100% within the rules. A defender has every right to aggressively defend within the rules, but if she tries to clean the clock of an attacker, she is committing a foul and is playing outside the rules. If I were officiating, that defender would get a red card every time.

[GratefulRed]

Izzy stepped on, not through, the goal circle with her left foot once but was bumped by rushing-to-close-the-gap Carolina defender Gabi Hall after the goal was in the net. Does getting pushed/bumped/checked into or on the crease by a defender get factored into the rule?

It does get factored, as you already know.

[BackOfTheNet]

This subject, or various permutations of it, has come up regularly (annually?) in the 20+ years I’ve been on laxpower/fanlax. Virtually all of the points being raised now are raised every year.

My own view has evolved. Currently I think the best practice is to put subs in at the end of a lopsided game and that it is perfectly OK for the subs to score, even in the waning seconds. The defenders are still defending, the goaltenders are still goaltending, the refs are still officiating, the know-it-all-fans are still hollering instructions to the players and the refs from the sidelines. So I don’t see any problem with the attackers continuing to shoot.

It gets a little more complicated when coaches decide to leave their starters in at the end of blowout games. My view is that the coaches should pull the starters at that point. But if they choose not to do so, then that is on the coach. I have no problem whatsoever with players whom the coach has put on the field playing 100% until the final whistle. That includes scoring in the last few seconds. I simply don’t understand why it is “OK” for defenders to defend and goalies to try to stop shots, but not OK for attackers to shoot.

Some raise the issue of sportsmanship. Yeah, maybe 50 years ago. But that ship has sailed. Lots of things occur routinely these days that might’ve been considered poor sportsmanship in the past. I have no problem at all with every player on the field playing 100% until the final whistle, regardless of the score.

To the suggestion that defenders might start taking cheap shots on attackers who go to goal — YIKES! — that to me is a really disappointing comment. 100% wrong. Attackers scoring at the end of a game are competing 100% within the rules. A defender has every right to aggressively defend within the rules, but if she tries to clean the clock of an attacker, she is committing a foul and is playing outside the rules. If I were officiating, that defender would get a red card every time.

+1.. the suggestion and (seemingly agreement) that attackers should expect retaliation for scoring, regardless of the remaining time, or whose feelings are hurt, is very disappointing.

[LarryGamLax]

hmmm wrote the following about NU scoring the final goal in yesterday's game : "Especially considering NU has a history of doing this?"
REALLY?

Give this Thread "the history of doing this." Keep in mind the word History. Show that History.

Well Larry, I actually listed the most recent example. Rhatigan scored with no time remaining just last year in the NCAA Championship game to make the game 18-6. That recent enough history for you?

No. And that was in a Championship Game, between 2 teams that don't like each other. I have ZERO problem with the Rhatigan score. That's one example, not history.

[LarryGamLax]

hmmm wrote the following about NU scoring the final goal in yesterday's game : "Especially considering NU has a history of doing this?"
REALLY?

Give this Thread "the history of doing this." Keep in mind the word History. Show that History.

In addition to the Championship game, the following occurred just within the last 1.5 seasons. I think I've proven my point, but maybe you don't consider this to be "History" so you can do the rest of the research yourself.

Just this year:
Scored with 30 seconds left against Albany to make the score 25-8(Scored 3 goals in last 4.5 mins)
Scored with 1:17 left against Central Michigan to make the score 27-3(It was 19-3 after 3 qtrs so scored 8 more in 4th including 4 goals in last 5.5 mins)
Scored with 1:08 left against Marquette to make the score 21-3 (Scored 3 goals in last 4.5 mins)

Last Year:
Scored with 47 seconds left against Vandy to make the score 24-7
Scored with 1 second left against Youngstown St to make score 24-3

You did a much better job with showing examples. My one caveat would be, who scored these goals that you see as "a history of poor sportsmanship"? If they are scored by reserves who get little playing time, then I as a HC am not going to ask them to sit on the ball or throw it around like their in a warm-up. That's not fair to them.

[hmmm]

This subject, or various permutations of it, has come up regularly (annually?) in the 20+ years I’ve been on laxpower/fanlax. Virtually all of the points being raised now are raised every year.

My own view has evolved. Currently I think the best practice is to put subs in at the end of a lopsided game and that it is perfectly OK for the subs to score, even in the waning seconds. The defenders are still defending, the goaltenders are still goaltending, the refs are still officiating, the know-it-all-fans are still hollering instructions to the players and the refs from the sidelines. So I don’t see any problem with the attackers continuing to shoot.

It gets a little more complicated when coaches decide to leave their starters in at the end of blowout games. My view is that the coaches should pull the starters at that point. But if they choose not to do so, then that is on the coach. I have no problem whatsoever with players whom the coach has put on the field playing 100% until the final whistle. That includes scoring in the last few seconds. I simply don’t understand why it is “OK” for defenders to defend and goalies to try to stop shots, but not OK for attackers to shoot.

Some raise the issue of sportsmanship. Yeah, maybe 50 years ago. But that ship has sailed. Lots of things occur routinely these days that might’ve been considered poor sportsmanship in the past. I have no problem at all with every player on the field playing 100% until the final whistle, regardless of the score.

To the suggestion that defenders might start taking cheap shots on attackers who go to goal — YIKES! — that to me is a really disappointing comment. 100% wrong. Attackers scoring at the end of a game are competing 100% within the rules. A defender has every right to aggressively defend within the rules, but if she tries to clean the clock of an attacker, she is committing a foul and is playing outside the rules. If I were officiating, that defender would get a red card every time.

So I think I've made it clear that my issue is mostly goals scored in the last minute, especially in a situation that the shot clock is off and there is no need to shoot. Why is wlax different than any other sport in this situation? In basketball if a team stops fouling and the shot clock is off, does the team usually jack up a 3 or dribble out the clock? In football, when a team isn't calling timeouts and they have the ability to just take a knee do they do that or keep throwing the ball downfield trying to get one more score? The list can go on and on and I'm sure as most of you know includes the men's game. Why is sportsmanship not an outdated ideal in these sports but it is in wlax? I sure hope that ship hasn't sailed although if so it explains a lot about our society at the moment.

[Womenslaxxfan]

This subject, or various permutations of it, has come up regularly (annually?) in the 20+ years I’ve been on laxpower/fanlax. Virtually all of the points being raised now are raised every year.

My own view has evolved. Currently I think the best practice is to put subs in at the end of a lopsided game and that it is perfectly OK for the subs to score, even in the waning seconds. The defenders are still defending, the goaltenders are still goaltending, the refs are still officiating, the know-it-all-fans are still hollering instructions to the players and the refs from the sidelines. So I don’t see any problem with the attackers continuing to shoot.

It gets a little more complicated when coaches decide to leave their starters in at the end of blowout games. My view is that the coaches should pull the starters at that point. But if they choose not to do so, then that is on the coach. I have no problem whatsoever with players whom the coach has put on the field playing 100% until the final whistle. That includes scoring in the last few seconds. I simply don’t understand why it is “OK” for defenders to defend and goalies to try to stop shots, but not OK for attackers to shoot.

Some raise the issue of sportsmanship. Yeah, maybe 50 years ago. But that ship has sailed. Lots of things occur routinely these days that might’ve been considered poor sportsmanship in the past. I have no problem at all with every player on the field playing 100% until the final whistle, regardless of the score.

To the suggestion that defenders might start taking cheap shots on attackers who go to goal — YIKES! — that to me is a really disappointing comment. 100% wrong. Attackers scoring at the end of a game are competing 100% within the rules. A defender has every right to aggressively defend within the rules, but if she tries to clean the clock of an attacker, she is committing a foul and is playing outside the rules. If I were officiating, that defender would get a red card every time.

So I think I've made it clear that my issue is mostly goals scored in the last minute, especially in a situation that the shot clock is off and there is no need to shoot. Why is wlax different than any other sport in this situation? In basketball if a team stops fouling and the shot clock is off, does the team usually jack up a 3 or dribble out the clock? In football, when a team isn't calling timeouts and they have the ability to just take a knee do they do that or keep throwing the ball downfield trying to get one more score? The list can go on and on and I'm sure as most of you know includes the men's game. Why is sportsmanship not an outdated ideal in these sports but it is in wlax? I sure hope that ship hasn't sailed although if so it explains a lot about our society at the moment.

+1.
When the outcome of the game is not in doubt, it’s bad sportsmanship to score in the final moments of the game. If you don’t believe that, then we can agree to disagree….

[ultravisitor]

This subject, or various permutations of it, has come up regularly (annually?) in the 20+ years I’ve been on laxpower/fanlax. Virtually all of the points being raised now are raised every year.

My own view has evolved. Currently I think the best practice is to put subs in at the end of a lopsided game and that it is perfectly OK for the subs to score, even in the waning seconds. The defenders are still defending, the goaltenders are still goaltending, the refs are still officiating, the know-it-all-fans are still hollering instructions to the players and the refs from the sidelines. So I don’t see any problem with the attackers continuing to shoot.

It gets a little more complicated when coaches decide to leave their starters in at the end of blowout games. My view is that the coaches should pull the starters at that point. But if they choose not to do so, then that is on the coach. I have no problem whatsoever with players whom the coach has put on the field playing 100% until the final whistle. That includes scoring in the last few seconds. I simply don’t understand why it is “OK” for defenders to defend and goalies to try to stop shots, but not OK for attackers to shoot.

Some raise the issue of sportsmanship. Yeah, maybe 50 years ago. But that ship has sailed. Lots of things occur routinely these days that might’ve been considered poor sportsmanship in the past. I have no problem at all with every player on the field playing 100% until the final whistle, regardless of the score.

To the suggestion that defenders might start taking cheap shots on attackers who go to goal — YIKES! — that to me is a really disappointing comment. 100% wrong. Attackers scoring at the end of a game are competing 100% within the rules. A defender has every right to aggressively defend within the rules, but if she tries to clean the clock of an attacker, she is committing a foul and is playing outside the rules. If I were officiating, that defender would get a red card every time.

This.

If it's okay for UNC's attackers to keep attacking and their defenders to keep defending, then it's okay for NU to keep playing.

Otherwise, why even bother playing after a certain point? Why don't the officials just decide "Oh well, it's too late now" and stop the clock and the game?

This isn't little league. These are young adult women, and they should be treated that way and not like children.

[Bart]

To the suggestion that defenders might start taking cheap shots on attackers who go to goal — YIKES! — that to me is a really disappointing comment. 100% wrong. Attackers scoring at the end of a game are competing 100% within the rules. A defender has every right to aggressively defend within the rules, but if she tries to clean the clock of an attacker, she is committing a foul and is playing outside the rules. If I were officiating, that defender would get a red card every time.

I made that statement first and I am sorry you are so disappointed in it. There is a difference in bench scoring and the FU scores the original poster was talking about. No one should take things into their own hands and if done I 100% agree that player deserves a red card. But do you really think it's out of the realm possibility that in a charged game a starting player scores a FU goal and a defender does something wrong and stupid. Not condoning, not saying anyone should expect that but saying that these type of FU goals in a charged atmosphere on a field filled highly competitive players the possibility exists for something bad to happen. It is the coaches decision, the coaches reading of the atmosphere on the field and sideline. Leaving your starters out there for these type of FU goals is 100% on the coach. It only takes a moment of bad judgement by a frustrated player to impact another player in a terrible manner.

I have seen this type of bad judgement in the past on attackers/midfielders I know. This was in the mens game and more than a few years ago.

[tothedraw]

Not an NU fan in any way, shape or form. But as for the last 2 goals, you let Scane dodge through 4-5 people to score, that's your problem. Amonte was given an 8 meter, in that game she should shoot as she normally would. These are 2 top teams who play hard to the whistle both have examples of poor taste goals in blow outs.

Imho, KAH has always coached her team to play until the refs make the call. Don't want to do your job? Ok, we'll sit in 3 seconds as long as we want.

[intheknow247]

This subject, or various permutations of it, has come up regularly (annually?) in the 20+ years I’ve been on laxpower/fanlax. Virtually all of the points being raised now are raised every year.

My own view has evolved. Currently I think the best practice is to put subs in at the end of a lopsided game and that it is perfectly OK for the subs to score, even in the waning seconds. The defenders are still defending, the goaltenders are still goaltending, the refs are still officiating, the know-it-all-fans are still hollering instructions to the players and the refs from the sidelines. So I don’t see any problem with the attackers continuing to shoot.

It gets a little more complicated when coaches decide to leave their starters in at the end of blowout games. My view is that the coaches should pull the starters at that point. But if they choose not to do so, then that is on the coach. I have no problem whatsoever with players whom the coach has put on the field playing 100% until the final whistle. That includes scoring in the last few seconds. I simply don’t understand why it is “OK” for defenders to defend and goalies to try to stop shots, but not OK for attackers to shoot.

Some raise the issue of sportsmanship. Yeah, maybe 50 years ago. But that ship has sailed. Lots of things occur routinely these days that might’ve been considered poor sportsmanship in the past. I have no problem at all with every player on the field playing 100% until the final whistle, regardless of the score.

To the suggestion that defenders might start taking cheap shots on attackers who go to goal — YIKES! — that to me is a really disappointing comment. 100% wrong. Attackers scoring at the end of a game are competing 100% within the rules. A defender has every right to aggressively defend within the rules, but if she tries to clean the clock of an attacker, she is committing a foul and is playing outside the rules. If I were officiating, that defender would get a red card every time.

So I think I've made it clear that my issue is mostly goals scored in the last minute, especially in a situation that the shot clock is off and there is no need to shoot. Why is wlax different than any other sport in this situation? In basketball if a team stops fouling and the shot clock is off, does the team usually jack up a 3 or dribble out the clock? In football, when a team isn't calling timeouts and they have the ability to just take a knee do they do that or keep throwing the ball downfield trying to get one more score? The list can go on and on and I'm sure as most of you know includes the men's game. Why is sportsmanship not an outdated ideal in these sports but it is in wlax? I sure hope that ship hasn't sailed although if so it explains a lot about our society at the moment.

THIS 100%!!! Sportsmanship has not sailed and there is something called winning and losing with class. As outlined above, every other sport on the planet knows how to do this except women's lacrosse. Embarrassing!

[njbill]

This subject, or various permutations of it, has come up regularly (annually?) in the 20+ years I’ve been on laxpower/fanlax. Virtually all of the points being raised now are raised every year.

My own view has evolved. Currently I think the best practice is to put subs in at the end of a lopsided game and that it is perfectly OK for the subs to score, even in the waning seconds. The defenders are still defending, the goaltenders are still goaltending, the refs are still officiating, the know-it-all-fans are still hollering instructions to the players and the refs from the sidelines. So I don’t see any problem with the attackers continuing to shoot.

It gets a little more complicated when coaches decide to leave their starters in at the end of blowout games. My view is that the coaches should pull the starters at that point. But if they choose not to do so, then that is on the coach. I have no problem whatsoever with players whom the coach has put on the field playing 100% until the final whistle. That includes scoring in the last few seconds. I simply don’t understand why it is “OK” for defenders to defend and goalies to try to stop shots, but not OK for attackers to shoot.

Some raise the issue of sportsmanship. Yeah, maybe 50 years ago. But that ship has sailed. Lots of things occur routinely these days that might’ve been considered poor sportsmanship in the past. I have no problem at all with every player on the field playing 100% until the final whistle, regardless of the score.

To the suggestion that defenders might start taking cheap shots on attackers who go to goal — YIKES! — that to me is a really disappointing comment. 100% wrong. Attackers scoring at the end of a game are competing 100% within the rules. A defender has every right to aggressively defend within the rules, but if she tries to clean the clock of an attacker, she is committing a foul and is playing outside the rules. If I were officiating, that defender would get a red card every time.

So I think I've made it clear that my issue is mostly goals scored in the last minute, especially in a situation that the shot clock is off and there is no need to shoot. Why is wlax different than any other sport in this situation? In basketball if a team stops fouling and the shot clock is off, does the team usually jack up a 3 or dribble out the clock? In football, when a team isn't calling timeouts and they have the ability to just take a knee do they do that or keep throwing the ball downfield trying to get one more score? The list can go on and on and I'm sure as most of you know includes the men's game. Why is sportsmanship not an outdated ideal in these sports but it is in wlax? I sure hope that ship hasn't sailed although if so it explains a lot about our society at the moment.

Concededly, I broadened the issue.

In the two sports you mentioned, the opposing team is not defending. I would feel entirely differently if in lacrosse, the team on the short end of the score stopped defending. If at the end of the North Carolina Northwestern, UNC had pulled their players off to the side and left the goalmouth open, I would agree Amonte should not have shot. But the defenders were trying to stop her and the goalie was trying to stop her shot.

Using this game as an example, if it is OK for UNC’s attackers to continue to try to score, for their defenders to continue to try to stop Northwestern and take the ball away from them, and for the Tar Heels goalie to try to stop shots AND, I presume, if it is OK for Northwestern’s defenders to defend and for their goalie to try to stop shots, why are NU’s attackers the only players on the field who can’t do what they normally do?

This point, of course, has been made by others, but if you don’t want the opposing team to score what some are calling an FU goal, then stop them. Or don’t let the game get out of hand.

I guess we could convert the 10 goal running clock into a 10 goal mercy rule and stop the game at that point. I don’t think anybody wants that.