Miscellaneous questions, thoughts, impressions, etc.

[wlaxphan20]

They all play tough, it's highly competitive D1 lax played by well conditioned, talented athletes who are trying to win a game. It's always the other team who doesn't play clean lacrosse.

So you are saying all teams play the same and no teams play aggressive borderline dirty lacrosse ? Obv you never watched florida play ?

Am not saying that at all. Lot of different styles of play out there, lot of aggressive teams, lot of very tough Ds out there.
Borderline dirty to you might just be very tough and tenacious to another...including the refs. I don't think any team is coached to play dirty. Yes, I've watched Florida play. Cuse too and they've been accused of playing dirty but they don't.

I wouldn't necessarily call it dirty because for me "dirty" implies maliciousness, but I've always thought teams like Syracuse, Florida, SBU, NU, (among others, this is not a complete list) can definitely play a more physical game and that game can flirt with the gray area around fouls & benefits from how inconsistently they are called. Some coaches are ok with giving up more fouls than others. I think the inconsistencies in how fouls are called and which fouls are called benefit teams that like to push the envelope on physicality.

[wlaxphan20]

You correctly recalled UMD defenders laying the wood in 2 instances but neither player was guilty of fouling on a consistent basis.

I agree that the "consistent basis" matters more.

Also looking at fouls without context doesn't help either (not saying you did this, just stating it in general). You really need to see the whole game to get a good idea about the tone and physicality and that might give more context to a specific foul.

[laxer12]

Cuse too and they've been accused of playing dirty but they don't.

They totally play dirty sometimes. I’ve seen enough incidents over the years to come to that conclusion. I don’t know if Treanor will allow that style to continue now that she’s in charge, but before her the team was typically rough and chippy, and on occasion, yes, dirty.

Totally agree, and it came back to haunt Syracuse in their last game they played last year. What was it, four yellow cards in the first half?. Kind of hard to recover from that when you’re playing a woman down for that much time.

Well remembered and well stated. 3 yellows in the first and yellows and greens in the 2nd. In addition to the knee Meaghan Tyrrell gave Belle Smith in the first half that went undetected by the refs.

Start watching about 15 seconds in. Meaghan deliberately slowed her pace to have her knee right where Smith was falling. That’s dirty all day every day in my book.

What is your infatuation with this particular series of events in this game? Do you have a vendetta against the Tyrrell sisters for some unfounded reason? Do you have an obsession with painting the Syracuse program in a bad light? Syracuse is not a dirty team, and Meaghan Tyrrell is certainly not a dirty player. She's a fantastic attacker that rarely makes mistakes; she can dodge, pass, cut, shoot, and score. The one time she makes a poor decision, you choose to monotonously cast a magnifying glass over it. Get over it.

You say that you can't find examples of North Carolina or Maryland swinging their sticks or being aggressive or "dirty" or "chippy" or even "thuggy". Whereas I can recall several instances of these teams displaying this exact kind of behavior. In the 2014 National Championship game between Cuse and Maryland, Alice Mercer and Megan Douty double-teamed Katie Webster, Webster split them and Douty slashed her in the neck; this was called as a normal foul. In the 2015 National Championship game between UNC and Maryland, Douty hit Sam McGee in the face while she shot and scored the ball; the refs never called that either. My point of all this is you can literally find instances of almost any player in division 1 women's lacrosse where they are seemingly playing "rough" or "aggressively". You don't define an entire player's career, or an entire team's reputation as "dirty" or "thuggy" or any other word that implies bad intent, based on those isolated incidents.

In Kayla Treanor’s initial press conference at Syracuse she stated that her team would need to play with discipline, to me that says a lot , questionable fouls definitely fall into that category. Now anyone can commit a foul once in a while but there are others who on a game by game basis are consistently committing the border line hard foul ( I’m thinking of a defender who wore # 0 some years ago as a prime example as well as a certain defender this past year ) Northwestern has a couple as well , consistently on a game by game basis they are just laying people out. Northwestern pushes the envelope every year and then pays for it in the playoffs ( see last years game vs Syracuse ) when games are consistently called much tighter. You correctly recalled UMD defenders laying the wood in 2 instances but neither player was guilty of fouling on a consistent basis.

I'm not accusing Megan Douty or Alice Mercer of being overly rough, brutish players. All I was attempting to say was that, in women's Division 1 lax, literally anyone can find examples of unnecessary physicality in almost every single player; it's just the nature of the game. And this is why I find it extremely unfair and disingenuous to characterize a single player or team as "dirty" or "thuggy" based on a few isolated instances as some posters here regularly do. ONW incessantly throwing a microscope on the Tyrrell sisters over one occurrence in the title game is a prime example of this.

Syracuse has played some physical, sometimes pretty questionable defense in the past. I, being a Syracuse fan, was not in love with their defense at all from 2015-2018. I thought they were unorganized, error-prone, and committed some very foolish, unnecessarily aggressive fouls. I agree with you about #0 as I was not a fan of her defense or her clearing abilities. However, I don't think any Cuse defender this past season or the two seasons before 2021 fell into that same category. They could be physical, sure, but didn't showcase anywhere near the recklessness or unawareness of seasons' past.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

ONW incessantly throwing a microscope on the Tyrrell sisters over one occurrence in the title game is a prime example of this. Syracuse has played some physical, sometimes pretty questionable defense in the past. I, being a Syracuse fan, was not in love with their defense at all from 2015-2018. I thought they were unorganized, error-prone, and committed some very foolish, unnecessarily aggressive fouls. I agree with you about #0 as I was not a fan of her defense or her clearing abilities. However, I don't think any Cuse defender this past season or the two seasons before 2021 fell into that same category. They could be physical, sure, but didn't showcase anywhere near the recklessness or unawareness of seasons' past.

There are other examples of overly rough/chippy play I could have used for Syracuse. Like this one:



or this one:



Meaghan and Emma Tyrrell are both outstanding players. But when a player commits a nasty foul—whether the refs see it or not—I’ll call attention to it on this board. And it’s also not just Syracuse who has been guilty, as others have stated previously in this thread. Here are 2 clips of both Florida and High Point getting nasty multiple times in the same game—vicious even—with their sticks:





Women’s lacrosse is accruing more and more of a video history as more and more of the games are televised/streamed. Incidents get recorded like they do in all the other sports (complete with slow motion and freeze frame). Here's a recent example from the NHL:

https://www.nhl.com/news/bruins-marchan ... =277549076

And that ultimately is the point--women's lacrosse is a sport just like any other sport (except that it's more compelling and wonderful than all the other sports). I comment on this sport, just like I do all the other sports I watch.

[Bart]

ONW incessantly throwing a microscope on the Tyrrell sisters over one occurrence in the title game is a prime example of this. Syracuse has played some physical, sometimes pretty questionable defense in the past. I, being a Syracuse fan, was not in love with their defense at all from 2015-2018. I thought they were unorganized, error-prone, and committed some very foolish, unnecessarily aggressive fouls. I agree with you about #0 as I was not a fan of her defense or her clearing abilities. However, I don't think any Cuse defender this past season or the two seasons before 2021 fell into that same category. They could be physical, sure, but didn't showcase anywhere near the recklessness or unawareness of seasons' past.

There are other examples of overly rough/chippy play I could have used for Syracuse. Like this one:



or this one:



Meaghan and Emma Tyrrell are both outstanding players. But when a player commits a nasty foul—whether the refs see it or not—I’ll call attention to it on this board. And it’s also not just Syracuse who has been guilty, as others have stated previously in this thread. Here are 2 clips of both Florida and High Point getting nasty multiple times in the same game—vicious even—with their sticks:





Women’s lacrosse is accruing more and more of a video history as more and more of the games are televised/streamed. Incidents get recorded like they do in all the other sports (complete with slow motion and freeze frame). Here's a recent example from the NHL:

https://www.nhl.com/news/bruins-marchan ... =277549076

And that ultimately is the point--women's lacrosse is a sport just like any other sport (except that it's more compelling and wonderful than all the other sports). I comment on this sport, just like I do all the other sports I watch.

Good players make dumb mistakes and often at inopportune times. Good players foul hard, perhaps on the edge, perhaps over the edge at times. It happens, some players get caught up in the moment and react. Not all but enough to just look, shake your head and indicate to yourself that that was a stupid play/foul, and chalk it up to that.

Until you have actually been in that situation, actually played in a high stress game and react you will not understand it. You can not understand it in that regard and never will and that is just fine. Point out such plays if you would like but to repetitively beat the dead horse seems a bit silly. If a player is indeed dirty then there will be a huge body of evidence to say so.

FTR, I agree with an above poster in the past SYR defense was prone to fouling at very inopportune times, often allowing their opponents an out. Aggression is a good thing....controlled. In the past I think SYR did not control it as much as they might have.

[DMac]

Good players make dumb mistakes and often at inopportune times. Good players foul hard, perhaps on the edge, perhaps over the edge at times. It happens, some players get caught up in the moment and react. Not all but enough to just look, shake your head and indicate to yourself that that was a stupid play/foul, and chalk it up to that.

Until you have actually been in that situation, actually played in a high stress game and react you will not understand it. You can not understand it in that regard and never will and that is just fine. Point out such plays if you would like but to repetitively beat the dead horse seems a bit silly. If a player is indeed dirty then there will be a huge body of evidence to say so.

That sums it up rather nicely. "Good players make dumb mistakes and often at inopportune times" and I might add in the heat of the battle with competitive spirits high and adrenaline rushing. This of course creates an opportune time for the slo mo freeze frame critic to replay and describe the play with words such as dirty, underachieving, choking, and chippy. Truth of the matter is, often times that is distorting, sensationalizing, and exaggerating. Further, it's an opinion, but of course this particular critic doesn't use IMO because his 7th grade English teacher (who was flat out wrong) told him that such language makes one a mealy mouth.
"Until you have actually been in that situation, actually played in a high stress game and react you will not understand it."
Indeed. It is what it is and nothing is going change. The resident critic has never experienced a double team coming at you with high intensity and full intent of making you as uncomfortable as possible, hence the description would be that a player underachieved and/or choked in that circumstance. Bout time for an Emma clip, no?

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Bout time for an Emma clip, no?

Emma Ward? Sure—why not. (Although what she has to do with rough play, I have no idea). This is a nice little clip (not my edit) of what I thought was a beautiful nifty little pass to set up a goal. Emma Ward is an extremely gifted athlete whose absence from the IL Top 50 was also conspicuous.

[Dr. Tact]

"Until you have actually been in that situation, actually played in a high stress game and react you will not understand it."
Indeed. It is what it is and nothing is going change. The resident critic has never experienced a double team coming at you with high intensity and full intent of making you as uncomfortable as possible, hence the description would be that a player underachieved and/or choked in that circumstance. Bout time for an Emma clip, no?

[8meterPA]

"Until you have actually been in that situation, actually played in a high stress game and react you will not understand it."
Indeed. It is what it is and nothing is going change. The resident critic has never experienced a double team coming at you with high intensity and full intent of making you as uncomfortable as possible, hence the description would be that a player underachieved and/or choked in that circumstance. Bout time for an Emma clip, no?

I think you are dismissing his time on the pickleball court - heard it can get pretty nasty at times

[tothedraw]

I'm very curious to see Thorpe's influence on an already physical Florida defense. I feel like Defliese really brought organization to the SU defense, less chaos less need to foul imo.

[DMac]

Did you see Regie play when he was at Cuse?
One of my all time faves.

[TNLAX]

I'm very curious to see Thorpe's influence on an already physical Florida defense. I feel like Defliese really brought organization to the SU defense, less chaos less need to foul imo.

I don't want to comment on any teams play, but what I have noticed for years is that some officials allow for rougher play than others. Not going to say it's good or bad, but I tend to favor protecting the athletes from serious injuries. I prefer a game that is called "tight" rather than "lose". A lot of folks would say that to many whistles ruin a game, but I think a player who is injured due to an illegal hit because refs are "letting them play" ruins the game. My two cents for the day.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

I don't want to comment on any teams play, but what I have noticed for years is that some officials allow for rougher play than others. Not going to say it's good or bad, but I tend to favor protecting the athletes from serious injuries. I prefer a game that is called "tight" rather than "lose". A lot of folks would say that to many whistles ruin a game, but I think a player who is injured due to an illegal hit because refs are "letting them play" ruins the game. My two cents for the day.

Well said.

[laxer12]

ONW incessantly throwing a microscope on the Tyrrell sisters over one occurrence in the title game is a prime example of this. Syracuse has played some physical, sometimes pretty questionable defense in the past. I, being a Syracuse fan, was not in love with their defense at all from 2015-2018. I thought they were unorganized, error-prone, and committed some very foolish, unnecessarily aggressive fouls. I agree with you about #0 as I was not a fan of her defense or her clearing abilities. However, I don't think any Cuse defender this past season or the two seasons before 2021 fell into that same category. They could be physical, sure, but didn't showcase anywhere near the recklessness or unawareness of seasons' past.

There are other examples of overly rough/chippy play I could have used for Syracuse. Like this one:



or this one:



Meaghan and Emma Tyrrell are both outstanding players. But when a player commits a nasty foul—whether the refs see it or not—I’ll call attention to it on this board. And it’s also not just Syracuse who has been guilty, as others have stated previously in this thread. Here are 2 clips of both Florida and High Point getting nasty multiple times in the same game—vicious even—with their sticks:





Women’s lacrosse is accruing more and more of a video history as more and more of the games are televised/streamed. Incidents get recorded like they do in all the other sports (complete with slow motion and freeze frame). Here's a recent example from the NHL:

https://www.nhl.com/news/bruins-marchan ... =277549076

And that ultimately is the point--women's lacrosse is a sport just like any other sport (except that it's more compelling and wonderful than all the other sports). I comment on this sport, just like I do all the other sports I watch.

I don't have a problem with someone calling out what they perceive to be a "nasty foul". It's just the frequency in which you call out those same exact plays from the title game over and over again. I don't see you doing that to any other group of players from the same program. What other reason would you be doing this for? Except for maybe to tarnish Syracuse and brand its players as characters with dirty, malicious intentions to harm fellow opponents.

Also, those two videos you claim to support your argument of rough/chippy play from Syracuse don't hold water at all. In the 2019 clip, Cara Urbank is the one that displayed extremely over-the-top, viciously aggressive behavior; she should've been red carded. What she did is an actual example of a lacrosse player actively trying to harm another lacrosse player. In the title game clip (what a surprise to be seeing this one yet again), Swart barely extends her arms at all. Hall sold that foul by dramatically falling (flopping?) over in the manner she did. If anything, Swart was trying to slow down but couldn't fast enough and ran into Hall. Yes, there was probably a slight push in there, but in no way was it hard enough to force Hall to keel over in the manner she did.

Have a great day

[tothedraw]

I'm very curious to see Thorpe's influence on an already physical Florida defense. I feel like Defliese really brought organization to the SU defense, less chaos less need to foul imo.

I don't want to comment on any teams play, but what I have noticed for years is that some officials allow for rougher play than others. Not going to say it's good or bad, but I tend to favor protecting the athletes from serious injuries. I prefer a game that is called "tight" rather than "lose". A lot of folks would say that to many whistles ruin a game, but I think a player who is injured due to an illegal hit because refs are "letting them play" ruins the game. My two cents for the day.

Totally agree.

To your point I also think some coaches put the onus for safety completely on the official and have a "push the envelope til they stop you" attitude. I've certainly seen it at the club and high school level. You can tell when teams are taught to do or not do certain things when it is consistent. I mostly see it when it comes to checking.

DMAC - no, I never saw Thorpe play and I don't know him as a person - probably great at both.

[DMac]

DMAC - no, I never saw Thorpe play and I don't know him as a person - probably great at both.

Very tough D man, very good chance of finding yourself on the ground if you got too close to him. Am not at all surprised to see that he teaches very tough D. Used to have a VHS Regie highlight reel, he was something else. Rough boy. Yes, very nice guy, he gave me a Rochester Knighthawks jersey when he was playing for them just out of the blue. No reason to but I sure appreciated it...nice jersey too.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

I don't have a problem with someone calling out what they perceive to be a "nasty foul". It's just the frequency in which you call out those same exact plays from the title game over and over again. I don't see you doing that to any other group of players from the same program. What other reason would you be doing this for? Except for maybe to tarnish Syracuse and brand its players as characters with dirty, malicious intentions to harm fellow opponents.

Also, those two videos you claim to support your argument of rough/chippy play from Syracuse don't hold water at all. In the 2019 clip, Cara Urbank is the one that displayed extremely over-the-top, viciously aggressive behavior; she should've been red carded. What she did is an actual example of a lacrosse player actively trying to harm another lacrosse player. In the title game clip (what a surprise to be seeing this one yet again), Swart barely extends her arms at all. Hall sold that foul by dramatically falling (flopping?) over in the manner she did. If anything, Swart was trying to slow down but couldn't fast enough and ran into Hall. Yes, there was probably a slight push in there, but in no way was it hard enough to force Hall to keel over in the manner she did.

Have a great day

We both have different opinions. That’s cool. We can agree to disagree. And thank you. I hope you have a great day too.

[Dr. Tact]

To your point I also think some coaches put the onus for safety completely on the official and have a "push the envelope til they stop you" attitude. I've certainly seen it at the club and high school level. You can tell when teams are taught to do or not do certain things when it is consistent. I mostly see it when it comes to checking.

I noticed it most when watching club play at national tourneys. With the BlueChip clubs, the play was almost equally rough with the competing teams. With the lesser clubs/teams the play was more tightly called as the roughness stood out more. I am sure it is an unrealized Bias (better teams=rougher accepted play because they can and do) and it is seen in local HS play as well. NoVa public HS teams get called for more rough play than the privates. As the privates are simply better and are used to playing harder against teams that play hard against them.

From my perspective above, it is coaching, the athletes and the refereeing that defines how hard the play is in any level of competition.

[cltlax]

To your point I also think some coaches put the onus for safety completely on the official and have a "push the envelope til they stop you" attitude. I've certainly seen it at the club and high school level. You can tell when teams are taught to do or not do certain things when it is consistent. I mostly see it when it comes to checking.

I noticed it most when watching club play at national tourneys. With the BlueChip clubs, the play was almost equally rough with the competing teams. With the lesser clubs/teams the play was more tightly called as the roughness stood out more. I am sure it is an unrealized Bias (better teams=rougher accepted play because they can and do) and it is seen in local HS play as well. NoVa public HS teams get called for more rough play than the privates. As the privates are simply better and are used to playing harder against teams that play hard against them.

From my perspective above, it is coaching, the athletes and the refereeing that defines how hard the play is in any level of competition.

I don't mind tough, aggressive play from two closely matched teams. However, when watching club teams play, what makes me almost lose my mind is watching the head-bobbing embellishment that certain clubs/players employ to try to draw fouls/cards. It is clearly being taught.

[Dr. Tact]

To your point I also think some coaches put the onus for safety completely on the official and have a "push the envelope til they stop you" attitude. I've certainly seen it at the club and high school level. You can tell when teams are taught to do or not do certain things when it is consistent. I mostly see it when it comes to checking.

I noticed it most when watching club play at national tourneys. With the BlueChip clubs, the play was almost equally rough with the competing teams. With the lesser clubs/teams the play was more tightly called as the roughness stood out more. I am sure it is an unrealized Bias (better teams=rougher accepted play because they can and do) and it is seen in local HS play as well. NoVa public HS teams get called for more rough play than the privates. As the privates are simply better and are used to playing harder against teams that play hard against them.

From my perspective above, it is coaching, the athletes and the refereeing that defines how hard the play is in any level of competition.

I don't mind tough, aggressive play from two closely matched teams. However, when watching club teams play, what makes me almost lose my mind is watching the head-bobbing embellishment that certain clubs/players employ to try to draw fouls/cards. It is clearly being taught.

It is taught and extends to high level D1 players as well. Not a fan of that or any other embellishment, but it works more often than not, so the bad behavior gets the reward