Cuse v Stony Brook, 1600 hrs in the Dome

D1 Womens Lacrosse
User avatar
Dr. Tact
Posts: 3342
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2018 6:36 pm

Re: Cuse v Stony Brook, 1600 hrs in the Dome

Post by Dr. Tact »

laxer12 wrote: Sun Feb 20, 2022 7:06 pm
Lax101 wrote: Sun Feb 20, 2022 6:33 pm Exciting game but the play was extremely sloppy and undisciplined. So many mistakes, turnovers and YC's. I'm still waiting to see the Cuse team from last year. Their defense is awful and goalie play shaky.
Their offense from last year still hasn't arrived yet either. I was also very surprised Stony Brook dominated in draws like they did. Definitely not a fan of the alternating possession, "jump ball" rule if the ball doesn't go up the way it's supposed to. I definitely think Stony Brook benefitted from this rule change.
Can you expound? I don't know this new role...
Lax101
Posts: 468
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2021 11:46 am

Re: Cuse v Stony Brook, 1600 hrs in the Dome

Post by Lax101 »

In order to speed up the game the drawer girls have one opportunity to cleanly get the ball up in the air and in play. If they fail to do so there is a "possession arrow" like in basketball and the team's take turns getting the ball. The big issue is that in a bit spot a drawer girl may try to NOT go up in the air with the ball if the possession arrow favors her team. At they very least, the last 3 minutes of the game they should remove the alternating possession rule.
laxer12
Posts: 314
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2020 9:22 am

Re: Cuse v Stony Brook, 1600 hrs in the Dome

Post by laxer12 »

Dr. Tact wrote: Sun Feb 20, 2022 7:08 pm
laxer12 wrote: Sun Feb 20, 2022 7:06 pm
Lax101 wrote: Sun Feb 20, 2022 6:33 pm Exciting game but the play was extremely sloppy and undisciplined. So many mistakes, turnovers and YC's. I'm still waiting to see the Cuse team from last year. Their defense is awful and goalie play shaky.
Their offense from last year still hasn't arrived yet either. I was also very surprised Stony Brook dominated in draws like they did. Definitely not a fan of the alternating possession, "jump ball" rule if the ball doesn't go up the way it's supposed to. I definitely think Stony Brook benefitted from this rule change.
Can you expound? I don't know this new role...
Sure. It used to be that if the ball didn't go straight up above both players' heads, they would just redo the draw. If this occurs now, the refs just give it to one team. And if this happens again on the draw (it happened several times during this game), the refs automatically give it to the team that didn't receive the ball the last time it occurred (alternating possessions like they have in basketball when there's a jump ball). I hope I explained that halfway coherently.
Laxfan500
Posts: 1030
Joined: Sat May 25, 2019 5:44 pm

Re: Cuse v Stony Brook, 1600 hrs in the Dome

Post by Laxfan500 »

Lax101 wrote: Sun Feb 20, 2022 7:20 pm In order to speed up the game the drawer girls have one opportunity to cleanly get the ball up in the air and in play. If they fail to do so there is a "possession arrow" like in basketball and the team's take turns getting the ball. The big issue is that in a bit spot a drawer girl may try to NOT go up in the air with the ball if the possession arrow favors her team. At they very least, the last 3 minutes of the game they should remove the alternating possession rule.
They totally should lift that the last 5 minutes of game. good coaches or crafty players are gonna use that to their advantage.
Fischer
Posts: 243
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2021 10:21 pm

Re: Cuse v Stony Brook, 1600 hrs in the Dome

Post by Fischer »

Kleizaster wrote: Sun Feb 20, 2022 6:55 pm
Fischer wrote: Sun Feb 20, 2022 6:46 pm
Dr. Tact wrote: Sun Feb 20, 2022 6:25 pm I am thinking there is hope for other top 10 teams... Not sure that either if these teams are unc/bc level.
Unc barely contained Florida. Bc stands alone
not sure you watched that game but it was 14-8 UNC in the 4th. Florida scored some garbage time goals. Hardly troubled UNC.
I watched the first half. I still think it should’ve been a blowout by half
TNLAX
Posts: 376
Joined: Tue May 19, 2020 11:46 am

Re: Cuse v Stony Brook, 1600 hrs in the Dome

Post by TNLAX »

Lax101 wrote: Sun Feb 20, 2022 7:20 pm In order to speed up the game the drawer girls have one opportunity to cleanly get the ball up in the air and in play. If they fail to do so there is a "possession arrow" like in basketball and the team's take turns getting the ball. The big issue is that in a bit spot a drawer girl may try to NOT go up in the air with the ball if the possession arrow favors her team. At they very least, the last 3 minutes of the game they should remove the alternating possession rule.
My understanding of the rule is that the official has the "discretion" to rule that if one of the players didnt "draw" properly the official can give the position to the other team. If the official determines that both players exicuted the draw properly and the ball didnt go above the shoulders, then alternating possesion is used.

So a player can not intentionally violate the rules of the draw and have her team awarded the ball.
Lax101
Posts: 468
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2021 11:46 am

Re: Cuse v Stony Brook, 1600 hrs in the Dome

Post by Lax101 »

It's not too early. The question is when will defenses do something about it. Teams let her run wild. Take a look at the championship game last year. BC closely guarded her, frustrated her and held her to one goal. Coaching 101 is to take away the opponents best offensive player. Coaching in general throughout women's lax is poor.
laxer12
Posts: 314
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2020 9:22 am

Re: Cuse v Stony Brook, 1600 hrs in the Dome

Post by laxer12 »

Lax101 wrote: Sun Feb 20, 2022 8:18 pm It's not too early. The question is when will defenses do something about it. Teams let her run wild. Take a look at the championship game last year. BC closely guarded her, frustrated her and held her to one goal. Coaching 101 is to take away the opponents best offensive player. Coaching in general throughout women's lax is poor.
What are you talking about?
Laxfan500
Posts: 1030
Joined: Sat May 25, 2019 5:44 pm

Re: Cuse v Stony Brook, 1600 hrs in the Dome

Post by Laxfan500 »

laxer12 wrote: Sun Feb 20, 2022 8:26 pm
Lax101 wrote: Sun Feb 20, 2022 8:18 pm It's not too early. The question is when will defenses do something about it. Teams let her run wild. Take a look at the championship game last year. BC closely guarded her, frustrated her and held her to one goal. Coaching 101 is to take away the opponents best offensive player. Coaching in general throughout women's lax is poor.
What are you talking about?
Tyrell?
Lax101
Posts: 468
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2021 11:46 am

Re: Cuse v Stony Brook, 1600 hrs in the Dome

Post by Lax101 »

Yes - sorry. Someone asked it if was too early to say they the older Tyrrell is the focal point of the offense. Might have been a different thread.
User avatar
OuttaNowhereWregget
Posts: 7085
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2021 4:39 am

Re: Cuse v Stony Brook, 1600 hrs in the Dome

Post by OuttaNowhereWregget »

Laxfan500 wrote: Sun Feb 20, 2022 6:22 pm
OuttaNowhereWregget wrote: Sun Feb 20, 2022 6:16 pm WOW! That sure doesn't happen everyday! First time for me--I got my hand raised.

Anyone else ever see an illegal stick take a goal off the board? In a big game?
yes , many times

Lot to unpack from this game....Syracuse has issues with Goalies, and D def needs work. Not too high on draw girl either. Obv offensively they are strong.
SB undisciplined...maybe because first game. Although they always play rough. They have a very good goalie but not a ton of offence. They will be fine in their conference. The SB-Princeton game should be a good one.
If Princeton plays the way they did against Virginia, they'll take Stony Brook apart.
User avatar
OuttaNowhereWregget
Posts: 7085
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2021 4:39 am

Re: Cuse v Stony Brook, 1600 hrs in the Dome

Post by OuttaNowhereWregget »

Fischer wrote: Sun Feb 20, 2022 6:46 pm
Dr. Tact wrote: Sun Feb 20, 2022 6:25 pm I am thinking there is hope for other top 10 teams... Not sure that either if these teams are unc/bc level.
Unc barely contained Florida. Bc stands alone
I don't think BC has played anyone as aggressive and hungry as Florida yet though. Maybe Denver will give them trouble. Maybe Virginia is angry enough after 2 losses to give BC a hard time. Too early to put BC alone.
DMac
Posts: 9365
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2018 10:02 am

Re: Cuse v Stony Brook, 1600 hrs in the Dome

Post by DMac »

Lax101 wrote: Sun Feb 20, 2022 8:18 pm It's not too early. The question is when will defenses do something about it. Teams let her run wild. Take a look at the championship game last year. BC closely guarded her, frustrated her and held her to one goal. Coaching 101 is to take away the opponents best offensive player. Coaching in general throughout women's lax is poor.
Coaching 101 is also having the caliber players to do this. Coaching 101 will also tell you that when your best defender is closely guarding the opponent's best offensive player you need the D to be able to closely guard the not best offensive players like Carney, EH, ET (in your opinion) for example in this case. It's not as easy as you make it sound, no one is letting MT run wild, she's just playing good lacrosse and putting the ball where the GK isn't.
I do hope you are coaching somewhere and taking teams/a team from the awful level that Cuse plays at to another level.
JFTR, taking your best defender to closely guard or face guard your opponent's best player also takes your best D player out of the game. Might want to keep her more involved in the game and find another player to do that.
Bart
Posts: 2314
Joined: Mon May 13, 2019 12:42 pm

Re: Cuse v Stony Brook, 1600 hrs in the Dome

Post by Bart »

Lax101 wrote: Sun Feb 20, 2022 8:18 pm It's not too early. The question is when will defenses do something about it. Teams let her run wild. Take a look at the championship game last year. BC closely guarded her, frustrated her and held her to one goal. Coaching 101 is to take away the opponents best offensive player. Coaching in general throughout women's lax is poor.
There is a big difference between having 1 facilitator/ attacker who can run the show and having two or three. SU was down to 1. With the return of Carney behind the cage this gets much more difficult to do. I do not see 51 as a facilitator in the way of 18 and 22 but her presence dictates that you pay alot of attention to her opening up things for others.
User avatar
Dr. Tact
Posts: 3342
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2018 6:36 pm

Re: Cuse v Stony Brook, 1600 hrs in the Dome

Post by Dr. Tact »

DMac wrote: Mon Feb 21, 2022 7:27 am JFTR, taking your best defender to closely guard or face guard your opponent's best player also takes your best D player out of the game. Might want to keep her more involved in the game and find another player to do that.
This is a good point. The idea of a face guard is to completely blanket and frustrate your opponent's best player. This does not require the best defender.
watcherinthewoods
Posts: 774
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2020 1:32 pm

Re: Cuse v Stony Brook, 1600 hrs in the Dome

Post by watcherinthewoods »

+ 1 ^ … in fact, it’s usually specifically NOT the ‘best’ defender.
Lax101
Posts: 468
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2021 11:46 am

Re: Cuse v Stony Brook, 1600 hrs in the Dome

Post by Lax101 »

You absolutely never use your best defender to face guard. Need someone fast, aggresive and disciplined - annoying helps as well. If you watch BC you will find that is what they do and they face guard the most important offensive player every game no matter who they play. Bill B. the Patriots coach does the same thing in football. Takes away the other teams biggest weapon. The best lax defender would likely cover the #2 offensive threat. If you watched the Princeton game Sears scored 2 goals in about the first 3 minutes of the game. UVA coach then locked her off and she did nothing else before she ultimately fouled out. You can still lock off or at least focus on best offensive player when playing a zone.
tothedraw
Posts: 602
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2020 4:30 pm

Re: Cuse v Stony Brook, 1600 hrs in the Dome

Post by tothedraw »

In my experience your face guard defender is usually a hyper as heck middie who you give one job. It's really hard for players who work in a system of help, slide, double to all of a sudden just focus on one task. It's also not necessarily the other teams best player you FG it's the quarterback of the O. Disrupt the system.
Brownlax
Posts: 1149
Joined: Thu May 09, 2019 10:43 am

Re: Cuse v Stony Brook, 1600 hrs in the Dome

Post by Brownlax »

Lax101 wrote: Sun Feb 20, 2022 7:20 pm In order to speed up the game the drawer girls have one opportunity to cleanly get the ball up in the air and in play. If they fail to do so there is a "possession arrow" like in basketball and the team's take turns getting the ball. The big issue is that in a bit spot a drawer girl may try to NOT go up in the air with the ball if the possession arrow favors her team. At they very least, the last 3 minutes of the game they should remove the alternating possession rule.
If the ref determines that the player is not going up, then that is a penalty and the draw would go to the other team.
wlaxphan20
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2019 9:23 pm

Re: Cuse v Stony Brook, 1600 hrs in the Dome

Post by wlaxphan20 »

Lax101 wrote: Mon Feb 21, 2022 9:38 am You absolutely never use your best defender to face guard. Need someone fast, aggresive and disciplined - annoying helps as well. If you watch BC you will find that is what they do and they face guard the most important offensive player every game no matter who they play. Bill B. the Patriots coach does the same thing in football. Takes away the other teams biggest weapon. The best lax defender would likely cover the #2 offensive threat. If you watched the Princeton game Sears scored 2 goals in about the first 3 minutes of the game. UVA coach then locked her off and she did nothing else before she ultimately fouled out. You can still lock off or at least focus on best offensive player when playing a zone.
Yes I agree - fast, aggressive, disciplined, and a motor that runs for days. I believe UMass actually had a senior soccer player join the team in spring 2016 and primarily used her to face guard.
Post Reply

Return to “D1 WOMENS LACROSSE”