Tweak the College Rules

[youthathletics]

So the recommendation is to add a 6 foot radius semicircle on the front side of the crease (concentric with the current 9 foot radius crease). The semicircle would be twice as wide as the current 6 foot wide goal structure.

That semicircle would be the "goal mouth." A jump or dive that lands in this goal mouth would disallow any goal. No contact would also be a loss of possession. Contact with the goalie would be a one minute penalty.

As far as I can see, the crease would then have a sacred area that could not be landed in that is well defined...

I never understood why the dive was re-instituted. Other than Coach T complaining, I thought we had gotten past it.

+1

Totally agree. Although I will admit this is with the advantages of maturity. In my younger years watching the Gaits do it I thought it was the coolest thing on two legs. One of the benefits of experience however is experience. There is way too much risk of injury (to everyone, diver, goalie and sliding D) and, as an added insult, it is well neigh impossible to call for the refs. Away with it!

+2

Maybe lacrosse just needs a new rules committee.

[wgdsr]

So the recommendation is to add a 6 foot radius semicircle on the front side of the crease (concentric with the current 9 foot radius crease). The semicircle would be twice as wide as the current 6 foot wide goal structure.

That semicircle would be the "goal mouth." A jump or dive that lands in this goal mouth would disallow any goal. No contact would also be a loss of possession. Contact with the goalie would be a one minute penalty.

As far as I can see, the crease would then have a sacred area that could not be landed in that is well defined...

I never understood why the dive was re-instituted. Other than Coach T complaining, I thought we had gotten past it.

+1

Totally agree. Although I will admit this is with the advantages of maturity. In my younger years watching the Gaits do it I thought it was the coolest thing on two legs. One of the benefits of experience however is experience. There is way too much risk of injury (to everyone, diver, goalie and sliding D) and, as an added insult, it is well neigh impossible to call for the refs. Away with it!

for folks younger than 25, i'd be surprised if the number was as low as 9/1 for it.
it's the codgers who don't like it. looks like we're in for at least another year.

[youthathletics]

So the recommendation is to add a 6 foot radius semicircle on the front side of the crease (concentric with the current 9 foot radius crease). The semicircle would be twice as wide as the current 6 foot wide goal structure.

That semicircle would be the "goal mouth." A jump or dive that lands in this goal mouth would disallow any goal. No contact would also be a loss of possession. Contact with the goalie would be a one minute penalty.

As far as I can see, the crease would then have a sacred area that could not be landed in that is well defined...

I never understood why the dive was re-instituted. Other than Coach T complaining, I thought we had gotten past it.

+1

Totally agree. Although I will admit this is with the advantages of maturity. In my younger years watching the Gaits do it I thought it was the coolest thing on two legs. One of the benefits of experience however is experience. There is way too much risk of injury (to everyone, diver, goalie and sliding D) and, as an added insult, it is well neigh impossible to call for the refs. Away with it!

for folks younger than 25, i'd be surprised if the number was as low as 9/1 for it.
it's the codgers who don't like it. looks like we're in for at least another year.

Is that not the point of age and being wiser, otherwise the rules committee would be staffed with primarily players. Every young man thinks they are damned near invincible.

If they are going to keep it, I would forego the added ice cream cone goal mouth line and recommend that any attempt to score that requires the player leaving one or both feet into the cylinder must be initiated at or below GLE with their trajectory “upfield” or parallel with GLE across the back of the net. This would allow dunks and dives and allow the leaping players momentum to be away from the goalie.

If the goal is to allow dunks like MJ or Clyde Drexler from the hoops foul line, get rid of the crease all together.

[FannOLax]

"If it's not broken, don't fix it." Of course, it is broken. My fix would be to eliminate it.

[wgdsr]

for folks younger than 25, i'd be surprised if the number was as low as 9/1 for it.
it's the codgers who don't like it. looks like we're in for at least another year.

Is that not the point of age and being wiser, otherwise the rules committee would be staffed with primarily players. Every young man thinks they are damned near invincible.

c'mon, players aren't getting any opportunity to write nc$$ rules whether wisdom was a benjamin button feature of the human condition or not.
and at least in this moment in time, those sage rule makers have decided yay on the dive. so what does that say to that point?
the most surprising thing by far is that in today's p.c. society, i can't think of a similar scenario where we have actually gone backwards on "risk". any incremental move is always a rubicon event.
in any case, if there is in fact a 6 foot radius no fly zone, really they've just made a smaller crease. there's actually not that much room between the 2. so by prospectus, it'd seem we'll see some tighter plays than the pre-2019 era, but similar otherwise. without seeing it in action, seems like a positive change.

[xxxxxxx]

This is still very dangerous and I really fear for the goaltenders. I agree with above post that I have never seen a rule is sports made to protect players reversed. The NCAA rule committee is a joke and should be abolished, no sport changes rules like lacrosse, just leave it alone please.

[DMac]

I actually like the dive but inasmuch as it seems so difficult for the officials to get it under control, I think they should just do away with it. I've seen plenty of calls that I thought should have gone the other way. I also think the D man is flat out screwed to play D once the O man gets close to the crease...anything he does is going to be called a push, warranted or not. JMHO.
Was noted a few posts back that the best way to clean up the dive is to allow it from GLE or behind. No way you're flying into the GK then, much of the risk is eliminated. Had mentioned this before and agree.

[oldjayfan]

Agree dmac..would not want to be a college official as the dive call is officiated differently, or so it seems, every game--even within every game. I thought the idea of "feet being grounded" when shot is taken was an easier method for refs to get it right.

[oldjayfan]

"If it's not broken, don't fix it." Of course, it is broken. My fix would be to eliminate it.

Exactly

[Can Opener]

Not a fan of the dive, but this is pretty dang cool.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Not a fan of the dive, but this is pretty dang cool.

Gary wasn’t putting anyone in danger.

[DMac]

This was beyond wild when he did that, then he did it again. Just nuts.
For those who might not know, the reason fans are turned around and
looking after the shot, the press boxes are up there and you can catch
the replays on the TVs in there (was before the big screens in the Dome).
You knew what you just saw, but kinda had to see it again to believe it.
Notice the lefty laxer does that righty too (he's a righty person..Paul too).
Still can't figure out why so many righties play lacrosse lefty (hockey too).

[Drcthru]

Not a fan of the dive, but this is pretty dang cool.

Gary wasn’t putting anyone in danger.

+1 or more!

[wgdsr]

This was beyond wild when he did that, then he did it again. Just nuts.
For those who might not know, the reason fans are turned around and
looking after the shot, the press boxes are up there and you can catch
the replays on the TVs in there (was before the big screens in the Dome).
You knew what you just saw, but kinda had to see it again to believe it.
Notice the lefty laxer does that righty too (he's a righty person..Paul too).
Still can't figure out why so many righties play lacrosse lefty (hockey too).

for the canucks (of which there are an inordinate amount of lefties in lacrosse), no empirical evidence but the legend is:
1) they are more likely to pick up a hockey stick as babes, and being so small --- do so with their dominant hand (right) on top to carry around, making them lefty hockey players. and thus lefty lacrosse players eventually.
2) that coaches in canada push the strong hand on top model
3) that when curved sticks were invented, more lefts went to canada, more rights to the u.s.

https://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/16/spor ... ml?mcubz=3
https://www.purehockey.com/c/why-are-so ... eft-handed

[youthathletics]

Not a fan of the dive, but this is pretty dang cool.

Gary wasn’t putting anyone in danger.

+1 or more!

Mhmm, at or below GLE.

[Typical Lax Dad]

This was beyond wild when he did that, then he did it again. Just nuts.
For those who might not know, the reason fans are turned around and
looking after the shot, the press boxes are up there and you can catch
the replays on the TVs in there (was before the big screens in the Dome).
You knew what you just saw, but kinda had to see it again to believe it.
Notice the lefty laxer does that righty too (he's a righty person..Paul too).
Still can't figure out why so many righties play lacrosse lefty (hockey too).

It’s how they hold a hockey stick. Most “lefty Canadians” are true righties. The dominant hand is closer to the end of the shaft in hockey lift that stick in the air and you are a lefty lacrosse player.

[DMac]

This was beyond wild when he did that, then he did it again. Just nuts.
For those who might not know, the reason fans are turned around and
looking after the shot, the press boxes are up there and you can catch
the replays on the TVs in there (was before the big screens in the Dome).
You knew what you just saw, but kinda had to see it again to believe it.
Notice the lefty laxer does that righty too (he's a righty person..Paul too).
Still can't figure out why so many righties play lacrosse lefty (hockey too).

for the canucks (of which there are an inordinate amount of lefties in lacrosse), no empirical evidence but the legend is:
1) they are more likely to pick up a hockey stick as babes, and being so small --- do so with their dominant hand (right) on top to carry around, making them lefty hockey players. and thus lefty lacrosse players eventually.
2) that coaches in canada push the strong hand on top model
3) that when curved sticks were invented, more lefts went to canada, more rights to the u.s.

https://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/16/spor ... ml?mcubz=3
This is some pretty crazy stuff. I get it that it's legend, doesn't make a damn bit of difference, but I find it an interesting phenomenon that no one can really figure out. The top hand on a stick (hockey or lacrosse), I hope I've got this part right, is the one closest to the blade of the stick. The torque, strength, and all else mentioned in the article is from the left for a lefty (who is a righty in everything else). This same guy would probably poke himself with the fork if he tried scrambling eggs left handed. Hurt himself when using a hammer lefty, and come up with an empty ladle when trying to get sauce from the pot to his pasta....righties can't do jack sh*t with their left. Yet on that stick, all of the control and wrist/hand movement involved in that comes from the left. Makes absolutely no sense (to me). Put a ball in that same guy's hand and ask him to stuff it in the hoop (which is what Gary is doing, pretty much...hence, righty) and all of that wrist and hand movement would come from the right. Ping pong, tennis, darts, all played righty by the lefty hockey/lacrosse guy. Hell, the lefty hockey boy would even play air hockey right handed.Pretty wild.
https://www.purehockey.com/c/why-are-so ... eft-handed
Mostly the same stuff here and still nuts.

The Canadians say the strong hand is more useful in stick handling at the top of the stick, as well as better able to produce power for a wrist shot.

"The strong hand", this is what seems so crazy to me. A righty playing hockey/lacrosse lefty is considered using his strong hand for strength, finesse, dexterity, soft touch and maximum control, but off the ice he can't do jack sh*t with his strong hand. Splain dat.

[wgdsr]

as you read the articles, for hockey it's top hand strong at the butt end of the stick and weak hand low (closer to blade), as that's how the hockey stick sits. think of a 2 year old who can barely carry around a stick... and does so by grabbing it with one hand at the end, dragging it. he'll do it with his strong hand.

it's the opposite of what we call top and bottom hand of course in lacrosse as the stick is "raised" in the air... but as many of the motions are the same.... a righty magically has become a lefty lacrosse player.

[DMac]

as you read the articles, for hockey it's top hand strong at the butt end of the stick and weak hand low (closer to blade), as that's how the hockey stick sits. think of a 2 year old who can barely carry around a stick... and does so by grabbing it with one hand at the end, dragging it. he'll do it with his strong hand.
So I did have it wrong, top hand in hockey is the butt end, makes sense, it's the top of the stick when being used. Got it, understood the dragging part. In lacrosse top hand is the nearest to the sick hold, deep pocket. Makes sense too.

it's the opposite of what we call top and bottom hand of course in lacrosse as the stick is "raised" in the air... but as many of the motions are the same.... a righty magically has become a lefty lacrosse player.
Which doesn't explain why the righty little hockey boy who drags his stick across the floor, puts his right hand at the bottom (nearest the blade) of the stick and plays right handed. The dominate hand is on the top (butt end) for a lefty player, but the "weak/lesser" hand is on the top for a righty? Still comes out as pretty crazy in the end (to me).

[wgdsr]

as you read the articles, for hockey it's top hand strong at the butt end of the stick and weak hand low (closer to blade), as that's how the hockey stick sits. think of a 2 year old who can barely carry around a stick... and does so by grabbing it with one hand at the end, dragging it. he'll do it with his strong hand.
So I did have it wrong, top hand in hockey is the butt end, makes sense, it's the top of the stick when being used. Got it, understood the dragging part. In lacrosse top hand is the nearest to the sick hold, deep pocket. Makes sense too.

it's the opposite of what we call top and bottom hand of course in lacrosse as the stick is "raised" in the air... but as many of the motions are the same.... a righty magically has become a lefty lacrosse player.
Which doesn't explain why the righty little hockey boy who drags his stick across the floor, puts his right hand at the bottom (nearest the blade) of the stick and plays right handed. The dominate hand is on the top (butt end) for a lefty player, but the "weak/lesser" hand is on the top for a righty? Still comes out as pretty crazy in the end (to me).

he doesn't. per the articles, all the canadian hockey players are "lefty". kids grab it at the butt end with strong hand.... eventually, they earn to use 2 hands and put left hand low.
ciaches teach it, too.
give your nearest 2 year old a hockey stick or a golf club. they will drag it around with their strong hand. when you see them at xmas or easter, maybe they'll eventually listen to you and use their other hand, too. and their weak hand will go low, unless you correct them.

you can actually train about anyone to use their other side for anything. throwing, golf, baseball hitting, whatever. you just have to start them that way.