Boston College

[LarryGamLax]

Larry,

This is Rachel Hall's dad. I think it is sad that an old man hides behind a pseudonym to consistently denigrate a 21 year old girl who has fought to achieve everything she has accomplished against all odds. I am glad that people like you did not have the opportunity to influence her along the way, but instead she received the encouragement and praise of the likes of Kayla Treanor, Katrina Dowd, AWW, KAH and other great coaches who saw something in her. She is not mediocre, and if you were to meet her you would find her engaging, intelligent and with perhaps as much if not more knowledge about today's modern game of women's lacrosse than you.

I appreciate everyone who sticks up for her in this forum, but I fear you are only just feeding the troll and Rachel doesn't need help that makes her the brunt of misplayed and uninformed spoutings of an armchair goalie whose knowledge of the game appears grounded in the last century.

I really hope this is the last of this and you can move on to insulting someone else's daughter and not use mine as your example of today's mediocracy in women's lacrosse.

Thanks for coming at me bhall123. Let's go point by point :
*I'm not hiding behind any psuedonym. Many people know my name or know me. I'm also not a "old man". That was a d@#k move, but my current health state says that I need to let that go.
*Did I name call your daughter or state that she is a terrible person? That would be NO! Telling me that she's a wonderful person has nothing to do with my criticism of her as a Lacrosse player. If you can point out to me where I lied about this, then you will get a sincere apology from me.
*Those coaches you named, I know them all except Treanor. If they have a different view of Rachel that's fine, but that doesn't negate what I said.
*So I know nothing of the "modern game"? Another d@#k assumption on your part. My involvement with the sport is long and consistent (outside of the last 3 years due to illness). I've been deeply involved for a long time.
*No armchair goalie here. I was never a goalie, but I have trained many many girls at the position for a very long time as part of my business. I like to think that I know what I'm talking about having learned from some of best(male and female) to have ever played the position. If not, then I should have gone into Real Estate or writing.
*I am sorry to report that you(nor anyone else) are not going to run me off the Forum. Not happening!
I will repeat again that if I start getting personal with your daughter, then you can point that out to me. I will delete it and apologize, otherwise I'll stay as I am.

Thanks for your time.

[njbill]

Nah, Cletus, I’d just call that venting from a goalie dad.

Goalie dad (or mom) is the toughest spot in sports. Tougher than goalie or field player or coach. Tougher than parent of field player or coach. A guy I know has three daughters. The oldest was a goalie. The middle daughter was a defender. When the youngest came along, he told her she could play any position she wanted except goalie. He did not want to be a goalie dad again. And goalie dad of the goalie on a top national team is even tougher still.

The subject of criticism of players is hotly debated on these boards. Some are of the view that the players shouldn’t be criticized. Many of those posters are parents of current players. No one likes to hear their DD criticized. In fact, though, almost all posters criticize players from time to time, including poster-parents. Look at the recent Syr-NU thread. Syr’s goalies were criticized. The NU player who was central to a key play with 90 secs to go in regulation got a lot of criticism. (“She should have been carded” is criticism, although certainly a fairly debatable opinion to express.) Look at the posts from the final four games every year. A sizeable number include player criticisms.

Posters are free to adopt their own guidelines about criticizing players. It would be nice if each poster was consistent with his or her guidelines, but they have no obligation to be, and many aren’t. I have long followed the protocol in place under LaxPower, which is that the line is drawn between high school and college. Criticism of HS players should be off limits. Fair, objective (non-personal) criticism of college players is OK. By that point they are adults. In the adult world, adults are subject to criticism. The one aspect of this that really riles me is that some say it is OK to criticize male college athletes but not female athletes. To me that is rank sexism which has no place in the third decade of the 21st century.

Turning to Hall’s daughter, she is the starting goalie for the reigning national champion and the current no. 1 team. She is a senior in college, 21 years old according to her dad. Lots and lots of her games are on national TV or streamed. She is written up in national magazines. She is a national figure in women’s college lacrosse. She gets a lot more attention now that she is at BC than she did at Oregon. She knew what she was getting herself into when she transferred as she was joining a team that had been to the final game three years in a row.

She got a lot of very deserved praise for her performance in the final four last year. She had a great game in the semis and a very good game in the finals. In my view, she was clearly the main reason BC won on Friday and a key reason they won on Sunday. All the kudos she got were well deserved and on the money.

If you can be praised when you do well, the other side of the coin is that you can be criticized when you don’t. Against UVA this year she allowed 15 goals and had four saves. I watched that game on TV. Against Brown she allowed nine goals and had two saves. Did not see that game. But it is fair criticism to say she didn’t play well in those games. Now, the dad doesn’t like to hear his daughter criticized, which is completely understandable (I feel the same way about my daughter), but that doesn’t mean she should be exempt from fair, accurate criticism.

If BC gets to the final four and Hall plays well, she will get praised. If she doesn’t play well, she will be criticized. Bank on it. And there will be nothing wrong with that. The same will no doubt apply to the goalies of the other final four teams. Play well; get praise. Don’t play well; get criticized.

Ben (if I may call you that), the goalie of the national champ/no. 1 team is going to get a lot of ink. Some may be critical. I understand that as the dad, you get pissed off at any criticism of your daughter. All dads feel that way. But your daughter is all grown up now. She has worked her way to get to the top of the college game. Much credit to her for that. But the higher up the food chain you go, the more you attention you get. Some of it may not be positive.

I imagine you’ve been a goalie dad for over ten years. You must have heard at least some criticism of your daughter along the way. Maybe you had just had enough, and this was the straw that broke the camel’s back. You gave in to the urge to vent. I think your post lost some steam, though, when you manufactured some things that weren’t said or implied (“consistently denigrate,” “feeding the troll,” “insulting”). Criticizing people for things they actually said is one thing. Making up things that weren’t said is quite another.

[LarryGamLax]

In Beantown, we call that a scorchah.

(Is the fire extinguisher handy?)

I don't know where the fire is. Last time I checked I didn't see any burn marks on me.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

In Beantown, we call that a scorchah.

(Is the fire extinguisher handy?)

I don't know where the fire is. Last time I checked I didn't see any burn marks on me.

Truth is you stepped in it Larry—again. It wasn’t that long ago that you provoked another Dad on this board with your cringe-worthy unrestrained remarks about his daughter.

And what a (NOT!) surprise—no one else with the sand to call you out. All the moral giants strangely silent on the sidelines. But I’m too effusive and ignorant in my assessment of Charlotte North. Of mice and men indeed. Where are the air sick bags. 

[Can Opener]

Larry,

This is Rachel Hall's dad. I think it is sad that an old man hides behind a pseudonym to consistently denigrate a 21 year old girl who has fought to achieve everything she has accomplished against all odds. I am glad that people like you did not have the opportunity to influence her along the way, but instead she received the encouragement and praise of the likes of Kayla Treanor, Katrina Dowd, AWW, KAH and other great coaches who saw something in her. She is not mediocre, and if you were to meet her you would find her engaging, intelligent and with perhaps as much if not more knowledge about today's modern game of women's lacrosse than you.

I appreciate everyone who sticks up for her in this forum, but I fear you are only just feeding the troll and Rachel doesn't need help that makes her the brunt of misplayed and uninformed spoutings of an armchair goalie whose knowledge of the game appears grounded in the last century.

I really hope this is the last of this and you can move on to insulting someone else's daughter and not use mine as your example of today's mediocracy in women's lacrosse.

Mic drop. Good on ya, dad.

Sometimes you reach a point with bullies where they need to be either punched in the nose or publicly humiliated. You did both!

[seacoaster]

Nah, Cletus, I’d just call that venting from a goalie dad.

Goalie dad (or mom) is the toughest spot in sports. Tougher than goalie or field player or coach. Tougher than parent of field player or coach. A guy I know has three daughters. The oldest was a goalie. The middle daughter was a defender. When the youngest came along, he told her she could play any position she wanted except goalie. He did not want to be a goalie dad again. And goalie dad of the goalie on a top national team is even tougher still.

The subject of criticism of players is hotly debated on these boards. Some are of the view that the players shouldn’t be criticized. Many of those posters are parents of current players. No one likes to hear their DD criticized. In fact, though, almost all posters criticize players from time to time, including poster-parents. Look at the recent Syr-NU thread. Syr’s goalies were criticized. The NU player who was central to a key play with 90 secs to go in regulation got a lot of criticism. (“She should have been carded” is criticism, although certainly a fairly debatable opinion to express.) Look at the posts from the final four games every year. A sizeable number include player criticisms.

Posters are free to adopt their own guidelines about criticizing players. It would be nice if each poster was consistent with his or her guidelines, but they have no obligation to be, and many aren’t. I have long followed the protocol in place under LaxPower, which is that the line is drawn between high school and college. Criticism of HS players should be off limits. Fair, objective (non-personal) criticism of college players is OK. By that point they are adults. In the adult world, adults are subject to criticism. The one aspect of this that really riles me is that some say it is OK to criticize male college athletes but not female athletes. To me that is rank sexism which has no place in the third decade of the 21st century.

Turning to Hall’s daughter, she is the starting goalie for the reigning national champion and the current no. 1 team. She is a senior in college, 21 years old according to her dad. Lots and lots of her games are on national TV or streamed. She is written up in national magazines. She is a national figure in women’s college lacrosse. She gets a lot more attention now that she is at BC than she did at Oregon. She knew what she was getting herself into when she transferred as she was joining a team that had been to the final game three years in a row.

She got a lot of very deserved praise for her performance in the final four last year. She had a great game in the semis and a very good game in the finals. In my view, she was clearly the main reason BC won on Friday and a key reason they won on Sunday. All the kudos she got were well deserved and on the money.

If you can be praised when you do well, the other side of the coin is that you can be criticized when you don’t. Against UVA this year she allowed 15 goals and had four saves. I watched that game on TV. Against Brown she allowed nine goals and had two saves. Did not see that game. But it is fair criticism to say she didn’t play well in those games. Now, the dad doesn’t like to hear his daughter criticized, which is completely understandable (I feel the same way about my daughter), but that doesn’t mean she should be exempt from fair, accurate criticism.

If BC gets to the final four and Hall plays well, she will get praised. If she doesn’t play well, she will be criticized. Bank on it. And there will be nothing wrong with that. The same will no doubt apply to the goalies of the other final four teams. Play well; get praise. Don’t play well; get criticized.

Ben (if I may call you that), the goalie of the national champ/no. 1 team is going to get a lot of ink. Some may be critical. I understand that as the dad, you get ticked off at any criticism of your daughter. All dads feel that way. But your daughter is all grown up now. She has worked her way to get to the top of the college game. Much credit to her for that. But the higher up the food chain you go, the more you attention you get. Some of it may not be positive.

I imagine you’ve been a goalie dad for over ten years. You must have heard at least some criticism of your daughter along the way. Maybe you had just had enough, and this was the straw that broke the camel’s back. You gave in to the urge to vent. I think your post lost some steam, though, when you manufactured some things that weren’t said or implied (“consistently denigrate,” “feeding the troll,” “insulting”). Criticizing people for things they actually said is one thing. Making up things that weren’t said is quite another.

As usual, this pretty much sums it up from a rational and reasonable, and informed, point of view. Let's turn the page maybe.

[wlaxphan20]

Nah, Cletus, I’d just call that venting from a goalie dad.

Goalie dad (or mom) is the toughest spot in sports. Tougher than goalie or field player or coach. Tougher than parent of field player or coach. A guy I know has three daughters. The oldest was a goalie. The middle daughter was a defender. When the youngest came along, he told her she could play any position she wanted except goalie. He did not want to be a goalie dad again. And goalie dad of the goalie on a top national team is even tougher still.

The subject of criticism of players is hotly debated on these boards. Some are of the view that the players shouldn’t be criticized. Many of those posters are parents of current players. No one likes to hear their DD criticized. In fact, though, almost all posters criticize players from time to time, including poster-parents. Look at the recent Syr-NU thread. Syr’s goalies were criticized. The NU player who was central to a key play with 90 secs to go in regulation got a lot of criticism. (“She should have been carded” is criticism, although certainly a fairly debatable opinion to express.) Look at the posts from the final four games every year. A sizeable number include player criticisms.

Posters are free to adopt their own guidelines about criticizing players. It would be nice if each poster was consistent with his or her guidelines, but they have no obligation to be, and many aren’t. I have long followed the protocol in place under LaxPower, which is that the line is drawn between high school and college. Criticism of HS players should be off limits. Fair, objective (non-personal) criticism of college players is OK. By that point they are adults. In the adult world, adults are subject to criticism. The one aspect of this that really riles me is that some say it is OK to criticize male college athletes but not female athletes. To me that is rank sexism which has no place in the third decade of the 21st century.

Turning to Hall’s daughter, she is the starting goalie for the reigning national champion and the current no. 1 team. She is a senior in college, 21 years old according to her dad. Lots and lots of her games are on national TV or streamed. She is written up in national magazines. She is a national figure in women’s college lacrosse. She gets a lot more attention now that she is at BC than she did at Oregon. She knew what she was getting herself into when she transferred as she was joining a team that had been to the final game three years in a row.

She got a lot of very deserved praise for her performance in the final four last year. She had a great game in the semis and a very good game in the finals. In my view, she was clearly the main reason BC won on Friday and a key reason they won on Sunday. All the kudos she got were well deserved and on the money.

If you can be praised when you do well, the other side of the coin is that you can be criticized when you don’t. Against UVA this year she allowed 15 goals and had four saves. I watched that game on TV. Against Brown she allowed nine goals and had two saves. Did not see that game. But it is fair criticism to say she didn’t play well in those games. Now, the dad doesn’t like to hear his daughter criticized, which is completely understandable (I feel the same way about my daughter), but that doesn’t mean she should be exempt from fair, accurate criticism.

If BC gets to the final four and Hall plays well, she will get praised. If she doesn’t play well, she will be criticized. Bank on it. And there will be nothing wrong with that. The same will no doubt apply to the goalies of the other final four teams. Play well; get praise. Don’t play well; get criticized.

Ben (if I may call you that), the goalie of the national champ/no. 1 team is going to get a lot of ink. Some may be critical. I understand that as the dad, you get ticked off at any criticism of your daughter. All dads feel that way. But your daughter is all grown up now. She has worked her way to get to the top of the college game. Much credit to her for that. But the higher up the food chain you go, the more you attention you get. Some of it may not be positive.

I imagine you’ve been a goalie dad for over ten years. You must have heard at least some criticism of your daughter along the way. Maybe you had just had enough, and this was the straw that broke the camel’s back. You gave in to the urge to vent. I think your post lost some steam, though, when you manufactured some things that weren’t said or implied (“consistently denigrate,” “feeding the troll,” “insulting”). Criticizing people for things they actually said is one thing. Making up things that weren’t said is quite another.

Lot of great points here. This was well said.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

She's the Nick Foles of Lacrosse. She will be a legend at BC.

Nick Foles is a great example. Just makes Rachel Hall look that much better.

Nick Foles stepped onto perhaps the grandest stage in all of sports and performed like a champion--completing 28 of 43 pass attempts for 373 yards and three touchdowns and also caught a one-yard touchdown pass on a trick play. He was named Super Bowl MVP. Hall performed just as heroically in the 2021 final four whose stats I have previously noted.

Foles went up against the greatest team of the 21st century and the greatest player in NFL history and beat them. Similarly, Hall backstopped BC to wins over #1 Carolina (which some folks had speculated might be the greatest team of assembled talent ever seen in the ranks of women's lacrosse) and the #3 Syracuse Orange which only days before had shredded #2 Northwestern.

The Philadelphia Eagles had been to the Super Bowl twice before and lost both times. Nick Foles was key in propelling the Eagles to their first ever Super Bowl title. As is well known, the Eagles had been to 3 previous national championship finals and came away disappointed. Hall was the reason the Eagles finally got over the hump and won their first NCAA title.

Great company and birds of a feather--these two Eagles. And you are right--Rachel Hall will always be considered a legend at BC, just like Foles will always be considered legend and spoken well of in the city of brotherly love.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Larry,

This is Rachel Hall's dad. I think it is sad that an old man hides behind a pseudonym to consistently denigrate a 21 year old girl who has fought to achieve everything she has accomplished against all odds. I am glad that people like you did not have the opportunity to influence her along the way, but instead she received the encouragement and praise of the likes of Kayla Treanor, Katrina Dowd, AWW, KAH and other great coaches who saw something in her. She is not mediocre, and if you were to meet her you would find her engaging, intelligent and with perhaps as much if not more knowledge about today's modern game of women's lacrosse than you.

I appreciate everyone who sticks up for her in this forum, but I fear you are only just feeding the troll and Rachel doesn't need help that makes her the brunt of misplayed and uninformed spoutings of an armchair goalie whose knowledge of the game appears grounded in the last century.

I really hope this is the last of this and you can move on to insulting someone else's daughter and not use mine as your example of today's mediocracy in women's lacrosse.

Mic drop. Good on ya, dad.

Sometimes you reach a point with bullies where they need to be either punched in the nose or publicly humiliated. You did both!

Hear, hear!

[Dr. Tact]

Larry,

This is Rachel Hall's dad. I think it is sad that an old man hides behind a pseudonym to consistently denigrate a 21 year old girl who has fought to achieve everything she has accomplished against all odds. I am glad that people like you did not have the opportunity to influence her along the way, but instead she received the encouragement and praise of the likes of Kayla Treanor, Katrina Dowd, AWW, KAH and other great coaches who saw something in her. She is not mediocre, and if you were to meet her you would find her engaging, intelligent and with perhaps as much if not more knowledge about today's modern game of women's lacrosse than you.

I appreciate everyone who sticks up for her in this forum, but I fear you are only just feeding the troll and Rachel doesn't need help that makes her the brunt of misplayed and uninformed spoutings of an armchair goalie whose knowledge of the game appears grounded in the last century.

I really hope this is the last of this and you can move on to insulting someone else's daughter and not use mine as your example of today's mediocracy in women's lacrosse.

Good on ya Dad!!! While my D is not the star on her team, to the extent that she draws message board criticism, I appreciate your measured response. I would be apoplectic. We tend to forget what is behind, in this case, the helmet. I know there is a sentiment on this board that all should be open for criticism. I personally don't negatively criticize players. I limit my vitriol to coaches .

My daughter is so much a better lacrosse player, athlete, scholar and overall person than I am. So I am protective of my little Cindy Lou, as you are. I have not focused on BC's players (other than CN and JM), so I cant defend your D or any other player without generalized comments.

Anyway, I support your post and hope that all is well in the Hall family.

I told Larry in a PM that I would do this, not to placate him but to explain my response to Mr. Hall.

I understand that there are folks (Larry included) that feel it is appropriate to negatively criticize players on the Message Board. I don't do it, but I support his/their right to do so.

I know little to squat about Goaltending. I could not imagine criticizing a goalie. [replace "Goaltending/goalie" with any other positional player and it still is true for me ]

I don't have an issue with anyone criticizing a player. That said, as a Dad of a current player, I would get defensive and call out the criticism. If you are going to put negative criticism out there, then be prepared to get push back. I wasn't trying to take sides on the content, just on the Dad reaction.

[Dr. Tact]

Nah, Cletus, I’d just call that venting from a goalie dad.

Goalie dad (or mom) is the toughest spot in sports. Tougher than goalie or field player or coach. Tougher than parent of field player or coach. A guy I know has three daughters. The oldest was a goalie. The middle daughter was a defender. When the youngest came along, he told her she could play any position she wanted except goalie. He did not want to be a goalie dad again. And goalie dad of the goalie on a top national team is even tougher still.

The subject of criticism of players is hotly debated on these boards. Some are of the view that the players shouldn’t be criticized. Many of those posters are parents of current players. No one likes to hear their DD criticized. In fact, though, almost all posters criticize players from time to time, including poster-parents. Look at the recent Syr-NU thread. Syr’s goalies were criticized. The NU player who was central to a key play with 90 secs to go in regulation got a lot of criticism. (“She should have been carded” is criticism, although certainly a fairly debatable opinion to express.) Look at the posts from the final four games every year. A sizeable number include player criticisms.

Posters are free to adopt their own guidelines about criticizing players. It would be nice if each poster was consistent with his or her guidelines, but they have no obligation to be, and many aren’t. I have long followed the protocol in place under LaxPower, which is that the line is drawn between high school and college. Criticism of HS players should be off limits. Fair, objective (non-personal) criticism of college players is OK. By that point they are adults. In the adult world, adults are subject to criticism. The one aspect of this that really riles me is that some say it is OK to criticize male college athletes but not female athletes. To me that is rank sexism which has no place in the third decade of the 21st century.

Turning to Hall’s daughter, she is the starting goalie for the reigning national champion and the current no. 1 team. She is a senior in college, 21 years old according to her dad. Lots and lots of her games are on national TV or streamed. She is written up in national magazines. She is a national figure in women’s college lacrosse. She gets a lot more attention now that she is at BC than she did at Oregon. She knew what she was getting herself into when she transferred as she was joining a team that had been to the final game three years in a row.

She got a lot of very deserved praise for her performance in the final four last year. She had a great game in the semis and a very good game in the finals. In my view, she was clearly the main reason BC won on Friday and a key reason they won on Sunday. All the kudos she got were well deserved and on the money.

If you can be praised when you do well, the other side of the coin is that you can be criticized when you don’t. Against UVA this year she allowed 15 goals and had four saves. I watched that game on TV. Against Brown she allowed nine goals and had two saves. Did not see that game. But it is fair criticism to say she didn’t play well in those games. Now, the dad doesn’t like to hear his daughter criticized, which is completely understandable (I feel the same way about my daughter), but that doesn’t mean she should be exempt from fair, accurate criticism.

If BC gets to the final four and Hall plays well, she will get praised. If she doesn’t play well, she will be criticized. Bank on it. And there will be nothing wrong with that. The same will no doubt apply to the goalies of the other final four teams. Play well; get praise. Don’t play well; get criticized.

Ben (if I may call you that), the goalie of the national champ/no. 1 team is going to get a lot of ink. Some may be critical. I understand that as the dad, you get ticked off at any criticism of your daughter. All dads feel that way. But your daughter is all grown up now. She has worked her way to get to the top of the college game. Much credit to her for that. But the higher up the food chain you go, the more you attention you get. Some of it may not be positive.

I imagine you’ve been a goalie dad for over ten years. You must have heard at least some criticism of your daughter along the way. Maybe you had just had enough, and this was the straw that broke the camel’s back. You gave in to the urge to vent. I think your post lost some steam, though, when you manufactured some things that weren’t said or implied (“consistently denigrate,” “feeding the troll,” “insulting”). Criticizing people for things they actually said is one thing. Making up things that weren’t said is quite another.

As usual, this pretty much sums it up from a rational and reasonable, and informed, point of view. Let's turn the page maybe.

Yep.

[8meterPA]

Why is Charlotte North so good? Ive been watching her for awhile. Besides being incredibly crafty and creative, nothing she is doing seems new or game-breaking but everything she does seems to work. I never played but have been a casual fan for years and i recognize that she's really good but cant understand WHY she is really good? like what is she doing differently than everyone before her that makes a move that much better when she does it compared to her predecessors?

She is fierce. She is extremely talented and confident in those abilities. Her FP shot is unstoppable. Just like a great white, she goes for what she wants and eats it. Now her game has some flaws - ride /redefend isn't great and she isn't a feeder, but when she can give you 6-8 goals a game....

She’s a real innovator. Here’s a perfect example in this clip. She tried on this new shot for size in one game, and perfected it in the very next game. Astounding talent and fire. She’s a true artist.

I think North is talented and fiercely competitive, but I think this take is a little exaggerated or maybe not the best example. IMO, making a shot adjustment is not elite or innovative, but expected. Additionally, high bounce shots are not a novel concept. They were around even before the time these links were posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VTszQ7zeuI

https://youtu.be/s3aWoYbI82U?t=46

https://youtu.be/u87ZmRFAs8I?t=144

one could argue that was a "dangerous propulsion" by CN, shot with her back to the goal and a defender in harm's way

[8meterPA]

Larry,

This is Rachel Hall's dad. I think it is sad that an old man hides behind a pseudonym to consistently denigrate a 21 year old girl who has fought to achieve everything she has accomplished against all odds. I am glad that people like you did not have the opportunity to influence her along the way, but instead she received the encouragement and praise of the likes of Kayla Treanor, Katrina Dowd, AWW, KAH and other great coaches who saw something in her. She is not mediocre, and if you were to meet her you would find her engaging, intelligent and with perhaps as much if not more knowledge about today's modern game of women's lacrosse than you.

I appreciate everyone who sticks up for her in this forum, but I fear you are only just feeding the troll and Rachel doesn't need help that makes her the brunt of misplayed and uninformed spoutings of an armchair goalie whose knowledge of the game appears grounded in the last century.

I really hope this is the last of this and you can move on to insulting someone else's daughter and not use mine as your example of today's mediocracy in women's lacrosse.

Good on ya Dad!!! While my D is not the star on her team, to the extent that she draws message board criticism, I appreciate your measured response. I would be apoplectic. We tend to forget what is behind, in this case, the helmet. I know there is a sentiment on this board that all should be open for criticism. I personally don't negatively criticize players. I limit my vitriol to coaches .

My daughter is so much a better lacrosse player, athlete, scholar and overall person than I am. So I am protective of my little Cindy Lou, as you are. I have not focused on BC's players (other than CN and JM), so I cant defend your D or any other player without generalized comments.

Anyway, I support your post and hope that all is well in the Hall family.

+1

[8meterPA]

Nah, Cletus, I’d just call that venting from a goalie dad.

Goalie dad (or mom) is the toughest spot in sports. Tougher than goalie or field player or coach. Tougher than parent of field player or coach. A guy I know has three daughters. The oldest was a goalie. The middle daughter was a defender. When the youngest came along, he told her she could play any position she wanted except goalie. He did not want to be a goalie dad again. And goalie dad of the goalie on a top national team is even tougher still.

The subject of criticism of players is hotly debated on these boards. Some are of the view that the players shouldn’t be criticized. Many of those posters are parents of current players. No one likes to hear their DD criticized. In fact, though, almost all posters criticize players from time to time, including poster-parents. Look at the recent Syr-NU thread. Syr’s goalies were criticized. The NU player who was central to a key play with 90 secs to go in regulation got a lot of criticism. (“She should have been carded” is criticism, although certainly a fairly debatable opinion to express.) Look at the posts from the final four games every year. A sizeable number include player criticisms.

Posters are free to adopt their own guidelines about criticizing players. It would be nice if each poster was consistent with his or her guidelines, but they have no obligation to be, and many aren’t. I have long followed the protocol in place under LaxPower, which is that the line is drawn between high school and college. Criticism of HS players should be off limits. Fair, objective (non-personal) criticism of college players is OK. By that point they are adults. In the adult world, adults are subject to criticism. The one aspect of this that really riles me is that some say it is OK to criticize male college athletes but not female athletes. To me that is rank sexism which has no place in the third decade of the 21st century.

Turning to Hall’s daughter, she is the starting goalie for the reigning national champion and the current no. 1 team. She is a senior in college, 21 years old according to her dad. Lots and lots of her games are on national TV or streamed. She is written up in national magazines. She is a national figure in women’s college lacrosse. She gets a lot more attention now that she is at BC than she did at Oregon. She knew what she was getting herself into when she transferred as she was joining a team that had been to the final game three years in a row.

She got a lot of very deserved praise for her performance in the final four last year. She had a great game in the semis and a very good game in the finals. In my view, she was clearly the main reason BC won on Friday and a key reason they won on Sunday. All the kudos she got were well deserved and on the money.

If you can be praised when you do well, the other side of the coin is that you can be criticized when you don’t. Against UVA this year she allowed 15 goals and had four saves. I watched that game on TV. Against Brown she allowed nine goals and had two saves. Did not see that game. But it is fair criticism to say she didn’t play well in those games. Now, the dad doesn’t like to hear his daughter criticized, which is completely understandable (I feel the same way about my daughter), but that doesn’t mean she should be exempt from fair, accurate criticism.

If BC gets to the final four and Hall plays well, she will get praised. If she doesn’t play well, she will be criticized. Bank on it. And there will be nothing wrong with that. The same will no doubt apply to the goalies of the other final four teams. Play well; get praise. Don’t play well; get criticized.

Ben (if I may call you that), the goalie of the national champ/no. 1 team is going to get a lot of ink. Some may be critical. I understand that as the dad, you get ticked off at any criticism of your daughter. All dads feel that way. But your daughter is all grown up now. She has worked her way to get to the top of the college game. Much credit to her for that. But the higher up the food chain you go, the more you attention you get. Some of it may not be positive.

I imagine you’ve been a goalie dad for over ten years. You must have heard at least some criticism of your daughter along the way. Maybe you had just had enough, and this was the straw that broke the camel’s back. You gave in to the urge to vent. I think your post lost some steam, though, when you manufactured some things that weren’t said or implied (“consistently denigrate,” “feeding the troll,” “insulting”). Criticizing people for things they actually said is one thing. Making up things that weren’t said is quite another.

a NJBill sighting!

[DMac]

If you are going to put negative criticism out there, then be prepared to get push back.

You bet...and in spades. Yet again an example of the fragile territory you wander in on this forum.
Players don't read it, coaches don't read it, Moms and Dads don't? Bullschidt. This is a very tiny world
and this entire forum is made up mostly of people who have an emotional connection in one way or
another to a team or player. Many lurk and refrain from comment until that final straw laid upon the
camel's back too. It's one thing to sit in your favorite watering hall and throw criticisms about teams/
ballplayers around, quite another to do it here, do indeed expect pushback.
What one might see as poor GK fundamentals and poor positioning, another might see as just good
shooting. The second CN shot that goes in isn't a matter of poor goal tending, it's a matter of good
shooting with the element of surprise thrown in. You can criticize the GK all day, or you can recognize
good shooting....take your choice.

[wlaxphan20]

Why is Charlotte North so good? Ive been watching her for awhile. Besides being incredibly crafty and creative, nothing she is doing seems new or game-breaking but everything she does seems to work. I never played but have been a casual fan for years and i recognize that she's really good but cant understand WHY she is really good? like what is she doing differently than everyone before her that makes a move that much better when she does it compared to her predecessors?

She is fierce. She is extremely talented and confident in those abilities. Her FP shot is unstoppable. Just like a great white, she goes for what she wants and eats it. Now her game has some flaws - ride /redefend isn't great and she isn't a feeder, but when she can give you 6-8 goals a game....

She’s a real innovator. Here’s a perfect example in this clip. She tried on this new shot for size in one game, and perfected it in the very next game. Astounding talent and fire. She’s a true artist.

I think North is talented and fiercely competitive, but I think this take is a little exaggerated or maybe not the best example. IMO, making a shot adjustment is not elite or innovative, but expected. Additionally, high bounce shots are not a novel concept. They were around even before the time these links were posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VTszQ7zeuI

https://youtu.be/s3aWoYbI82U?t=46

https://youtu.be/u87ZmRFAs8I?t=144

one could argue that was a "dangerous propulsion" by CN, shot with her back to the goal and a defender in harm's way

They could, but from what I’ve seen it’s called pretty consistently, especially when there’s little to no contact solid contact.

[DMac]

....and that her back is not to the goal.
Would be a weak argument, goal is good.

[8meterPA]

....and that her back is not to the goal.
Would be a weak argument, goal is good.

correct, her back was not to the goal, poor wording on my part - she turned and shot without a line of sight to the goal - have seen it called.

[DMac]

Wow, wlax is tough. You are right, when she makes her initial move to pivot and take that shot she does not have a line of sight to the goal (more evidence of the element of surprise on that shot). She does when she's shooting though. That would be a tough call and one I wouldn't like.

[Laxfan500]

Wow, wlax is tough. You are right, when she makes her initial move to pivot and take that shot she does not have a line of sight to the goal (more evidence of the element of surprise on that shot). She does when she's shooting though. That would be a tough call and one I wouldn't like.

I’m honestly suprised with all of her shots - she hasn’t hit someone yet . A lot of shots in traffic, no look shots…etc