Possible face-off changes

[kramerica.inc]

I really wonder what the purpose is with these constant tweaks to faceoff rules. Has there been a period of more than a couple years without some big rule change regarding faceoffs?

If you don’t want there to be an advantage, then ban the faceoff or ban FOGOs (I’ve heard suggestions including the facing off player needing to be on the field during the preceeding goal/stoppage in play). No matter what rule tweak they make it, there’s going to be guys who specialize and dominate. Either accept it and let it be, or ban it completely

Banning the clamp will just make the guy who can consistently swipe faster win. It won’t do sh*t for competitiveness or watchability, just like banning holding the ball in the back of the stick, banning moto grip, banning knee down, etc.

Just seems like unnecessary constant over-regulation

I think the idea is to eliminate the need for FO specialists & return to having multiple midfielders on each team able to take the draw.
Similar to ice hockey -- make the FO a way to initiate play without requiring substitutions which disrupt & slow down the flow of the game.
Rather than something new, I see it as a back to the future change. This makes it easier to keep the faceoff man on the field, like Greg Harrison & the Peysers did. It also makes wing play more critical.

But let's keep swapping out the LSM? Because it's more to their liking? No. The subs have nothing to do with it. LSMs are simply easier to recruit/train/convert Defensemen.
This comes down to these coaches calling for the change not recruiting/coaching well.
Coaches CAN eliminate the FO man on their own. They can do exactly what you said. They just dont want to lose games while they figure out how to coach.
If substituting is bothering you as a coach, be better. Teach that athletic 2way middie to faceoff better. Manipulate your wings to get an advantage.
Stop bellyaching to change the rules every 2 years, because you're incompetent.

[FMUBart]

Sources tell me Tambroni is pushing this, funny when Arceri was all big ten he had no problem with face offs. The rule committee is a bunch of self-serving frauds.

If it's really Tambroni, then Marr is his mouthpiece because Marr is the one who spoke up.

Regardless, as someone else pointed out a few days ago - this has to go through PROP first. The rules committee did not come up with this suggestion (as early posters said); it's from the coaches.

Thank you Doxology...any rule change that gets discussed happens for one reason: multiple coaches AND officials have recommended the change. I say keep the clamp, but only if done with the front of the stick. It's awful when the fogo comes out with the ball and then tries to throw with a mangled stick with the ball on the "wrong" side of the head. Best change would be to revert to late 70's early 80's before the pinched heads were allowed...

[wgdsr]

Now it will go to the rules committee in June where it will pass and the FaceOff Specialist position will be eliminated from the sport. Really not fair for all the FaceOff specialists out there. Gotta be a weird relationship between fogos and coaches this spring knowing the coaches voted to eliminate the position.

You mean essentially go back to college lax was like 15 years ago...oh, the horror. The worst thing to happen to face offs was the introduction of the FOGO. And this is coming from a dad whose son is primarly going to be one. It is better for the game to have less specialization in this context. Have face off guys play offense and defense and make the more rounded players.

One thing that is overlooked is the likely impact this has from the Olympics perspective.

this isn't going to create less specialization. the skill will now be who can rake the best. they're not gonna be playing offense and defense. had fogos on my squad, and it was a lot longer than 15 years ago, unfortunately.
don't gather what you mean by olympics.

They want to reduce the importance of the face-off. I was simply spitballing that 6s have basically eliminated the face-off and make the game similar to what is going to be offered at the Olympics. I.e., go from the current field game with 10 players to 6s. This is similar to rugby that has full field with 15 players and you have rugby 7s. I think the idea is to grow the fewer player game to grow the larger game.

i'm still not 100 what you mean, but if it's that nc$$ is trying to now emulate the 6s setup, that is not what this is. 6s was set up specifically to conform with olympic constraints. the tail isn't wagging the dog here.

[cmbtp88]

Logically, getting rid of the clamp makes sense. Why should an action (witholding) that is illegal in every other aspect of the game be legal for a faceoff?

Goalies can clamp the ball so there it is, used in another aspect of the game..

[FMUBart]

Goalies only have "protection" when the ball is in the crease. A goalie can clamp outside, but is susceptible to other players--and they will put their stick under the goalies so a rake isn't possible.

[cmbtp88]

Goalies only have "protection" when the ball is in the crease. A goalie can clamp outside, but is susceptible to other players--and they will put their stick under the goalies so a rake isn't possible.

a FO guy after clamping, the ball has to immediately come out, he is more exposed with his clamp than a goalie because he cannot keep the ball clamped at all and the opposite FOGO is al over his stick too....right

[PizzaSnake]

Goalies only have "protection" when the ball is in the crease. A goalie can clamp outside, but is susceptible to other players--and they will put their stick under the goalies so a rake isn't possible.

a FO guy after clamping, the ball has to immediately come out, he is more exposed with his clamp than a goalie because he cannot keep the ball clamped at all and the opposite FOGO is al over his stick too....right

Hence my suggestion re full-contact between the restraining lines. Threat of getting laid out would quickly modify clamping and the resultant scrum.

[FMUBart]

Goalies only have "protection" when the ball is in the crease. A goalie can clamp outside, but is susceptible to other players--and they will put their stick under the goalies so a rake isn't possible.

a FO guy after clamping, the ball has to immediately come out, he is more exposed with his clamp than a goalie because he cannot keep the ball clamped at all and the opposite FOGO is al over his stick too....right

Hence my suggestion re full-contact between the restraining lines. Threat of getting laid out would quickly modify clamping and the resultant scrum.

Not really an issue as most FOGO's are able to get it clamped/pinched before any wing player is on them.

[PizzaSnake]

I really wonder what the purpose is with these constant tweaks to faceoff rules. Has there been a period of more than a couple years without some big rule change regarding faceoffs?

If you don’t want there to be an advantage, then ban the faceoff or ban FOGOs (I’ve heard suggestions including the facing off player needing to be on the field during the preceeding goal/stoppage in play). No matter what rule tweak they make it, there’s going to be guys who specialize and dominate. Either accept it and let it be, or ban it completely

Banning the clamp will just make the guy who can consistently swipe faster win. It won’t do sh*t for competitiveness or watchability, just like banning holding the ball in the back of the stick, banning moto grip, banning knee down, etc.

Just seems like unnecessary constant over-regulation

I think the idea is to eliminate the need for FO specialists & return to having multiple midfielders on each team able to take the draw.
Similar to ice hockey -- make the FO a way to initiate play without requiring substitutions which disrupt & slow down the flow of the game.
Rather than something new, I see it as a back to the future change. This makes it easier to keep the faceoff man on the field, like Greg Harrison & the Peysers did. It also makes wing play more critical.

But let's keep swapping out the LSM? Because it's more to their liking? No. The subs have nothing to do with it. LSMs are simply easier to recruit/train/convert Defensemen.
This comes down to these coaches calling for the change not recruiting/coaching well.
Coaches CAN eliminate the FO man on their own. They can do exactly what you said. They just dont want to lose games while they figure out how to coach.
If substituting is bothering you as a coach, be better. Teach that athletic 2way middie to faceoff better. Manipulate your wings to get an advantage.
Stop bellyaching to change the rules every 2 years, because you're incompetent.

This. ^

[rolldodge]

Logically, getting rid of the clamp makes sense. Why should an action (witholding) that is illegal in every other aspect of the game be legal for a faceoff?

Goalies can clamp the ball so there it is, used in another aspect of the game..

As mentioned above, Goalies don't count. The have a stick 8 times bigger than normal, can use their hands, and live inside a magic circle.

[Laxxal22]

Logically, getting rid of the clamp makes sense. Why should an action (witholding) that is illegal in every other aspect of the game be legal for a faceoff?

Goalies can clamp the ball so there it is, used in another aspect of the game..

As mentioned above, Goalies don't count. The have a stick 8 times bigger than normal, can use their hands, and live inside a magic circle.

That kind of specialization is bad for the game. Flip the net over and put a trash can in the middle of it to reduce any unfair advantages and bring back the flow we all remember when there was a sideline horn every time the ball went out of bounds.

[rolldodge]

Logically, getting rid of the clamp makes sense. Why should an action (witholding) that is illegal in every other aspect of the game be legal for a faceoff?

Goalies can clamp the ball so there it is, used in another aspect of the game..

As mentioned above, Goalies don't count. The have a stick 8 times bigger than normal, can use their hands, and live inside a magic circle.

That kind of specialization is bad for the game. Flip the net over and put a trash can in the middle of it to reduce any unfair advantages and bring back the flow we all remember when there was a sideline horn every time the ball went out of bounds.

[kramerica.inc]

Forget these faceoff rule changes.

Let's bring back the releasable fouls where you clear the ball and touch it inside the offensive box to release the minor penalties.

Enough of these teams having to play stall ball.

Let's speed up play again.

[FMUBart]

Kramerica, great post...never understood why that rule was changed in the first place!

[LaxAllStars]

A few of these gifts are for Maryland.

https://laxallstars.com/quints-holiday-wish-list/

[PizzaSnake]

A few of these gifts are for Maryland.

https://laxallstars.com/quints-holiday-wish-list/

“Wind at your back…”

[OCanada]

I don’t see a need for a participation tournsment like the NIT.

Standardized rules would be great but it also requires universal application standards.

I am surprised he did not mention universal standards for officials or the shortage of qualified officials.

[coda]

I don’t see a need for a participation tournsment like the NIT.

Standardized rules would be great but it also requires universal application standards.

I am surprised he did not mention universal standards for officials or the shortage of qualified officials.

When the NCAA lax tournament starts selling out, we can talk about a NIT tournament

[kramerica.inc]

I don’t see a need for a participation tournsment like the NIT.

Standardized rules would be great but it also requires universal application standards.

I am surprised he did not mention universal standards for officials or the shortage of qualified officials.

When the NCAA lax tournament starts selling out, we can talk about a NIT tournament

Correct.
The NCAA doesn't care about sports or the players.

[1766]

Quint should give us all a gift and remove himself from telecasts.