Face-off rules

[LaxRef]

When a team has all of its players on the field, it shall confine its goalkeeper and three other players inside the defensive-area line, three players inside the attack-area line and one player in each of the wing
areas.

When the whistle sounds to start play, the players in the wing areas shall be released. All other players are confined to their areas until a player of either team has gained possession of the ball, the ball goes out of bounds, the ball crosses the defensive-area line or a whistle stops play for a time-serving foul.

A.R. 23. If a non-time-serving foul is committed during or after a faceoff but before possession, or before the ball crosses the defensive-area line, players will not be released from behind the defensive-area line until the whistle blows, resuming play.

Someone was arguing with me that, based on the above, if there is a pre-whistle face-off violation then the wing players must stay behind the wing lines until the whistle blows to start play. I've never seen it done this way. What do you think:

a) Should be done?

b) The rules actually say?

[eme]

I think AR 23 is pretty clear that the wing guys are free to roam after a FO violation. But I suppose if you added the word "before" to it so that it begins:
"If a non time-serving foul is committed before, during, or after a faceoff but before possession..."
then it would be air tight.

[LaxRef]

I think AR 23 is pretty clear that the wing guys are free to roam after a FO violation. But I suppose if you added the word "before" to it so that it begins:
"If a non time-serving foul is committed before, during, or after a faceoff but before possession..."
then it would be air tight.

That is exactly the quibble with which I'm faced: A.R. 23 just says "during or after."

[Shorelax]

Let them roam.

Adding the word before would certainly help.

I would suggest that a pre-whistle FO violation occurs during the face off. In my opinion - The faceoff in a broader sense starts when the lead places the ball on the line and trail flips on his timer. At this point we are enforcing the rules of play - the ball is considered live...in a sense.

In reality it is a quick whistle and should have no impact on the game. It is still a quick whistle witthe new rule correct?

[LaxRef]

Let them roam.

Adding the word before would certainly help.

I would suggest that a pre-whistle FO violation occurs during the face off. In my opinion - The faceoff in a broader sense starts when the lead places the ball on the line and trail flips on his timer. At this point we are enforcing the rules of play - the ball is considered live...in a sense.

In reality it is a quick whistle and should have no impact on the game. It is still a quick whistle witthe new rule correct?

According to the current rules, a wing-line violation is a play-on. I have suggested that this be changed, since it's just going to get ugly if we let play go on, then send off the face-off middie.

[eme]

Not in the rulebook, but a good-rule-of-thumb is that any non time-serving infraction prior to the FO official saying "Down" will usually be a delay of game, IP. I am trying to think of one that wouldn't be and I can't....
After "Down" it's a FO violation.
On either IP or FO violation, wing players allowed to meander before the ensuing whistle is blown.

[BlueJaysLaxFan]

Based on the wording of the rules, it appears that the wings are locked before the whistle blows. The main thing for the wingmen to observe is the 5 yard rule before restart. I do work with officials who insist on locking the wings until the whistle is blown after a FO violation restart.

[Lax Fan26]

Someone was arguing with me that, based on the above, if there is a pre-whistle face-off violation then the wing players must stay behind the wing lines until the whistle blows to start play. I've never seen it done this way. What do you think:

a) Should be done?

b) The rules actually say?

LR, while rule 4-4-a does mention the wings, AR 23 does not impact the wings in anyway. Therefore, whoever you were arguing with is incorrect.

Susequently, I am confused about your discussion with eme and inserting "before" in AR 23; that still has no impact on the wings (though I agree it locks in the attack & defense).

In a practical sense, the wings won't be near enough to the center to impact a properly whistled restart after the IP call. If a wing could possibly get there, he would have to stay 5 yds away, so there is no incentive to do it. Defensive wings will absolutely have to fall back as they are instantly man down until their FOGO sub gets in.

[LaxRef]

LR, while rule 4-4-a does mention the wings, AR 23 does not impact the wings in anyway. Therefore, whoever you were arguing with is incorrect.

Susequently, I am confused about your discussion with eme and inserting "before" in AR 23; that still has no impact on the wings (though I agree it locks in the attack & defense).

In a practical sense, the wings won't be near enough to the center to impact a properly whistled restart after the IP call. If a wing could possibly get there, he would have to stay 5 yds away, so there is no incentive to do it. Defensive wings will absolutely have to fall back as they are instantly man down until their FOGO sub gets in.

The problem is the statement "When the whistle sounds to start play, the players in the wing areas shall be released. " The logical implication of this is that they are not released if there is no whistle to start play.

Thus, Team A scores, there's a face-off pending, but Team A delays the game. Based on a strict interpretation of the rules, since Team B has been awarded possession, since there has been no whistle, and since the foul did not occur during or after the face-off (A.R. 23), it would seem that the wing players are not released until the whistle blows to start play (even though I've never seen anyone do it that way).

While A.R. 23 does not address the wings--and thus they are clearly free to roam if the foul is during or after the face-offf--it does not address a non-time-serving foul before the face-off. That's why there's a suggestion to add that word to A.R. 23.

This is especially important with the new face-off rule, since it creates a big difference in the effect of that short man-down.

[massref]

"When the whistle sounds to start play, the players in the wing areas shall be released." According to this sentence, the wings would still be be confined because the whistle never blew. What's a new season without a little confusion??

[Lax Fan26]

LR, what event starts the wings being constrained to the wing lines? If there is a conduct foul while the refs are getting the ball out of the net after a goal, do we constrain the wings for that restart? No, but there is no requirement for the FOGO to get off.

So if you are going to create a clause of "before the FO", you will also need to define when the wing constraints begin during the dead ball resetting the field after a goal or starting new period. Is it when the trail says "ball is ready" and starts timer? When the mids actually get to the wing lines?

I am still not clear how the wings remaining constrained is an issue for FO IP restart. The restart should be within 1 to 2 seconds and the defensive wings know that they must fall back into a short-term zone. What am I missing?

[LaxRef]

LR, what event starts the wings being constrained to the wing lines? If there is a conduct foul while the refs are getting the ball out of the net after a goal, do we constrain the wings for that restart? No, but there is no requirement for the FOGO to get off.

On a conduct foul after a goal (possession foul), the attackmen and defensemen must be behind the restraining line on the restart since the foul occurred with a face-off pending. A strict reading of the rules might make you believe the wing middies are constrained as well.

You are correct that the definition of when the face-off begins is vague. I'd say that the face-off begins with "Down." But for positioning, the key is whether a face-off is pending. If you don't agree, answer this: when you restart after that conduct foul, are you doing it laterally from the goal or at midfield? It's a midfield, because that's where the ball would have been for a face-off (note there would be no free clear on a possession foul).

I think this is an issue where you're locked into seeing what the rules intend rather than what they say. I was guilty of that as well, or I would have submitted this for correction years ago.

BTW, I have spoken to officials who make the wing middies stay behind the wing line until the whistle after a violation because of this rule.

I am still not clear how the wings remaining constrained is an issue for FO IP restart. The restart should be within 1 to 2 seconds and the defensive wings know that they must fall back into a short-term zone. What am I missing?

The rules say that the wing players are released when the whistle blows to start play. There's no other mention of when they are released, so it would seem that they need to stay there until there's a whistle (although we don't really believe that's what's intended).

[nwzebra]

LR, what event starts the wings being constrained to the wing lines?

I realized that this was asked as a question, but it brings up a good point. The wings are not constrained behind the wing lines until the whistle is blown. If a wing stands on the line and at the last second before the whistle he steps back behind the line, he has committed no foul. Therefore by my crazy logic, since there will be no face-off whistle, he need not be constrained.

[LaxRef]

I realized that this was asked as a question, but it brings up a good point. The wings are not constrained behind the wing lines until the whistle is blown. If a wing stands on the line and at the last second before the whistle he steps back behind the line, he has committed no foul. Therefore by my crazy logic, since there will be no face-off whistle, he need not be constrained.

I agree completely. If he steps over, then he steps back, then there's a whistle, I have no violation (there's certainly no advantage). Thus, there's no way that a wing-line violation should be considered to be a pre-whistle violation. But the coaches get what the coaches want.

BTW, welcome to the forum!

[LaxRef]

How do you think we'll handle this one:

B1 is called for illegal procedure on the face-off late in a 1-goal game. As soon as he realizes that B1 is going to be sent off, but before the whistle blows to start play, Coach B calls for

(1) a timeout

(2) an equipment check on A7

in order to prevent the fast break. As far as I can see, this would be a valid tactic. Am I missing something?

[Lax Fan26]

LR, you have been around this game too long and are spilling the beans on these coaches. You weren't supposed to realize this and say anything until March 08.

Of course you are right and the rules would support these tactics. I guess the FO official restarting could do it quickly enough and ignore the request for equipment check but it would pretty hard to not allow the TO presuming they had one left.

You could put forward a rule that requested equipment checks could not be called in the last 2 mins. but that would increase the liklihood of illegal sticks down the stretch.

On the other hand, the prudent team that saved a TO until the end for just such an emergency should get the benefit of it, for as many TOs as they have left.

[LaxRef]

LR, you have been around this game too long and are spilling the beans on these coaches. You weren't supposed to realize this and say anything until March 08.

I apologize for the advantage I unwittingly gave to the three coaches who read this forum. :chuckle:

[massref]

Hi,
Try this situation out:
The 20 sec beeper is on for the faceoff. The non-face off official keeps his hand up because a wing player is not behind the restraining line thus not ready or in position for the face off, the beeper goes off, delay of game on the player not behind the restraining line. What's the result?

[LaxRef]

Hi,
Try this situation out:
The 20 sec beeper is on for the faceoff. The non-face off official keeps his hand up because a wing player is not behind the restraining line thus not ready or in position for the face off, the beeper goes off, delay of game on the player not behind the restraining line. What's the result?

To me, that is not a face-off violation because it is not covered under 4-3 or 4-4; it's illegal procedure. Thus, I would not send off the face-off player under NCAA rules.

The big difference is that in this case the team is simply conceding the face-off, not trying to gain an unfair advantage on the face-off in hopes that (a) it goes uncalled and they wing the face-off due to the unfair advantage or (b) they get called for it and cede possession but have time to set up their defense. This situation is why we have the new rule. If they just cede the possession with no advantage (as they do here with the delay), I see no reason for the punitive measure of sending off the face-off guy.

The key word, to me, is "pre-whistle face-off violation"; I don't think this kind of delay is a face-off violation. But ask me again after the rulebook comes out. :laugh:

[TXD2LAX]

To me, that is not a face-off violation because it is not covered under 4-3 or 4-4; it's illegal procedure. Thus, I would not send off the face-off player under NCAA rules.

The big difference is that in this case the team is simply conceding the face-off, not trying to gain an unfair advantage on the face-off in hopes that (a) it goes uncalled and they wing the face-off due to the unfair advantage or (b) they get called for it and cede possession but have time to set up their defense. This situation is why we have the new rule. If they just cede the possession with no advantage (as they do here with the delay), I see no reason for the punitive measure of sending off the face-off guy.

The key word, to me, is "pre-whistle face-off violation"; I don't think this kind of delay is a face-off violation. But ask me again after the rulebook comes out. :laugh:

If the player that was not at the restraining line before the beeper went off was on the team that was leading by a goal with less than a minute to play, would that change anything for you? You could argue that he was trying to gain an advantage by running down the clock. I just wanna hear if this would change your thought process any.

[LaxRef]

If the player that was not at the restraining line before the beeper went off was on the team that was leading by a goal with less than a minute to play, would that change anything for you? You could argue that he was trying to gain an advantage by running down the clock. I just wanna hear if this would change your thought process any.

My thought process would be:

"Why is the clock running during a dead ball in an NCAA game?" :thinking: :chuckle:

[TXD2LAX]

Dang, I thought I could stump you. I was going to see who realized what I said first, but you are right on top of it.

[eme]

With regard to LR's original post:

NCAA Rules 2008 page 36
AR 24: If a non time-serving foul is committed before, during, or after a FO (but before possession and before the ball crosses the def. area line) wing players will be released immediately, but players behind the def. clearing line will not be released until the whistle blows to resume play.

[LaxRef]

With regard to LR's original post:

NCAA Rules 2008 page 36
AR 24: If a non time-serving foul is committed before, during, or after a FO (but before possession and before the ball crosses the def. area line) wing players will be released immediately, but players behind the def. clearing line will not be released until the whistle blows to resume play.

I managed to sneak this wording in to TPTB before the book went to press.