Loose ball in the crease Quiz

[CoachRob]

NFHS:

GK B1 is in his own crease. The ball rolls into the crease and is now loose. He wets his padded shorts as it's his first game in goal (the regular GK is injured and the coach stuck B1 in goal even though his mother screamed bloody murder!). (He is not interfered with, nobody else enters the crease, etc.)

a) With his gloved hand, he pushes the ball into his crosse.
b) With his gloved hand, he picks up the ball and places it in his crosse.

1. What is the ruling in each case?
2. Does GK B1 serve any penalty time in either case?
3. How does the play restart, if a restart is needed, in each case?

[LaxRef]

Conduct foul for wetting his shorts? Or is that a USC? I can never remember :chuckle:

[Snake~eyes]

Conduct foul for wetting his shorts? Or is that a USC? I can never remember :chuckle:
USC. I think it falls under 5-9-3
"No player...shall
ART. 3 . . . Bait, taunt, call undue attention to oneself"

[CoachRob]

You two ruin all the fun! :banghead:

I don't know the call if you wet your OPPONENT'S pants, however it is a USC for wetting one's pants

For the REST of the readers, you just have to figure out about the handling the ball part.

:thinking:

[smitt5l68]

If I'm not mistaken, I believe the GK can use his hands with contact. But picking up the ball would be with holding the ball from play, correct?

So situation A- No penalty, B keeps ball in play.
B- With holding the ball from play, team A starts with ball outside of the box.

[Thrillhouse]

I'm 99% sure goalies can use thier hands...

[CoachRob]

NFHS:

GK B1 is in his own crease. The ball rolls into the crease and is now loose. He wets his padded shorts as it's his first game in goal (the regular GK is injured and the coach stuck B1 in goal even though his mother screamed bloody murder!). (He is not interfered with, nobody else enters the crease, etc.)

a) With his gloved hand, he pushes the ball into his crosse.
b) With his gloved hand, he picks up the ball and places it in his crosse.

1. What is the ruling in each case?
2. Does GK B1 serve any penalty time in either case?
3. How does the play restart, if a restart is needed, in each case?

You guys are AWESOME!

Goalkeeper Privileges
RULE4: SECTION 19. Within his own goal-crease area, the designated goalkeeper has the following privileges and protections:
a. The goalkeeper may stop or block the ball in any manner with his crosse or body. The goalkeeper may block the ball or bat it away with his hand, but he may not catch the ball with his hand. However, if the ball is outside the crease, the goalkeeper may NOT touch it with his hand even if HE is within his crease.

So:
1. In case (a), it is LEGAL.
In case (b), it is ILLEGAL. It is an ILLEGAL PROCEDURE, not w/holding ball from play.

[To review WITHOLDING BALL FROM PLAY (which this is NOT):
RULE 6, SECTION 13. When a loose ball is on the ground, a player may not lie on the ball, trap it with his crosse longer than is necessary for him to control the ball and pick it up with one continuous motion, or withhold the ball from play in any other manner. A player, players or team may not deliberately withhold the ball from play.]

Another example is if you have the ball in your crosse and you put your hand on the ball. This was flagged in the NCAA 2004 Lax Finals against a Navy attackman. His upper hand went too far up his crosse, past his guardstop, and the ref caught it. Bad boy!!

2. In neither case does the GK serve any time. In (a) it's legal; in (b) it's merely possession to the team A.

3. In (a) he already has control of the ball. In (b) it is a restart for team A, lateral to the box.

Again, good job. Looks like you guys are in playing form already. Maybe I'll have to make the ???'s a little more difficult.

[Snake~eyes]

You guys are AWESOME!
Well thankyou Rob! :grin:

[MrTibs]

wow i learn somethin new every time i come here. I love this place.

[CoachRob]

Well thankyou Rob! :grin:

Okay Snake, even though had you missed this one I would have plotzed (Yiddish for "dropped dead"), you can feel free to pat yourself on the back.
:nut: :bartmoon:

And Mr. Tibs,
Keep coming back. This site is a GREAT place to learn about lax and get questions answered. That's why Snake~eyes, LaxRef, and I post quizzes.

[FPlaxer]

i would belive that would be the same rule as the goalie above would get. I personally would have stepped in front of it and scoop it with my stick

[CoachRob]

What would be the correct call if the ball bounces in front of a defenseman but takes a funny hop? He realizes that if the ball gets by him it will go to an attackman for a easy one-on-one with the goalie so he reaches his hand out to grab it and throws it up field. Is that a penalty?

No player may make a play on the ball with a free hand (except the GK as noted above).

NFHS 6-5.1: Touching the ball- A player shall not touch the ball with his hands while it is in play. The exception is the GK while both he and the ball are inside the crease.

{However, it IS legal to kick a free ball, including scoring a goal by kicking it into the goal.}

The penalty is a technical foul, the ball is awarded to the opposing team, and no penalty time is to be served as it was a LOOSE BALL technical.

[CoachRob]

i would believe that would be the same rule as the goalie above would get. I personally would have stepped in front of it and scooped it with my stick.

FP, this is a much better idea and it's legal.

However, if you really think it is going to be a sure goal, playing it with your hand is not such a bad idea. It brings an immediate whistle and you simply give the ball to the opponent. In this case, that would move the ball lateral to the goal area and give your defense time to set up.

BUT...This is REALLY a play-on situation and any good ref would rule it that way. That means he waits a few seconds to see if the attacking team manages to get the ball and regain control. If they don't, then he toots his whistle and gives them the ball lateral to the goal. So, this may NOT prevent the one-on-one.

Also, such an act may be considered unsporting conduct (USC). After all, it was done to purposely deny a goal. What's worse sportsmanship than this type of act? (Yes, I do know of plenty, but I think you get the idea.) :nono:

[LaxRef]

BUT...This is REALLY a play-on situation and any good ref would rule it that way. That means he waits a few seconds to see if the attacking team manages to get the ball and regain control. If they don't, then he toots his whistle and gives them the ball lateral to the goal. So, this may NOT prevent the one-on-one.

Yeah, but if he catches the ball and just holds onto it, then you have to blow the whistle.

Also, such an act may be considered unsporting conduct (USC). After all, it was done to purposely deny a goal. What's worse sportsmanship than this type of act? (Yes, I do know of plenty, but I think you get the idea.) :nono:

Hmmmm. While I agree that it's not particularly sporting, I'd have a hard time calling this a USC the first time it happened[i], because there is a prescribed penalty for committing this foul. However, if the same player did it twice I'd probably give him the 1:00 [i]releasable USC for "repeatedly committing the same technical foul."

What do you think, Snake~eyes?

[CoachRob]

...or any other act considered unsportsmanlike by the officials.


To ME, any time a player intentionally does something designed to prevent a near certain goal, you need to consider a USC flag.

In soccer, if you tackle or otherwise illegally impede a player who the official deems has a chance at a near certain goal, that player is ejected.

[LaxRef]

...or any other act considered unsportsmanlike by the officials.


To ME, any time a player intentionally does something designed to prevent a near certain goal, you need to consider a USC flag.

In soccer, if you tackle or otherwise illegally impede a player who the official deems has a chance at a near certain goal, that player is ejected.

I believe the clause you quote is intended for crazy things people try to get away with that aren't specifically covered in the rules.

Think about this: A1 is running toward the goal and about to shoot, and B1 holds him. The official decides this is an unsportsmanlike act and penalizes him with 1:00 NR. As a coach, wouldn't you freak? I would. I mean, a hold is a 30-second technical according to the rules, right?

I'd prefer to invoke this clause for instances when the team is trying to do something not covered, like sewing webbing between the goalie's arms and legs so he can spread out and block the whole mouth of the goal. :chuckle:

[CoachRob]

Think about this: A1 is running toward the goal and about to shoot, and B1 holds him. The official decides this is an unsportsmanlike act and penalizes him with 1:00 NR. As a coach, wouldn't you freak? I would. I mean, a hold is a 30-second technical according to the rules, right?

True, all true. I'm just thinking that in this hand ball case, where the player does it to PURPOSELY defeat a goal scoring opportunity, a USC can be considered. Didn't say I'd DO it, just consider it.

I think a hold at midfield is MUCH different than a hold by the last defender against an attacker who would now be one-on-one vs. the GK. But as you said, there is a specific penalty for holding and it should be adhered to.

As for would I freak? I NEVER freak 'cause ALL refs are outstanding human beings and deserve our fullest respect and I love each and every one of them. Plus, who am I to argue with a ref who probably only read the rulebook once, VERY late at night, while falling-over drunk, and got his ref's license from his uncle who runs the local lax association and is on the take? :guns:

[LaxRef]

I think a hold at midfield is MUCH different than a hold by the last defender against an attacker who would now be one-on-one vs. the GK. But as you said, there is a specific penalty for holding and it should be adhered to

As for would I freak? I NEVER freak 'cause ALL refs are outstanding human beings and deserve our fullest respect and I love each and every one of them.

I know. For you, I meant freak "on the inside."

Plus, who am I to argue with a ref who probably only read the rulebook once, VERY late at night, while falling-over drunk, and got his ref's license from his uncle who runs the local lax association and is on the take? :guns:

Wow, you must be pretty naiive to think that the officials have read the rules at all :chuckle:

Our training program specifically tells us to avoid arguing with coaches and players about the rules, and the best way to avoid these arguments is to know nothing about them. When the coach calls me over, you should hear my Sargent Schultz impression! (This, sadly, will be lost on everyone under 35 or anyone who didn't waste their childhood on old TV reruns on cable).

[CoachRob]

Wow, you must be pretty naiive to think that the officials have read the rules at all :chuckle:

Nah, I DO think they've all read them at least once so they can SAY they've read them. At least, I THINK that's true.

Our training program specifically tells us to avoid arguing with coaches and players about the rules, and the best way to avoid these arguments is to know nothing about them. When the coach calls me over, you should hear my Sargent Schultz impression! (This, sadly, will be lost on everyone under 35 or anyone who didn't waste their childhood on old TV reruns on cable).

Great character. Classic. Still shows on Classic TV (I think).

[LCNlaxman]

wow i learn somethin new every time i come here. I love this place.


i agree, plus the questions ALWAYS making learning the questions (if you got it wrong or just want to know) fun! Snake, Laxref and CoachRob you guys make learning fun, you all rock! keep the questions coming!