late hits

[franks2089]

Is there such a thing as late hits in lacrosse? Because after one of my games at a tournament a couple weeks ago the ref blew his whistle to signal half time and this guy just runs over and levels this other kid on the other team, i didn't stick around to see what happened, but what would a ref call that?

[smittMONEY]

Un-nesecary roughness.

[franks2089]

Thanks, now I have a question about un-nesecary roughness. When does a legal check become un-nesecary roughness? Like when you just run through someone as hard as you can and they go flying.

[smittMONEY]

When you hit someone above the shoulders, below the waist, from behind, or with the intent to injure. Example for intent to injure: Guy is looking over his shoulder to catch pass, you hit him in the chest in the legal area, but that is the intent to injure because he has no way to protect himself then.

[TheKOB]

I think that would be a late hit, unsportsmanlike, or both (probably). When I think of late hit, it's a hit after a guy has gotten rid of the ball, usually from a late slide.

I would be interested to know what would be considered a late hit.

Also, I don't think that's the right def. of intent to injure. If it is, then we're creeping towards the women's game. Do we have to yell "hey, #23, turn around, I'm gonna hit you...". Does ample warning solve the problem?

I also agree with penalties for hitting too hard, usually defined as unnecessary roughness. "hey you, don't run so fast at 'em...slow down and give them a chance, it's just not fair".

[tokiolax]

i think its legal if its uncontrollable..so like if i was running to hit a buy and he dishes it right before and i have no time to stop myself then its legal...but if you can control it then it is illegal

[TheKOB]

i think its legal if its uncontrollable..so like if i was running to hit a buy and he dishes it right before and i have no time to stop myself then its legal...but if you can control it then it is illegal

That's what I've always heard, but that's pretty subjective. The best definition is after someone throws/shoots it, if the guy is hit after there is is time to say "it's a shot", then it was late.

[eme]

Three things about late hits that I have always kept in mind as a ref:
1. If I think it's late, it probably is.
2. Hit on the passer/shooter with the ball more than 5 yards gone.
3. Lack of deceleration on the part of the sliding d-Man on a shooter after ball has been released. He'd better be racheting DOWN and not racheting UP when he makes contact.

I think the new ncaa rules this year will have some new or cleaned up language in its definition of illegal bodycheck.

Un-necessary roughness most often occurs in two areas:
1. Defender running through a stationary screen with excessive force.
2. A (sometimes legal) hit where the defender has "lined up" the often defenseless recipient from some distance.

Both illegal bodycheks and unnecessary roughness are judgement calls.

[Laxref_36]

Coach,

I think that this becomes a very subjective call. Let me try and add clarity to a murky situation. If a player makes a hit and the player who they have hit is NOT within five yards of the ball, they are at risk of being called for a late hit.

An unofficial rule of thumb is one and a half strides. If a player takes two full strides AFTER the ball is released and makes a legal body check, that's a late hit (unnecessary roughness). The issue here is that a player, delivering the check, can easilly avoid throwing his body at the player, in two strides. After two strides the ball if thrown is more than five yards from the ball.

That is not an official guide, but something officials will look at. In the original question, that hit is late and should be penalized by a one to three minute personal foul.

[TheKOB]

2. A (sometimes legal) hit where the defender has "lined up" the often defenseless recipient from some distance.

I think this is the one I have the most problem with. I was helping out a hs team here in SC. One of our defenders had what I thought was a legal hit on a guy right near the goal with the ball at his feet. We were playing a team that ended up beating us by about 18-0. Basically the ball was being fought over by a gaggle of players to the goalie's left, and the ball bounced over to a player on the opposing team who was on the goalie's left, with nothing or anyone around him. One of my d-men, in what I thought was a head's-up play, ran from about 10 yards away (where the group of players was) and, effectively, blew the kid up because he couldn't pick up the ball (it was boucing up and down). If he had, he would've had a one on one with the goalie. The ref (the only one at the game...I felt sorry for him, but such is the case in SC) said that basically he hit 'em too hard. The only alternative I saw was a goal for the opposition.

On a lacrosse field (if I can pick at your choice of words) no one is defenseless. To me, if he doesn't see it coming and it's a legal hit, that is his (the hitee's) fault and not the other way around. This is a contact sport. No one in football would make the excuse anyone on the field is defenseless. A high clearing pass from the goalie is the same as a wide reciever running right into a safety because of a bad pass by the qb...that's hanging your teammate out to dry. While it's dangerous, it's not the fault of the defense/riding team that they're given an opportunity, and take advantage of it (as they rightly should...it's their job).

That 1.5 strides makes sense...it's a better measure than "It's a shot", although the latter gives me a bit extra time (I'm a bit slow...).

[LaxRef]

Is there such a thing as late hits in lacrosse? Because after one of my games at a tournament a couple weeks ago the ref blew his whistle to signal half time and this guy just runs over and levels this other kid on the other team, i didn't stick around to see what happened, but what would a ref call that?

As is often the case, the real answer is "it depends." If it was long after the whistle, I'd be inclined to call it USC, or maybe even an ejection for flagrant misconduct if it was really bad.

If the hit was not on the guy with the ball or within 5 yards of a loose ball, it's an illegal body check. If the guy with the ball has just passed or shot, and you hit him after the ball is more than 5 yards away--and it doesn't take long for that to happen--it's an illegal body check. The NCAA is removing language in the rules that talked about "avoidable" late hits, since the feeling is that you should be in control at all times. Thus, you can no longer try to argue that you couldn't avoid the hit; if the ball is more than 5 yards away, it's illegal.

It is extremely important for the trail official to watch the shooter after a shot to see if he gets creamed so he can call the foul. If both (or all three) officials are watching the ball go in the goal, there's no one who can make this call. When I'm the trail, I continually tell myself "Stay on the shooter."

As for unnecessary roughness, that's likely not the call for a late hit, although if it was a late hit and particularly brutal I'd probably assess a 2:00 or 3:00 illegal body check penalty, or even a NR USC penalty.

Personally, I'll call unnecessary roughness any time the hit is, well, rougher than necessary. For example, running full speed at a defenseless player with the intent to hit him as hard as possible (e.g., the guy is on the receiving end of a "hospital pass") when basically any check is going to jar the ball loose is completely unnecessary, even if the check otherwise conforms to a legal body check.

As an analogy with football: Suppose defensive end B1 runs in unabated and tackles the QB. Hey, great play. But now suppose B1 grabs the QB, picks him up high off the ground, and slams him into the turf, driving him into the ground and landing on top of him as hard as possible. I'm pretty sure you're going to see a personal foul called, since there was no need for that level of violence to make the play.

[LaxRef]

When you hit someone above the shoulders, below the waist, from behind, or with the intent to injure.

You're confusing illegal bodycheck and unnecessary roughness here. You've got a little of each listed.

[LaxRef]

i think its legal if its uncontrollable..so like if i was running to hit a buy and he dishes it right before and i have no time to stop myself then its legal...but if you can control it then it is illegal

Nope. The 2005 NCAA rules are removing the word "avoidable." You need to be in control, and you need to be able to back off if the ball is shot or passed. Of course, if you back off but still run into the guy, I'm not going to call it provided you're not blasting him.

[LaxRef]

I think this is the one I have the most problem with. I was helping out a hs team here in SC. One of our defenders had what I thought was a legal hit on a guy right near the goal with the ball at his feet. We were playing a team that ended up beating us by about 18-0. Basically the ball was being fought over by a gaggle of players to the goalie's left, and the ball bounced over to a player on the opposing team who was on the goalie's left, with nothing or anyone around him. One of my d-men, in what I thought was a head's-up play, ran from about 10 yards away (where the group of players was) and, effectively, blew the kid up because he couldn't pick up the ball (it was boucing up and down). If he had, he would've had a one on one with the goalie. The ref (the only one at the game...I felt sorry for him, but such is the case in SC) said that basically he hit 'em too hard. The only alternative I saw was a goal for the opposition.

Well, the alternative to a goal was to hit the guy but to NOT "blow him up." There's no need to blast the guy and potentially injure him when a softer hit will still knock him on his butt. Come on, you said yourself the guy couldn't pick up the ball, so even contesting the ground ball is going to prevent the one-on-one with the goalie.

Sure, you can run in from 20 yards away and check someone, but you just need to make sure you're not "teeing him up" and coming in to hit him at full speed.

[smittMONEY]

You're confusing illegal bodycheck and unnecessary roughness here. You've got a little of each listed.


Around here they generally call an illegal bodycheck as unnecessary roughness, but that might be the fact that we're hitting them just as they turn when they're catching, or just the style of the refs.