***Legal Heads & Pockets for 2005***

[RYU]

http://www.lacrosseforums.com/showthread.php?t=12601

Based on the prior thread, maybe lilaxgurl23 & I are the only ones who are concerned about this stuff. Anyway... there were a lot of rule changes & additions for 2005 regarding stick (aka "crosse") specifications. There were a lot of rumors about what head was going to be legal and what would become illegal. Well the wlax Rules Committee FINALLY posted their list of US field legal heads & pockets. They were saying this was going to be posted ever since last Nov. Well finally, as of yesterday, here is the link at USL:

http://www.uslacrosse.org/womens_div/sticks_manufacturer.phtml

It's kind of messed up in that, even if the head or pocket doesn't meet 2005 specs, it's still legal for play if it was manufactured before 2005. For those who are interested, I've attached a Word doc of the Rule 22 stick specifications.

[lilaxgurl23]

Mmm, ok so, if my sis has a surge, that is legal, and if I strung it with a trakker pro, thats still legal, because under the pockets, it's leagal. But say I strung trad, but did my shooting strings like the trakker pro, is it legal?

Yeah, it is kind of wierd that they would allow sticks that don't meet the specifications, but because they were made before, they can be used. The only thing that does is prevent the company from making more. If the rule made it so you couldn't use those sticks though, I guess a lot of people would be getting new sticks.

[CTLaxer]

Maybe I'm not understanding this...but how do they plan on regulating and figuring out if the stick was purchased before or after the new specs when they're on the field come game time? Are players now required to bring a printed receipt with the purchase date circled for certain sticks?

[RYU]

CTL, good question. I asked the Rules Chair the same thing. When you go over the list, every head is assigned a 1-4 notation. But regardless of notation, every head (& pocket) is still legal for play in 2005. So what's the point, right?

The 2005 rule changes regarding stick specs aren't aimed at the players so much as they are aimed at the manufacturers. The rules don't address products of the past & present so much as they address future products still on the drawing board. It's the Rules Committee's way of saying, "We know the ___ (e.g. Tenacity, Trakker pocket) doesn't meet 2005 specs, but since it's already out there, you can keep using it. Just stop making anymore of them."

So even though something is illegal, it's legal. deBeer can keep selling their current stock of illegal Trakker pockets until they run out. Afterwards, I suppose they'll sell a modified version where the throw strings aren't rolled so many times.

Right now, the player is always given the benefit of the doubt. Like lilaxgurl wrote, "The only thing that does is prevent the company from making more."

I don't know if 5-10 yrs from now, a player will be able to argue, "I bought that stick/pocket before the rule change, so it's still legal for me to play w/ it."

But say I strung trad, but did my shooting strings like the trakker pro, is it legal?Technically no, it's not legal, since you knowingly strung something illegal after the rule change. But if you said your pocket was strung that way before the rule change, then it would be grandfathered in as legal - at least for 2005 season.

The other thing is that very, very few umpires bother to look for things like that. Most will only do a cursory check on your pocket depth. Most National rated umpires (the ones who do the big college games) will know to look for stick discrepansies like that, but there are only ~80 in the whole country.

By contrast, when mlax officials (any level) are required to do an equipment check on a player, they are trained to be much more thorough. CTL knows exactly what I'm talking about.

[CTLaxer]

Indeed I do, we need to get some mlax refs working airport security. That'd make me feel a bit safer with that kind of scrutiny present.

RYU: do you have a 2005 women's ncaa rule changes book? If ya do could you post the most prevalent changes for this season? I can't get my hands on a copy for another few weeks and I want to be prepared considering my first game is in less than 3 weeks.

And it's nice to see you back on the boards posting :thumbsup:

[OutBurst]

I don't see the Brine Money on that list...

[RYU]

RYU: do you have a 2005 women's ncaa rule changes book? If ya do could you post the most prevalent changes for this season?Here's a link to the wlax umpire newsletter. It's 7 pgs PDF, so it might take a little while to download. Pages 4-5 have a good synopsis of 2005 rule changes.

http://sites.uslacrosse.org/wdoc/PDFs/Flags&Whistles/dec04fw.pdf

And it's nice to see you back on the boards posting :thumbsup:Thanks. As the season draws near, the boards have become more relevant and useful.

BTW, the Brine Money should probably be designated w/ a "3" on that list, but technically, since it's not on there, then it's not legal for play. I doubt anyone would raise an issue w/ a wlax goalie using one though. Even I would let it go unless an opposing coach specifically challenged it. Good call on Outburst's part though.

[OutBurst]

Hmm, the Money has been out for a while now. I am so surprised.