View Full Version : No mouthpiece and penalty assessment
CoachRob
04-10-2005, 06:59 AM
NFHS: Our player was given a USC for playing with his mouthguard dangling from his mask, a 1 minute NR. I said it WAS a 1 minute NR for playing without a mouthpiece, but NOT a USC. This is significant as if he got a second NR USC he would have been ejected. While that did not happen, who was right? I've never seen a stick or mouthguard NR penalty be ruled a USC (unless the player purposely touches the mesh/strings after being asked to hand it over for inspection).
If you agree and it is not a USC, is it counted toward the five personal fouls?
It is NOT USC. It DOES count toward the 5 personal fouls. Federation rules here.
LaxRef
04-10-2005, 07:38 AM
See http://www.lacrosseforums.com/showthread.php?t=16346&highlight=mouthpiece+USC
It's easy to get confused, but equipment violations are NR personal fouls, but NOT USC fouls. Well, except for jamming the crosse or adjusting the strings.
CoachRob
04-10-2005, 10:52 AM
That's what I thought. Good thing I didn't have to use 7-13 to debate it if he got another USC. We've had two challenges to date, and in each case I've changed the mind of the official. They were actually appreciative of my bringing to their attention their errors (of course, they know me from since we're members of the same official's chapter). Of course, one involved simult. fouls. Shocker!!
LaxRef
04-10-2005, 11:22 AM
That's what I thought. Good thing I didn't have to use 7-13 to debate it if he got another USC. We've had two challenges to date, and in each case I've changed the mind of the official. They were actually appreciative of my bringing to their attention their errors (of course, they know me from since we're members of the same official's chapter). Of course, one involved simult. fouls. Shocker!!
So, I think you need to tell us the details on the two successful challenges!
CoachRob
04-10-2005, 08:43 PM
First was our player serving 1 minute for a slash. Our team was advancing on goal, and our player (B1) released 10 seconds early. The official wanted to send our player back to the box for the remaining 10 seconds and add 30 seconds. I told him that it is simply a return for 10 seconds and loss of possession with no additional 30 seconds. He agreed.
The second was our player A1 was slashed by B1, flag down. We (A2) then committed an illegal body check while still in possession, whistle sounded. He wanted to award the ball to their team, saying sequence was determined, and our team committed the last foul. I countered these are SF's, with equal penalty time to be served (by B1 and A2). Thus, we should retain possession. He agreed after conferring with his partner.
LaxRef
04-10-2005, 09:05 PM
Good challenges! I can't imagine there are a lot of coaches that will bat this high a percentage this season. Did they end up making you the "head coach" for game purposes so you can do the talking?
Snake~eyes
04-10-2005, 09:53 PM
So far, I have not lost a challenge this year...
...but no coach has challenged yet either.
CoachRob
04-11-2005, 08:17 AM
Good challenges! I can't imagine there are a lot of coaches that will bat this high a percentage this season. Did they end up making you the "head coach" for game purposes so you can do the talking?
Yes we decided I would be named "head" coach for games only. It works out well.
There was another one, also for early release (strange), that I didn't make a fuss about. Our player B1 was told by the their timekeeper (an away game) to release, but realized it was five seconds early. Their team scored against our team and the timekeeper hit the double horn to tell the ref about the early release. The ref sent our player B1 BACK to the box for the remaining five seconds. I know B1 should not have been returned to the box as no advantage was gained by an early release, thus his penalty was completed despite the early release, but I figured it wasn't worth the hassle or upsetting the ref. I discussed it with him after the game and he realized his error.
What I DID do was not bring an attacker down into the wing position for the FO, so that B1 could release as soon as his penalty expired. It was a chance to teach our guys about this situation versus having to wait until possession was gained if we HAD brought down an attacker to fill the wing position. A teaching point for our kids. Probably not the best strategy as five seconds is a long time, but we were winning by four goals, and teaching is more important IMO.
And Snake, if you ever lose a challenge, let us know. I can't imagine it would happen.
You know, the term "lost" a challenge makes it sound more confrontational than it is. Really it's a discussion with no winner or loser. Most officials respond well if the case is presented in a diplomatic way, and as I said, they thanked me for bringing the proper interpretations to their attention. I didn't even have to break out the rulebook (of course they know me, so maybe that's the reason). The early release and SF's are somewhat confusing.
To review (and correct me if I am in error):
1) B1 releases early, team B in possession: At the whistle, B1 returns for the early release time, PLUS a loss of possession to team A.
2) B1 releases early, team A in possession: At the whistle, B1 returns for the early release time, PLUS 30 seconds for a technical foul violation.
3) B1 releaseses early, team A scores: At the whistle, B1 does NOT return as no advantage was gained by his early release. FO to follow.
Keep going, Coach Rob. Take the 3 situations above but change the beginning of each sentence to "B1 is released early by the timer...."
CoachRob
04-11-2005, 11:30 AM
Keep going, Coach Rob. Take the 3 situations above but change the beginning of each sentence to "B1 is released early by the timer...."
I'll give it a try. I believe as this is a timekeeper error, all remaining penalty time is released.
1) B1 is released early by the timer, team B in possession: At the whistle, B1 does not return for the early release time; team B retains possession. (I believe it SHOULD be awarded to team A, but I don't think that's the ruling.)
2) B1 is released early by the timer, team A in possession: At the whistle, B1 does not return for the early release time; team A retains possession. (I don't think it is fair to penalize B1 for 30 seconds for early release as it was not his fault; thus, I wrote team A simply retains possession.)
3) B1 is released early by the timer, team A scores. At the whistle, B1 does not return for the early release time; FO to follow.
I don't find any cases directly on point. The 7-13 cases do not address these cases directly.
Snake~eyes
04-11-2005, 12:27 PM
And Snake, if you ever lose a challenge, let us know. I can't imagine it would happen.[/b]
Well it could happen.
Something like I wasn't thinking straight and I didn't give them a free clear on goalie inteference when I should have. Then the coach reminded me....oops. :idea:
But if I ever do lose a challege don't expect me to come here telling you guys about it. :agree: I have a reputation to uphold. :naughty:
CoachRob
04-11-2005, 12:37 PM
Something like I wasn't thinking straight and I didn't give them a free clear on goalie inteference when I should have. Then the coach reminded me....oops. :idea:
But if I ever do lose a challege don't expect me to come here telling you guys about it. :agree: I have a reputation to uphold. :naughty:
You probably meant to have written: Something like I wasn't thinking straight and I didn't give them a free clear on goalie inteference when he had possession when I should have.
So, you can always get out of that by saying, "Hey, I gave it to him lateral to the goal because he didn't have possession". You can thank me later.
As for your reputation, well, that's questionable...
Snake, are you going to the NCAA's?
Snake~eyes
04-11-2005, 01:40 PM
You probably meant to have written: Something like I wasn't thinking straight and I didn't give them a free clear on goalie inteference when he had possession when I should have.
I didn't put "when he had posession" because it is some waht redundant, when I put "when I should have" that meant that he had posession. :p
As for your reputation, well, that's questionable...
You're probably right.
Snake, are you going to the NCAA's?
As I told Laxref, probably not. But we'll see...