New tack on stick requirements?

[LaxRef]

Take a look at this stick, which shows how far the equipment manufacturers are willing to go to meet the letter of the rules but not the spirit.

Perhaps the new approach to deciding whether sticks should be legal is for them to produce a plastic insert that must fit inside the head of the crosse for it to be legal. What do you think?

[old geezer]

This was probably inevitable after the manufacturers started channeling the throat of the crosse. It would be interesting to see how it shoots and passes. That is the strangest looking head that I think I have ever seen.

[rilax]

1-7-1: ....The net of the crosse...shall be roughly triangular in shape.

dosen't look like a trianguar shaped net...illegal

[aikitim]

pic ture doesnt work for me.... what head is it? the arrow?

[Mavido]

The throat is slightly narrower then the scoop.. so you could say it was trangularish..

[laxdevil666]

i think the ncaa approved it, so i dont see a problem.

[LCNlaxman]

pic ture doesnt work for me.... what head is it? the arrow?


You got it.

I personally think that the Arrow was a stoopid idea. I hope it is a big flop. :P

[RockStar]

If they actually made it stiff enough for men's lacrosse, it might work. It's sort of like a wussified Powerplay with 6.5" wings added to cheat the law.

Stiff enough? Looking at the design and hearing about a 4 oz total head weight, I'm not so sure. My guess is that this P.O.S. will collapse with the first hard pass or slap check.

[RockStar]

1-7-1: ....The net of the crosse...shall be roughly triangular in shape.....

See, that is quite possibly the dumbest rule ever written.

What is it supposed to mean anyway? Commercially available Mesh pieces are all rectangular..

Just curious, does the rule go on to say what the penalty is for not having a triangular net? Stick taken out of the game? Illegal stick penalty?

[Snake~eyes]

1-7-1: ....The net of the crosse...shall be roughly triangular in shape.

dosen't look like a trianguar shaped net...illegal
Depends on your intepratationof roughly.

[Shorelax]

Has anyone seen one of these ont he field this season?? I understand they have been available.

[Snake~eyes]

Has anyone seen one of these ont he field this season?? I understand they have been available.
Nope, they're relatively new. That and they are expensive, I have also heard they are rather weak.

[rilax]

Depends on your intepratationof roughly.
True. Language is there though if someone wanted to flag it they can. Don’t know what I would do more I think about it. Thankfully it seems these gimmick things die a rather quick death.

[LaxRef]

You could probably also measure the width from the bottom if you wanted to toss the stick :chuckle:

Rules like "roughly triangular" serve only one useful purpose: the NCAA can send out a bulletin saying "such and such a stick is illegal for NCAA lacrosse because the shape of the head is not roughly triangular" if they want to. It's essentially impossible to apply such a phrase fairly and objectively on the field.

Of course, I'm not sure we've been given guidance on how to objectively applly the rollout tests, either. :chuckle:

[SDS416]

Bacharach posted in another thread that STX has recalled the Arrow and is doing a redesign due to weakness and breakage with the first run. Reportedly the new, improved arrow will be available in September.
The new Brine "reflex" technology is another one of those pushing the rules deals, IMHO. The fact that that the depth of the pocket is essentially controlled by a rubber band that allows it to stretch when being used to catch, throw or cradle, but return to a shallower depth otherwise essentially creates a stick that will be illegal essentially when being used but legal the way a stick check is conducted. Thoughts, comments?

[LCNlaxman]

Yeah i'm not too sure about that new Brine thing. Some people say "it'll change the face of the game" some say "it'll be a huge flop."

Personally, i don't know. It may create new rules because it is essentially a broken head held on by a rubber band.

[scliff42002]

It may create new rules because it is essentially a broken head held on by a rubber band.


Then the liquid gimmick coould be called illegal also? The sidewall was loose and was basically a piece of rubber held on with some string.

[laxref39]

True. Language is there though if someone wanted to flag it they can. Don’t know what I would do more I think about it. Thankfully it seems these gimmick things die a rather quick death.
If it is approved for play, you can't flag it!!!!!!!!

[laxersk8erguy8]

I believe there is also a girls version, The Stingray?

[ColtsLax]

see, the new brine stick, the pulse, is not illelgal. During play, the entire sidewall hinges, thereby keeping the ball at the required depth. the ball would always be even with the bottom of the sidewall

[LaxRef]

If it is approved for play, you can't flag it!!!!!!!!

There's no such thing as a crosse that's "approved for play":

The NCAA Men’s Lacrosse Committee is responsible for formulating the official playing rules. The committee is not responsible for testing or approving playing equipment.

If it doesn't meet the requirements in the rules, it's illegal. And, of course, some of the rules are open to interpretation.

[RockStar]

There is no such thing as approved for play, but.....

Apparently you can run a design by the powers that be and have it endorsed as legal.

Found this on Mohawk's site:

http://www.mohawkintlacrosse.com/products/images/legaldoc.jpg

[LCNlaxman]

Then the liquid gimmick coould be called illegal also? The sidewall was loose and was basically a piece of rubber held on with some string.


But the string did not strech, correct?

Last night i also thought, if the rubber band stretches under the weight of a ball, it may become illegal for having a sidewall more than 2 inches high.

[rilax]

There is no such thing as approved for play, but.....

Apparently you can run a design by the powers that be and have it endorsed as legal.

Found this on Mohawk's site:

http://www.mohawkintlacrosse.com/products/images/legaldoc.jpg
The thing about that letter is that it only addresses two things the 6.5 inch and 10.0 inch measurements and says that it is very tight measurements. They make no other statements about the legality of the head. Just something to think about…

[RockStar]

The thing about that letter is that it only addresses two things the 6.5 inch and 10.0 inch measurements and says that it is very tight measurements. They make no other statements about the legality of the head. Just something to think about…

All they're saying is that the plastic part of the head, AS SOLD AND SHIPPED, meets the letter of the law. They really can't legitimately make any other statements on legality other than those two, except maybe on the depth of the sidewall.

You know as well as I do that the legality of a stick depends too much on what the end user does ("aftermarket" ball stops, re-string, pinch/re-shape, length of shaft attached....etc.)

As far as marketting and production - I know that if I ran a lacrosse equipment company, I would not move past the detail drawing or prototype phase unless I had a letter like that in my file. Ideally I'd want one from CLA (about 200K players), and NCAA + NFHS (if applicable) for another ?200K? players and maybe the ILF too to cover the rest of the world!

[lax4life6]

In real life the arrow is more triangular than it looks

[laxref39]

There's no such thing as a crosse that's "approved for play":



If it doesn't meet the requirements in the rules, it's illegal. And, of course, some of the rules are open to interpretation.
Perhaps my wording can be changed to say meets NCAA specifications, however, the STX add in lacrosse magazine specifically states "APPROVED FOR NCAA PLAY"! It becomes obvious how many of the rules are subject to interpretation based on geography and level of play.

[3rdPersonPlural]

Imagine being on the receiving end of a misplaced slap check (read slash to the torso) by someone using that head. I've seen Aztec war clubs in Museums that have a similar profile, and I suspect that those pointy protrusions on the side would do a fine job of concentrating force at a real small and painful point.

[freestylewalkin]

This head is an embarresmanet i now want to find a hole in the wall and cry i am so ashamed

[AZReDWiNG]

This head is an embarresmanet i now want to find a hole in the wall and cry i am so ashamed

What, did you buy one? :D

[ragnut]

Is it true that the sidewall can't be more than 2 inches in width? If so, does anyone know if the sidewall becomes greater than 2 inches when the hinge opens (in reference to the soon-to-be released Brine Pulse)?

[LaxRef]

Is it true that the sidewall can't be more than 2 inches in width?

Yes. It even says so in two places. Er, I guess they say "2 inches high," not wide, but we know what they mean. It's all relative.

[OGND]

There's no such thing as a crosse that's "approved for play":

NCAA Rule 1-24:
The NCAA Men’s Lacrosse Committee is responsible for formulating the official playing rules. The committee is not responsible for testing or approving playing equipment.

If it doesn't meet the requirements in the rules, it's illegal. And, of course, some of the rules are open to interpretation.

But, from the same rule (1-24):
While the committee does not regulate the development of new equipment
and does not set technical or scientific standards for testing equipment
or the approval or disapproval of specific playing equipment, the
committee may provide manufacturers with informal guidelines as to the
equipment-performance levels it considers consistent with the integrity of
the game. The committee reserves the right to intercede to protect and
maintain that integrity.

The Men’s Lacrosse Rules Committee suggests that manufacturers planning
innovative changes in lacrosse equipment submit the equipment to
the committee for review before production.
According to STX, the Arrow was expressly ruled legal by the NCAA Rules Committee. Isn't our job to enforce, and not to legislate? If the legislative body for NCAA Men's Lacrosse, the Rules Committee, says that a stick is legal, who are we to flag it?

[laxref39]

Thanks for the support of my point.

[LaxRef]

According to STX, the Arrow was expressly ruled legal by the NCAA Rules Committee. Isn't our job to enforce, and not to legislate? If the legislative body for NCAA Men's Lacrosse, the Rules Committee, says that a stick is legal, who are we to flag it?

I'm not saying I would flag it. But there are people here who've said that it is not "roughly triangular," and that's open to interpretation unless the NCAA communicates that they've made a ruling on the head to the officials, which they didn't (at least not to me).

Suppose official A flags it because he doesn't think it's roughly triangular. Coach A says that STX has a letter on file that says the stick is okay. This is unverifiable on the field.

I guess part of my problem is semantic. Intead of saying that it's approved, I'd be happier if people said, "The NCAA was sent a prototype and the NCAA did not rule the shape illegal."

Another problem with saying a head is approved is that Company X makes a head and gets it approved. You field test it and the ball doesn't roll out. You flag it and the coach and player go ballistic, saying it's approved by the NCAA yet it's clearly illegal.

[laxref39]

I'm not saying I would flag it. But there are people here who've said that it is not "roughly triangular," and that's open to interpretation unless the NCAA communicates that they've made a ruling on the head to the officials, which they didn't (at least not to me).

Suppose official A flags it because he doesn't think it's roughly triangular. Coach A says that STX has a letter on file that says the stick is okay. This is unverifiable on the field.

I guess part of my problem is semantic. Intead of saying that it's approved, I'd be happier if people said, "The NCAA was sent a prototype and the NCAA did not rule the shape illegal."

Another problem with saying a head is approved is that Company X makes a head and gets it approved. You field test it and the ball doesn't roll out. You flag it and the coach and player go ballistic, saying it's approved by the NCAA yet it's clearly illegal.
That being said, our high school rules interpreter makes sure he checks out sticks and then checks with the state for there opinion and relates it to our local association as to how we should handle new sticks and thier legality.

[Ghslongpole14]

Has anyone seen one of these ont he field this season?? I understand they have been available.

Yes. Someone posted a thread about the Arrow, and provided a picture showing a Gettysburg player using one (I believe in a game against OWU).

It must be legal to use in the NHSLA (don't know if that's the right initals) and NCAA because in my IL magazine, it is advertised on the first pages of the UVa cover (either May or June '05). It says "Approved for NCAA play" and it measures 6.57 " between those two wings...

[ColtsLax]

when he says 2" wide, does he mean looking at it face on, or as if you were doing a stick check?

[surveyor12]

It means the sidewall height. So, if you measure the sidewall, look at the profile,a nd measure the height of the wall itself. It should not exceed 2 inches. Think of it like the height of a tennis racked frame (which is about 1/2 inch). Same difference.