Another fun one: goal or not?

[LaxRef]

Here's another one:

Goalie makes a save in a 1-goal game with 20 seconds to play. With the ball in his crosse, he puts the crosse head-first into the goal as far as he can and he sets it down inside the goal. The ball is inside the crosse, so it's not a loose ball, so it's not a goal. Also, the goalie is not in possession, so there's no 4-second count, and even though there's a 20-second clearing count on the game will be over before it expires. The goalie stands in front of the goal and waits for the game to end.

Ruling? :WTF:

[blindbill]

NFHS:
I'd warn goalie to play, give him 3 sec. to begin play, then toot for witholding ball from play. Give to other team at GLE with approximately 14 sec. remaining.

[skip0l]

i'd kick him in the shins really hard. no i have no idea how it would go, but i'm curious

[C.Montgomery]

Rule 4, section 5 define a loose ball as a ball not in possession. So in this situation we have a loose ball inside of the goal. My ruling: goal. To me this is no different from the situation where the goalie has the ball in his crosse, brings his crosse back inside the net, and then drops the ball. If he can't perform any of the normal acts of control (carrying, cradling, passing, shooting) then he doesn't have possession, and if he's not holding his crosse then obviously he cannot perform any of those acts.

[WHEELAX2]

hmm... is the ball possibly in the back side of the head??? if an attempt isn't made to get the ball out, it should be a change of posession for withholding.. even though the ball is still in the head, the goalie is not in posession with the ball in the wrong side of the head, therefore he needs to gain posession as quickly as possible, or suffer a delay call.. and since the ball is still in a stick, it can not be ruled a goal..

[ploaref]

The ball is not inside the crosse, so it's not a loose ball, so it's not a goal.

Is this really how you meant to say it?

[CTLaxer]

I believe he meant the ball *is* inside the crosse

[Woodenstick]

Rule 4, section 5 define a loose ball as a ball not in possession. So in this situation we have a loose ball inside of the goal. My ruling: goal. To me this is no different from the situation where the goalie has the ball in his crosse, brings his crosse back inside the net, and then drops the ball. If he can't perform any of the normal acts of control (carrying, cradling, passing, shooting) then he doesn't have possession, and if he's not holding his crosse then obviously he cannot perform any of those acts.

Rule 4-8 (Scoring) actually says that a goal is scored when a loose ball passes through the plane of the goal. So if the ball is in possession when it passes through the plane of the goal and becomes loose later on, is it a goal? I always thought so, but this does not seem to follow from the literal reading of the rule.

Other than that issue, I think that this is a great answer!

[LaxRef]

Is this really how you meant to say it?

Nope; I fixed it now. Thanks!

[donald28]

Illegal Procedure- Goalie is delaying game; maybe USC -award ball 20 yards lateral. My question would be do you put some time back on?

[eme]

I like C. Montgomery's answer.

You would not put time back on the clock. Only instance you would do that is if the clock runs while ref has not blown a whistle to re-start a play.

[pboyd]

As goalie makes save - 4-sec count starts and continues (assumption of no 4-sec count is not valid) - count does not stop when goalie intentionally decides not to clear the ball and intentionally places crosse on ground or in goal. Ball gets awarded to other team 20 yds lateral to goal with 16 sec left in game. If crosse with ball is placed in the goal - no goal because ball was not loose when it passed from the front completely through the imaginary plane of the goal.

[LaxRef]

As goalie makes save - 4-sec count starts and continues (assumption of no 4-sec count is not valid) - count does not stop when goalie intentionally decides not to clear the ball and intentionally places crosse on ground or in goal. Ball gets awarded to other team 20 yds lateral to goal with 16 sec left in game. If crosse with ball is placed in the goal - no goal because ball was not loose when it passed from the front completely through the imaginary plane of the goal.


I would argue that you cannot have a 4-second crease violation if the goalie does not have possession. The goalie is certainly allowed to drop the ball on the ground, and you have to stop the 4 count if he does not have possession. However, if a goalie drops the ball intentionally and then picks it back up to try to get a new count, that is illegal procedure by rule.

As I see it, you have a few options here.

Most likely, you'd call a penalty shot. Move everyone outside the attack area except for the goalie and award the ball to A1 one yard inside the top of the attack area. When you blow the whistle, A1 must advance toward the goal without stopping or backing up and take a shot within 10 seconds. After the shot, other players from both teams may enter the attack area unless a goal is scored.

Okay, just kidding, but that would be cool, huh?

The most obvious is to call withholding the ball from play, since it is illegal to withhold the ball from play "in any matter." Award the ball to the defense ouside the box.

You could call a USC penalty as well.

Finally, you could call it a goal. There are valid arguments for and against calling it a goal. However, I like the argument that the ball is now "loose" even though it's in the head of the crosse, since the goalie cannot cradle, pass or shoot. In any case, the goalie's coach is going to have a hard time defending his goalie's actions whatever you call!

As someone stated, there's no justification for putting time back on the clock in this situation.

[laxfan25]

If crosse with ball is placed in the goal - no goal because ball was not loose when it passed from the front completely through the imaginary plane of the goal.
This is not a valid argument, because you could have a case where a goalie, on his clearing windup, puts the head of his stick with the ball in it into the goal (past the plane of the back of the pipes), and then has the ball fall out the back. In that instance you would clearly have a goal, even though the ball was "in possession" when it passed through the plane.
In the example cited, of the goalie putting his stick on the ground with the ball in the pocket - I would also consider that a loose ball, and thus a goal. That will dissuade that goalie from attempting that subterfuge again.
To take it a step further, let's say the goalie places the stick on the ground in the crease, but not in the goal. Attack A pushes D-man B trying to get to the ball. Does A serve 30 secs?

[LaxRef]

To take it a step further, let's say the goalie places the stick on the ground in the crease, but not in the goal. Attack A pushes D-man B trying to get to the ball. Does A serve 30 secs?

Same principle applies: if the goalie can't cradle, pass, or shoot, he's not in possession. Loose-ball push. Award the ball to team B unless you judge the goalie's action to be "withholding the ball from play." That would depend on where in the crease he placed his crosse.

[donald28]

Ok- I concede my answer is wrong - can't be illegal procedure for failure of player to place the ball directly on the field or hand it to the nearest official ON A CHANGE OF POSSESSION because he did not have possession. What about illegal procedure for throwing his stick- you could certainly say his action was intentional- ok ok he did not actually throw it but this goalie should not get away with this. I would not want to call it a goal as that call might well decide the game's outcome. Withholding seems the best answer or USC. By the way, EME did I have dinner with you at The Red Lodge Rest. in Vail this past summer? Just wondering.

[LaxRef]

I would not want to call it a goal as that call might well decide the game's outcome. Withholding seems the best answer or USC.

Does the call decide the game's outcome, or does the player's moronic action in this case decide the game's outcome?

I've never bought into the "that call decided the game" mentality. The players decide the game. We just enforce the rules.

[donald28]

I hear you loud and clear LaxRef but if it was an important game and I called it a goal, I might have to be airlifted out- that would not be cool.

[LaxRef]

I hear you loud and clear LaxRef but if it was an important game and I called it a goal, I might have to be airlifted out- that would not be cool.

I think you just say: "The ball is in the goal. It is not in possession since the goalie cannot cradle, pass, or shoot if he's not holding the crosse, therefore it is a loose ball inside the goal. Goal!"

And, besides, it's only the tying goal.

[Lax_coach]

Wait- apologize for the potential thread hijacking, but can we talk about the "scoring is when a LOOSE ball crosses the PLANE of the goal"? If a goalie has the ball in his stick after making a save, winds back to throw a deep outlet pass, the ball (in his stick) crosses through the plane of the goal in his wind up- no goal? Also, if the ball then (once inside the goal and still in his stick) drops out of his stick- still no goal (loose ball didnt cross the plane)? What if he then picks it up (with his stick) and pulls it out of the goal? still no goal since its crossing the plane (again) but not loose? If he kicks it out of goal so it crosses the plane loose (even though it is leaving the goal)--- goal?

LC

[tjslax]

Wait- apologize for the potential thread hijacking, but can we talk about the "scoring is when a LOOSE ball crosses the PLANE of the goal"? If a goalie has the ball in his stick after making a save, winds back to throw a deep outlet pass, the ball (in his stick) crosses through the plane of the goal in his wind up- no goal? Also, if the ball then (once inside the goal and still in his stick) drops out of his stick- still no goal (loose ball didnt cross the plane)? What if he then picks it up (with his stick) and pulls it out of the goal? still no goal since its crossing the plane (again) but not loose? If he kicks it out of goal so it crosses the plane loose (even though it is leaving the goal)--- goal?

LC

1. Ball in stick across plane during wind up and thrown-No goal
2. If the ball is dropped A) in the goal or before entering the goal-goal B) Dropped after coming out of the goal-no goal
3. Next 2 situations don't matter-goal or no goal has already been determined

[laxfan25]

Wait- apologize for the potential thread hijacking, but can we talk about the "scoring is when a LOOSE ball crosses the PLANE of the goal"? If a goalie has the ball in his stick after making a save, winds back to throw a deep outlet pass, the ball (in his stick) crosses through the plane of the goal in his wind up- no goal? Also, if the ball then (once inside the goal and still in his stick) drops out of his stick- still no goal (loose ball didnt cross the plane)? LC
Whatza matta? Didn't you read my post earlier?
This is not a valid argument, because you could have a case where a goalie, on his clearing windup, puts the head of his stick with the ball in it into the goal (past the plane of the back of the pipes), and then has the ball fall out the back. In that instance you would clearly have a goal, even though the ball was "in possession" when it passed through the plane.

[tjslax]

As lax ref said: "The ball is in the goal. It is not in possession since the goalie cannot cradle, pass, or shoot if he's not holding the crosse, therefore it is a loose ball inside the goal. Goal!"

The ball does not need to be loose when crossing the plane just loose while across it.

[LaxRef]

The ball does not need to be loose when crossing the plane just loose while across it.

This is complicated by the following:

A.R. 45. Goalkeeper, in possession of ball, brings his crosse back through the plane of his goal. RULING: Legal play, no goal scored. (Only a loose ball that passes through the plane of the goal counts.)

That makes it sound like the ball has to be loose when it crosses the plane to be a goal, but then elsewhere there's an A.R. that says if the goalie drops it while the ball is inside it is a goal. It would be clearer if they said "Only a loose ball inside the plane of the goal is a goal," or something similar.

[Woodenstick]

As lax ref said: "The ball is in the goal. It is not in possession since the goalie cannot cradle, pass, or shoot if he's not holding the crosse, therefore it is a loose ball inside the goal. Goal!"

The ball does not need to be loose when crossing the plane just loose while across it.

This is contrary to a literal reading of rule 4-8, which refers to a loose ball crossing the plane of the goal. But AR 42 (posted by Laxref in a different thread) "clarifies" the meaning of the rule:

"A.R. 42. Goalkeeper, who is in possession of ball in crease, brings crosse back through the plane of his goal and drops the ball to the ground across the goal line. RULING: Goal awarded to opposing team. "

AR 42 shows that the ball need not be loose when crossing the plane.

[tjslax]

This is contrary to a literal reading of rule 4-8, which refers to a loose ball crossing the plane of the goal. But AR 42 (posted by Laxref in a different thread) "clarifies" the meaning of the rule:

"A.R. 42. Goalkeeper, who is in possession of ball in crease, brings crosse back through the plane of his goal and drops the ball to the ground across the goal line. RULING: Goal awarded to opposing team. "

AR 42 shows that the ball need not be loose when crossing the plane.

I realize there are other ways to read this rule but I must disagree. AR 42 does not indicate anything about wether or not the ball needs to be loose. It says if the ball becomes loose after being brought across the line (by the goal tender) it is a goal.

Also if you carefully read the cases for 2005-it says "Only a loose ball that is beyond the plane of the goal counts" (p. 66)

Wording varies throughout the text. I understand that the book is perfect and under no circumstances should it be changed so unfortunetly we could call it either way :crazy:

[kingdawgell]

wouldnt you assess some sort of penalty for playing without a crosse? i dont know the rules well enough to cite a specific rule but i know that is against the rules

[LaxRef]

wouldnt you assess some sort of penalty for playing without a crosse? i dont know the rules well enough to cite a specific rule but i know that is against the rules

If he's just standing there, is he participating in the play?

BTW, how would all of these answers change if he never let go of the crosse after sticking the crosse with the ball in it into the goal? :chuckle:

[eme]

"BTW, how would all of these answers change if he never let go of the crosse after sticking the crosse with the ball in it into the goal? "

No goal as he has possession. 4-sec. count starts.

[LaxRef]

"BTW, how would all of these answers change if he never let go of the crosse after sticking the crosse with the ball in it into the goal? "

No goal as he has possession. 4-sec. count starts.

Exactly! I was wondering if we'd talked about it long enough that people might forget about the 4-count, but I guess not.

[laxfan25]

Exactly! I was wondering if we'd talked about it long enough that people might forget about the 4-count, but I guess not.

Almost had me there - but fortunately we had the 3rd team on the field and got the call right!

[old geezer]

According to NCAA rules if you go by the definitions of player possession, Rule 4-5-b, loose ball, Rule 4-5-d, and goal, 4-8 AR. 42, this situation is a goal. The goalie does not have possession, therefore it is a loose ball and thus a goal.

[pboyd]

I am not convinced by any of my esteemed colleagues arguments that the original situation was a goal. I would still argue that a 4-sec count was started and when the goalie doesn't clear the ball in 4-sec or if he intentionally places his crosse inside the goal and takes his hand off crosse this is a loose ball (no possession) and the whistle needs to be blown (Illegal Procedure - for 4-sec violation or delay of game - really doesn't matter) is called and ball awarded to other team 20 yds lateral with 16 sec left in game. I would also argue that NCAA 2006 A.R. 40 conflicts with Rule 4-8 and the Rule takes precedence (ball has to be loose when it passes through the imaginary place). I also find it interesting that NFHS 2005 4.8 Sit D is different from NCAA 2006 AR 40 in the way its worded. I'm hoping that Woodenstick, blindbill and Donald28 come to my support.

[scruffy221]

or, goalie places ball in stick walks around back and places it on the back of the net, shaft in the holes in the net, upright, ball in crosse.
wat happens then laxref?

[laxfan25]

or, goalie places ball in stick walks around back and places it on the back of the net, shaft in the holes in the net, upright, ball in crosse.
wat happens then laxref?
Well, while he is taking his stroll around the crease and placing the sticking the net, the referee is counting 1, 2, 3, 4 and then awarding the ball to the attack.

[laxfan25]

(ball has to be loose when it passes through the imaginary place).
We've already determined though that the ball does not have to be loose when it passes through the plane to be a goal. Two examples; the goalie bringing the ball through the plane on a clearing pass, and then inadvertantly dropping it - Goal. You could also have a defenseman come down and extend his stick into the goal with the ball in it (not touching the pipes or net) and then dropping the ball to the ground inside the goal. You're saying that wouldn't be a goal also?

[pboyd]

Correct by my interpretation of Rule 4-8 - no goal - I stick by the no goal call because the ball was not loose when it passed from the front completely through the imaginary plane of the goal.

[eme]

Pboyd wrote: "I stick by the no goal call because the ball was not loose when it passed from the front completely through the imaginary plane of the goal."


I feel the original Framers of the Constitution (sorry...following the Supreme Court nominations)...er...the Rule Writers of the NCAA Rulebook wanted to protect the goalie and make it easier for refs to declare a goal when the goalie brought his stick back to make a save or a pass and the ball in the stick broke that imaginary plane of the goal-line. Other than that, a loose ball inside that sucker is a goal and I could sell it by saying the goalie relinquished control of the stick and thereby can't perform the duties that we define as possession OR that devilsh little ball in there bounced up a fraction of an inch in the air when the goalie set it it on the ground...thereby loose ball. I can't think of a sport in the world where a loose ball in that goal beyond the goal line (with no infraction by the attacking team) isn't a goal.

Do I get to sit on the Bench? or the bench?

[old geezer]

The Bench.

[blindbill]

Arrrrgh!! I can see both sides of this one. I think the IP would be a whole lot easier to sell though. I think we need a stone tablet coming down the mountain for this one (or an "official" interpretation)

[LaxRef]

Arrrrgh!! I can see both sides of this one. I think the IP would be a whole lot easier to sell though. I think we need a stone tablet coming down the mountain for this one (or an "official" interpretation)

This one is not worth submitting to TPTB, because it's so unlikely to happen in a real game. In any case, if it did happen, I think you want to opt for a more severe penalty to discourage this sort of thing. I think I'd call it a goal, and the goalie would never do it again.

[Woodenstick]

"Correct by my interpretation of Rule 4-8 - no goal - I stick by the no goal call because the ball was not loose when it passed from the front completely through the imaginary plane of the goal."
pboyd

Pboyd, your reading of the rule is literally correct. But the example for the rule (goalie dropping the ball in the goal) seems to modify the literal meaning for this unusual case. So, sorry to say, I have conceded to the majority interpretation! GOAL!!!