U.R. and your opinion on it

[Longpole5435]

I searched and there was only one previous thread on this, and it discussed what constituted U.R., not what I would like to debate.

It is my opinion that U.R. is a penalty that should be eliminated from the game of lacrosse. My reasons are:

1.) Inconsistency in calling: Ref's judgement of what actualy constitutes a "unnecessary action" is way too varied. Therefore, players will make hits that one ref would call while others would not

2.)This rule is often use to penalize a bigger player for hitting a smaller player, and that is my main issue with it. Too many ref's seemingly feel sorry for the little guy who just got bulldozed by a big defenseman and throws the flag. It is also used if a team is way up on another team and a good hit is made. Once again, the ref sympathises wit hthe losing team and calls it.

3.)Some argue this rule allows players to learn the basics before htting comes into play. Last I checked, hitting IS a basic element of lacrosse, used in defense and GB's all the time. Also, if a player needs to learn a lesson about what to do and not to do, then they will learn pretty quickly from getting laid out that that course of action should not be taken.

I'm not here to take issue with the ref's of these forums but there needs to be a more defined rule than "unnecessary" if you are to limit body checks. Lowering the shoulder is not acceptable, as that is HOW you hit, not a symptom of an illegal one.

Your thoughts would be appreciated.


**Edit- U.R., for those of you who don't know, is unnecessary roughness**

[shrekjr]

As an official I respect your opinion and give you credit for a well thought out suggestion. Give me some time for a well thought out response.

[laxfan25]

My thoughts;
1) If you feel the U.R. rule should be eliminated because it is often subject to the judgement of the official, there are many others that you should include in the same category, since the refs are applying their judgement to these rules the entire game. The most obvious is slashing. If you were to read the rulebook on slashing and the refs were to apply a literal interpretation of the book, we would have an endless parade of players to the penalty box, or players would not be making any attempts with a stick check. That is just one example of a rule where judgement comes into play on almost every interaction between players on opposing teams.
2) Good judgement is one of the hallmarks of a professional official, and why we are on the field. Someone has to make those calls, or else you can just play skins and shirts and call your own fouls. Not a pleasant thought, I'm sure.
3) Yes, judgement will vary from official to official, but they are human after all. Whether a particular play will warrant a call will also vary with the same official based on a number of criteria; the level of the game (middle school, HS, club, college varsity) is a big one for sure. The demeanor of the game in question - are the teams playing lacrosse and emphasizing stick skills, or is it getting chippy, with more interest being shown in laying people out rather than going for a loose ball? In that case, the refs may throw some flags in order to gain control of the game before it spirals out of control with retaliatory hits.
4) Yes, by the nature of its name - Unnecessary Roughness denotes that someone is making a judgement as to whether a particular bodycheck exceeded the standard for reasonable play. Just because a hit is made in a legal fashion - i.e. from the front or side, above the waist and below the neck, no leading with the head or contact with the head - does not mean that it can't be called for U.R. If in the opinion of the official the hit had the potential to injure a player, you will likely draw a flag - but that is not the only criteria the ref may use. Realize that most refs have years of experience, many have played the game themselves and have a good understanding of what they will allow.

During the course of a game, the referee is making literally hundreds of judgement calls as they observe every interaction between players. As an example; the defense makes a stop and the D man is starting to head up field. As he passes the attackman, does A make a wild one-handed wrap check attempt as the D motors by, with no chance of reaching his stick and made more out of frustration at blowing his shot? Pass to the middie, and now you have the opposing middie running with him up field, throwing stick checks all the way. Are the checks under control? Reasonably placed? Is the ball carrier warding? Is the guy about to set a pick in good position? Staying motionless? Does the defender see the pick and you see his eyes light up as he drops his shoulder to tell the picker "no way you're setting a pick on me and getting away with it!". (Might have a U.R. there).
Now the feed to the attack, who is working one on one on the D. Is he warding? (Every coach thinks so!) Is the D using good technique vs a cross-check hold position? Are the checks well placed and under control? Etc, etc, etc. Now multiply this by every play that occurs in the game, and you begin to realize how much "judgement" comes into the picture! I happen to think I have good judgement, and I sometimes will exercise it in trying to protect the health and safety of the teams under my responsibility.

Based on your post, it appears that you feel you have been unnecessarily flagged for some of your checks, maybe when you've taken out some smaller kid. My feeling is the that the problem is not so much with how you are hitting (with the shoulder, which is good!) but the severity of the blow. If you were to deliver it at 50 to 70% of the force would it still accomplish your objective of putting the opponent on the ground? If so, perhaps the official is trying to get you to throttle back on the hits, especially if there is a size difference.
Lastly, it should not be your mission in the game to "instruct" your opponent on what they "should do or not do" by laying them out with uncessary force. Go ahead and make a legal check, just keep it under control! With my many years of experience I can get a pretty good mental picture of some of the plays you've likely been called on. Don't blame the refs or the rules - our primary mission is safety - just lighten up a little bit, and realize that hitting is PART of lacrosse, but it is NOT the main intent of the game.
I hope this extended opinion was helpful, and your thoughtful, well-written post is a refreshing change from some of the incomprehensible stuff we sometimes find on here.
My closing advice - throttle back a little, and when you see an opportunity for a bodycheck, rather than blasting the guy into next week, just send him to tomorrowland.
Peace.

[dram183]

ok, say you took UR out of the game and you were playing. the other team sends a 250 pound defenseman on you and as you crank up for a shot or something he hits you with a 10 yard running start, or just when you get passed to, he'll deck you every time. No call because of no UR.

[shrekjr]

Laxfan25 covered it very well. Here's another scenario I had today....

A & B both chasing a loose ball. A gets close and stops, B just flat runs over him from behind without slowing down at all. I could have had a loose ball push, but that just wasn't enough in this situation. I could have had an illegal body check from behind, might could have called a cross check, but the bottom line was the defender intentionally, blatantly and UNNECESSARILY made an illegal play that also could have been harmful. In this case, it just made more sense to me to call U.R.

[SDS416]

Laxfan25 covered it very well. Here's another scenario I had today....

A & B both chasing a loose ball. A gets close and stops, B just flat runs over him from behind without slowing down at all. I could have had a loose ball push, but that just wasn't enough in this situation. I could have had an illegal body check from behind, might could have called a cross check, but the bottom line was the defender intentionally, blatantly and UNNECESSARILY made an illegal play that also could have been harmful. In this case, it just made more sense to me to call U.R.

Couple of points:

1. No one expects a guy to just dead stop in front of you while going for a loose ball. Obviously both players should be focused on the ball and if A stops and B plows him into the earth it may just be because B never expected (nor should he have) A to just dead stop in front of him.

2. Even if B had seen A stop, depending on a lot of factors such as speed, timing, size, etc. B likely had little or no chance to stop in time without hurting himself. If I have a choice between injuring myself or plowing some guy into the ground, trust me, its a no brainer, I hope the other guy has his chin strap tight.

Hitting is part of lax. And too often we are taking the phyiscal play out of the game unneccesarily.

[gfink]

Hitting is PART of lax. Hitting is not lax alone. It has a purpose. The purpose being to seperate a person form the ball or the chance of getting the ball. Not seperating them from their skin. Nor is its sole purpose to intimidate players. The equipment is not designed to protect players from high speed hits. It is not even close the protection factor that is afforded by football players' equipment. Even good hits have the potential of sometimes causing injury. Almost all of the unnecesary hits carry this potential.Your best hitters in the game do not need 10 yard runs to deliver punishing hits. They don't need to punish shooters after a goal is scored. They possess the mental and physical abilities to do this within the confines of the rules. Concentrate on your game and not the rulebook and you will be a better player/coach.

[Longpole5435]

To laxfan:
Yes, I have been called for my share of U.R. because I am 6'1" 190 and when i hit someone, it rarely goes well for them. But should I not be able to hit because I am bigger? And you say to use less force, but that is a ridiculous notion in a competitive game when you have to make sure that you make the play or else it hurts your team. What if I don't hit the guy hard enough and he holds on to the ball, shoots and scores?

And you say that Referees make judgement calls all the time, as they do, but with penalties such as slashing, the guidelines are clearer, (ex: keep it on the hands/stick) and refs will often inform the players beforehand what they will call and not call, either through the captains or the coach. "Unnecessary" is simply too vaugue a word to leave up to the judgement of the official.


ok, say you took UR out of the game and you were playing. the other team sends a 250 pound defenseman on you and as you up for a shot or something he hits you with a 10 yard running start, or just when you get passed to, he'll deck you every time. No call because of no UR.

Thats exactly my point...just because someone get popped doesn't make it unnecessary. A good hit is a good hit.


A & B both chasing a loose ball. A gets close and stops, B just flat runs over him from behind without slowing down at all. I could have had a loose ball push, but that just wasn't enough in this situation. I could have had an illegal body check from behind, might could have called a cross check, but the bottom line was the defender intentionally, blatantly and UNNECESSARILY made an illegal play that also could have been harmful. In this case, it just made more sense to me to call U.R.

Theres already a call that exists, call an illegal bodycheck, it was from behind. No need to point out that it was unnecesary. Giving him a penalty indicates that to him clearly enough.


The bottomline is this: Lacrosse is not a finesse game where contact is frowned upon, and U.R. attempts to eliminate size as a factor by eliminating hitting, which is absurd.



EDIT in Response to gfink

Hitting is PART of lax. Hitting is not lax alone. It has a purpose. The purpose being to seperate a person form the ball or the chance of getting the ball. Not seperating them from their skin. Nor is its sole purpose to intimidate players. The equipment is not designed to protect players from high speed hits. It is not even close the protection factor that is afforded by football players' equipment. Even good hits have the potential of sometimes causing injury. Almost all of the unnecesary hits carry this potential.Your best hitters in the game do not need 10 yard runs to deliver punishing hits. They don't need to punish shooters after a goal is scored. They possess the mental and physical abilities to do this within the confines of the rules. Concentrate on your game and not the rulebook and you will be a better player/coach.

First of all, I never said hitting is all of lacrosse. Actually, I am pretty sure I mention it ALONG with other basics. You also take to task the equipment, yet in 8 Years of lacrosse that I have played, I have NEVER seens anything worse than a concussion because of a big hit. Countless kids have been hurt because of people who hack with their sticks, and indeed I have seen arms and hands broken because of this. My favorite example of the suprising ability of equipment to protect lacrosse players from body blows concerns helmets. My friend and I were in practice, fooling around and jokingly punched me in the helmet. He threw the punch hard, but i was not the least bit bothered. He however, broke his hand and pinkie and required surgery. Lacrosse equipment is much better than it may appear. My only major injuries I have ever suffered were in FOOTBALL, not lacrosse, despite your arguement that football euipment is better. For each sport, its own requirements. Injuries are part of a high speed contact game like lacrosse, whether or not you like it. Deeming an otherwise clean hit unnecessary because it carries a greater potential of injury is simply illogical.

And gfink, don't tell me to concentrate on my game. I am not just another whiny player who has been penalized too many times. I had 5 penalties in 27 games last season (as a defenseman in high school, no less). I work very hard to be a good lacrosse player ( which I am) and I don't need a referee to tell me to ignore the rules of the sport when they very much impact me. Therefore, its only fair I should be able to voice my concerns. Anf or all that post, I would liek to know if you have ever actually played lacrosse at the high school level or above, because it will greatly impact your view on certain calls made by referees. To know the game, you have to play it, at least in my opinion. it is easy to say "oh do this, don't do that," but until you experience it as a player, you will not fully understand the significane of your words.

[shrekjr]

1. No one expects a guy to just dead stop in front of you while going for a loose ball. Obviously both players should be focused on the ball and if A stops and B plows him into the earth it may just be because B never expected (nor should he have) A to just dead stop in front of him.
B SHOULD expect A to stop in front of him when playing a ball that I said was loose, but I didn't say moving. The ball was stopped on the ground near the corner of the field. Both players ran to the ball. A stopped to play the ball. He couldn't have scooped and run through it or he would have been out of bounds. B made no attempt to stop at all.

[Longpole5435]

B SHOULD expect A to stop in front of him when playing a ball that I said was loose, but I didn't say moving. The ball was stopped on the ground near the corner of the field. Both players ran to the ball. A stopped to play the ball. He couldn't have scooped and run through it or he would have been out of bounds. B made no attempt to stop at all.

Illegal body check.
End of story.
NOT U.R.
Things like that happen, I've been on both ends of that one before.

[LaxRef]

1. No one expects a guy to just dead stop in front of you while going for a loose ball. Obviously both players should be focused on the ball and if A stops and B plows him into the earth it may just be because B never expected (nor should he have) A to just dead stop in front of him.

You have to be in control of your own body. The NCAA in particular has made it clear that no body checks are "unavoidable"; the players need to be in control at all times.

[Longpole5435]

You have to be in control of your own body. The NCAA in particular has made it clear that no body checks are "unavoidable"; the players need to be in control at all times.

Agreed, but you lose sight of the issue.
This ISN'T U.R., its an Illegal Body Check.

[shrekjr]

Therefore, its only fair I should be able to voice my concerns. Anf or all that post, I would liek to know if you have ever actually played lacrosse at the high school level or above, because it will greatly impact your view on certain calls made by referees.
I think we have all already agreed that we give you credit for your well spoken thoughts. But just like you ask if he has ever played, I would like to ask if you have ever officiated, and if so, for how long? To be a successful official takes a combination of a lot of different things, but game management and communication are certainly two of the biggest. It isn't always about what you call, but also how and when you call it. It is also about leaving the rule book in the car and calling the game fair and equitable as it relates to the skill level of both teams. This is my 30th year of officiating multiple sports and I can assure you that sometimes, things are better off when NOT done quite by the book. The rule book should be a guideline, not set in concrete and never to be strayed from.

[LaxRef]

1.) Inconsistency in calling: Ref's judgement of what actualy constitutes a "unnecessary action" is way too varied. Therefore, players will make hits that one ref would call while others would not

I can't believe it's any more varied than the calling of slashing. As others have pointed out, the way it is called depends on many factors, one of the biggest of which is the level of play.

BTW, part of your job as a player is to figure out how the officials are calling the game and adjust accordingly. If you want to risk U.R. penalties by hitting harder than you have to, I guess you have the right. Just don't complain when it happens.

Let's just say that the powers the be believe that this rule has its place. To allow people to hit defenseless players as hard as possible for no apparent reason is ludicrous and it invites injuries and liability lawsuits, particularly when everyone knows a much lighter hit will put the guy on the ground and dislodge the ball.

And no one is saying that you have to hit just hard enough to knock the guy down and that if you hit just a little harder than that you'll get flagged. There's clearly some leeway: you can most likely get away with hitting him with 125% or even more of the necessary force. But when the guy is waiting for a hospital pass and you tee him up from 10 yards away and hit him two or three times as hard as you need to to put him down, I'm throwing the flag, you're going to sit, and that's not going to change in the near future.

2.)This rule is often use to penalize a bigger player for hitting a smaller player, and that is my main issue with it. Too many ref's seemingly feel sorry for the little guy who just got bulldozed by a big defenseman and throws the flag. It is also used if a team is way up on another team and a good hit is made. Once again, the ref sympathises wit hthe losing team and calls it.

If you are smart enough to figure out that this call is often made when you hit a 150-lb guy with the same force you'd use to knock over a 300-lb guy, then you should be smart enough to his the 150-lb guy with less force and still knock him over.


3.)Some argue this rule allows players to learn the basics before htting comes into play. Last I checked, hitting IS a basic element of lacrosse, used in defense and GB's all the time. Also, if a player needs to learn a lesson about what to do and not to do, then they will learn pretty quickly from getting laid out that that course of action should not be taken.

Yes, hitting is part of lacrosse, but deliberately attempting to hit people with extra force is nothing but an attempt to injure people. If you want to hit people as hard as you can, switch to boxing or ultimate fighting.

And if you think that hitting people as hard as possible should be allowed or even emphasized as a "basic" of lacrosse at the youth levels, you have no idea what you're talking about. It is not unusual to have kids who weigh 60 lbs and kids who weigh 150 lbs in the same youth age group. Letting kids with such a weight differential blast away will get kids hurt, keep kids from wanting to play, keep parents from letting kids play, expose everyone involved in running the league to liabilty lawsuits, and de-emphasize the development of the real basics of lacrosse: ground balls, catching, passing, shooting, cutting, stick checking, and position defense.

I think the whole idea of repealing this rule is crazy, but you can suggest it to the rules committees and see what happens if you want to. I wouldn't hold my breath!

[Longpole5435]

Actually, I have reffed a few youth games, nothing official, I think they were only scrimmages but I understand the challenge of your job. All officials who show your sensibility have my respect.

I wholeheartedly agree that sometimes going by the book is the wrong way to go, especially in the cases that are complete mismatches. However, calling penalties because of it is not the way to go about it. As long as a ref calls it both ways with consistency, they have done their job.

But in my opinion, a hit is a hit, and its either clean or dirty. Dirty would be hands to the face, a buttend, crosscheck etc. Just because the hit is a hard one should not make it illegal. I am not advocating dirty hits here. I am simply saying that no hit should be "too hard."

[Longpole5435]

BTW, part of your job as a player is to figure out how the officials are calling the game and adjust accordingly. If you want to risk U.R. penalties by hitting harder than you have to, I guess you have the right. Just don't complain when it happens.

Actually, the rulebook is supposed to tell us how the game will be called, seeing as how its where the rules come from. And you raise the exact issue of inconsistency. you say hit harder than you have to, but that puts an incredible amount of variance in. And here is where the player factor comes in. A ref better understands how hard it is to gauge the power required to deliver an effective blow. it is not as if they play against thier openent all the time, this is most likely the first time they will ever have hit their opponent. And the player can't afford to screw up can they?

Let's just say that the powers the be believe that this rule has its place. To allow people to hit defenseless players as hard as possible for no apparent reason is ludicrous and it invites injuries and liability lawsuits, particularly when everyone knows a much lighter hit will put the guy on the ground and dislodge the ball.

Liability waiver? Yup, those are required by virtually all teams. Takes care of the lawsuit problem. And injuries are part of the game, they happen in every sport. guess what sport has the most injuries? Soccer, a supposedly non-contact sport. Leads you to the conclusion that contact DOES NOT NECESSARILY mean injuries.



If you are smart enough to figure out that this call is often made when you hit a 150-lb guy with the same force you'd use to knock over a 300-lb guy, then you should be smart enough to his the 150-lb guy with less force and still knock him over



Yes, hitting is part of lacrosse, but deliberately attempting to hit people with extra force is nothing but an attempt to injure people. If you want to hit people as hard as you can, switch to boxing or ultimate fighting.

or football or hockey which are contact sports that don't provide for hitting power limits. And i already adressed the issue of basic skills. Hitting IS a basic skill, GB's and playing good defense all require it.

[laxfan25]

To laxfan:
Yes, I have been called for my share of U.R. because I am 6'1" 190 and when i hit someone, it rarely goes well for them. But should I not be able to hit because I am bigger? And you say to use less force, but that is a ridiculous notion in a competitive game when you have to make sure that you make the play or else it hurts your team. What if I don't hit the guy hard enough and he holds on to the ball, shoots and scores?
No one says that you can't hit, it is a part of the game. just do it in a non-reckless fashion. If you've been called more than once for U.R. by different officials I would say it is you that has the problem, not the refs.
If you don't hit him hard enough and he scores, you've given up a goal. But by the same token, what if you hit him too hard and draw the U.R., putting your team a man-down?


And you say that Referees make judgement calls all the time, as they do, but with penalties such as slashing, the guidelines are clearer, (ex: keep it on the hands/stick) and refs will often inform the players beforehand what they will call and not call, either through the captains or the coach. "Unnecessary" is simply too vaugue a word to leave up to the judgement of the official.
And as I pointed out, even with the clear guidelines on slashing (that the check be applied to the hands or stick) I think you would agree that most, if not all officials do not call slashes on every stick check that contacts the arms, side or back, although by rule we are supposed to do so. The term "Unnecessary roughness" carries with it the recognition that lacrosse IS inherently a rough sport - but also the realization that sometimes play goes over the bounds of what is necessary, and is penalized accordingly.


Thats exactly my point...just because someone get popped doesn't make it unnecessary. A good hit is a good hit. Agreed, and see my point above. I like a good, clean hit as much as the next guy, but not when it is excessive in nature (in MY judgement).



Theres already a call that exists, call an illegal bodycheck, it was from behind. No need to point out that it was unnecesary. Giving him a penalty indicates that to him clearly enough.
And by calling Uncessary Roughness on a bodycheck that was "legal" in its placement, we are TRYING to indicate clearly to you that it was too much. And I will usually follow up my penalty call with a little discreet counseling as to how to avoid the call in the future.


The bottomline is this: Lacrosse is not a finesse game where contact is frowned upon, and U.R. attempts to eliminate size as a factor by eliminating hitting, which is absurd.
The U.R. rule is not attempting to eliminate size as a factor, but to take it into account in computing the physics that occurs during a collision - Mass x acceleration = force. The amount of that force, and what it is applied to, is what matters.


Injuries are part of a high speed contact game like lacrosse, whether or not you like it. Deeming an otherwise clean hit unnecessary because it carries a greater potential of injury is simply illogical. Injuries, while uncommon in my games, do sometimes occur. And as I tried to state in my first post, the FIRST and HIGHEST responsibility of an official is PLAYER SAFETY. I will not let you use the excuse that its "just part of the game" to attempt to maim or injure another player. Mind you, I'm no pantywaist here - I've let hits go where some members on the sidelines were calling for a flag, and I've also whistled my share of U.R.'s. I can tell you flat out - if they were called, they were very well-deserved. Just watch the game films.



I don't need a referee to tell me to ignore the rules of the sport when they very much impact me.
GFink wasn't telling you to ignore the rules, but to play within them, including the ones pertaining to unnecessary roughness. If you're getting called for U.R. on more than one occasion, take a look in the mirror.


I would liek to know if you have ever actually played lacrosse at the high school level or above, because it will greatly impact your view on certain calls made by referees. To know the game, you have to play it, at least in my opinion. it is easy to say "oh do this, don't do that," but until you experience it as a player, you will not fully understand the significane of your words.
Lastly, I've been involved with lacrosse for 36 years. I played 3 years in high school, 4 years of D1 lacrosse and 14 years organizing and running a post-collegiate club team. I have officiated for over 20 years; D1/D3 down to middle school. I've seen and played a game or two, and feel that experience allows me to "judge" what is necessary and unncessary in regard to two players colliding on the field of battle. Is that enough experience for you?
As someone else asked - have you ever attempted to referee a game? I would highly recommend it to you. Every former player that I recruit to try reffing comes away with an entirely different attitude of what it takes to do it. Fortunately I think you have the intelligence and demeanor to actually be a good ref - and there is a big need for officials. Someone like yourself could help your understanding of the game and put some money in your pocket by deciding to referee youth level or middle school games, and I strongly encourage you to consider doing so - I think you might like it!
(BTW - thanks for posting! While we have free-ranging and frank discussions, and don't always agree - without submissions such as yours it gets pretty boring - doing all these reverse quizzes :bye: )

[Longpole5435]

As I said, I have reffed, while only briefly, I enjoyed it. And you're right, it does give you a new perspective. Plus its quite the workout, running up and down, reminds me why I switched to defense from middie.

how would I go about becoming a referee, i have never been able to get a sure answer and I figure you guys would probably know :-D.

[laxfan25]

As I said, I have reffed, while only briefly, I enjoyed it. And you're right, it does give you a new perspective. Plus its quite the workout, running up and down, reminds me why I switched to defense from middie.

how would I go about becoming a referee, i have never been able to get a sure answer and I figure you guys would probably know :-D.

I had to smile when I noticed your location - that is where I played my HS and College ball. I'm now in the midwest and I'm not sure who you should contact - perhaps one of our CT brethren can point you in the right direction. At the very least you can e-mail Steve Hinchey who writes the Stripes column in Lacrosse magazine - his e-mail is in his byline and he lives in CT. (You ARE a member of US Lacrosse in order to support this great sport, aren't you? :thumbsup: ) Again, I hope you do it! You really seem like a thoughtful and intelligent guy, who just has to be disavowed of the notion that ANY legal hit is OK, no matter how hard it is delivered. That thought is wrong, and will continue to get you in trouble if you play that way.
As another example of how we try to maintain a certain level of safety - are you aware of all the reasons for calling a slash? Did you know this is in there?
Slashing includes the following actions:
a. Swinging a crosse at an opponent’s crosse or body with deliberate
viciousness or reckless abandon, regardless of whether the opponent’s
crosse or body is struck.
So if we can give someone a minute when their stick check doesn't even hit anything - why can't we penalize them for an unnecessarily violent bodycheck that DOES make contact?
I hope to see you on the field sometime - either in uniform or in stripes. Either way I'll help you to improve...

[Longpole5435]

Yup, I'm a member of US lacrosse.
And I do adjust my play to this rule, and as I said, I only had 5 penalties in 27 games, only one of which was a U.R. I just think that this rule should change, but its only an opinion.
Yeah, I know about the slash rule and am quite thankful for it, it keeps me in one piece with those riding attackmen swinging their sticks like lumberjacks.

[laxfan25]

Based on you record it doesn't seem like you have too much to worry about. You're probably just focusing on that one hit where you lined him up and laid him out just perfectly, only to see the yellow hankie fly. Ah well, put it out of your mind and continue to play hard, play fair and play safe. Keep us here in the Forum posted on your progress toward becoming a ref. BTW, this is a great place to hone your edge as an official! Keep on coming back, and good luck to you this season.

[Longpole5435]

Yweah thats basically the thought, plus watching my teamates get called.

And I play HS lax, so i need to know how you get schedyuled for games, is it random or do you get to sign up, because mine would have to fit around my schedule

[LaxRef]

Actually, the rulebook is supposed to tell us how the game will be called, seeing as how its where the rules come from. And you raise the exact issue of inconsistency. you say hit harder than you have to, but that puts an incredible amount of variance in. And here is where the player factor comes in. A ref better understands how hard it is to gauge the power required to deliver an effective blow. it is not as if they play against thier openent all the time, this is most likely the first time they will ever have hit their opponent. And the player can't afford to screw up can they?

So, if the rulebook tells us how to call the game, theny you'll be happy if we throw TPOAD out the window and start calling everything that meets the definition of a push, slash, or hold? You'll spend a lot more time in the box!

Liability waiver? Yup, those are required by virtually all teams. Takes care of the lawsuit problem. And injuries are part of the game, they happen in every sport. guess what sport has the most injuries? Soccer, a supposedly non-contact sport. Leads you to the conclusion that contact DOES NOT NECESSARILY mean injuries.

Waivers aren't worth much. You can't sign away your right to sue. Soccer also has more injuries because more people play it than lacrosse. And I never said contact meant more injuries.

or football or hockey which are contact sports that don't provide for hitting power limits. And i already adressed the issue of basic skills. Hitting IS a basic skill, GB's and playing good defense all require it.

So, you think hitting is more fundamental than the other items I listed. I don't agree.

The bottom line is, you think it should be legal to hit someone much harder than you need to. Why? It serves no purpose, other than increasing the risk of injury. I can't think of a single good argument for this, and you certainly haven't articulated one.

[MElaxRef]

I'm not certain how you'd get started officiating in CT, but probably the same as in Maine. Find a youth league near where you live and volunteer.

Any good youth program will sponsor a USL training course or know where to find one. In Maine, the youth programs really need officials and pay about $40 a game.

You'll need to pay a modest training fee ($25-30), attend a clinic or two, pass a test and bump your USL membership to include officiating (covers the cost of liability insurance, in case you miss a UR call) and you'll be in business.

Good luck!

[laxfan25]

Yweah thats basically the thought, plus watching my teamates get called.

And I play HS lax, so i need to know how you get schedyuled for games, is it random or do you get to sign up, because mine would have to fit around my schedule
Middle school leagues, which is where you would get started, typically have an assignor who you will give you availability schedule to, and they will then give you games that fit your schedule when you are free. Good luck!