Ball stops on sidewalls

[WAKEFIELDLAX6]

I heard some prso put ball stops all the way up their sidewalls? IS THIS LEGAL???? and what the heck does it do?

[MDlaxin69]

i dunno, maybe they were trying to create the effect of those heads with elastomer sidewalls. which doesnt do anything by the way

[nofear45465]

it makes the head more pinched and ball stops can be sorta sticky henceforth holding the ball in. not sure if its legal. doubt it.

[CougarLax07]

in summer league i used a goalie ball stop on a normal head and i think it helps keep the ball in a little better but not much and i think it is illegal in high school play

[RockStar]

I don't see what would make it illegal as long as the stick can otherwise pass the stick test.

[CoachRob]

Nothing in the rules addresses the length of the sidewall, just the thickeness IIRC.

[Rileylax]

can only have one ball stop. having them all the way up the side walls would mean using multiple stops.

[LaxRef]

can only have one ball stop. having them all the way up the side walls would mean using multiple stops.

That's the NFHS rule. There is no NCAA rule disallowing multiple ball stops, although many people believe there is.

[laxfan25]

That's the NFHS rule. There is no NCAA rule disallowing multiple ball stops, although many people believe there is.

Isn't the intent of the NFHS rule to prvent people from stacking ball stops on top of each other? While weird, if the stick passes the ball release check I don't think we really have a violation.

[pomplax]

one point of the multiple stops could be to conceal the ball in the pocket, much like that mikey powell stick with the ball shield thingys.

[Lax101]

Read my www.laxnation.com review of it. I go into depth on discussing the advantages of it.

[jnico129]

its suposed to do what the g-force does it give it more pinch and ball controle i guess.
it seems like ball stops would come off real easy though.

[laxplaya98]

does a goalie require a ball stop in high school

[LaxRef]

does a goalie require a ball stop in high school

All sticks in HS and college must have a ball stop.

[Rileylax]

laxfan25, we do have a violation if it's a hs game. A) it's in the rules, b) it gives the player an advantage. I doubt he is doing it for aesthetic reasons.

[ColtsLax]

Read my www.laxnation.com review of it. I go into depth on discussing the advantages of it.
a review of what?

[MElaxRef]

Both NCAA and NFHS disallow any alteration of the crosse that creates an advantage. If multiple stops create an advantage, such as preventing dislodgement of the ball, then they are illegal. If stops on the sidewall prevent the ball from resting loosely on the stop at the throat, then the crosse is illegal.

[RockStar]

......having them all the way up the side walls would mean using multiple stops.
Or one larger stop.

You're not tied to the crap that Brine/Warrior/STX/etc give you.....use your imagination. Foam rubber sheets are available by the yard in varying thickesses, homegrown ballstop fabrication is not rocket science, and there are many types of glue that could secure the stop to a plastic stick.

The rules don't provide any maximum allowable dimensions, so you could custom cut a stop that goes partway up the sidewalls. The allowable ballstop thickness and dimensions are only really governed by a need to pass the roll-out test.

............If multiple stops create an advantage, such as preventing dislodgement of the ball, then they are illegal..........

This is yet another one of those cases where the law is an ***.

Rules require you to have a ball stop, and then don't tell you exactly what a ballstop is, allowable materials, allowable thickness, allowable height up the sidewalls,........., etc. The only thing we know is that you can't use multi-piece stops under one ruleset.

So, one set of rules says you can't, one rule set doesn't explicity say you can't.

Under the second ruleset, you have an illegal stick if any ball stop (single or multi-piece) causes failure on the roll-out test.

If the ballstop doesn't cause the throat to trap, you just have a ball stop made up of more than one piece on an otherwise legal stick......honestly, what advantage does this give? and who cares?

My thoughts are that there are plenty of rules that do matter. I sure wouldn't worry about calling a nit-picking foul on something that isn't even explicitly illegal.

[RockStar]

LaxRef and other senior officials,

I have a theory that this rule requiring a ball stop is a holdover from the days of Indian woodsticks. I own three of these, none with stops (not explicitly required for box, I only own box woodies). Anyway, they trap at the throat where the gut wall and woodwall come together. The ball can be shaken loose fairly easily, but it does trap and would fail a field roll-out test. I wonder if the (pointless) rule requiring a ballstop on modern sticks is just a leftover from days gone by.

So, it might take a very experienced ref to remember what was done, but lets try it:

A player is using an Indian woodstick. Apparently by the rules, he needs a ballstop. what constitutes an acceptable ballstop?

I've got a few ideas.

[LaxRef]

LaxRef and other senior officials,

I have a theory that this rule requiring a ball stop is a holdover from the days of Indian woodsticks. I own three of these, none with stops (not explicitly required for box, I only own box woodies). Anyway, they trap at the throat where the gut wall and woodwall come together. The ball can be shaken loose fairly easily, but it does trap and would fail a field roll-out test. I wonder if the (pointless) rule requiring a ballstop on modern sticks is just a leftover from days gone by.

No doubt.

I have a theory that people are always hip to make new rules, but it rarely occurs to them to repeal obsolete or unenforced rules (although I've had a little success with a few suggestions on this front).This is why we still have laws on the books that say things like "Single women can't eat mutton under the large oak in the Towne Square on Thursdays in November during daylight hours unless accompanied by a male uncle."

I'll try to address the ball stop issue when we have the next round of rules suggestions.

[laxfan25]

Both NCAA and NFHS disallow any alteration of the crosse that creates an advantage. If multiple stops create an advantage, such as preventing dislodgement of the ball, then they are illegal. If stops on the sidewall prevent the ball from resting loosely on the stop at the throat, then the crosse is illegal.
But what type of advantage are they referring to? I agree if the sidewall foam prevented the ball from coming out in the stick check, you have a violation, otherwise, why would I consider it any different than someone weaving shoelaces on their mesh to form a better throwing pocket? It certainly gives them an advantage, but not a technically illegal one. As soneone else mentioned, what if you just buy stock foam and make a stop that is 2 inches by 12 inches. The rules don't give dimensions for the stop, so why penalize creativity, as long is it doesn't cause the stick to fail the designated check protocol?

[SU22]

can only have one ball stop. having them all the way up the side walls would mean using multiple stops.

YOU CAN USE GOLIE STOPS AND THERE LONGER