Equipment check quiz

[LaxRef]

A1 scores a goal, and immediately Coach B calls for an equipment inspection. It turns out that A1 has a ball painted into the mesh of his crosse but no other violations. Ruling?

[carolinafreak]

whether or not you believe that the painted ball affected the play determines if the goal counted. your call. a painted ball is illegal, mesh can be two colors and if it is, it must be half and half.

[goalieskcickay]

whether or not you believe that the painted ball affected the play determines if the goal counted. your call. a painted ball is illegal, mesh can be two colors and if it is, it must be half and half.

No, mesh must all be of one color, unless it is trad...

[pattonlax24]

does not matter, can be all dif. colors i think , but i duno i aint a ref and i aint a pansy who decorates the mesh...sheesh

[laxb0rder]

mesh can only be one color no goal

[jrmelax16]

does not matter, can be all dif. colors i think , but i duno i aint a ref and i aint a pansy who decorates the mesh...sheesh

no it can only have one color per side of the mesh. so i would rule no goal, because it doesnt matter how the stick was illegal, all that matters is the stick is illegal.

[laxfan25]

A.R. 13. The mesh weaving of a crosse must be of one color. Any attempt to mislead an opponent, such as painting a ball, etc., into the weaving is illegal. RULING:
Unsportsmanlike conduct, three-minute non-releasable penalty.

[Woodenstick]

A.R. 13. The mesh weaving of a crosse must be of one color. Any attempt to mislead an opponent, such as painting a ball, etc., into the weaving is illegal. RULING:
Unsportsmanlike conduct, three-minute non-releasable penalty.


AND no goal of course.

[LaxRef]

AND no goal of course.

That's my point. According to the rules, we do not have grounds for disallowing the goal, because we do not have an illegal crosse, we have a USC. In fact, it isn't even clear whether the coach is charged with his "free" equipment check, since there were technically no equipment violations found; we just happened to find a USC penalty while inspecting him.

In general, I'm all for throwing the book at equipment cheats. However, in this case, I can't see how having the ball and also having a ball painted in the crosse at the same time could confuse the goalie. In fact, I'd have a stronger urge to wave off the goal--although I couldn't--if A2 had the ball painted in his crosse when A1 scored, because in that case GK B1 might have been focused on the guy without the ball.

So in this case, the goal is good and A1 sits 3:00 NR for the USC. Weird, but that's how the rules read.

[eme]

Laxref, the "no painting of a ball in the mesh/weaving of the head" is a rule in the rulebook...but where they got it I have no idea. Wooden stick days?

I have never seen this nor have I ever heard ofthis being done. Why would a white ball-like mark show up anyway on the white meshes out there?

[Shorelax]

About 20 years ago - I was a HS kid helping as an assitant coach at the rec level. There was an opposing team who pulled this trick. The coach painted all of the players mesh orange, with white circles in the middle. At a critical restart he would have all of the players huddle together, count to three and everyone would come out cradling. The goalie was pretty confused and a goal was usually scored.

[LaxRef]

About 20 years ago - I was a HS kid helping as an assitant coach at the rec level. There was an opposing team who pulled this trick. The coach painted all of the players mesh orange, with white circles in the middle. At a critical restart he would have all of the players huddle together, count to three and everyone would come out cradling. The goalie was pretty confused and a goal was usually scored.

That wouldn't work so well anymore since you can't have a restart with anyone within 5 yards of the player in possession.

[LaxRef]

Laxref, the "no painting of a ball in the mesh/weaving of the head" is a rule in the rulebook...but where they got it I have no idea. Wooden stick days?

I have never seen this nor have I ever heard ofthis being done. Why would a white ball-like mark show up anyway on the white meshes out there?

Maybe no one does it because they know there's a rule against it?

Yeah, I don't think it would work out too well with modern sticks. Maybe if you sewed a white circle into the mesh, but painting it wouldn't be very deceptive.

[WHEELAX2]

That wouldn't work so well anymore since you can't have a restart with anyone within 5 yards of the player in possession.


yeah.. they changed the rule after the Gait's hidden ball trick eh?

[LaxRef]

yeah.. they changed the rule after the Gait's hidden ball trick eh?

I'm surprised it took so long for someone to try that trick, since I've seen vintage football footage (College or NFL, I'm not sure), where the players huddled with the guy who received the kickoff and then ran off in all directions. Of course, with the speed of today's players, I don't think that trick would work so well anymore in football.

[Woodenstick]

.R. 13. The mesh weaving of a crosse must be of one color. Any attempt to mislead an opponent, such as painting a ball, etc., into the weaving is illegal. RULING:
Unsportsmanlike conduct, three-minute non-releasable penalty.

I know goals are only removed for illegal equipment/crosse, and that the AR says "unsportsmanlike conduct," which suggests that the goal is not removed.

BUT I believe that the AR is in the rulebook under the heading of illegal crosse/equipment, and not unsportsmanlike conduct.

AND the AR mandates a 3 minute penalty, which it would be required for illegal crosse/equipment; if this was USC the ref should have the discretion to give 1-3 minutes.

AND this really is an illegal crosse.

So I think that the AR mispeaks when it refers to USC, and this really is an illegal crosse penalty. Therefore the goal should not count.