Calling the game

[LaxRef]

Under what circumstances have you, or would you, call the game? In other words, how and when do you decide that the game is so out of hand that you refuse to continue presiding over it?

And, more important, how do you justify making this call under the current rules (NCAA or NFHS)?

I've never had to do this (except for weather-related issues, and almost once due to darkness), but I think I have a rough idea of where the line is. I'd like to hear how other people handle this.

[JohnB-6]

Ive never had to call a game, it kind of seems like going down with the ship. I doubt my assignor would talk to me much after that.

NFHS Rule 2.6.3 says... An official may suspend the play of the game for any reason deemed necessary for the proper enforcement of the rules or conduct of the game.

Im not sure if this supports calling a game. It says we can suspend the game, but not terminate it. I guess we could suspend a game just like we could for weather, and then make both teams come back later to finish playing when people calm down.

If I was to call a game, my line would be after the second fight.

If you had a fight, and had a 9 on 4 situation for 3 minutes, would you just allow the team with 9 players shoot on the other teams goalie for 3 straight minutes? I would think that the team that only had 4 guys on the field (3 attack and 1 goalie) would come back reeeeal angry, and things would get much worse from there.

[Woodenstick]

I also have never called a game for non-weather/light issues. But I would suspend the game if one or more teams/coaches/spectators are no longer in control and I thought someone might get hurt. I would suspend a lopsided game faster.

[LaxRef]

Ive never had to call a game, it kind of seems like going down with the ship. I doubt my assignor would talk to me much after that.

NFHS Rule 2.6.3 says... An official may suspend the play of the game for any reason deemed necessary for the proper enforcement of the rules or conduct of the game.

The other way to do it is to eject all of the coaches, and then they have to forfeit since they don't have a coach anymore. I would not allow an untrained parent or spectator to take over the team.

Im not sure if this supports calling a game. It says we can suspend the game, but not terminate it. I guess we could suspend a game just like we could for weather, and then make both teams come back later to finish playing when people calm down.

Well, you suspend the game and let the league sort it out from that point. Just be sure to take good notes regarding the game situation in case the game is resumed at a later date.

If I was to call a game, my line would be after the second fight.

It depends. Certainly, if there were two fights, I'd let the coaches know that I was on the verge of calling it. If the second fight was a melee, we'd be done right then.

If you had a fight, and had a 9 on 4 situation for 3 minutes, would you just allow the team with 9 players shoot on the other teams goalie for 3 straight minutes? I would think that the team that only had 4 guys on the field (3 attack and 1 goalie) would come back reeeeal angry, and things would get much worse from there.

I have a hard time envisioning this playing out without team B managing to end the game with repeated USC fouls. But I think I'd let team A take their shots and score their goals until something made me stop, since that's what the rules require.

[DeftGoalie28]

i had one of my games called because of a fight

[BlueJaysLaxFan]

I've described this in another thread for a different reason, but we called an MS game when there were 22 seconds left, the goalie got injured, and the coach blew up big-time at us. The game was not close and instead of having the irate coach prep a replacement goalie for the remaining 22 seconds, it was better to call the game at that point.

[JohnB-6]

i had one of my games called because of a fight

DG28, feel free to use your creative writing skills. What level was it? How many people were involved in the fight? Was there anything else that happened before or after? What did the ref say when he called the game? What did your coaches say? Did you replay the game later?

Ive never seen a game called in all my time playing/coaching/reffing/spectating, so Im kind of curious.

[laxfan25]

I've called two games in my 20+ years.
One, ironically enough, was in Apple Valley, and they were playing Hastings I believe. (This would have been around 1999/2000). In the 4th quarter a scuffle broke out, and before we could do anything, both benches and all players were on the field in a giant scrum. Of course trying to get numbers was out of the question - since everyone was basically the next man in.
So, I just said - "game over" and left.
Had a middle school jamboree this year. First game of a six-game set - one team is riding the edge, and then one of their guys comes up and cross-checks a guy in the back at the midline. Fortunately I was delaying my progress upfield and saw the event. The pushee turns and objects strenuously - pushing and grabbing takes place and a small melee takes place. It was later in a 50-minute timed-game, so my partner just said "game over" and made sure the crosschecker sat out the next game.

[LaxRef]

I've described this in another thread for a different reason, but we called an MS game when there were 22 seconds left, the goalie got injured, and the coach blew up big-time at us. The game was not close and instead of having the irate coach prep a replacement goalie for the remaining 22 seconds, it was better to call the game at that point.

I agree that this is completely reasonable. I'm just wondering how we justify doing this based on the rules.

[Lax Fan26]

In 16 years, I have reffed my share of wild games, at various levels. Anytime I sense that the players are no longer going for the ball but are looking for cheap shots, I call officials' timeout and get the captains in the center of the field, away from the benches. I ask them if they have any interest in continuing the game. I mention that I will get paid the same regardless of how many go into the box. Looking into their eyes, usually one can see whether they are really interested in redeeming the game or whether they only want to murder their opponent. I stress that their teams must go for the ball and that any sort of retaliation will be banged severely. Break the huddle and return to play. This works 95% of the time. The other 5% of the time, I just start fouling out the "problem children" as quick as possible.

Often times, the captains are senseable and wanting to get their teams under control. Too often, it is actually one or more coaches conspiring with a couple of players on the field that are the source of problem. I have even had captains or other players come up to me after a game and apologize for their coaches' behavior.

As far as darkness goes, for HS, I always try to get both teams to agree to a running time format that has a predictable end before it is too dark. Though not legal by the NFHS book, it is better for both teams to have the game end at a predictable point instead of a ref's arbitrary decision that it is too difficult to see the ball (I have noticed that the goalies of the winning team are very willing to inform me that they are having trouble seeing the ball). If teams refuse running time, then I inform them that they must accept my decision to call it.

Most MDIA games are either midday or have lighted fields.

[laxfan25]

You are wise beyond your years, LF26. Well, now that I think about how many years....you are almost as wise as your years!

[tjklax01]

I have called 2 games this season. One game was due to Lightning. The other game was because of a fight with only 4 seconds left in the game. It was a Modified game (7th/8th grade). The game was not close at all and both coaches were glad that we called it at that point. However these 2 teams are not rivals and they are about 90 miles from each other (In opposite areas of our section).

[LaxRef]

The other game was because of a fight with only 4 seconds left in the game.


I had a vaguely similar situation once. Team A led by 2 after scoring an insurance goal with about 3 seconds left in a tight playoff game. On the faceoff, B1 used the opportunity to take a cheap shot at the opposing faceoff man. If that situation ever comes up again, I'll either find something to call as a faceoff violation or warn both players that any cheap shots risk an expulsion foul and a suspension (being that this was a playoff game, if A1 was a senior it might not have deterred him).

[BlueJaysLaxFan]

The rules probably justify calling the game to maintain the conduct of the game (though it was really the coach in this case), which is a judgement call. The alternative in my case was to suit up a new goalie and play the last 22 seconds, and give the coach a conduct foul if he did not cool down when play resumed. This would probably been the case if the game was close or tied.

[scruffy221]

I once saw a game get called in a tourney, two kids fought. Both were ejected then coach A1 starts talking, loudly enough for the Ref to hear, about how horrible of an official he was and how his kid should still be in. Then the Ref confronted him on it and asked him to stop. Then another A team player yells "Hey F you and let's just F-ing play!" The Ref just blew his whistle and called a no contest. Then everybody got REALLY mad that was funny.

[RockStar]

I had a vaguely similar situation once. Team A led by 2 after scoring an insurance goal with about 3 seconds left in a tight playoff game. On the faceoff, B1 used the opportunity to take a cheap shot at the opposing faceoff man.
Classic. Game's a blowout, so each team sends the goons to take the draw. Mayhem ensues!


If that situation ever comes up again, I'll either find something to call as a faceoff violation or warn both players that any cheap shots risk an expulsion foul and a suspension (being that this was a playoff game, if A1 was a senior it might not have deterred him).
That's precisely the way to handle it. As soon as you see the goons coming to draw, just call a fake violation and award possession one way or the other.

Now here's something hypothetical - Is there a rule that a team has to have full strength of 10 guys on the field when there's no one with a time serving penalty?

(Thinking that if you want to call a game, but don't have the rules on your side, just keep ejecting players until there's only 8 runners left).

[LaxRef]

Now here's something hypothetical - Is there a rule that a team has to have full strength of 10 guys on the field when there's no one with a time serving penalty?

(Thinking that if you want to call a game, but don't have the rules on your side, just keep ejecting players until there's only 8 runners left).

Well, aside from the fact that the players would get suspended for the ejections, the rule actually says you have to have 10 guys to start the game. You can play with fewer if you have guys injured or ejected.

[JohnB-6]

We have heard a couple of instances of calling a game, mostly in summer or youth league, but part of the original question from LR remains:

And, more important, how do you justify making this call under the current rules (NCAA or NFHS)?

Im not as versed on NCAA as NFHS, do the rules support this in either book? I cited earlier NFHS Rule 2.6.3... An official may suspend the play of the game for any reason deemed necessary for the proper enforcement of the rules or conduct of the game. Do you interpret this as saying we can stop a game and call it there? (I have an issue with the word 'suspend' as opposed to 'terminate')

[CardinalPuff]

a couple of years ago I was officiating a blowout (16-5) when a huge bench clearing brawl broke out....luckily the the clock was running at this point and my partner and I took our sweet time restoring order and by then the game clock had run out.....

other than that I really can't justify ending or cancelling a game......

[LaxRef]

other than that I really can't justify ending or cancelling a game......

Well, I can't justify it by the rules, but I can justify it based on common sense and safety. But I've never had to do it.

[shrekjr]

Fortunately, I've never had to end a lacrosse game early (a couple of football games, yes). However, my decision would be based upon time left in the game, score of the game, and whether or not I honestly felt I could control the game during the remaining time. I don't care what rules you use to try and justify it, it comes under my personal safety for me and the other players, and common sense rules. In football, that comes under Rule 11 which grants the officials unlimited powers as they see fit. Maybe lacrosse needs a generic catch-all rule just to protect the officials in times of crisis?

[3rdPersonPlural]

First year on the job. Working with a no-nonsense primarily college official and doing a game made up of first year teams mostly stocked with varsity football players having a grand time prior to graduation.

The long and the short of it was, after a skirmish that more resembled a gang fight than lacrosse, he blew his whistle, called everybody together (both teams, down to the last scrub) and explained that we were going to stop calling the game in a manner cognizant of the limited skills and experience on the field, and were thenceforth going to start calling the game by the letter of the law. He added that if one team cleaned up it's act and the other didn't, ........suffice it to say that it's difficult to win when playing 2 or 3 men down for 18 minutes.

Lo and behold, we had a reasonably well behaved pair of teams after that.

[Woodenstick]

We have heard a couple of instances of calling a game, mostly in summer or youth league, but part of the original question from LR remains:

And, more important, how do you justify making this call under the current rules (NCAA or NFHS)?

Im not as versed on NCAA as NFHS, do the rules support this in either book? I cited earlier NFHS Rule 2.6.3... An official may suspend the play of the game for any reason deemed necessary for the proper enforcement of the rules or conduct of the game. Do you interpret this as saying we can stop a game and call it there? (I have an issue with the word 'suspend' as opposed to 'terminate')

I don't think that the use of the term "suspend" means that the game must continue after a short pause, but rather that the referee may pause the game for a time, or may pause/suspend/end it for the day.

So when the ref says he is "calling" (or terminating) the game, he really is only "suspending" the game for that day. The league can later decide to continue the game from the point of suspension, or replay, or treat the game as ended at the point of suspension, or penalize the teams for what caused the suspension, or whatever it wants. Personally, I am happy to leave that decision to the league, my decision is only that we are done for the day.

[LaxRef]

I don't think that the use of the term "suspend" means that the game must continue after a short pause, but rather that the referee may pause the game for a time, or may pause/suspend/end it for the day.


This is what the NCAA rules say, which make it clearer that the rule refers to continuing after a short pause:

By sounding of the whistle, an official may suspend the play of the game for any reason deemed necessary for the proper enforcement of the rules or conduct of the game.

[A-D-I-D-A-S]

If there is an entire team fight which gets very violent and you have to call the game does the team winning no matter what the score is wins or do you give them a draw. Ex: Team A has dominated the the first three quarters 12-4 then in the fourth something magical happens to team B and they come back having the score 12-11 with 2 minutes left. A fight breaks out started by team A, which empties the bench. The game must be called. Does Team A get the win or is it a draw because it clearly looks like team B had a very good chance of a comeback or would you just have a redo game?

[shrekjr]

League decision.

[3rdPersonPlural]

Does Team A get the win or is it a draw because it clearly looks like team B had a very good chance of a comeback or would you just have a redo game?

Shrek's dismissive reply aside, yeah, that would be a decision out of the hands of the officials.

We officials are charged with orchestrating a safe, fair and fun contest (in that order). If the game gets so out of control that the officials can't step on to the field confident that a lacrosse game, not a bar brawl, will ensue, we are expected to have the presence of mind to call the thing off.

This has never happened to me, but I'm sure that the more experienced refs here will have stories.

Nonetheless, I go into every game fully prepared to shut the whole game down if the lacrosse that I'm trained to officiate is replaced by some sort of hooliganism. I'm not a cop or a therapist, so I'm always ready to shut the enterprise down if it ever gets beyond my ability to control.

Day in and day out, our job is calling the fouls that keep the game fair. However, our ulitmate mandate is to keep the game safe. If that mandate seems to be compromised, it is our duty to be the adult on the field and shut the game down.