legal faceoff move?

[steve-okneav-o]

i saw this kid do a weird face off move and i want to no if its legal:


he and another player were both tring to do a clamp.and got beat but he put his foot betwwen the kids arms(you no how ur arms and the stick make a box )so when the kid whent to scoop it he's arm hit the kids leg and he lost the ball

shouldn't that be a hold or some kind of techincal

[LaxRef]

i saw this kid do a weird face off move and i want to no if its legal:


he and another player were both tring to do a clamp.and got beat but he put his foot betwwen the kids arms(you no how ur arms and the stick make a box )so when the kid whent to scoop it he's arm hit the kids leg and he lost the ball

shouldn't that be a hold or some kind of techincal

It's sure not a hold; I don't know why it would be illegal, but it's risky.

[RockStar]

.......I don't know why it would be illegal, but it's risky.

It certainly is risky.....if someone stepped over my stick with one leg so they're straddling it, they're practically begging me to find out whether they're wearing a cup or not (the hard way)

Anyway, there's the solution - if someone is using this move to beat you at faceoffs, you can probably solve that quickly with your STX home vasectomy kit :OMG:

[steve-okneav-o]

It's sure not a hold; I don't know why it would be illegal, but it's risky.

because your preventing someone to scoop the ball with his leg

and rockstar he only beat me with it onece and then eevry time i just took my bottom hand off the stick

[laxfan25]

because your preventing him to scoop the ball with your leg
I agree with LaxRef - unless he steps on the stick or arm, there is not a hold. The tricky part is avoiding stepping on those items, but just putting his foot in that open space in and of itself isn't a violation, IMM.

[Sour]

interference

[Mrmccoolsatool]

interference


no, it would only be interference if the player stepped on the stick or the other players arm.

[laxfan25]

Here is the NCAA rule on interference:

Interference
SECTION 8. A player may not interfere in any manner with the free
movement of an opponent, except when that opponent has possession of the
ball, the ball is in flight and within 5 yards of the players, or both players are within 5 yards of a loose ball.
Note 1: This rule is not intended to prohibit a legal offensive screen.
Note 2: A player may not kick or step on his opponent’s crosse.

I don't see how the play as described violates this rule.

[sammyduelist]

Would it be illegal if this were to happen to me and in attempts to free my stick , I yank it, causing the person to trip?
And how about if I were to....find out if they wore a cup? :runaway:

[Sour]

te be honest i usually call Interference when i'm sure i should call something but not sure what.

That said though if the player who won the clamp then lifted his arms and dumped the other player over....would that be a trip? not sure if NCAA has the specified "deliberate" in the trip rule that's in English and ILF rules....if not would it then be interference?

or even an illegal body check

PS thats me not reading posts again, apologies to sammyduelist for stating his point

[laxfan25]

I believ if you were to trip the player with your stick it could be called tripping. If you lift your stick up and crack him in the 'nads that could be unsportsmanlike conduct.

[Sour]

But personally i'd consider straddling some ones crosse so they cant get the ball out as pretty unsportsmanlike

[LaxRef]

But personally i'd consider straddling some ones crosse so they cant get the ball out as pretty unsportsmanlike

I think a player has a right to stand whereever and however they want as long as they aren't violating a rule. Standing on the crosse: that's a no-no. But if I stand with my foot within the loop created by your body, arms, and crosse, it's not like you can't let go wtih one hand and get your crosse out.

Would you consider it unsportsmanlike if a defender happened to stand in s spot in front of the crease where an offensive player wanted to stand? Of course not! The first player to get there has a right to that position. I don't see why an exception should be made for a foot during a face-off.

[ML_LAX09]

laxref has spoken, i think thats going to be the best explanation on said move.

[TheKOB]

would it be any different if he would put his hand and arm through said loop? That would be a lot easier and still just as hard for the opponent to get out without giving up the advantage (taking his hand out of the stick). Try to get out and you might be called for holding.

[RockStar]

would it be any different if he would put his hand and arm through said loop? ........

I just can't see this working well........I mean to get an arm through the loop, he has to take it off his own stick. This should let you win the draw to yourself and get going.

[TheKOB]

I can't imagine how a kid could get his leg in that "loop". Let me use another example...suppose a kid stuck his hand through the "loop" while someone was trying to cradle.

Basically, it seems like this is one of those things that doesn't mess with the letter of the rules, but is against the spirit. The one player is interfearing with the other.

[RockStar]

Hand in loop?

Is there anything in the rules about checking with a free hand? Seems to me if you're not allowed to ward on offense, you shouldn't be allowed to fist check or palm check on defense

[TheKOB]

I wonder if they all go under the guidelines of playing with the free hand....

Seems to me it should extend to all other limbs as well.

[pooch]

I believ if you were to trip the player with your stick it could be called tripping. If you lift your stick up and crack him in the 'nads that could be unsportsmanlike conduct.


You have the answer no matter how many different possibilities. You have two hands, you can let go or you can risk a technical or more. Let go.

[Sour]

I think a player has a right to stand whereever and however they want as long as they aren't violating a rule. Standing on the crosse: that's a no-no. But if I stand with my foot within the loop created by your body, arms, and crosse, it's not like you can't let go wtih one hand and get your crosse out.

Would you consider it unsportsmanlike if a defender happened to stand in s spot in front of the crease where an offensive player wanted to stand? Of course not! The first player to get there has a right to that position. I don't see why an exception should be made for a foot during a face-off.

As i see the situation is this...A1 wins the draw and has the ball clamped, B1 then straddles A1's crosse to prevent him playing the ball.

Its not comparable to a defender on the crease, mainly die to the fact as everyone seems to have agreed that if A1 does anything apart from release a hand (and probably lose the ball in that act as B1 is in a much stronger position with regards to picking up the ball) it's a foul.

Sounds unsportsmanlike to me....and as theKOB says against the spirit of the game

[LaxRef]

As i see the situation is this...A1 wins the draw and has the ball clamped, B1 then straddles A1's crosse to prevent him playing the ball.

Its not comparable to a defender on the crease, mainly die to the fact as everyone seems to have agreed that if A1 does anything apart from release a hand (and probably lose the ball in that act as B1 is in a much stronger position with regards to picking up the ball) it's a foul.

Sounds unsportsmanlike to me....and as theKOB says against the spirit of the game

Souds like overkill to me: if I step on his crosse, A1 gets possession, but if I don't step on it but just near it I get 1:00 NR?!

What you aren't getting is that people do all kinds of stuff designed to give them an advantage and/or put the opponent in a disadvantageous position that is perfectly legal. Why do you think stepping somewhere that puts my opponent at a disadvantage—and which isn't addressed by the rules—is so awful? I mean, if it works, everyone will do it, and then either there will be a rule made against it or not. And if it doesn't work, who cares?

[TheKOB]

Why do you think stepping somewhere that puts my opponent at a disadvantage—and which isn't addressed by the rules—is so awful? I mean, if it works, everyone will do it, and then either there will be a rule made against it or not. And if it doesn't work, who cares?

Sounds like you could be describing an illegal screen on the goalie or a moving pick.

[LaxRef]

Sounds like you could be describing an illegal screen on the goalie or a moving pick.

Aren't moving picks addressed by the rules? And where do they define "an illegal screen on the goalie" in the rules? If they don't define it, what makes it illegal. (There is the USC for facing the goalie and waving the arms, but I've never heard that called an illegal screen.)

[mmlaxplaya17]

players that take face offs anve to be extremely quick thinking, there are so many moves and counter moves and counter counter moves you have to do. if he clamps u slide .... etc etc mabey thats just one of his moves.

[3rdPersonPlural]

I'm trying to visualize this:

A guy wins the clamp and almost ceretainly has his shoulder directly over the ball, and his left hand is on his nipple.

In the blink of an eye, he's going to rake that ball to his wingman.

As I see it, his opponent has about as much chance of lifting his right leg and squeezing his cleat between the guy's chest and his stick before the rake happens as I have of being Anna Nicole Smith's baby daddy.

What's the proper call for kicking the other guy during a face off? USC?

That's what I visualize.

[laxfan25]

Could also be unnecessary roughness. I love it when we have these heated debates on issues that I haven't seen in 35 years of lacrosse.

[Shorelax]

So what is the consensus guys?? Would you make a call and if so what would it be??

If done cleanly - I say no call.

IMO - the chances of doing it cleanly though are very slim and a high level game almost impossible. It opens the player up to committing multiple fouls.

[LaxRef]

So what is the consensus guys?? Would you make a call and if so what would it be??

If done cleanly - I say no call.

IMO - the chances of doing it cleanly though are very slim and a high level game almost impossible. It opens the player up to committing multiple fouls.

I agree. In principle, if executed perfectly, no call. But a player attempting to do this move will in all likelihood screw it up and commit some foul.

In fact, the only way I can see it working is if A1 clamps the ball and doesn't move it, so B1 has a stationary target for putting his foot down without hitting/kicking/stepping on A1 or his crosse. But if A1 clamps the ball and doesn't move it, it's withholding anyway, so there's no point in B1 risking it in the first place.

[Longpole5435]

I say bonk him in the berries and take your USC with the knowledge that he wont be trying that again. :chuckle:

[LaxRef]

I say bonk him in the berries and take your USC with the knowledge that he wont be trying that again. :chuckle:

If I think you're intentionally smashing a guy's bits and pieces, I'm giving you the heave-ho, so you're right—he won't try that move on you again because you'll be on the bus!

[faceofflax15]

If anyone is trying this move to me, I'm hitting him in the berries and he's going to know, don't do that. But I won't make it look obvious.

[TheKOB]

Aren't moving picks addressed by the rules? And where do they define "an illegal screen on the goalie" in the rules? If they don't define it, what makes it illegal. (There is the USC for facing the goalie and waving the arms, but I've never heard that called an illegal screen.)

I was referring to your point about "stepping somewhere that puts an opponent at a disadvantage isn't against the rules". In an illegal screen (standing in front of the goalie while facing him and mirroring his movements is called a screen, in case you've never played lacrosse, and it's called "illegal" because it's against the rules in that you can't face him and mirror his movements) you're "stepping somewhere that puts an opponent at a disadvantage. You basically proved my point that, yes, it can be against the rules....

[LaxRef]

I was referring to your point about "stepping somewhere that puts an opponent at a disadvantage isn't against the rules". In an illegal screen (standing in front of the goalie while facing him and mirroring his movements is called a screen, in case you've never played lacrosse, and it's called "illegal" because it's against the rules in that you can't face him and mirror his movements) you're "stepping somewhere that puts an opponent at a disadvantage. You basically proved my point that, yes, it can be against the rules....

I'll repeat this, since you didn't respond to it:

Aren't moving picks addressed by the rules? And where do they define "an illegal screen on the goalie" in the rules? If they don't define it, what makes it illegal. (There is the USC for facing the goalie and waving the arms, but I've never heard that called an illegal screen.)

I'll save you the trouble: they don't define it in the rules, so it doesn't exist.

[massref]

i saw this kid do a weird face off move and i want to no if its legal:


he and another player were both tring to do a clamp.and got beat but he put his foot betwwen the kids arms(you no how ur arms and the stick make a box )so when the kid whent to scoop it he's arm hit the kids leg and he lost the ball

shouldn't that be a hold or some kind of techincal

It could be painful....cup check. :jawdrop:

[RockStar]

It could be painful....cup check. :jawdrop:
As stated, if anyone was consistently beating me at F/Os with this move, I might try to find out the hard way!

[EastCoastDeft]

YESSS. that facoff move where he puts the foot inbetween the guys arms is the move i made up and im glad somebody is finally using it!!!!- it is a risk but its %100 worth it

[TheKOB]

I'll repeat this, since you didn't respond to it:



I'll save you the trouble: they don't define it in the rules, so it doesn't exist.

Dude, why do you get off on hounding me? What is your deal?

That's what it's called. Deal with it and realize that The Laxref is not infalliable.

I'd suggest growing up.

[LaxRef]

Dude, why do you get off on hounding me? What is your deal?

That's what it's called. Deal with it and realize that The Laxref is not infalliable.

I'd suggest growing up.

If you cannot find a rule defining an "illegal goalie screen" in the rule book, it doesn't exist. If you don't understand that, you shouldn't be coaching.

I've read the rule book more than once or twice, and there's no illegal goalie screen defined in the rules. If there were, you'd find the reference and post it.

[stinisonfire]

If you cannot find a rule defining an "illegal goalie screen" in the rule book, it doesn't exist. If you don't understand that, you shouldn't be coaching.

Agreed. The picket fence is a middle school / high school play used to shield the goalie. KOB, please come to a discussion with knowledge before you knock someone who has it.

[pboyd]

Let's all recognize that there is always room for different interpretations - I would call a violation for the situation The KOB describes "standing in front of the goalie while facing him and mirroring his movements" as Illegal Procedure or possibly USC. Rule 6-5-2.a-t are "examples" and not all inclusive so I would feel justified making the Illegal Procedure call. Rule 5-9 "or any act considered unsrpotsmanlike by the officials" would also justify the USC call in my opinion. If the same crease attack were facing away from the goalie - no call everytime.

[LaxRef]

Let's all recognize that there is always room for different interpretations - I would call a violation for the situation The KOB describes "standing in front of the goalie while facing him and mirroring his movements" as Illegal Procedure or possibly USC. Rule 6-5-2.a-t are "examples" and not all inclusive so I would feel justified making the Illegal Procedure call. Rule 5-9 "or any act considered unsrpotsmanlike by the officials" would also justify the USC call in my opinion. If the same crease attack were facing away from the goalie - no call everytime.

I did mention that USC call and specifically ask if that's what he was talking about. But I would contend that if something so basic was illegal, they would put it in the rules.

BTW, I never bought the "Illegal procedure rules are examples, so make up whatever you want and call it IP" argument.

[TheKOB]

Agreed. The picket fence is a middle school / high school play used to shield the goalie. KOB, please come to a discussion with knowledge before you knock someone who has it.

I've never heard of a picket fence...it sure isn't mentioned in the rulebook.

LAXREF ATTACK!!!

I call something one thing, someone else calls it something else. Is that a reason to bash me on a forum? No. If a kid from NY calls a 2-3-1 a 1-3-2 (those are lacrosse formations btw) does that mean some "adult" should go after him? It's sad in any case...especially when the attacker is supposed to be a professional.