What the heck is the problem with cross checking in the US?

[jenrick]

Why is is that every "box lacrosse" or indoor lacrosse rules set I read here in the US prohibits checking into the boards, off ball checking, and cross checking. Why are these considered so evil that they must be prohibited? We play hockey in the US, we play football, both of which have plenty of contact.

I can't see how being checked into the boards in hockey is any less dangerous or painful then having it done in a box lacrosse game. Even assuming someone can answer that, why cross checking? How is having someone push on me with their stick (albeit forcefully) any worse then getting lumber jacked in the field game by a long pole? I'd really like to be able to play true box lacrosse in the US, vs the amalgamation of field and box that currently exists.

Anyone from the USLA want to answer why I can't get insurance coverage if crosschecking is allowed for a rec box league?

-Jenrick

[Aetraxx]

Originally Posted by jenrick

Anyone from the USLA want to answer why I can't get insurance coverage if crosschecking is allowed for a rec box league?
-Jenrick

Oddly enough, this question answers your original question...

In the league I run, we cannot have cross checking because we have ages 14-adult. It is a matter of not having that many guys available here. If I allowed cross checking a senior MCLA player could be matched up against a high school freshman with no lax experience. Ugly.
Complicating things for us is the building we are in is an old soccer facility that used to be a barn for show horses (insert hickish Iowa joke here). The boards are actually full walls. Thick oak boards that are like concrete when you hit them. Unlike hockey boards, there is no give.

Cross checking is a liability - plain and simple. Most adult rec hockey leagues in the US forbid it as well.

[OldPtboBoy]

Insurance is easy, it's just really expensive. In Canada minor box systems operate under the umbrella of large governing bodies. In Ontario insurance is purchased for municipal programs (Peterborough Minor Lacrosse) under the umbrella of the OLA. Many cities buying in to one policy. This lowers the cost to the individual player.

In the US where field is more prevalent you would be insured in the same fashion. Your problem lies in the lack of an all encompassing organizing body specifically geared towards Box Lacrosse. Or even a state or regional body. If you were to look I'd suggest contacting the USIL or other established box programs as to inquire towards the possibility of purchasing insurance under their umbrella. It benefits everyone. You will have insurance and their premiums will be lower with more policies within their group.

That being said what Aetraxx posted above may be what falls within the confines of American Insurance Providers. I'm sure that there are some differences between what is offered up here and what is offered where you play. Still I'd look into it. Our kids start full contact at age 5-6.

[jenrick]

Aetraxx: Hmm I can see where the age mismatch would be an issue, but it's not one we've got. We've got enough people down here that run a middle school, high school, and mens league. After evaluation the upper level HS players can play in the mens league if they choose. Some of those HS guys are bigger, stronger, and more skilled then some of our adult players.

I can also see where the type/consistency of the boards could be a problem. However we've got a large hockey presence down here, and if we were willing to pay the money we could use their facilities with normal side boards.

Why do you say cross checking is a liability? When players wear appropriate padding, I don't see where it has any greater chance of causing injury then an other stick check that contacts the player. I'd say it's quiet a bit less likely to cause injury then a full speed open field hit, or I'll concede a good check into the boards. I'd say it's a mindset that if it's not legal in field it shouldn't be legal period. Same thing with off the ball checking.

I'm not trying to be contrary, I just can't see a good reason to remove cross checking from box. I have no issues with cross checking not being allowed in the field game, as that's how the rules are written. Box however specifies that cross checking is allowed, so why can't we do it south of the Canadian boarder?

OldPtboBoy: Every sanctioning body I've checked with in the US is more then happy to insure indoor lacrosse. So long as there is no boarding, no off ball checking, and no cross checking. Basically if we're playing field lacrosse indoors I can have insurance set up in a day. If I want to play actual box lacrosse I'm told to look somewhere else. If I had the money and the knowledge of insurance I'd get with some like minded folks and start my own organization, but I don't on either count. I haven't tried contacting anyone in Cananda, I wonder how that'd go?

-Jenrick

[SyracuseLax4You]

Originally Posted by jenrick

Why do you say cross checking is a liability? When players wear appropriate padding, I don't see where it has any greater chance of causing injury then an other stick check that contacts the player.
-Jenrick

I have to disagree, I think cross checking is a liability. And appropriate padding? Me like all the lax players on my team besides the goalie have nothing protecting our necks if we got caught in the adams apple with a cross check it could kill us. In our rules we are allowed to put are hands together on our shaft and push on peoples bodies, I'm not sure if we are allowed to hit them but we possibly might. This in my opinion is a lot safer and still has the same amount of force of a cross check. Besides if im going to hit a player to try to knock the ball loose im not going to use a cross check im going to hit him with my body and leave my stick out of it, so I not fumbling with my stick to try to scoop the ball if i leave my stick out of it im ready to scoop right after I lay the hit.

[slinky]

Originally Posted by SyracuseLax4You

I have to disagree, I think cross checking is a liability. And appropriate padding? Me like all the lax players on my team besides the goalie have nothing protecting our necks if we got caught in the adams apple with a cross check it could kill us. In our rules we are allowed to put are hands together on our shaft and push on peoples bodies, I'm not sure if we are allowed to hit them but we possibly might. This in my opinion is a lot safer and still has the same amount of force of a cross check. Besides if im going to hit a player to try to knock the ball loose im not going to use a cross check im going to hit him with my body and leave my stick out of it, so I not fumbling with my stick to try to scoop the ball if i leave my stick out of it im ready to scoop right after I lay the hit.

If you get hit in the adams apple you aren't protecting yourself at all. The only way for that to happen in front to front and its pretty silly to crosscheck in the neck from that angle because the opponent would just turn and roll you over. Boxla needs crosschecking for containment, the floor is too small for the stick work of field. If you're crosschecking properly your hands are in position to scoop the minute you lay the hit. If you have both hands over the shaft you're going to break your wrists.

[SyracuseLax4You]

Originally Posted by slinky

If you get hit in the adams apple you aren't protecting yourself at all. The only way for that to happen in front to front and its pretty silly to crosscheck in the neck from that angle because the opponent would just turn and roll you over. Boxla needs crosschecking for containment, the floor is too small for the stick work of field. If you're crosschecking properly your hands are in position to scoop the minute you lay the hit. If you have both hands over the shaft you're going to break your wrists.

I see what you mean but in lax stuff happens, not everyone is smart enough to know to roll over the person's cross check. But I also agree that box needs some kind of check but I don't think cross checking is the answer. It's just my opnion.

[jenrick]

SyracuseLax4You: You're right a cross check to the adams apple can be extremely dangerous, and doing so intentionally it's also illegal. So I'll assume we're talking about inadvertent, non-intentional, one in a million accidents. What then is the difference between that and someone trying a wrap check at an upward angle, or coming around the shoulders? All it takes is for the ball carrier to dip his stick and raise his chin to look for his open man, and suddenly you've got the same situation. Both scenarios result in a stick traveling w/ a great deal of force headed straight to the throat. I have yet to see anyone advocate the removal or banning of the wrap check in field lacrosse.

Personally someone trying to cross check me from the front is going to be a lot easier to see coming, protect myself, or avoid it entirely, then someone coming from my back or side with a stick whipping around.

Also the cross check is not just to knock the ball lose, it's to limit mobility on the floor. It's the same as getting your chest on someone in basketball, you're preventing them from moving around as much. When you play close defense on your man in field lacrosse how do you do it? If you're like most people you've got at least one hand or your stick on your man. What difference does it make if it's the shaft, a glove, or the head of your stick that's touching your man? Field lacrosse rules say no to the shaft and a free hand, that's fine those are the rules. Box rules say the the shaft is fine, so why south of the Canadian border is it considered in the same light as spearing someone? It's the rules of the game. I'm not advocating adding cross checking to the field game, just playing box the way the rules are written.

If we're going to be safety conscious we really ought to be playing intercrosse and flag football here in the US.

-Jenrick

[OldPtboBoy]

It's not a mis match in age that's your problem. Or a shot to the adam's apple. It's the way that US Insurance views box lacrosse. The arguments are null and void. I've played field lacrosse and been hit just as hard or viciously as in box. That doesn't change the way that the US Insurance industry looks at the box game.

Truth be known, there exists an honor system. No box player wants to injure another. Fights are fights, hits are hits, we don't go out to intentionally injure another player. Cross Checks are part of the game but not to intentionally injure. If you want to fight you drop your helmet and your gloves. That's life.

This isn't a question of age. This isn't a question of ability. It's a question of how insurance sees your game. They accept football, they accept the checks of the field game, they do not see the box game as a money maker. Which is funny, because alot more kids get hurt playing soccer than box lacrosse.

We have the benefit of the game being played this way for a long, long time. It's just normal for us. You have changes that you need to institute, that will take some time and some doing.

It's unfortunate, but it is the truth.

[SyracuseLax4You]

you guys are starting to change my opinions about cross checking in box.

[Aetraxx]

Originally Posted by OldPtboBoy

Insurance is easy, it's just really expensive. In Canada minor box systems operate under the umbrella of large governing bodies. In Ontario insurance is purchased for municipal programs (Peterborough Minor Lacrosse) under the umbrella of the OLA. Many cities buying in to one policy. This lowers the cost to the individual player.

In the US where field is more prevalent you would be insured in the same fashion. Your problem lies in the lack of an all encompassing organizing body specifically geared towards Box Lacrosse. Or even a state or regional body. If you were to look I'd suggest contacting the USIL or other established box programs as to inquire towards the possibility of purchasing insurance under their umbrella. It benefits everyone. You will have insurance and their premiums will be lower with more policies within their group.

That being said what Aetraxx posted above may be what falls within the confines of American Insurance Providers. I'm sure that there are some differences between what is offered up here and what is offered where you play. Still I'd look into it. Our kids start full contact at age 5-6.

"Expensive" is what prevents us from having insurance. When setting up the league, the overall response was make it cheap and fun. Additional costs for insurance - which I would have to really search for - was not an option. Our local association is in its infancy and i am doing what I can to advance it, but as of right now there is now funding. Everything is out of my pocket or the participants. Extra liability insurance for excessive contact just was not an option.
We do have a physical game with a lot of stick checks and body checks, but we ply a rec league. Most of the adult rec hockey leagues have an outright ban on cross checking too. Again it comes down to liability insurance and cost.
Your tip on the USIL is valid. If their website ever works properly or I can find contact/insurance info elsewhere, I might try that. It will be next season though. Hopefully by then I will have the association more established/legitimized.
I guess I would be more open to it if we had kids that started at 5-6 and. that way by the time they got to high school they would understand how to deliver and take a cross check without unnecessary injury. The possibility is always there, but it is amazing how much cleaner and safer hits are when the kids are taught to do them properly at a young age...

[titans 43]

I wouldn't be worried about high checks but more of hits from behind into the boards. I can't even imagine a league without cross checking it pretty much the entire basis of proper d in box other than footwork

[#15Roadies]

In my entire knowledge of Canadian box lacrosse I cannot recall anyone being killed by a crosscheck. I know some players have been severely injured by bad falls or checks into the boards over the years, but death in box lacrosse is so rare as to be considered non-existant. There are far more serious and fatal injuries in football than box lacrosse.

So if you are afraid of crosschecks, your fear is completely unfounded. If you are properly equipped, a cross check is merely an extenstion of a hard push with the arms or block as in football. And it doesn't take learning crosschecking from the age of 5-6 to understand how effective and legal crosschecking works - a few hours for most reasonably intelligent folks will do.

Having high school aged kids in adults contact rec leagues up here is as problematic as it is there and insurance is a key factor to that. Up here most adult rec leagues (that allow HS aged kids) are played under masters rules which is basically no contact. Our provincial and national governing bodies have strict rules about ineligible aged players playing in mens box leagues with very severe penalties. And I don't care how big the 14, 15, 16 year old is, he simply does not have the same coordination, muscle or bone development as an adult. If I was an insurer, I wouldn't insure you either. Neither would the OLA.

So... the way around crosschecking proper is the concept of pushing with the stick. The crosscheck rule is modified to specify only 'place and push' is allowed. That means the portion of the stick between the hands must be placed on the opposite player with only pushing allowed. An illegal crosscheck would be hitting the player with the portion of the stick between the hands. Once your sports insurer understands the concept of place & push stick checking it might make it easier to get insurance. It becomes a matter of definition.

Off ball checking is the same and in our part of the world, knocking an off-ball carrier down is an interference penatly. You can push pressure on the off-ball player, who can apply 'equal pressure' back. You don't crank the off ball players in the floor. Removing off ball checking from the NLL is the one reason I can't watch the NLL anymore. Off ball checking adds a dynamic to the game that makes good players better.

[slinky]

Originally Posted by titans 43

I wouldn't be worried about high checks but more of hits from behind into the boards. I can't even imagine a league without cross checking it pretty much the entire basis of proper d in box other than footwork

Preach on Ransom.

Syra, we all grew up playing box with crosschecking. It's not box without it. They got rid of it one season when I was in bantam I think, games were brutal. If the opponent is placing and pushing, I'm just going to run him over. The only real danger of crosschecks are into the boards from behind like my quoted acquaintance has so eloquently put.

Have strict enforcement on CFB like there is here with a major/game for a hit and you save alot of it. Still happens but it makes you think twice. Proper education of players to take the ball parallel to the boards instead of perpendicular and they won't need to be worried at all. I also noticed that without crosschecking goon play increases dramatically. I know I was alot dirtier that season, without the ability to actually hit someone hard enough to take the ball I resorted to alot of open floor shoulder+head hits. Which are the leading cause of concussions in hockey; luckily I'm not a real big guy and I didn't hurt anyone, I rung a few bells. Actually Titans43 might be able to attest to that, I think he was one the people I laid out.

The open floor body checks to the head don't happen much in lax because a crosscheck is more effective at getting the ball with way less chance of missing. I'm fairly certain every time I missed they scored but I was never faulted because if I didn't attempt I was just letting them by anyway.

[bluelineguy]

Two other quick comments

Dirst: In the US, most players start as field players. Most avoid rib pads like the plague (or H1N1), do they put rib pads on for box? (Just a note, most box players seem to keep their rib pads on whenplaying field.)

Second: Read about the yahoos here, most don't even see to care that they might have seriously injured someone.
http://www.lacrosseforums.com/showthread.php?t=170037

PS: Most adult hockey leagues are no checking. Too many mortgages need to be paid.

[jenrick]

bluelineguy: I think the no rib pad thing is based on what we learn as young players down here. None of the cool kids do it why should I? I've found that once you get into the post college club leagues you see a lot more rib pads. It's a lot harder to justify cool, when you're gonna miss 3 weeks worth of work due to a busted rib or something.

-Jenrick

[bluelineguy]

I think you just answered your question again. Most US players don't wear rib pads because they were brought up in field and very few field players wear rib pads (kind of like goalies without shin pads).

No rib pads = more opportunity for injury = higher insurance costs (or no insurance available)

[AHS_laxer]

In the box league I play in, kidney pads are required.

I don't see the problem that insurance companies have, the same injuries that they are worried about happening in box can also happen in hockey and yet, they insure hockey?

Make kidney's a requirement and you should be set for protection. Other than that, good luck convincing the insurance companies that this is the way the sport is played in most countries.

Something to note though. Other countries with a strong box lacrosse history like Canada, England, Australia, ect. all have the benefits of free healthcare. I know very little about how insurance works but I'm going to assume that because healthcare is free in these countries the insurance will cost considerablely less.

[Stoned_Lax]

Is anyone aware that Cross Checking is actually a penalty in Box lacrosse in Canada. The correct move would be Push Check. Cross checking or beating on someones arm is technically illegal.

[#15Roadies]

Originally Posted by Stoned_Lax

Is anyone aware that Cross Checking is actually a penalty in Box lacrosse in Canada. The correct move would be Push Check. Cross checking or beating on someones arm is technically illegal.

Illegal crosschecking - in the back, high or low, while a player is down - is illegal in Canada, but a distinction is added to the rulebook as guidance for the younger age divisions where skill level & body types can vary greatly. 'Place and push' is the technical way to crosscheck and is usually the most effective move if done correctly. However, in the older ages there is more leeway as to how fast the 'place' is applied and how much pressure is added to the 'push.'

Aside: We were watching a couple of American teams in the Rochester Turkeyshoot over the weekend and was surprised to see players crosschecking. We commented on this and were informed by someone connected with RIT that at the older age divisions crosschecking in fairly common now and is even taught in some programs. We did hear some refs in other games telling players to close their hands on the stick, but not in the game we were watching, which was clearly cross checking of the place and push variety. This RIT fellow said that refs rarely call it. Can any of our Yankee cousins tell me a little more about this?