Cradling hand position

[laxfan25]

The ruelbook has this section on withholding the ball from play...
Withholding Ball from Play
SECTION 13. When a loose ball is on the ground, a player may not lie on the ball, trap it with his crosse longer than is necessary for him to control the ball and pick it up with one continuous motion, or withhold the ball from play in any other manner. Note: A player in possession of the ball who holds his crosse against any part of his body, thus preventing the normal dislodgment of the ball, is illegally withholding the ball from play. The glove hand cannot grasp any portion of the head of the crosse.
This is intended to cover faceoffs and a player in possession of the ball who is “thumbing” the ball or choking up and grasping the plastic portion of the crosse.

A "few" years ago at the NCAA rules clinic, enforcement of this was a Point of Emphasis. the thinking was that if the hand was kept off the plastic it was virtually impossible to reach up and "thumb" the ball. Since then you rarely see this call made, and you see a lot of players cradling as in the picture above. My feeling is that it gives an advantage -at the least helping to absorb the shock of a stick check, and at most allowing a little hankie-pankie on a tight roll dodge.
What are your thoughts? Do you cradle this way? Do your opponents?

[umdulax1]

I guess the point of emphasis should be placed on "thumbing" the ball. That is a call that if seen should be called as it plays to a big advantage to the ball carrier. But does holding the through of the head of the stick really give a ball carrier that much added support? I know it sure leaves that thumb open to a nice slap check and an easily broken thumb! IMHO if it doesn't lessen the chance of the ball coming free from the crosse then why call it but if it in fact does then by all means make the call.

[LaxRef]

I guess the point of emphasis should be placed on "thumbing" the ball. That is a call that if seen should be called as it plays to a big advantage to the ball carrier. But does holding the through of the head of the stick really give a ball carrier that much added support? I know it sure leaves that thumb open to a nice slap check and an easily broken thumb! IMHO if it doesn't lessen the chance of the ball coming free from the crosse then why call it but if it in fact does then by all means make the call.

The key is that it puts the hand in position that you can thumb the ball for just a split second while doing the dodge if you're holding the head; there's almost no chance of the official seeing it then. Thus, the idea was to penalize any grasping of the plastic, since you can't thumb the ball if your thumb is too far away.

[umdulax1]

Cheaters never prosper... You have convinced me that it is a call that should be made or at least something that the first time seen should be warned to the benches.

[LaxRef]

Cheaters never prosper... You have convinced me that it is a call that should be made or at least something that the first time seen should be warned to the benches.

Wow, I convinced someone! That Debating for Dummies book is really starting to pay off!

[grinderpete]

Cheaters never prosper... You have convinced me that it is a call that should be made or at least something that the first time seen should be warned to the benches.

Wow, I convinced someone! That Debating for Dummies book is really starting to pay off!

Dont you mean Debating Dummies book here on this board.

[laxfan25]

I guess the point of emphasis should be placed on "thumbing" the ball. That is a call that if seen should be called as it plays to a big advantage to the ball carrier. But does holding the head of the stick really give a ball carrier that much added support? I know it sure leaves that thumb open to a nice slap check and an easily broken thumb! IMHO if it doesn't lessen the chance of the ball coming free from the crosse then why call it but if it in fact does then by all means make the call.

LaxRef hit the point on the head, it gives someone the opportunity to thumb when they have the stick tucked in. A question, why do players cradle while they're holding the head if they didn't think it was beneficial?
IMM, it helps keep the stick in the right direction (one of the reasons guys used to cut out their palms), helps to absorb a stick check, gives me a better sense of stick control, without even getting into the benefits of a potential thumb slide.
As I mentioned, I rarely call it now, while I used to quite a bit - just because "no one else seems to". My point though, why do they have a specific point about it in the rulebook? It's not like we're making up our own interpretation of withholding. If the coaches don't want that call made - take it out.

[Lax_Stats]

In the picture at the top of this posting is a player who has really choked up far onto the stick head. If I saw this, i would warn the player to drop his hand off the plastic completely. If I saw him a second time with his hand up that far, I would warn him again and let him know that the next time I saw him he would lose the ball. I would also inform the other officials he had been warned twice and to watch for this situation. As officials, you never want to go looking to make a call and take the ball away from a player. However, rules are in place for a reason and if you have warned a player twice that he is not complying with the rules and he chooses to ignore your warnings, I figure any player smart enough to be in college is smart enough to understand the warning and the repercussions if he fails to head those warnings. yes, it is a ticky tack call to make, but I have seen players "thumbing" the ball for years, and if the hand isn't on the plastic, it's pretty hard to thumb the ball! Remember, the rule is in the book for a reason and it would be taken out if it was felt it wasn't necessary to keep it in the book.

[LaxRef]

Remember, the rule is in the book for a reason and it would be taken out if it was felt it wasn't necessary to keep it in the book.

This is the first breach of logic you've had in your short time here!

Seriously, how many times have we seen rules in the book that are obsolete. It took me about 5 years to get them to take the "When not offside" section out of the rulebook, which became obsolete with the advent of the stakcing rule. There are many other examples.

I think it's much easier for people to think about adding rules that they think are needed than it is to get rid of rules that aren't needed (the same probably goes for our stuff: we go out and buy stuff we need, but we are very reluctant to get rid of stuff we no longer need). This type of thinking leads to having laws on the books that say things like, "It is illegal to milkest thy cow in the chambers of the state senate on alternate Thursdays in April when there be ankle-deep snow under the large oak at Bowman's Ridge."

[Lax_Stats]

Ouch! LOL

[Lax_Stats]

I agree there are in fact rules in the book that have become obsolete. However, I believe this is a good rule to keep in the book. I try and use both preventative measures as well as good judgement when i see this potential violation/violation taking place.