LaxTV Forums | A Forum About The MCLA

Boys Lacrosse Revision Addresses Misapplication of Rule

INDIANAPOLIS (August 18, 2006) — Effective with the 2007 high school lacrosse season, new rules will dictate the circumstances under which a head coach may discuss a misapplication of a rule. In addition to this change, 10 other rules revisions were approved by the National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS) Boys Lacrosse Rules Committee at its July 16-17 meeting in Indianapolis, and then were subsequently approved by the NFHS Board of Directors.

“Among the changes to Rule 7-13-1, the timekeeper shall sound the double horn at the request of the head coach,” said NFHS Boys Lacrosse Rules Committee Chairman Ron Belinko, athletic director of Baltimore (Maryland) County Schools. “The previous wording specified that the timekeeper was to sound the horn at the request of the head coach when there was no significant action. The timekeeper is normally not trained sufficiently to understand ‘when there is no significant action’ and may inadvertently kill a fast break or advantage situation. The double horn makes this procedure consistent with Rule 2-8-2e. The second revision under this rule clarifies that the use of video monitoring, replaying of equipment or personal wireless communication devices by the officials is prohibited.”

Rule 4-5-9 was revised to include a definition of a shot as a ball propelled toward the goal by an offensive player, either by being thrown from a crosse, kicked or otherwise physically directed. The revision also delineates under what circumstances a shot is no longer considered a shot by stating that a shot or deflected shot remains a shot until the ball comes to rest on the field of play, a player gains possession of the ball, the ball goes out of bounds or a player causes the ball to go out of bounds.

“Rule 4-5-9 now provides a clear definition of what is considered a shot and will assist in determining when a ball that is shot ceases to be considered a shot,” said Kent Summers, NFHS assistant director and liaison to the NFHS Boys Lacrosse Rules Committee.

In another change, Rule 1-6-2 specifies the required guard stop at the throat of the crosse must be a minimum of 10 inches from the outside edge of the head to the farthest unexposed edge of the stop. This revision standardizes lacrosse stick specifications with those of other rules codes.

Rule 4-6-3b specifies that when a ball that has not crossed the defensive-area line goes directly out of bounds on a face-off, it shall be refaced when it is not known which team caused the ball to go out of bounds and when it is not known who last touched the ball prior to going out of bounds.

Another rule change (Rule 4-29) states that restarts following a time-out must be nearest to the spot where the ball was at the time the whistle was blown. A ball in the goal area shall be restarted closest to the spot, outside the goal area. A shot that has crossed the end line shall be restarted at that spot.

“This rule was revised because previous wording of Rule 4-29 would potentially have allowed a re-start two yards in the front of the goal,” Summers said.

Inadvertent whistles and flags are addressed in Rules 7-13-2 and 7-13-3. The rules now state that in the event of an inadvertent whistle, play shall be suspended immediately. The team with possession when the whistle was blown shall retain possession. If the ball was loose, possession shall be awarded by alternate possession. In the event of an inadvertent flag, play shall be suspended at the earliest opportunity that does not interfere with an imminent scoring opportunity. The team with possession when the flag was thrown shall retain possession. If the ball was loose, possession shall be awarded by alternate possession.

In addition to these rules changes, the committee approved eight major editorial changes. Among them, Rule 2-8-2e6 states only a head coach can request a time-out to check the number of long crosses in the game.

The committee also identified Points of Emphasis for the 2007 season. Among those are crosse dimensions, mouthguards, risk minimization for defensive players, flagrant misconduct, revised jersey rules, NFHS authenticating mark on game balls, stick measurement and slashing by riding attack players.

Boys lacrosse had 59,993 participants at the high school level during the 2004-05 season, according to the High School Athletics Participation Survey conducted by the NFHS, and was sponsored by 1,334 schools.

This article was written by Colleen Merkel, a summer intern in the NFHS Publications/Communications Department from Franklin (Indiana) College. For more information, click here.

###
MEDIA CONTACT: Bruce Howard or John Gillis, 317-972-6900
setstats 1

“Among the changes to Rule 7-13-1, the timekeeper shall sound the double horn at the request of the head coach." --“The previous wording specified that the timekeeper was to sound the horn at the request of the head coach when there was no significant action. The timekeeper is normally not trained sufficiently to understand ‘when there is no significant action’ and may inadvertently kill a fast break or advantage situation. The double horn makes this procedure consistent with Rule 2-8-2e.

Another rule change (Rule 4-29) states that restarts following a time-out must be nearest to the spot where the ball was at the time the whistle was blown. A ball in the goal area shall be restarted closest to the spot, outside the goal area. A shot that has crossed the end line shall be restarted at that spot.

In addition to these rules changes, the committee approved eight major editorial changes. Among them, Rule 2-8-2e6 states only a head coach can request a time-out to check the number of long crosses in the game.

James Foote wrote:To start, this is a poorly written press release from my stand point. I coach high school ball under the jurisdiction of the Federation rulebook and I can't say I'm a fan, but I'll live. Maybe someone can help me get a better grasp on some of these statements.

“Among the changes to Rule 7-13-1, the timekeeper shall sound the double horn at the request of the head coach." --“The previous wording specified that the timekeeper was to sound the horn at the request of the head coach when there was no significant action. The timekeeper is normally not trained sufficiently to understand ‘when there is no significant action’ and may inadvertently kill a fast break or advantage situation. The double horn makes this procedure consistent with Rule 2-8-2e.

Perhaps the long off-season has gotten to me and my memory is paying the price, but what is this "double horn" and how will it make Rule 7-13-1 any better?

James Foote wrote:

Another rule change (Rule 4-29) states that restarts following a time-out must be nearest to the spot where the ball was at the time the whistle was blown. A ball in the goal area shall be restarted closest to the spot, outside the goal area. A shot that has crossed the end line shall be restarted at that spot.

I know this is an absurd question coming from a coach, but what is the definition of the goal area in the NFHS rule book? Are we simply talking about the restraining box? I ask these questions just to make myself feel better about the wording of the press release.

James Foote wrote:

In addition to these rules changes, the committee approved eight major editorial changes. Among them, Rule 2-8-2e6 states only a head coach can request a time-out to check the number of long crosses in the game.

Is there a solid point to adding this to the release? Not trying to be critical... I just can't read the NFHS rulebook back to you verbatim so there's a great chance I'm missing some relevance.

Any help would be awesome. Thanks for the time.

James Foote wrote: I've always felt that the rules, with safety in mind, should be as similar those of the NCAA.

LaxRef wrote: So, now they're saying that the timer should sound it as soon as the coach asks for it, but I'll bet—or at least hope—that it can only be called for during a dead ball.

laxfan25 wrote:

LaxRef wrote: So, now they're saying that the timer should sound it as soon as the coach asks for it, but I'll bet—or at least hope—that it can only be called for during a dead ball.

Based on how I read the press release, my first thought was that the coach can get the double-horn immediately. Not logical, but that's what the rule seems to say...

If play continues after an inadvertent flag or horn and: (1) A goal is
scored, play will be restarted with a faceoff; (2) A shot is taken with no
goal scored, the ball shall be awarded by alternate possession outside
the attack area; or (3) No shot is taken, the ball is awarded to the team
last in possession.

Sonny wrote:If you allow play to continue more then a second or two after an inadvertant horn during live play.... IMHO, you aren't doing your job as an official.

I would blow it dead, get the nearest official over to the bench to see what happened/why the horn was blown, and then get things restarted as quickly as possible. You have to "reset the action" for exactly the scenario you described.

laxfan25 wrote: I agree wholeheartedly with you on this Sonny. As LaxRef pointed out, an unscrupulous coach (completely hypothetical, since none exist in real life) might call for a double-horn in a fast-break opportunity where an attacker is coming in one-on-one with the goalie. In that case would you kill the play in a sec or two? I would tend to wait until the significant scoring opportunity ended, then straighten things out in the proper manner.

Sonny wrote:

laxfan25 wrote: I agree wholeheartedly with you on this Sonny. As LaxRef pointed out, an unscrupulous coach (completely hypothetical, since none exist in real life) might call for a double-horn in a fast-break opportunity where an attacker is coming in one-on-one with the goalie. In that case would you kill the play in a sec or two? I would tend to wait until the significant scoring opportunity ended, then straighten things out in the proper manner.

If a coach did that, I would still stop the play. If I was able to determine that happened (exactly as you described above) with 100% certainity, then I would impose an Unsportsmanlike Conduct on the bench.