A modest proposal

[LaxRef]

A colleague of mine has a great idea. You know how the NFL has a rule that a half (or is it any quarter?) cannot end on a defensive penalty? Well, what if we had a rule that a game could not end while the team in the lead was serving a penalty? For example:

Team A is up by 1 with 10 seconds left in the game, B1 has possession, and A1 tackles B1 to prevent the shot (not that that would ever happen in a real game ). A1 is ejected for flagrant misconduct, with the in-home serving a 3:00 NR penalty. The game would be extended for the length of that penalty or until Team B scored.

There are some details to be worked out here:

What happens if a man-down team scores during (conventional) OT? (maybe have this rule only for regulation)

What happens if the teams are even? Does it make a difference if the leading team's penalty expires first?

What happens if the game is extended for a foul by Team A but then Team B commits a foul, creating an even situation?

However, I like the basic idea since it would discourage intentional fouling late in the game. What do you think?

[shrekjr]

Without giving it too much thought, I like it. I remember watching either the DII or DIII championship a few years ago when Team A was down by one with just a few seconds to go in regulation. After calling a timeout, they ran an "iso" play, the guy scored just before time ran out and it went to OT. Team A won the face off, called time out, and again ran the same play...and again scored to win the game. I remember thinking at the time that had I been the Team B coach who was winning with less than 10 seconds to play, I would have told my players during the regulation timeout to hold, tackle, or do whatever was necessary to keep the opposing team from getting anywhere near the goal during the last few seconds of the game. And there is no way I would have let the same thing happen again in OT! With your proposal, my theory would be shot and there would be no advantage to fouling and wasting time late in the game. Without it, had I been coaching, Team B would have been the national champion that year instead of going home the first place loser.

[number85]

a shrek jr sighting?....i guess this is as good a place for my first post here....

imho, this is a fine solution, almost elegant, to an almost hypothetical problem....in other words, intentional fouling with less than a minute by the team in the lead isn't really that much of a problem, is it?

[OAKS]

I agree. I don't think I've seen it happen, but as the game grows, it might become a problem in the future. I think it would have changed the Duke / Cornell semifinal game in '07 if Cornell's ssm had held Greer in front of the goal, not allowing him to get free to catch that pass. Duke would have either had a 30 second technical with 5-10 seconds left, or possession outside the box with the same, rather than a shot on the doorstep.

I guess the question is does it need to be nipped in the bud now, or do we wait for it to show up, like the armadillo play, Jim Brown's short stick, jumping Alex Smith early to prevent UDel fast breaks, etc?

[LaxRef]

imho, this is a fine solution, almost elegant, to an almost hypothetical problem....in other words, intentional fouling with less than a minute by the team in the lead isn't really that much of a problem, is it?

Welcome aboard!

As to your "hypothetical" statement, see the last 10 seconds of this game:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3Mm58cOX64[/youtube]

[shrekjr]

a shrek jr sighting?....i guess this is as good a place for my first post here....

With a face like this, I'm not hard to find. Welcome to the board and your first post!

[shrekjr]

As to your "hypothetical" statement, see the last 10 seconds of this game:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3Mm58cOX64

Good lacrosse or bad coaching? Unethical - yes, unsportsmanlike - yes, playing within the rules as written to do what it takes to win the game - yes. One might call this "Bad lacrosse, good coaching".