Fights

[Dulax31]

What would you do if two players on the same team started throwing punches at each other during play? Would their be any flags thrown?

[A.J. Stevens]

What would you do if two players on the same team started throwing punches at each other during play? Would their be any flags thrown?

The NCAA rulebook says

Fighting
SECTION 13. Fighting is defined as a player, substitute, non-playing member of a squad, coach or anyone officially connected with a team deliberately striking or attempting to strike anyone in a malicious manner or leaving the bench or coaches area during an altercation.

It says anyone so that would be a three-minute non-releasable
penalty for each player. (Correct me if I'm wrong)

[Dan Wishengrad]

You have the rule correct, Coach Stevens -- but as a long-time (now retired) ref I can tell you I would never throw a flag in such a situation if a team was fighting only amongst themselves. I'm not sure I would even attempt to break it up. If it was a fight among teammates on the field during live-play they are doubly disadvantaging themselves anyway by having two guys not involved in the play anyway. If it was during a dead-ball I'd probably just try to get a good vantage point to enjoy the show. But I was very quick to throw a flag and call an expulsion if anything even resembling a punch was thrown at an opponent. I once tossed a guy in a Men's Club league game who threw a half-slap/half-punch that MISSED, and his teammates were all over me. I explained if you're going to throw a punch in a lacrosse game that I was reffing you better at least make it count!

Just my two cents...

[LaxRef]

You have the rule correct, Coach Stevens -- but as a long-time (now retired) ref I can tell you I would never throw a flag in such a situation if a team was fighting only amongst themselves.

I'd have to disagree. The rules don't say "opponent," they say "anyone"; I'd eject both players, just like I'd call a USC if a player or coach crossed the line toward another player or coach.

And, yeah, if during a live ball the team is fighting, they're playing two men down, but they'll be playing two men down for 3:00 NR after that as well.

As officials, we're supposed to enforce what the rules say, not what we think they should say.

[cjwilhelmi]

Interesting question - A1 strikes B1, B1 walks away and A1 goes after B1. Does B1 have a right to defend himself until the refs can break it up? If he does defend himself does he also get flagged and if so how severely?

Not a specific event, I had some of my boys that I coach ask me about it and didn't have a good answer.

[Dan Wishengrad]

Can't disagree with you Laxref -- and I admitted Coach Stevens had the rule correct as written. But I reffed hundreds of games in my 20 years of reffing -- youth, high school, college, men's club and international games. Thankfully, I never saw such a thing occur. I am speaking hypothetical what I'd do if I saw a scuffle between teammates. Who knows?

But on the other hand, I saw many, many violations of the rules during my time which also went uncalled. Will you maintain that you always call everything you see? Every stick-check that hits only arm, every time a player gets levelled seconds after a shot? Refs simply can not nor should not call every single thing in the book, by the book -- using judgement is part of the game. I certainly let some violence go in men's club games that get called in youth games, where protecting players safety is more important. In overtime of a championship game hardly anything ever gets called if it isn't blatantly obvious. No ref wants to "decide" such a game with a ticky-tack call that is just as easy to overlook. If you call everything in the rule book every time you see it games have no flow, refs become the show and that is NOT what we are paid to do. I watched the MLL game of the week Tuesday between Baltimore and Long Island, and if the refs in that game agreed with you than they must have been blind, as there were so many uncalled personal fouls that either the refs don't know the rules (doubtful) or they exercised some good judgement. You say that is not the refs' job, but I respectfully disagree -- and wholeheartedly.

My career highlight was being the lone American ref on the '98 Brogdan Cup final between Canada (Victoria Seaspray) and the US (NY Athletic Club). We were late in a tied, decisive third-game and the Crew Chief all but ORDERED the crew not to call anything that didn't result in a stretcher being brought out onto the field. The fans got a great show, the Zebras did the job we were paid to do and the game was decided by the players -- not by us.

[TexOle]

I am going to disagree with the Zebras not making calls in the 4th. I hate thinking I might have influenced the outcome of a game by making a call. I know I have. My main problem with putting the whistles away is that the game could get out of control quickly. The last thing I want to see is a problem once the game is over. I think it is more important to call it consistently from start to finish. If I have been calling something minor at the beginning then I need to call until the end. I do not care if it is overtime in the finals or some small exhibition game. I figure that most players will learn how the game will be officiated from the start of the game and they will adjust. If I make a call and one team wins as a result of my call then I can always say the call was made in the first period and the rule did not change. If you don't call something that is questionable that you called earlier then you have to explain why it was called earlier and not now.

To answer the question on fighting I would call the penalty and work it just like a normal fight. Nobody steps on the field. No other players try to break it up. There is the risk that other players might get involved. You have to call it to preserve the integrity of the game. I would also be tempted if it got bad enough to end the game to protect the safety of all players involved. Fights are not fun when you are officiating especially if you are doing a game alone. You might have to deal with someone who knows all the rules and would possibly argue if they never connected with any of the attempted blows that it was not fight.

[Dan Wishengrad]

If I have been calling something minor at the beginning then I need to call until the end. ... If I make a call and one team wins as a result of my call then I can always say the call was made in the first period and the rule did not change.

Well you can tell yourself that if it helps you to sleep at nights, but not many folks will remember that 1st quarter call, but if you clearly decide the outcome with a ticky-tack call late that awards a man-up in a tied championship game, that's all everyone will ever remember. I made exactly such a call in a state club championship in the 80s at Kezar Stadium, which essentially gave Orange County LC the win over San Francisco LC. It still bugs me 20 years later!

If you call the game tight early, if the teams got the message and are playing under control, why make a questionable call late just because you want to be seen as a model of consistency? The game is not about the refs -- we are there to ensure a safe, fun and fair game. Let the players decide it on the field -- it's not about us proving we're consistent. We should be invisible, at least when the circumstances dictate it.

Just my two cents of course...

[LaxRef]

Can't disagree with you Laxref -- and I admitted Coach Stevens had the rule correct as written. But I reffed hundreds of games in my 20 years of reffing -- youth, high school, college, men's club and international games. Thankfully, I never saw such a thing occur. I am speaking hypothetical what I'd do if I saw a scuffle between teammates. Who knows?

But on the other hand, I saw many, many violations of the rules during my time which also went uncalled. Will you maintain that you always call everything you see? Every stick-check that hits only arm, every time a player gets levelled seconds after a shot? Refs simply can not nor should not call every single thing in the book, by the book -- using judgement is part of the game. I certainly let some violence go in men's club games that get called in youth games, where protecting players safety is more important. In overtime of a championship game hardly anything ever gets called if it isn't blatantly obvious. No ref wants to "decide" such a game with a ticky-tack call that is just as easy to overlook. If you call everything in the rule book every time you see it games have no flow, refs become the show and that is NOT what we are paid to do. I watched the MLL game of the week Tuesday between Baltimore and Long Island, and if the refs in that game agreed with you than they must have been blind, as there were so many uncalled personal fouls that either the refs don't know the rules (doubtful) or they exercised some good judgement. You say that is not the refs' job, but I respectfully disagree -- and wholeheartedly.

I'm certainly not saying you need to call every foul exactly as the book described--we apply the principle of advantage/disadvantage when appropriate--and it's silly to characterize my officiating like that based on that fact that I disagree about the call in this case. But I don't think anyone is arguing that "well, maybe they're fighting, maybe not, it's a judgment call." I think it's pretty obvious to any reasonable individual when two people are fighting, so then you have to call it, in the same way you have to call an obvious crease violation or an obvious offsides.

My career highlight was being the lone American ref on the '98 Brogdan Cup final between Canada (Victoria Seaspray) and the US (NY Athletic Club). We were late in a tied, decisive third-game and the Crew Chief all but ORDERED the crew not to call anything that didn't result in a stretcher being brought out onto the field. The fans got a great show, the Zebras did the job we were paid to do and the game was decided by the players -- not by us.

One of the favorite lines I've ever heard was from a hockey game. One announcer said, "They're letting them play," and the other guy said "Well, they're letting one guy play. That other guy is getting the crap beaten out of them."

I have no respect for officials that decide not to do their jobs by not calling any fouls in the fourth quarter. Rest assured, you can decide a game just as easily by not calling fouls as you can by calling them. For example, team A and team B are tied, but in the fourth quarter you stop calling fouls. Team B holds, interferes, pushes, commits illegal body checks, trips, and so on, while Team A commits no fouls, and team B wins by 1. Can you really argue that the officials' decision to stop calling fouls didn't affect the outcome of the game?

[lil lady lax fan]

As a fan sitting on the sidelines I would prefer to see the ref making the calls, even if it does slow down the game a bit. That way both the fans and the teams know that the game is being played fairly. There is nothing worse, from a fan's point of view, than to come out of a game feeling like your team was cheated because of missed calls. Admittedly they can't catch every little infraction but if they catch the majority of them then you know it's a fair game.

A good game is a fair game.

my two bits...

Oh, and congrats to you, A.J., on your new coaching position. Good luck to you and the Fighting Illini in the coming year.

[Dan Wishengrad]

Well it's obvious I am digging a hole here with my zebra brethren.

Let me admit I said very little like what I have said above while I was still reffing, and certainly never when I served as DAA giving marching orders to a region full of other zebras. I remember NCO Charlie Philips telling the 11 of us DAAs from around the country exactly what was said by LaxRef and by TexOle above, about being consistent from start to finish and all season long. It sure was gospel then, and apparently still is. And I certainly didn't intend to criticize LaxRef's performance on the field! If offense was taken I sincerely apologize - truly!

But as a coach now, I do see the game with a different perspective. No ref is always consistent, nor are they any more perfect than anybody else. All the refs need to do is use their eyes and their brains and see what is unfolding. If a game is being played dirty like in the hypothetical example above, OF COURSE refs should keep the laundry flying regularly. But when everything is focused on the game itself, which is razor-close with the outcome hanging in the balance, then the refs should try to let the players decide the outcome themselves, rather than try to prove to the world how consistent they are or how much moxy they have by making a big call late that decides the outcome. That is the point I was trying to make, and I stand by it.

[cjwilhelmi]

Could someone still answer this for me?

Interesting question - A1 strikes B1, B1 walks away and A1 goes after B1. Does B1 have a right to defend himself until the refs can break it up? If he does defend himself does he also get flagged and if so how severely?

Not a specific event, I had some of my boys that I coach ask me about it and didn't have a good answer.

[Kyle Berggren]

No, you've got to sit there an take it. The rule says anyone. Get the attention of the refs, and you might be able to get away with pushing the guy off of you. The problem is, as we all know, the second guy gets caught. Most likely they'd see the push, and no more punches would be thrown.

From personal experience, I was in a very big game, and got under another players skin. It was weird, I don't talk too much on the field, I just try to play. I don't think he liked being hit very much. Anyway, I finished a shot put my arms up in the air and got tackled on the crease. I layed there with my arms above my head, the other player (their best defenseman) was ejected, and it took the officials a few minutes to discuss what would happen to me. I got to play, and had one of the biggest games of my life.

I will say punching a guy wearing a helmet isn't going to do much good anyway.
==
As far as officiating goes... in my eyes the differences above are what contribute to a large portion of complaining about officiating. As a coach, all I want is consitency (no MJ calls let go for certain players), and safety.

[laxfan25]

I would say that what Dan Wishengrad has been stating is the reality of lacrosse at the higher levels. when it is a big game such as the championships, it is obvious that the refs are "letting them play" more than at another level. I don't think he is saying that you don't make any calls, they just have to be more obvious or severe violations, just like how we call HS games different than college or club.
In my experience, you need to keep a tighter rein on HS kids because the testosterone overrides their self-control, and a hard check will most often result in a retalitory action. When I did a D3 game this year, one of my distinct impressions was that the D played hard defense with stick checks at both ends, and the attack players just kept trying to drive to the goal and score. The self-control was very evident.
In my early years reffing (mid 80's) I would go to the D1 championship weekend and say to my seatmates - "Ouch, that should be a slash!" In some cases, maybe so, but over the years I've gained more respectr for how the refs at that level call the game. I thought this year's championship was a good example of letting the players play, and I didn't really see that much that made me wince.
I think as long as you're calling it consistently, through the game and at both ends, even if you're "letting 'em play" a little, no team is getting an advantage and you will not hear complaints from either coach.
I understand where both Dan and LaxRef are coming from - they both make valid points and both viewpoints can be accomodated, IMO.

[laxfan25]

Interesting question - A1 strikes B1, B1 walks away and A1 goes after B1. Does B1 have a right to defend himself until the refs can break it up? If he does defend himself does he also get flagged and if so how severely? Not a specific event, I had some of my boys that I coach ask me about it and didn't have a good answer.

The reality is you kind of have to just take it, and I would agree that that calls for an extreme amount of self-restraint - more than I would likely be able to show if I was playing! That said, when I am reffing if I see the initial incident that caused a response, I will judge the level of reaction before sitting both players down. If the hitee just turns and maybe pushes the guy that whacked him, I will likely be lenient towards him, since I know he was provoked.