BOTC - US Lacrosse Community Forum Forums NORTHEAST LACROSSE BOTC MAIN FORUM (LI, CT, WC) Girls Spring 2014 High School Varsity Lacrosse

UA should have been run better. No reason for ALL of the YJ girls to be on the same team, did not allow passing to open players. Now it's clear why the "LI ALL AMERICAN" has not sent out invites to the to the best sophmores and freshmen. Say what you want but stats don't lie. If it's supposed to be comprised of the best varsity players and you have rostered girls who barely played vs girls with hard earned stats then it's clear this is a YJ money grab. What a shame, could have been good for Long Island.

UA should have been run better. No reason for ALL of the YJ girls to be on the same team, did not allow passing to open players. Now it's clear why the "LI ALL AMERICAN" has not sent out invites to the to the best sophmores and freshmen. Say what you want but stats don't lie. If it's supposed to be comprised of the best varsity players and you have rostered girls who barely played vs girls with hard earned stats then it's clear this is a YJ money grab. What a shame, could have been good for Long Island.

really? which team was that? My daughter played with 2 other YJ's. Obviously she wasn't on the team with ALL the YJ's and she did just fine with all the non YJ's.

My daughter was on a team with 4 or 5 Yellow Jacket players and it worked out fine. In fact, she made a new friend and, oh no - it was a yellow jacket Relax - the kids all like each other. the parents are the ones with the issues. Some real, some imagined.

There you have it- on a team w 4/5 YJ. I saw that many on every team, and they naturally passed to each other, and if you were playing together for years you would too. But they also had a go to the goal mentality which is frustrating when you see open players calling for the ball. Maybe your daughter is happy not touching the ball and is there "for the experience", but I thought it looked like a YJ showcase.

My daughter was on a team with 4 or 5 Yellow Jacket players and it worked out fine. In fact, she made a new friend and, oh no - it was a yellow jacket Relax - the kids all like each other. the parents are the ones with the issues. Some real, some imagined.

There you have it- on a team w 4/5 YJ. I saw that many on every team, and they naturally passed to each other, and if you were playing together for years you would too. But they also had a go to the goal mentality which is frustrating when you see open players calling for the ball. Maybe your daughter is happy not touching the ball and is there "for the experience", but I thought it looked like a YJ showcase.

With Florida mandating all girls lacrosse players to ware helmets, does anyone think any team outside of Florida will be willing to play Florida's teams.

Does anyone know of a Varsity and JV Summer League other than the Farmingdale one?

Dowling has one - 5 weeks, July and first week of August. The Smithtown girls link on the left has the details.

First I've heard of this. Tell me more.

Are Under Armour girls results posted yet?

Weren't they supposed to be posted within 48 hours of the tryout?

The rosters were made a couple weeks ago, should be announced any day now.

From Inside Lacrosse

It’s official: helmets have been mandated in the state of Florida.

On June 10, the Florida High School Athletic Association ruled that all participating members of the FHSAA will have to wear helmets in 2015. These participating FHSAA programs will be the only teams in the nation state-mandated to wear this form of protective head gear.

“The board did vote on mandating a helmet for the 2015 season,” Alex Ozuna, an Assistant Director of Athletics and the lacrosse administrator for the Florida High School Athletic Association, confirmed Wednesday. “A board member brought up this recommendation to the board for an action item. It was discussed during the operations committee, and we had individuals from US Lacrosse present to kind of give the committee a background on where they currently are in the process of standardizing specifications for a soft helmet for the girl’s game.”

Ozuna continued: “The item was taken to the Board of Directors. The whole entire board reviewed and took into account what was said by the individuals from US Lacrosse and decided that because it is a major safety issue in our state — they took into account how long the process has been for US Lacrosse to get to this point — and moving forward that they wanted to go ahead and take the steps now instead of having to wait one, two, possibly three years for an actual product with the specific standardize specifications that US Lacrosse was going to implement.”

Melissa Coyne, the Women’s Game Director at US Lacrosse, was one of two US Lacrosse representatives present at the FHSAA board meeting and was disappointed in the decision to mandate helmets in a sport that has no standard or definition for what a women’s lacrosse helmet is. “The mandate is very vague. Just simply, that they would mandate women’s lacrosse players to wear a helmet. They did not indicate at any point during that meeting what that would be.”

Coyne continued, “Obviously, that caused concern amongst a lot of members attending the meeting and for US Lacrosse, as well. I find it to be extremely irresponsible for any governing body to suggest an equipment intervention that has not been tested for nor is relevant in the game it’s going to be used… I’m disappointed they would make such a short-sighted and vague mandate.”

The decision comes at a time that many close to the sport have advocated that player safety calls for head protection and that helmets are a necessary leap to ensure that all participants are out of harm’s way as it pertains to concussions and head trauma injuries. However, many others have jumped on the opposition’s side of the argument: mandating helmets in the women’s game will only make matters worse.

The NCAA Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports is among them.

In a position statement dated December 2013, the NCAA addressed misperceptions regarding helmets and their prevention of concussions among student-athletes. “It should be noted that there is no helmet that can prevent a concussion,” the statement reads before touching base on what many have argued the premiere reason against helmets in women’s lacrosse: putting helmets on female players will only make the game more physical. The statement reads:

“When considering the use of this optional equipment during practice or permitted competition, athletes and coaches should take the time to read the qualifying statements provided with such a product addressing its limitations, particularly to prevent serious head injuries. Wearing such a device may provide a false sense of security in the area of concussion protection by the player, their coaches and their parents. In addition, placing headgear on a student-athlete may indirectly justify striking them in the head by opponents, especially in sports where this has never been the intent (for example, soccer, basketball, women’s lacrosse).

Moreover, a false sense of security in the area of concussion protection increases the likelihood that players, coaches, and parents will consider the medical condition to be adequately addressed and may place less importance upon avoiding head impact, reporting concussion symptoms, and returning to play prior to full recovery following a concussion.”

Also among those in favor of keeping the game helmet-free, the FHSAA girls lacrosse advisory panel comprising high school coaches within the FHSAA schools and an official. “The vote was strictly just the board members of the Florida High School Athletic Association. This topic was presented to our girls lacrosse advisory panel,” Ozuna said of the board’s vote against the advisory committee’s decision. “The panel did turn down this request to mandate helmets — so, they denied the recommendation; but, this recommendation was brought up by a board member at our board meeting and that’s what was voted on.”

In a historic move for the sport of women’s lacrosse, the decision made by the FHSAA already has the lacrosse community abuzz with questions: What were the factors behind this decision? Will this impact participation numbers in the country’s fastest-growing sport?

But, namely, the initial reaction has been: What type of helmet will be worn by these players?

The FHSAA cannot answer that question right now.

“The vote happened yesterday (Tuesday), so as a staff right now we’re just looking into a number of different things. We’re not quite sure where we’re going quite yet,” Ozuna said in regard to what type of helmet will be worn since no equipment provider in the sport offers a women’s lacrosse helmet, nor has US Lacrosse announced specification standards for what a women’s lacrosse helmet should be. "It’s a little premature to kind of guess where we’re going to go — whether it’s a soft or hard. If it’s a soft helmet, which helmet would it be? We’re not there yet. We’re looking into it.”

It is with that decision — that there has been no specific piece of equipment taken into account with this mandate — that disappoints the governing body for the sport the most. Expressed Coyne:

“US Lacrosse had no input into this decision. We were afforded very little time to talk or present on the subject other than within the operation committee. We were not consulted previous to this meeting. I had a single conversation with Alex Ozuna in which I laid out what US Lacrosse has been doing in women’s game safety and the head gear standard. He was very understanding of where we were and asked Bruce [Griffin; US Lacrosse’s Health & Safety Director] and I to come to attend the meeting to present that to the committee — which we did; but, we were not afforded that some opportunity at the board level. A discussion was limited to 20 minutes. It was taken up mostly by the [board member] who proposed the mandate. It seemed as if the members of the board had no interest in hearing what we had to say, which is disappointing.

…We honestly believe that players who want additional protection should be able to wear it — it’s our intention to make that standard optional. We understand that there will be state associations that want to mandate it and, in this case, we were hoping to work with the FHSAA… There is nothing out there that is designed for the women’s game and I see a tremendous amount of liability for that association should they provide some type of head gear for the girls not designed for the game and a young woman is to be injured. I would imagine that that would create a very interesting situation for them.”

Some of the All American selections this year? Wont name names but we all know. 29 goals? Ridiculous. Carol Rose as the former chair of the US Lacrosse All American Selection Committee possibly affecting that selection? Among others? What's going on here for all these years is disgusting. It's time for a change. Email US Lacrosse acarpenetti@uslacrosse.org and tell them. Email LIMLF at ajrit5@aol.com and tell them that your sick and tired of the coercion and political favoritism taking place on LI.

Did someone's daughter not get all American and now daddy's panties are in a bunch!!!

No not at all. The kids who don't deserve it but get it anyway pisses me and a lot of others off. It's obvious and finally going to end.

You still didn't explain how a kid with 29G 10A wins All American over the Bellport kid with 77 goals and 20 assists? Bell port kid plus SC Allstars not YJ. I'm waiting for the explanation.

How much did HS Coach Fight for Girl, did Coach put her in for consideration before season started, How well does Coach get along with others Coaches. Also Scoring a lot of goals does make you an All American

How much did HS Coach Fight for Girl, did Coach put her in for consideration before season started, How well does Coach get along with others Coaches. Also Scoring a lot of goals does make you an All American

No not at all. The kids who don't deserve it but get it anyway pisses me and a lot of others off. It's obvious and finally going to end.

You still didn't explain how a kid with 29G 10A wins All American over the Bellport kid with 77 goals and 20 assists? Bell port kid plus SC Allstars not YJ. I'm waiting for the explanation.

You're complaining someone didn't have enough goals to be deserving of AA? What about the defenders who don't score goals or the midfielders? In your mind it's the number of goals that makes an AA? Seriously? It's amazing the amount of cry babies that post here.

Is this serious, no offense but not even sure which Bellport kid you are talking about and if you are going to use stats to pick AA then the kid you are talking about is down on the list behind many YJ kids that did not get AA. While I agree many more deserving kids than who you are talking about but I do not see you complaining about the non YJ kid whos numbers are not very good either.

Honestly you people are clueless. Stats? points? really? That's what you think makes you worthy of AA? Let me get this straight. If you are a great Player on a great team who plays the best competition and you run the score up, you and your team are lambasted for poor sportsmanship, But you will have great stats. If the coach doesn't run up the score and takes said great player out or makes sure everyone gets a chance to score, the great player isn't worthy because she doesn't have great stats. The kid on a below average team, who plays poor competition(i.e. Bellport) is able to rack up the points against one of the weakest schedules in the division is more worthy? Look at the kids who made AA, their best games weren't against weak competition. In addition the better teams usually have more players who can score therefore even the best player won't get all that many scoring opportunities. None of this even takes into account the defensive side of the ball, which btw is REALLY important! Nice try though!!!!

come on man .....any girl on belport should have to score 1000 goals to make AA with the schedule they play..... they play nobody.. and if she is that good , how come they havent made the playoffs her entire career

Under Armour roster is up on the website, lots of deserving girls... Definitely a few questionable selections.. 3 goalies btw.. Never saw that before..