BOTC - US Lacrosse Community Forum Forums NORTHEAST LACROSSE BOTC MAIN FORUM (LI, CT, WC) Faceoff Petition 2014

That sounds fair, and easy to enforce. Any other thoughts?

Or move the restraining line forward and enforce that a pop occurs before entering the box or consider a back of the stick pinch a possession and free the restraining line at that point

I like it also, would vote for that over a 3 second rule, but both are better than what they are proposing.

All great suggestions. That's why actual F/O specialists need to be included. We can come to a compromise that everyone can live with. How do we insure our suggestions are considered?

Email the rules committee.

Any rule change that still includes the ball in the back of the stick is horrible. The back of the stick is not intended to carry the ball.

Now you need FO Guys with great offensive lacrosse skills, eliminates half of the current crew. Now the wings just got a gift.The LSM just got more money.

Why, because you said so? Clearly you have nothing constructive to add, and are not educated on the position. Please go away

Lacrosse faced off the same way for decades... It's only a problem now because a small percent of kids decided to work their [lacrosse] off to improve.

Competition committee just reaffirmed why Lacrosse will never be viewed as more than the third world nation of sports to mainstream USA ...

....OH, And please don't for a second site Goddell and NFL comp committee changes... Goddell is only dreaming of ways exploit fans and players to protect their billion dollar Empire

you said it...this rule change is huge...say goodbye to the finesse fogo who excelled at technique. goodbye small weaker fogos. this takes us back to the scrap and claw faceoffs and makes tough wing players a premium to have on the roster. the rule change is clear that they want that ball out and "lets get it on!"

The best face off guys in the history of the sport were great players not just guys who mastered cheating! This rule will get the wings involved again like they were intended and make the FOGO need actual lacrosse skills. These are all good things for the game.

I proposed the face off circle earlier, and think many of these comments on top of it are very good. This poster is correct. It is inevitable that there will be rules against play to carry the ball in back of the stick. If the FOGOs want a better rule, they'd better propose a good one for the rule committee. There is no way that a face off rule will be adopted if it includes unlimited running around the restraining area with the ball in the back of the stick. Counting a ball picked up in the back of a stick as a possession is not going to fly either. Those are just guesses of mine and don't consider me an authority.

Basically the pieces of a better rule are:
1. No illegal heads. The game needs specific rules on pinched heads which are enforced like the curve on a hockey stick. There should be no such thing as a face off device that is not the same specs as a field player stick.
2. Players can pinch and pop the ball, but the space on the field to do this needs to be restrained. A face off circle area or a smaller restraining box. The current restraining box I don't believe will cut it with the rule writers.
3. Clarity on the debate over whether ball lifted on back of the stick is a possession to release the restrain. I don't think that having the ball pinched on back of stick should count, and that is why I like the face off circle. FOGO leaves the circle with the ball on the back of stick = loss of possession. FOGO pops ball out or passes it out before leaving the circle, then ok.

This rule happened to take away playing lacrosse in the back of the stick. A rule modification proposal to make it so FOGO's play less with ball in back of stick makes for a losing battle I believe.

Might be the most educated person in the world on the position. Their opinion does not agree with yours. Your scorn, therefore, represents you as a rather uneducated person.

That is not entirely true. Part of the outcry against FOGOs is the face off has changed a lot with the equipment changes and improvements. You could not do with a wooden head or an early 1980s plastic head what FOGOs can do today. FOGOs carrying the ball and making passes from back of the stick in the box is not something we were seeing decades or even a few years ago. The rules makers want to restrain that. For FOGOs to not get blasted by this rule, propose a middle ground. That has to include severely limits on carrying the ball backwards, so propose what you can live with I suggest.

DO you really think you will have the power to change things because you are a parent. It is what it is get use to it and move on. Change is good

I totally agree.

why is he not allowed an opinion? I agree with him, I like the rule change and IMHO the ball should not be allowed to be played in the back of the stick and I believe that all these great FOGO's will adapt and they will still be great FOGO's just different technique

Again someone who has NO idea what they're talking about! First of all, wooden head, really??? Second, if this new equipment is to blame then why is the most sought after head for faceoffs, the OG Blade, discontinued about a decade ago? (goes for about 500$ on ebay) Carrying the ball in the back after the win is a burden, no player wants that ball back there any longer than it needs to be. Forcing a earlier pop out is a great suggestion, because it still allows for a clean win, yet makes it harder for the F/O man to hold on if he is not a skilled player.

Everyone is allowed an opinion. I don't mind the ball in the back of the stick, but I have a FOGO that is executing that particular move at a very high level...So my opinion is biased and I know it. However, there is no opinion that changes one simple fact, more ground balls at the x necessarily means more injuries.

Four men charging the x at full speed (3 seconds) two men battling equals a scrum on most F/O. Scrums mean slashing and hitting and lots of people on the ground. Some of those people will twist ankles, some will get crushed and have a concussion. More contact equals more injuries at a time when the growth of the sport will come from football.

Seems to me the smart people coming up with new rules or rule changes should consider likelihood of injury and growth of the game as the two most important priorities...

How will new rules effect growth of the game? Well if growth comes from TV coverage, the scrums will not fare well. TV likes action it can see and follow. Scrums are just a big mess. The pinch/pop made Brandon Fowler a star in this sport because everyone (except Syracuse) loved watching him sprint down with the ball. I guess someone forgot to tell him he wasn't a lax player...

some of you don't like it because it adds to much importance to one position on the field. To that, the counter argument is to take a step back and look at the two or three money sports. Baseball think pitcher, football think QB or running back or WR, basketball think power forward, center, point guard. Every big sport has role players because role player perfect their skill and contribute to the success of the team. That is exactly what a FOGO does, whether you like the role or not...so it is here to stay.

I think everyone that has a FOGO simply gets offended by some of the mindless people that make comments like FOGO is not an athlete or doesn't know how to play lax. Those same people are cheering for my son and then come here and anonymously make hurtful comments. Makes people mad and I understand that also.

It is funny though, through years of this, not one person has ever voiced these comments to me face to face...

So, to each of you , of course you can have an opinion, but because many of us don't agree with you doesn't make my kid any less athletic and certainly doesn't make anyone a whiner (as that word gets thrown around but some).

My boy will be fine should the rule pass. Already figured out what to do and how because he is practicing every day...

But he won't have to change as the rule won't get implemented. 3600 signatures so far and image it will be closer to 5k by the 10th of sept.

Excellent post. I can also say from experience that returning to the techniques of the 80s will not move the game forward. I was a F/O man at that time for a top team, and went on to play D1 on a scholarship. I did very well pulling the ball out behind me, or to my wing. Today's methods are so much more exciting to watch. This position has evolved in a positive way I would not want to see my son F/O the way I did, it was messy, and yes there were a lot of injuries. I can see tweaking it a little but not allowing the ball in the back of the stick at all seems to be overreaching.

So 10K on signatures can make this go away????Really. Please tell me your name so I can see if you are who I think you are...Get real. The FOGO is here for now but the future doesn't look good. SO changes are coming. Sooner then I thought. I am fine either way. Just don't think the signatures will make any difference at all. We don't make the rules as parents.

Agreed, excellent post and thanks for the insight from the former F/O man.

I posted earlier that I don't think that carrying the ball on the back of the stick is playing lacrosse, and face off rules hurt non-lacrosse player FOGOs. In the youth game learn to play in addition to learning to face off. 5,000 signatures sounds good, but with over a million kids playing lacrosse and about 800,000 registered with US Lacrosse, I am not so confident that voice is loud enough. I think that if FOGOs can propose a rule rather than oppose this, it would be better embraced than a petition with 5,000 signatures. I do think it is an excellent point by the poster to note increased head or other injury in scrums as a consequence of this rule change. That WILL BE HEARD. It is your job now as FOGOs to propose an amended rule set for restraints on carrying the ball backwards, release rules, etc. The people who do lacrosse rules are not too with it - think invisible shot clocks - and can use some constructive help. If it is emphasized as a safety issue, the arguments are more powerful. That's my two cents as a non-FOGO Dad. Good luck!

Good, well thought out post, but the one point I disagree with you is when you say that "some of you don't like it because it adds to much importance to one position on the field. To that, the counter argument is to take a step back and look at the two or three money sports. Baseball think pitcher, football think QB or running back or WR, basketball think power forward, center, point guard." The difference I think between your example and the FOGO, is that in each of those 3 other sports, the team that was just scored upon will automatciavlly get the ball back. Obviously, this is not true in LAX. A superior FOGO will consistently win the majority of faceoffs and allow their team to keep possesion. I think the rule change is trying to somehow level the playing field for possesion (diminish teh baility for a superior FOGO to win teh majority of faceoffs), thus making the games tighter. I personally do not like the ball being stuck in the back of the stick, but if this rule were to stay unchanged, then I think there needs to be a shot clock, so that the faceoff win/possesion is made more even. I am also sure that the better FOGOs will adjust and come up with different techniques to stay on top.

some much good dialog once the insults subsided I just wanted to add that the face off rules have changed over the years and they are not the same for the last 40 years.

From what I remember in the early 70's was 1) the heads touched and 2) the ball was off the ground between the two pockets 3) sticks did not bend like they do now 4)no LSM's on the wings and probably the biggest thing was that the wings engaged as soon as the reached the "X" - and it did make for some big hitting, usually the biggest collision?contact of the games

The biggest strongest guy on the team took the faceoff and it was a clamp and pull back or a rake right to a wing. rarely did you have the wrestling match that we see now with the guys spinning in circles. The reason that you had so much more transition off the faceoff was not because of the ball being on the ground or wings getting it but because the F/O and SSM's stayed on the field and played regardless of who one the face off and you never heard a team win a faceoff and the bench yell "yellow".

It is no one single factor that has gotten us from "The old days" to where we are today but a series of subtle changes and I think this is another change that will have huge impacts on a relatively few players and no major impact on the game.

I am the FOGO dad from the above post. Thank you for the thoughtful comments in response, all good points.

One further note that I am not sure many people know. For D-1, the best FO percentage in the country in 2014 was 68%, the tenth best was 58%, the 42 best was 50%.


So while people may want parity as a result of the new proposed rules, I would venture to guess that the best kid in the country will still be around 70% next year. So the rules won't likely accomplish parity.

It means that the issue really comes down to the back of the stick vs scrums and injury.

That said, I know that through HS, the disparity in winning %s is far greater. The kid that wrote the petition (nice kid by the way) wins all the time. My kid (different age) wins all the time. As a result, the audience here which is most likely the parents of kids between 3rd grade and 12th grade, see it from a much different perspective and I understand that also. It must be hard to be losing a big HS game because the opposing FOGO never losses.

But in college D-1 lax, there is pretty good parity now and the truth is that if they left it alone as more pinch and pop kids get to that level, the playing field is level.

We should also note, the HS rules haven't changed, even if the NCAA adopts the HS will not, at least for this year. SO those kids will still be pinching and popping for the next HS season. As most tournaments we attended this summer play HS rules, I suspect we will see it all of next summer without regard to NCAA rules.

Interesting stats. I agree that there is probably more disparity in high school as opposed to college.

I just re-read the petition, does anyone know the main driver behind the possible rule swith with pinching and popping? It is not stated in the petition, not sure if that type of information is public.

The face off is a great part of the game and has been for a long time. It should remain an important part of the game, but it shouldn't have a disproportionate impact on the outcome. Lacrosse is a game of possessions. If you have a FOGO that wins north of 50% then that team has a huge advantage over their opponent. I can't think of another sport that has a "face off" like event that can alter the outcome of a game. Not allowing a player to hold the ball in the back of the stick is a fine change and will result in more ground balls and should mitigate the impact of having a FOGO that has mastered the pinch and pop - it's better for the game and is probably a better alternative to doing away with the face off entirely. And more injuries? Please, that's a lame excuse to not making changes.

It seems to me they can have more impact on possessions by clarifying the rule around the shot out of bounds. Totally subjective call about who was closer to the spot where the ball went out. Happens in every game 10 times a game, a race to that spot with a kid holding out his stick. No athletic talent there at all, just run and dive...

If they really were concerned about possessions they would have put in the shot clock on every play. clearly that was not their concern.

Safety is lame ? Ok, why?

Why is it better for the game to remove pinch and pop? I have heard several times but no one gives an answer. Please enlighten those of us that don't understand why the game will be better.

This is the quote from the man that runs the rules committee for NCAA
Hind said. “Faceoffs continue to be an important part of the game, but the committee feels that some of the current tactics being used are contrary to the spirit of the rule.”

You mean to tell me this is it? The spirit of the rule? Really Let's not use statistics let's go on a feeling "the spirit of the rule" like they sat down with the creator!
That is your main driver behind this proposed change, nothing more, except for a few crying coaches that didn't want to recruit a faceoff kid

You sound like a crying parent. Look at what you wrote and just put your name in there it's the same thing. If your kid wasn't a FOGO player you would care less like most people. Let them make changes. All things can't stay the same

Safety in and of itself isn't lame, but using improved safety as a reason to keep the face offs status quo is lame. GBs are part of the game and involving the wingmen (6 players in total vs. just the two FOGOs) will equalize the situation.

Shot clock is another good idea, the stall tactic blows...these are all good improvements to the game...Why are so many against the changes to the face-off, there is not another position on the field that can have the same impact on the game (it's totally disproportionate to any other aspect of the game)

You certainly aren't helping them with this argument.After what you said I hope they do make the changes

The pinch and pop is essentially "with holding" the ball for a brief period of time, which is illegal. Perhaps that's the reason?

Thanks for finding the reason (whether or not it is good or not) behind the proposed rule chnage. Seems as though a simple change would be to eliminate the pinch and pop (I happen to agree with that, think it goes against the rules for teh rest of the game), but also, if safety is a concern, then simply elimniate the wings from going into the circle. That would elimnate the possible collisions, and would still allow a good FOGO to shine.

What am I missing?

Different perspective for a minute and just my opinion. This change to the game is not a move forward, rather a move backward.

People got creative and used the tools available to them to create a new move--the pinch and pop. Rather than outlaw the move, those people should be thanked for creating something that is exciting and fresh, not too mention extremely successful and cuts down on bone crushing collisions (yes I know, the tough guys out there like the collisions). But as another poster pointed out, the best is only winning 70% of the time at the D-1 level...so lets not give this new move too much actual game impact as the best have always won around 70% of their moves. So the only difference is the amount of collisions and resulting injuries.

Even if the impact on possessions was great, isn't that why colleges try and recruit the best players? Football rule changes are just the opposite--move the PAT back so that the better kickers can get the points...give skill a chance to make the game more competitive for those willing to do the work. Move the line of scrimmage on the kickoff up so we will have less bone crushing hits. Make skill positions more skilled. Imagine if they outlawed the curve ball in baseball because one guy did it better than everyone else??? What if they said David Tyree can't use his helmet to catch the ball???

No, not that simple. This step backward makes the time it takes to F/O far longer and will just result in the two toughest guys on the field fighting each other for the ball. Completely taking away skill and athleticism and creating a fight. That is a step backward I/M/O.

Ball in the back of the stick is withholding ball from play? I guess they haven't seen a guy with the ball running around with the ball in the front? What is the difference? Ball is dislodged from the front or the back quite easily. They put the ball in the back because there is just enough grab to let the person lift the ball from the ground and move away from the other player. Hit that shaft with the ball in the back and I would argue it is in fact easier to dislodge as there is no pocket to protect the ball. Have you seen how easy it is for them to pop the ball out?

The premise that the back of the stick is some how a stronger position to interact with the ball is plainly false. If it were true no one would use the front pocket. So silly an argument, but one that the rules committee knows can easily manipulate those who haven't played the game.

I would prefer to d up against some poor soul with the ball in the back pocket every day of the week (played for many years and I for one like the new move because it adds some excitement to the game). Most of the people liking the rule-never played this game - or are stuck with the memories of how they played the game. It is those people and the rules committee that need to learn to accept the change and help grow the game rather than moving it backward...my opinion, but fire away...

It is time for the FOGO defenders and FOGO Dads to take a deep breath and accept this plain fact: the rule makers do not want lacrosse played with the ball on the back of the stick. Fight all you want, but that is what they are going to put into rule. I am not against pinch and pop, but I see the point in a rule against pinch and play. This thread keeps reverting back to the starting point of people complaining, and that along with a petition with 10K signatures is not worth much. Suggest something to have a rule you can live with to the rules committee that severely restrains carrying the ball on the back of the stick, and propose it or get run over. This is not a rule change that is happening because your sons are good at a skill, it is a rule change because the face off X has become an extension of HS varsity wrestling season into spring. And watching wrestling sucks.

when was the last time you watched a pinch and pop turn into a wrestling match? Please that is what the proposed rule will create. Silly comments from someone that knows better I suppose.

The rule will be the guys have 5 seconds to get it out, take it or leave it but you heard here first.

And for the record, signatures mean everything