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

Accept? Perhaps that is your way but certainly not mine as a fogo i will continue to push. Your way is the past, mine is the future and I will fight for it. Wish some more of you had my back

My family taught me to fight for what i believe and I believe strongly this is a mistake.

Pinch and pop is no better then just putting your glove on the ball and holding it in the pocket for a few seconds. The modern head designs are the only reason why pinch and pop even came about, not because it was ever intended to be part of the game. The change needs to happen to remove this unintended consequence of modern equipment design. Carrying the ball in the back of the head is simply not lacrosse. Most parents never played lacrosse so the spirit of the game means nothing to them. All these parents care about are the thousands they've spent on pinch and pop lessons being flushed down the toilet.

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...

I'm not sure what the average score of a college game is but let's say 10-8, that's 18 faceoffs and then another 4 for the start of each quarter (assuming no penalty ad possession at the end of a quarter). So on average there are perhaps 22 faceoffs. If you have a kid that wins 70% of the time, your team will win 15 faceoffs vs. your opponents 7, so you have 8 more possessions. In a game that's easy to stall and control the ball that seems like too big of an impact for one specialized aspect of the game. I don't care if it's eliminating the pinch and pop or not, but since that one move came into play the faceoff has had a disproportionate impact on the game of lacrosse. The ball gets lodged in the back of the stick because the neck is very thin and the sidewall strings wedge against the sidewalls when the ball is in the back of the stick - to me someone's found a loop hole. My son's team has an excellent faceoff kid and we certainly benefit from his dominance at the faceoff X, but i'd love to see what would happen if the faceoff was a 50-50 groundball situation.

what others agree. there are 5000 people that disagree as well as 70% of the current d-1 coaches. You are dead wrong

I really wish people would think a little bit before they post. The best FO men in D-1 have been consistently at 70% for the last 20 years.

The attempt by people to say the pinch and pop has increased wins is patently false. So your 10-8 example does not change the possession outcome whether there is pinch and pop or there isn't pinch and pop. that is why changing the rule makes absolutely no sense. All you gain by the rule change is more collisions at the x, the best D-! guys will still gain possession 70 % of the time.

Remember, you are watching kids play, and clearly the advantage on that level is greater. My son is winning 90% of the time. And half of that is backwards between his legs to the wing. He will still win with the rule change because the other kids just aren't as strong and fast. The only difference to me--honestly--is the extra scholarship $ he can get if he scores three goals a game on a fast break.

High School rules are n ot changing so they will pinch and pop next year, we are only talking about d-1...

The only way your example makes sense is if the proposal was to eliminate the FO all together. Recall, they tried that and it hurt the game so they brought it back.

Wake up people!

I really wish people would think a little bit before they post. The best FO men in D-1 have been consistently at 70% for the last 20 years.

The attempt by people to say the pinch and pop has increased wins is patently false. So your 10-8 example does not change the possession outcome whether there is pinch and pop or there isn't pinch and pop. that is why changing the rule makes absolutely no sense. All you gain by the rule change is more collisions at the x, the best D-! guys will still gain possession 70 % of the time.

Remember, you are watching kids play, and clearly the advantage on that level is greater. My son is winning 90% of the time. And half of that is backwards between his legs to the wing. He will still win with the rule change because the other kids just aren't as strong and fast. The only difference to me--honestly--is the extra scholarship $ he can get if he scores three goals a game on a fast break.

High School rules are n ot changing so they will pinch and pop next year, we are only talking about d-1...

The only way your example makes sense is if the proposal was to eliminate the FO all together. Recall, they tried that and it hurt the game so they brought it back.

Wake up people!

I guess at the college level things even themselves out a bit, so point taken on that aspect of the face off. So perhaps something needs to be done then at the youth level though - for one player to have such a disproportionate impact on a game (to use my prior example and your son's stellar face off winning percentage then your son's team has 18 more possessions - due to one player? You think that's fair?).

Do you really think the massive egos of the NCAA committe is going to change what they put down because of 5 people, 500 people or 5000 people? A petition and what we all think of any of their moves-- means NOTHING to them.

Do you really think the massive egos of the NCAA committe is going to change what they put down because of 5 people, 500 people or 5000 people? A petition and what we all think of any of their moves-- means NOTHING to them.

I just don't think it is about being fair. There will always be some that are better, some that are great. Those are the ones that get scholarships. At the college level they are all great, that's why it tends to even out a bit. This is life, same thing happens to the smart kids when they hit college.

You are forgetting that the rules committee only is making suggestions they are not the ones ultimately responsible. The proposals need to now be approved or modified. This process involves what the coaches think is best. I have a hard time believing that the majority of coaches will want this. My son is committed to a big program and we are visiting in a couple weeks, you know that this will be a topic I discuss with him, I will report back around the 8th and give everyone a heads up as to what he believes will happen on the 10th, voting day.

He will never tell you that he wants the changes to go into effect. You already know what he will say so no need to report it. We will just see if it will happen

Coach has always been open and honest, no reason to think he would act any other way, no matter the outcome. Kind of irritating that you are so presumptuous! And as far as "reporting" it, You can close your eyes when I do, have the feeling there are others on this thread that may like to hear what I have to say.

What are the proposed rule changes attempting to correct in this great game? Is it the dominance of FO specialists? If so, many commentators have pointed out dominance has been a long standing issue and this change will do nothing. Is it to increase scoring? Do not see how grinding it out at X will help in that regard. A good pinch and pop player will generate more scoring opportunities. Is it because Syracuse can't win a National Championship with all that talent because they get crushed on faceoffs? It seems unclear why the change is needed.

One thing where there seems to be a consensus is that people do no like the FOGO. If FOGO is the issue, then any rule change should reflect the idea that a player taking faceoffs should need to stay on the field. They can't just win the draw and go to "yellow" so a real player can get on. They should stay on the filed until a shot on goal or change of possession, or at least some minimum period of time.

Also, while carrying the ball in the back of ones stick is certainly no advantage, any rule change could be narrower to allow for the pinch and pop and then putting the ball in the front of the stick within a set period of time (2-3 sec.) or before the ball enters the box. Anything to add Jackwagon?

All the guy was saying is what you report on the 8th won't make a difference on the 10th

I'm going to start a petition that supports the face-off change. How many do you think would support that? Bam!

If you started a petition to eliminate the face off from the game it would most likely get about the same amount of signatures as this pathetic petition against a rule change that is intended to and will improve the game.

I am sure that after doing all those wrist exercises you will have another great use for your hands!!!!!lol

FOGO HAS GOT TO GO!!!!! Become real LAX players!!!!

You are an a$$. No way around it. get a life, hope I am fortunate enough never to cross your path again.

You are an a$$. No way around it. get a life, hope I am fortunate enough never to cross your path again.

I definitely support the face-off change and hope that it can be quickly applied at the high school and youth levels.

At the college level the pool of face off men is smaller and all are elite. At the youth level a dominant faceoff man under the current rules can win 90%+ of their face offs and single handedly change the outcome of a 10 vs 10 game with a one person effort.

Anyone who is not a faceoff man should look for face off win percentages to be much closer to 50%. An elite FOGO should be considered winning around 60-65%

We have a strong FOGO yet it makes little sense to me that we are awarded posession after just about every single goal and at the start of every quarter.

Looking for the I support the rule change petition and ready to sign.

The proposed news rules are suggestions to adapt the faceoff, not abolish it. Most people that have been around the game for a long time love the FO in lax. Nobody is suggesting to get rid of the face off.

The pinch/pop move is controversial because of the adaptations to head of the stick. The NCAA should focus on the technological "advances" the game has experienced in the equipment players use.

Narrower heads have led to fewer turnovers (no, I don't have empirical data, just a keen eye for how the game has evolved).

More turnovers = more unsettled situations. More unsettled situations = higher scoring. Higher scoring = well, you get it....

As far as the comment referring to old guys wanting to move the game backwards I'll say this: when stick heads weren't as narrow as they are today, the clamp & rake was the move and the technique is the much the same as the pinch & pop. Only difference? After winning the initial draw, the FO player had to push the ball out to his wingman or in front/behind him and fight for the loose ball. Hence, creating an unsettled situation.

So, I don't think this debate is about abolishing the faceoff position, or taking anything away from the importance of the faceoff player.

The issue is using the stick in a manner that gives a player an unfair advantage. Widen the head of the stick by a quarter inch at the mouth, and regulate stringing and we wouldn't be having this discussion.

To all the parents and players that have invested money and time to the faceoff position, relax. Your son will adapt to the new rules. His time invested in perfecting his craft has not been a waste.

For the record, as a "purist of the game" I don't think the back of the stick should be allowed to be used to advance the ball.

Let the arrows fly:)