hand or the stick, and as we all know, as long as it's just considered a legitimate bona-fide attempt to dislodge the ball and even if he does get a little bit of the elbow or maybe the ribs a little bit, if the kid doesn't wince in pain, then it's just a failed attempt at a stick check rather than a slash.
The Scoop: Do you feel there should be different levels of allowable force with stick checks from level-to-level?
DB: Pretty much. At the U9/U11 level, stick checks should really be limited to pokes, lifts, and some slap checks. And that's basically it. The whole idea that we're allowing 11 year old kids to just swing recklessly and come over the top, I'd say 80% of the slashes that I call at the U11 level are over the top, on the head.
JT: We let the slashes go at the higher levels. So as to what Darrell says, they whack 'em, they whack 'em, they whack 'em, then they lift. Well... some of those whackings are really slashes, but we don't call them and anything that moves up the line or when we think the game is going so well, that there'll be no retaliation. We don't do that at the youth because they don't have that same mentality.
DB: You see it before it happens, you can see it coming as the kid's going up to get that stick, and when they're successful, the coach is going, "Great check, Johnny, great check!" And then the next one he gets him, boink, right on the middle of the helmet, so that should be disallowed as should any wild swings at the U11 level. They should be taught how to poke, how to lift. And I think if that's taught at the lowest levels, people will see how effective that is and you'll see some of the slashes go away.
PQ: A lot of times, like what Jimmy just mentioned, you know, in a good game, you don't have a lot of penalties and they're playing hard... you might be more apt to let something like a slash go. If he comes right down and gets all arm pad, you say "I can't call that now... this game is too good, they're not going to lose their head." But then you take that same level and the game's out of control, the score's out of control, the kids are starting to get a little upset, then you might have to throw a flag on that same exact type of check, because you know what, that's going to lead to something. In other words, sometimes the players just take care of themselves. You know? And sometimes they don't.
The Scoop: Where do you guys stand with the "No Downward Check Rule" specific to the U9 level?
PQ: I've read that rule before. Even for me, that would be somewhat kind of confusing. I can't see what the problem is, as long as that AO officiating the game knows that if a kid comes down too hard, then he's gotta call a slash. I don't see a problem with a kid coming down in a nice controlled manner and just checking another kid's stick, I don't see a problem with that at all.
The Scoop: The issue seems to be about interpretation. Last year it was changed to "No Aggressive Stick Checks, regardless of direction." Every year it is brought up to be discussed. And often an official, most likely an AO, has trouble interpreting the rule and making consistent calls.
PQ: Oh, I agree with you. And it's not really a lacrosse rule.
JT: If we discourage anything but poke checks, that's what they should be teaching: poke checks. They don't. They teach all these swing things and everything else. And maybe instead of trying to write a new rule about downward checks and all that, you put in something to the effect that all checks should try to be poke checks.
The Scoop: The current rule also states that lift checks and poke checks are preferred.
JT: That's probably the best way. Now a lot of guys might not understand that. A lot of them might not know what we're saying by lift check. They think that when you lift, you hold. Well that's not true. You hold when you keep it there for two seconds, and keep the kid in the air. When you poke, and lift... when his stick goes flying, that's a good check. Again, it's up to us to decide how far he went, and when the poke and the lift becomes a hold. And they're always screaming for a warding-off because the poor kid's hand is flying in the air.
DB: It's also an effective check, when you're trailing a player and you have a downward direction check, you don't get the ball... but you helicopter the stick out of the kid's hand, and everyone goes "Ooh" and "Aah," but the problem with that is that if coaches are teaching that, they're teaching the kid who's not playing good defense as a last resort to just try to catch that kid and helicopter his stick. And usually the first thing he gets is the helmet or the shoulder. And they should be taught to get in better position, to lift at that point, to come up from underneath, to lift and pop the ball right out or wait until you get into better position against him and poke and slap and do something different. I don't think there's an effective way to legislate it out of the game. I think it's better to use the phraseology that you just said: An aggressive stick check should be called, but we prefer the poke and the lift.
Darrell Benson
Paul Quill
Jimmy Tighe
The Scoop / Spring '15 33