Fl g Is Down
The Scoop: Gentlemen, when is a check no longer legal?
Jimmy Tighe: A check is no longer a legal check when a player isn't using it to get the ball or is using it to hurt another player. Period.
Darrell Benson: Jimmy's point is well taken. Typically we're looking for a check that is simply trying to dislodge the ball. Most checks either start off as illegal and up being called as illegal checks and only in minor instances is a check initiated as legal and eventually becomes illegal. In other words, a kid might try to ride somebody and he'll have two hands on his stick together and he'll hit him on the shoulder, but it'll slide up and hit the kid in the neck or head area. That's when a particular check becomes illegal, when it rises above the neck.
Paul Quill: I agree with everything that's been said. We didn't talk about the actual rule as far as it has to be delivered to the front or side. It can't be below the waist, it can't be above the neck. It also can't be delivered with one hand off the stick. There are so many different parameters to it.
DB: And some of it is age appropriate. What might be legal at U15 as a legal body check in an attempt to dislodge the ball is not legal at U11. At age 11, no contact is legal other than incidental contact.
PQ: Unnecessary roughness we call quite a bit. "Why is that unnecessary?" is the first thing a coach will ask. "All he did was knock the kid down." That's why it's unnecessary, coach. If your kid is going for a loose ball
all he has to do is
lot to do with it. And of course intent is a huge thing.
The Scoop: How difficult is it to determine intent?
PQ: I don't think it's all that difficult when you're watching the game and you're in the flow of the game. When there's a loose ball and that defender is ten yards away and he just goes right to the body, you know his intent that whole way was to just take that kid out. You know that. The ball's loose, he can go for the ball or he can go for the kid. And he comes from ten yards and lights the kid up. His intent there was to knock that kid down. There's no doubt about it.
DB: One of the things with intent is, we're not psychologists, we can't get in the kid's head, but you know it when you see it. In fact, we don't legislate or adjudicate intent. It's one of the words we stay away from. Because intent can lead to an expulsion, if its uttered. We don't use the word, but deep down, we know what the intent was.
PQ: Some times it can be very easy, and sometimes it can be more difficult. Like when a shooter is completely out of control, running as fast as he can, off-balance, and the defender takes a step, and just kind of puts a shoulder into him. The kid who took a shot was so off balance that he flies. And the defender only gave him a bump. You say to yourself, the defender's intent was to bump the kid off the ball, he only took a step, but the crowd reacts and wants a flag. And that's an instance where his intent wasn't to kill him, but it looked bad.
DB: You need to see it before it happens. As the defender is making his mind up as to what he's going to
"Body Checks"
The Scoop sat down with three Senior EMLOA Officials for a conversation about body checks in MBYLL youth lacrosse. Joining us for a candid conversation about the rules were Darrell Benson (President of Eastern Massachusetts Lacrosse Officials Association), Jimmy Tighe (EMLOA Assigning Authority), and Paul Quill (NW Region Officials Coordinator). Combined, they have over 70 years of officiating experience.
A Candid Conversation with EMLOA Officials
32 The Scoop / Winter '15
do next, it's up to us to kind of see what he's going to do. If you see the blood in the kid's eye because he just got beat on a goal two plays earlier, then there's a good chance he's just going to come out and get his pound of flesh. So we try and
bump the kid away.
He doesn't need to
plant and hit him so
hard his feet come off
the ground. Some
people are under the
impression that just
because the check
was delivered with
the shoulder into the
other kid's shoulder,
that it's legal. And
that's not true. The
force of the hit has a