Jump to content

The lacrosse goal: ban it?


seagoal

Recommended Posts

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

I had the Gretzky pulled on me last night. Center was behind the net faking left, faking right and passed the puck over the net to a Dman breaking in down the slot. He blasted it but the shot just hit me. I dont like it but got to give them credit when they go aerial and start playing 3 D hockey

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I usually toss my catcher hand up there and pull the puck and blade/stick out of their hands.

I've also slashed the stick really hard and taken a penalty, grabbed the stick/puck and the puck trickled out, which resulted in a penalty.

I've also been hit in the face/cage with the stick and had the opposing player not get called for high sticking/spearing.

Outside of tossing your hand there and getting lucky, they should call this play more harshly. Stick over the crossbar, no goal. Hit the goalie in the face, no goal. Spear the goalie, penalty.

Make them make the play right, don't stand there in awe and not want to be the fun police. When done properly with no infractions, I'm cool with it. Zegras looked clean. Others.... not so much.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, tubby34 said:

I usually toss my catcher hand up there and pull the puck and blade/stick out of their hands.

I've also slashed the stick really hard and taken a penalty, grabbed the stick/puck and the puck trickled out, which resulted in a penalty.

I've also been hit in the face/cage with the stick and had the opposing player not get called for high sticking/spearing.

Outside of tossing your hand there and getting lucky, they should call this play more harshly. Stick over the crossbar, no goal. Hit the goalie in the face, no goal. Spear the goalie, penalty.

Make them make the play right, don't stand there in awe and not want to be the fun police. When done properly with no infractions, I'm cool with it. Zegras looked clean. Others.... not so much.

Interesting take.

If a goalie is down, on his knees or on all 4s, and let's say an attacking player near the crease hits him in the head or face with a follow through on a one timer and the puck goes in....is that a penalty? High sticking? A good goal?

I'm honestly not sure .  I don't think the lacrosse play should be treated differently in this regard. In terms of hitting a goalie in the face it's just one among other types of shots.  It's not unique.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, seagoal said:

Interesting take.

If a goalie is down, on his knees or on all 4s, and let's say an attacking player near the crease hits him in the head or face with a follow through on a one timer and the puck goes in....is that a penalty? High sticking? A good goal?

I'm honestly not sure .  I don't think the lacrosse play should be treated differently in this regard. In terms of hitting a goalie in the face it's just one among other types of shots.  It's not unique.

Contacting the goalie in the head with your stick should be a penalty 100% of the time, even if we're down in a butterfly. Possible exception being if we're prone on the ice and someone is digging for the puck.

High sticking is, essentially, a penalty for not having safe control of your stick. If you're hitting the goalie in the head with your stick, then you don't have safe control of it.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, CJ Boiss said:

Contacting the goalie in the head with your stick should be a penalty 100% of the time, even if we're down in a butterfly. Possible exception being if we're prone on the ice and someone is digging for the puck.

High sticking is, essentially, a penalty for not having safe control of your stick. If you're hitting the goalie in the head with your stick, then you don't have safe control of it.

Right, that makes sense.  So it has nothing to do with the height of contact,  it's just hitting in the head equals penalty.

It'd be interesting to see this sequence: lacrosse move, hit goalie in head, puck goes in.

Good goal? Hopefully not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, seagoal said:

Right, that makes sense.  So it has nothing to do with the height of contact,  it's just hitting in the head equals penalty.

It'd be interesting to see this sequence: lacrosse move, hit goalie in head, puck goes in.

Good goal? Hopefully not.

The way games are called now, it'd probably be a good goal. Remember that time Neal broke his stick across Hellebuyck's face?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, CJ Boiss said:

The way games are called now, it'd probably be a good goal. Remember that time Neal broke his stick across Hellebuyck's face?

 

Ouch, jeez.  I had not seen that.  Well, that type of play is kinda what the lacrosse play is inviting, more and more. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Decades ago when the lacrosse goal was called the 'Michigan', every ham and egger tried it. But we hugged the post then, so I'd reach over the net and simply hit the dude with my glove when they were attempting to pick it up. Although these kids today are slippery fast scooping it up. Most don't even slow down when they're skating around the net.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, MTH said:

Decades ago when the lacrosse goal was called the 'Michigan', every ham and egger tried it. But we hugged the post then, so I'd reach over the net and simply hit the dude with my glove when they were attempting to pick it up. Although these kids today are slippery fast scooping it up. Most don't even slow down when they're skating around the net.

Here's a successful lacrosse save in real life, by the looks of it

 https://www.instagram.com/tv/CZ8qtdYNm1J/?utm_medium=share_sheet

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, CJ Boiss said:

The way games are called now, it'd probably be a good goal. Remember that time Neal broke his stick across Hellebuyck's face?

 

Someone does this to me, I'm kicking their ass. Doens't matter in that moment, or moments later when I jump them in the corner. They are getting their ass kicked.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, MTH said:

Decades ago when the lacrosse goal was called the 'Michigan', every ham and egger tried it. But we hugged the post then, so I'd reach over the net and simply hit the dude with my glove when they were attempting to pick it up. Although these kids today are slippery fast scooping it up. Most don't even slow down when they're skating around the net.

Decades ago hockey players played defense and were actually close to the opponent so any such maneuvers were defeated before they could be effective. Watch any goal highlights from today and you may see all five players near their goal, yet miraculously they are not covering anyone. Instead they cover space and puckwatch. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is really hard. I think both views of what used to be called "hot dog" moves and are now called "really skillful" are appropriate. But there's no getting around it; lacrosse/michigan/the Hertl move b/w his legs up until recently would have drawn a heavy response from a D man or defending F. Whether the absence of such a response is a good thing or bad thing is beside the point. The present hockey environment encourages the lacrosse/michigan/cutie pie moves. So, like always, it is up to us to figure how to stop the shot/move.

WillyGrips13, 100%. Collapse to the goal but no one is on a man. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...