National Collegiate Athletic Association

The NCAA News - News and Features

The NCAA News -- August 30, 1999

Men's lacrosse group delays action on automatic qualification

Automatic qualification for the Division I championship dominated discussions at the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Committee meeting July 18-22 in Teton Village, Wyoming.

However, all related recommendations were put on hold after the Division I Management Council referred automatic qualification as it applies to the men's championship back to the Division I Championships/Competition Cabinet for additional review at its September 13-17 meeting. The reasons cited for referral were concerns about the potential impact on the quality of the championship and the uncertainty about determining the appropriate level of access for conferences. Because of the referral, no automatic qualification forms have been sent to member schools.

In reaction to the Council's decision and to assist the cabinet with its meeting, the cabinet asked the lacrosse committee to provide information showing how automatic qualification would have affected the championships during the last five years.

Other recommendations made to the cabinet include a request that a rating percentage index (RPI) be used as part of the selection criteria in determining both the conferences that would receive automatic qualification and in selecting any at-large teams. The committee also recommended that additional criteria be used in determining at-large teams. Conferences that receive automatic qualification would be determined by the their RPI. The cabinet previously had recommended to the lacrosse committee that there be a maximum of four automatic qualification conferences plus the traditional representative from the West region.

In addition to the RPI, the other criteria approved by the lacrosse committee were head-to-head competition, results against the top 10 teams (as voted upon by the regional advisory committees) and results against teams not under consideration. This recommendation stands regardless of the outcome of the automatic-qualification issue. In other words, if approved, the criteria would be used either in selecting the entire tournament field or in selecting teams for those brackets not filled by automatic qualification.

As part of the selection discussion, the committee voted to discontinue its tradition of including Divisions II and III members of the committee in its in-person meeting during the weekend of selections. Although the Divisions II and III members did not vote on selections or seeding in the past, only Division I members will be present at this meeting.

Division I issues

In other Division I championship issues, the committee:

  • Voted to continue providing neutral clock and scoreboard operators for all championship competition.

  • Provided more flexibility for teams participating in the championship game by adjusting the schedule of available practice times available the day before the championship.

  • Reviewed a proposal for bracket expansion and format changes proposed by a member school. The committee agreed with the proposal in concept; however, it tabled further discussion until the Management Council took action on the matter. The Council subsequently voted down bracket expansion.

  • Discussed championships officiating issues with the U. S. Lacrosse Officials Council president and requested that the USLOC discuss its relationship with the United States Intercollegiate Lacrosse Association and clarify that relationship with the committee to help all entities to work together for the improvement of officiating.

    Division II issues

    The Division II Men's Lacrosse Committee responded to the mandate received from the Division II Championships Committee to realign from one to two regions and select one team from each region for its championship. Although the committee disagreed with the directive, it realigned its members as such, and forwarded that recommendation to the championships committee.

    The committee also presented a request to the Men's Lacrosse Committee that the Division II championship game be moved from the University of Maryland, College Park's Ludwig Field to the school's Byrd Stadium, where the Division I semifinals and the Division I and III championships are held. The lacrosse committee defeated that proposal, citing concerns about wear on the playing surface, especially in wet weather.

    Division III issues

    The Division III Men's Lacrosse Committee examined the implementation plan for automatic qualification for its 2000 championship and reviewed the selection criteria and pairing policies.

    The committee also voted to give those schools hosting preliminary-round competition the option of staging those games either on Saturday or Sunday to adjust for final examinations and graduation. The idea is to increase the number of schools that are able to host.

    In light of its members no longer being able to attend the in-person Division I selection meeting (see Division I issues above), the committee will forward a request to the USILA to finance committee members' travel for a Division III in-person meeting.

    Rules changesIn addition to issues regarding the Divisions I, II and III championships, the Men's Lacrosse Committee also approved the following rules changes during its July 18-22 meeting in Teton Village, Wyoming:

  • After an extensive discussion on the construction of crosses (commonly known as sticks) and the effect of new designs on the game, which was an extension of a meeting with manufacturers held at Maryland the day before the Division I semifinals, the committee formulated a recommendation to the respective division governance structures.

    Included in the recommendation are the following items that, if accepted, would be implemented for next season:

    (1) Deletion of an exception in the rules book that can be interpreted to mean that a sidewall made of gut can be any height. The rationale is that crosses with a gut wall are rarely, if ever, used and allowing an unlimited sidewall is both unsafe and unwise.

    (2) The sidewall shall be defined as the inside surface area (i.e., pocket side) of the wall, running from one point at which a line that is perpendicular to the shaft and runs through the widest portion of the head intersects the wall, to the other intersection point with the wall, and includes the surface area of the stop. The rationale is that there was no definition of a sidewall previously, but there was a limit to how high a sidewall could be; therefore, the sidewall needed to be defined.

    (3) The sidewall shall be no more than 2 inches wide. This limit was established in 1976, although it has since disappeared. In the 1999 book, the 2-inch limit is listed for goalkeeper's crosses only. During the May meeting, the committee understood that manufacturers have assumed a 2-inch limit on the sidewall, even though it was not spelled out in the book, so this is a change in wording only. Compliance already existed.

    (4) Beginning in 2001, the sidewall shall be smooth (i.e., no tabs, ridges, wings or any other protrusions) and perpendicular to a flat tabletop. The rationale is that the committee sees no other use for such features, other than to prevent free dislodging of the ball, which runs counter to the rules. A crosse in which the sidewall is not perpendicular could have the same effect as tabs, etc. The committee hopes to make crosses essentially consistent to eliminate any real or perceived advantage and place the focus on player skill rather than equipment. If the recommendation is implemented, an Approved Ruling (A.R.) would be added under the recommendation. This A.R. would read: "Is a sidewall with openings (e.g., holes) in it legal? RULING: Yes, provided it meets all other specifications."

  • Addressed the issue of players faking fouls by voting that if a player takes a dive or feigns slashes to the head, holding or pushing in order to deceive the official and draw a foul, the correct call shall be a technical foul and change of possession.

  • Determined that if a timeout is called when the team has none left, the officials shall honor the call regardless of the location of the ball. If the team does not have a timeout, that team shall lose possession.

  • Addressed a concern with pregame taunting before the officials arrive on the field. The committee will address this issue in the officiating video and have it mentioned as a point of emphasis during the clinics. As part of the discussion, the committee noted that coaches' behavior this year had improved considerably from previous years.

  • Noted that formalized experiments need to be run with the penalty box in scrimmages and preseason tournaments in the fall and that video should be taken of how these experiments work to help the committee in determining if it should consider modifying the penalty box as a future rules change. The committee, in conjunction with the USILA, will contact the hosts of such events to tell them how to run these experiments.