The NCAA Men’s Lacrosse Rules Committee discussed the current rules of play and made only minor adjustments at its annual meeting August 6-8. The committee’s actions must be considered by the Playing Rules Oversight Panel before final implementation. The Playing Rules Oversight Panel is scheduled to meet September 3.

The group reviewed the major changes made last season to the faceoff procedure and pace of play and believes these were positive adjustments.

“We had some extensive discussions and believe our rules are in very good shape,” said Willie Scroggs, senior associate athletics director at North Carolina and chair of the committee. “Adjustments made in recent years have achieved our intended goals.”

The committee also discussed how it plans to approach the two-year rules process, which all NCAA rules committees are using. The next edition of the rules book, published this fall, will cover the 2009 and 2010 competition seasons. After the 2009 season, the committee plans an extensive survey that will include significant rules proposals.

“This is a change in the way we do business, but we believe it is a positive change,” Scroggs said. “We hope to use the time to fully investigate some different ways to play the game and continue to monitor how it is played at the college level.”

The committee approved two points of emphasis for the upcoming season: sportsmanship issues, particularly during warm-ups, and protection of the head and neck area.  Data from the NCAA’s Injury Surveillance System indicates that concussions continue to be one of the most common injuries in men’s lacrosse.

One rule adjustment the committee made deals with a player that loses a piece of required equipment during play. For example, an attacking player that drives toward the goal loses a shoe during play, but shoots and scores. Previously, the goal would be disallowed and the defending team gains possession of the ball. Under the committee’s proposal, the goal is still disallowed, but the offensive team retains possession.

“The committee believes this is a positive change,” Scroggs said. “This rule remains a safety issue, but we believe the previous rule unfairly penalized the attacking team.”