Re: Why Are Coaches and Leagues Allowing Younger Boys to Body Check?

Why? Because more and more coaches and parents see lax as nothing more than "football with sticks". There is way too much emphasis all the way through the lax ranks on "sick stick skills" instead of the roots of the game and the meaning of lacrosse.

Why? Because lacrosse is being taught/instructed poorly.

In addition, the version of lacrosse we play is NOT baggataway, its not about training warriors. The game we play is based on the Iroquois version of the game, The Creators Game, the Medicine Game! The Native Iroquois roots of the game are not honored. The lax community likes to talk up a good stary about the "native roots of the game" for publicity purposes, but does not teach its own about what that really means.

I ran into a gentleman at a tournament a few weeks ago. I was finished coaching my hs team and was watching our youth team play. He stated he was now "happy to see his own son playing 7/8th grade lax because now they can hit." I stated lacrosse is not about hitting, its not football. Its a finess game that allows LIMITED body contact and if he wants to see big hits, go watch football."

There is way too much emphasis on winning, bragging, ego, domination, etc, etc, etc. The game is becoming classless. It is becoming just another "white mans" game like football, hockey, baseball and basketball. These game have no moral roots and culture. These game were developed solely for the recreational needs of bored people.

I coach high school lax in a non-traditional area. I am an east coast transplant. What I have seen out here at times has made me sick. Maybe lax in growing too fast for its own good. Maybe teams/coaches that promote unnecessary physical play should have their USLacrosse Insurance suspended.

Re: Why Are Coaches and Leagues Allowing Younger Boys to Body Check?

I'm going to disagree here. I think the kids should be allowed to check. But there is a difference between checking and hitting. The player who lines another player up and delivers a full speed blow should be penalized, but the player using his body to knock another off a ground ball or push an opposing player away from his goal should be allowed. Right now 4th graders in our league cannot check which leads to other problems. We often see one advanced player run the length of the field dodging past 3 or 4 defenders and shooting from point blank range. Because there is no body contact the defenders swing their sticks wildly at the head of the opposing players stick leading to viscous slashes. If you are going to have no body checking you must have a 2 or 3 pass rule.

Citing a study done on hockey players may be comparing apples to oranges. Hockey moves much faster than lacrosse, involves checking against boards and helmets with less protection than lacrosse. I believe soccer actually has the highest incident of concussions on the youth level. 4

I do agree about instruction today. The growth of the game is outpacing the supply of quality coaches. In games when the ball moves crisply and spends less time on the ground there is much less contact.

Re: Why Are Coaches and Leagues Allowing Younger Boys to Body Check?

Notwithstanding the racist part of desertlax's comment, I agree with him.

I didn't grow up playing lacrosse but I've been lucky to assistant coach under a great youth HC who taught the game to boys and me. I think the inappopriate body checking is part of the problem, along with youth programs that teach defense as "slash when the ball carrier gets within range and follow up with a cross check." But let's face it, if you only watch the NCAA, that looks like (note "looks like") the way defense is played.

Body checking is part of the game, but I think the U-9 level is completely too young and maybe even at the U-11 level. Maybe from a safety perspective, leagues go with minimum/maximum weights similar to youth football so that a 120 pound defender isn't inappropriately levelling an 90 pound attack player who happens to be his age or maybe even older.

But we as coaches also have to educate the parents. As the previous poster notes, this isn't football with sticks. It's not even hockey where the players are more padded up.

Re: Why Are Coaches and Leagues Allowing Younger Boys to Body Check?

Notwithstanding the racist part of desertlax's comment, I agree with him.

I didn't grow up playing lacrosse but I've been lucky to assistant coach under a great youth HC who taught the game to boys and me. I think the inappopriate body checking is part of the problem, along with youth programs that teach defense as "slash when the ball carrier gets within range and follow up with a cross check." But let's face it, if you only watch the NCAA, that looks like (note "looks like") the way defense is played.

Body checking is part of the game, but I think the U-9 level is completely too young and maybe even at the U-11 level. Maybe from a safety perspective, leagues go with minimum/maximum weights similar to youth football so that a 120 pound defender isn't inappropriately levelling an 90 pound attack player who happens to be his age or maybe even older.

But we as coaches also have to educate the parents. As the previous poster notes, this isn't football with sticks. It's not even hockey where the players are more padded up.

Re: Why Are Coaches and Leagues Allowing Younger Boys to Body Check?

Let's keep the discussion going. My experience (6-7-8 yr olds) is not to coach full body checking. since the ball is on the ground frequently you will have body contact and pushing but not 5 yrds off ball clear out checking. One playday I had there was an opposing player chasing one of my players with the ball and all he attempted to do was body check him out of bounds. which he did. Both went down. My player passed the ball off to another boy on our team before he was full body checked and we proceeded to get a goal. funny thing was my guy got right up and their player was hurt and left the game. They were obviously taught this and shame on their coach. I will not play them again. period.

US LACROSSE. please try to uniform the game rules expectations of youth lacrosse

Re: Why Are Coaches and Leagues Allowing Younger Boys to Body Check?

I also disagree with the broad use of "hitting" in this blog. Body Checking, when done properly, is a way to change an opposing player's direction. That is what should be taught because a player cannot threaten the goal if they move East and West. The lowering of the head is improper and that is a "hit" or it can be viewed as a take out body check, so there's goes the yellow laundry. A shoulder bump is fine even by defintion in Under 11 rules and regs. The shoulder check is not to hurt, but redirect the player driving to the cage or into traffic. Hitting is a football term and it needs to stay there.

Team USA players rarely lower their heads to body check, but rather use their lower and upper body strength to redirect an opponent. Look at Eric Martin or DJ Driscoll, they use their forearms and hips to drive a man away. They best place to use the body check is at the hips or under the ribs and push upwards and away from your body. Inherently, the legs follow where the shoulders go.... in a new direction. Please remember...speed and smarts will always beat the lowered head of a "hitman." Properly coached defensive positioning is where the body checking must begin for it to be effective.

Not all physical play is cause for reflection.......For instance, teams from California are traveling to Calgary, Canada this weekend to play Canadian rules Indoor Lacrosse at The Canada Day Festival. Boarding and cross checking are permitted and our kids are prepared for it. Moving the ball and yourself gets you out of the majority of cross checks and boarding situations. Our Cali Lax team, last year, went to the Finals in Pee Wee (Under 11s) because they played smart lacrosse. Yes, they were cross checked and body checked, but they out finessed most teams without any major injuries. Al lthe kids came home and wanted more of that contact. They lost in OT in the Finals and certainly turned a few heads the right way... by playing solid, team lacrosse.

What also should be noted is that 40% of all Division I rosters have Canadian Box Players on it. Why? It's because they played hard as young box players and excel at field lacrosse because they expected to be hit, especially around the crease. Lastly, please remember that a kid who is not taught to receive a hit is more likely to be hurt when it does happen, whether legal or not. Field awareness is quintessential for any aged player to be aware of his or her surroundings so as to not be caught off guard when they turn into a back side slide. That's just Murphy's Law and my 2 cents.

Re: Why Are Coaches and Leagues Allowing Younger Boys to Body Check?

As the coach of Connecticut U9 team, I have to say there is nothing more repulsive than witnessing the act of an 8 year old boy taken out by a cross check to the neck from the reckless play of an undisciplined and unskilled opponent who had a five yard running start. I know, I know, you're gonna say "they're just little kids..." Well, therein lies the point and heart of the matter: THEY ARE LITTLE KIDS! And, little kids who are not taught the skills, rules and disciplines of lacrosse by concerned, competent and "safety minded" coaches and leagues simply become bigger kids with poor skills who in turn become big liabilities to the game and to all concerned parties.

Personally, I feel it's a waste of time trying to argue one way or the other here. What cannot be argued is the fact that when the game is taught correctly it is usually played correctly and when it's not, it isn't. Coaches and leagues that permit body checking at a young age are putting kids at risk while doing a huge disservice to the game of lacrosse. While overt physical contact is a main component of the game of football and hockey it is NOT so for lacrosse and anyone who believes otherwise would be best served by re-examining their perspective. Hey, let's make this real simple, just go back and watch the last 20 years of Division I NCAA Championship games and then lets have this discussion. The guys who play in those games were well coached in their youth and went on to become the best players in the world.

Re: Why Are Coaches and Leagues Allowing Younger Boys to Body Check?

All very, astute observations. Here in the Midwest, we struggle to find quality coaches who want to learn the game, and teach it correctly. Spags is dead on. The pace of growth in the participants is outpacing the ability to recruit and train quality coaches (and quality referees). Maybe US Lacrosse ought to step in and remove body checking in anything other than sanctioned HS leagues or U15 levels...

Re: Why Are Coaches and Leagues Allowing Younger Boys to Body Check?

I have just read this but totally agree that there needs to be some monitoring of youth tournaments. And it needs to come from the top [USLacrosse]. There is no rules only guidelines wich are ignored. We do not want to wait untill someone gets hurt due to an overage player hitting and severaly injuring another. It is also not fair to the players who have been replaced by the older ones and not fair to the players who have to play against them. Lets have USLacrosse be pro active. Bill Allen

Re: Why Are Coaches and Leagues Allowing Younger Boys to Body Check?

I agree that they should not be body checking. I have been in and out of physical therapy clinics associated with sports and I get upset when I see this happening on the fields and the coaches all tell me it is "lacrosse" and suck it up. Tell you kid to eat more to bulk up. I get mad. And when the Refs do not make the calls on these hits, it seems like no one follows the rule book.

Re: Why Are Coaches and Leagues Allowing Younger Boys to Body Check?

The origin of any sport is irrelevant...what matters is how you handle the present so that the future is solid. Coaches should train/teach more about how to hit well (its not easy to do it well) and how to avoid hits (kids that miss their target tend not to hit so hard next time). Further, pads need to be modest so kids dont feel indestructible (witness football vs rugby)...cuts and bruises are fine people...lets focus on avoiding broken bones and concussions. Last, if you played lacrosse and were good at it, then you would probably agree that hitting is one of the things that makes the sport so awesome.

All that said, I would agree that kids should not be hitting until they can pass, catch, cradle and shoot with both hands...you need the stick skills to avoid being a target. I laid out a lot of competitors in high school but it was always the guys that didnt have a left-hand...the ambidextrous kids are simply too tough to defend against to have the luxury of lining them up for a big hit. By college, they were all simply too good to get hit hard.

So, net/net, kids shouldn't hit till freshman year in high-school in my opinion....maybe even JV.

Re: Why Are Coaches and Leagues Allowing Younger Boys to Body Check?

I agree with the author. This is not a matter of apples and orange. A hit is a hit. A check is a check. A concussion is a concussion in any sport. It happens in track and field - I got one pole vaulting - lost my sense of smell. My daughter got one ski racing - luckly no lasting damage. I deal with my deficiet every day:"wake up and smell the coffee" no can do "don't forget to smell the roses" no can do. It is a part of my life. I grieve when my 12 year old son plays lacrosse in a tournament where I can't watch. The grief is not due to a lack of experiece in sports - I've played baseball, wrestled, played football, ski raced, and ran track. The grief comes from an acute understanding of the forces inolved in sports - let's protect ourseleve with equipment and rules. Out smart the forces of nature - make all sports games of finess - don't let nature win.

Re: Why Are Coaches and Leagues Allowing Younger Boys to Body Check?

On the first day of practice I would tell my players that lacrosse is not about hitting. I told them that in 40+ years of playing, coaching and watching lacrosse I never saw a goal scored by a body check. Here in the West the game is growing faster than coaches and refs can be developed. There is much more hitting than back east and the stick skills develop more slowly. Too many coaches are football coaches who see lacrosse as spring football. They even tell their football teams to sign up for lacrosse then they coach them. You don't have to guess how that goes. Too many refs are transplants as well and they call the game accordingly. If we can hold off the "football" culture, lacrosse has a chance. Otherwise it will become just another "collision" sport.

Re: Why Are Coaches and Leagues Allowing Younger Boys to Body Check?

Soccer's concussion rate isn't quite as high as football. (It's interesting that girls have a substantially higher rate than boys.) Anyone know where lacrosse fits in?


Sport Concussion rate (per 1000 AE (athletic exposure)


Powell Schultz Gessel
1999 2004 2007

Baseball 0.05 0.11 0.05
Softball 0.10 0.10 0.07
Boys' Basketball 0.11 0.10 0.07
Girls' Basketball 0.16 0.17 0.21
Boys' Soccer 0.18 0.23 0.22
Girls' Soccer 0.23 0.13 0.36
Football 0.59 0.33 0.47
Field Hockey 0.09 NR NR
Volleyball 0.02 NR 0.05
Wrestling 0.25 0.09 0.18


Source: Kevin Guskiewicz, PhD, ATC, "Preventing Sudden Death in Sport: Head Injury Considerations." NATA Annual Meeting, Philadelphia, PA (June 24, 2010).

Read more: www.momsteam.com/concussion-rates-in-high-school-sports#ixzz0uz9jkNFU

Re: Why Are Coaches and Leagues Allowing Younger Boys to Body Check?

First, the dearth of quality lacrosse youth coaches coupled with its rapid expansion has caused a lack of "quality control" over the end product. What exactly do you expect when a hockey coach is instructing kids on defensive techniques in lacrosse. What other sanctioned youth sport has created and perhaps embraced this "trunkslammer' culture where kids jump from team to team, tournament to tournament, with no registration, paperwork or sanctioning. I can start an "Elite" team in a week and play in any number of tournaments. Secondly, it seems at many games at the youth level, the officiating is gawd-awful. A disinterested out-of-season ref who is doing 7 games in a row isn't gonna call anything that will extend the game, so the body contact escalates as the testosterone flows. Thirdly, the rules are completely flawed.."some contact" is allowed, and it lends itself to far too many "judgement calls." Wild swinging of sticks is far worse than some of the body contact. How about a 2-hands on the stick at all times rule thru U-13? Both offensively and defensively..the "Ward" call is almost never whistled. Finally, all the ex-HS and College laxers it seems are out to cash in on the new sport's popularity, rather than teach the sport. It is sickening how much camps, equipment, clinics, tournaments, college advisory services etc have blossomed, while the real nitty-gritty is not touched.

Re: Why Are Coaches and Leagues Allowing Younger Boys to Body Check?

Growing up in Canada and being in a "hockey first" lacrosse second environment, then relocating south - I've seen the differences in the way lax is played specially compared to boxlax. And growing up in Ontario - yes, body checking was generally for the older age groups. But, in hockey - the "lights out" line'M up hits were also fairly rare. Alot of the hits were generally for changing direction and impeding movement. The loud bang on the boards generally made the hits sound harder than they were.
I currently coach the girls game because of my daughters and do fully appreciate the pureness of the game in relation to it's medicine roots. There is still some body contact in the girls game, but there are no line'M up hits. What is disappointing is seeing U10 boys in neighboring fields trying to do the line'M up hits - they can't even cradle properly or catch half the time, but they want to blow someone up. Then you have some of these coaches trying to coach the girls game and all they are trying to teach is bodying up. There really does need to be a more precise set of rules about hitting.