What is cross-checking in lacrosse. How does it differ from body checking. What are the consequences of a cross-checking penalty. How do referees signal a cross-check in lacrosse.
Understanding Cross-Checking in Lacrosse
Cross-checking is a significant penalty in lacrosse that can dramatically impact the flow and outcome of a game. But what exactly constitutes a cross-check? In lacrosse, cross-checking occurs when a player extends the shaft of their stick into an opponent, typically with their hands spread apart on the stick. This action is considered dangerous and unsportsmanlike, potentially putting players at risk of injury.
The specific definition of cross-checking can vary slightly between different leagues and levels of play. For instance:
- NCAA Men’s Lacrosse rules define it as hitting an opposing player with the middle of the shaft while the player’s hands are placed wide apart on the stick.
- NFHS and Youth Lacrosse rules describe it as using the middle of the shaft to thrust or extend away from the body, using the area between the hands to hit an opponent.
Despite these minor variations, the core concept remains the same: using the stick’s shaft as a weapon or means of impeding an opponent’s movement is strictly prohibited.
Consequences of Cross-Checking in Lacrosse
When a player commits a cross-check, they face several potential consequences. The severity of the penalty often depends on the league, the referee’s discretion, and the intensity of the infraction. Here are some common outcomes:
- Personal Foul: Cross-checking is typically classified as a personal foul.
- Time Penalty: The offending player may serve a penalty ranging from one to three minutes in the penalty box.
- Ejection: In severe cases, particularly in NCAA games, a player might face ejection from the game.
- Suspension: Extremely dangerous or repetitive cross-checking could lead to suspension from future games.
It’s worth noting that box lacrosse, a variant of the sport played indoors, is the only formally recognized lacrosse league that allows any form of cross-checking. In all other forms of the game, it remains a serious infraction.
How Referees Identify and Signal Cross-Checking
Referees play a crucial role in identifying and penalizing cross-checking. They must be vigilant and quick to spot this infraction during the fast-paced action of a lacrosse game. When a referee witnesses a cross-check, they follow a specific procedure:
- Throw a penalty flag to indicate the foul.
- Wait for a loose ball or change of possession to stop play.
- Signal the penalty by pushing both arms straight in and out in a pushing manner with closed fists, mimicking the cross-checking motion.
- Assess the personal foul on the offending player.
- Announce the penalty time based on the severity of the infraction.
This clear signaling system ensures that players, coaches, and spectators understand the nature of the penalty and its consequences.
Examples of Cross-Checking in Lacrosse
To better understand what constitutes cross-checking, let’s examine some common scenarios:
- A defender thrusts their stick illegally into an opposing attacker’s head.
- A player uses the shaft of their stick as the initial point of contact while playing defense on another player.
- A player aggressively uses the cross-section of their stick to level an opponent.
These examples illustrate the dangerous nature of cross-checking and why it’s strictly prohibited in most forms of lacrosse.
Cross-Checking vs. Body Checking: Understanding the Difference
While cross-checking and body checking may seem similar at first glance, they are distinct actions in lacrosse. Body checking is a legal maneuver when executed correctly, while cross-checking is almost always illegal. Here’s how they differ:
Body Checking
- Involves using the body to attempt to take the ball away from an opponent.
- Typically focuses on shoulder-to-shoulder contact.
- Can be legal if performed safely and within the rules.
Cross-Checking
- Involves using the stick’s shaft to impede or strike an opponent.
- Focuses on the point of contact between the stick and the opponent’s body.
- Is almost always illegal and considered dangerous play.
Understanding this distinction is crucial for players to avoid penalties and play within the rules of the game.
The Impact of Cross-Checking on Player Safety
Cross-checking is strictly regulated in lacrosse primarily due to its potential to cause serious injuries. When a player extends their stick and uses it to check an opponent, several risks arise:
- Head and Neck Injuries: A cross-check to the head or neck area can result in concussions or more severe trauma.
- Rib and Torso Injuries: Forceful cross-checks to the body can cause bruising, fractures, or internal injuries.
- Loss of Balance: Unexpected cross-checks can cause players to fall awkwardly, leading to various injuries.
- Escalation of Aggression: Unchecked cross-checking can lead to retaliation and increased violence on the field.
By penalizing cross-checking, lacrosse authorities aim to maintain a safe playing environment and preserve the integrity of the sport. This focus on player safety has led to the development of protective gear and strict enforcement of rules against dangerous play.
Strategies to Avoid Cross-Checking Penalties
For players looking to improve their defensive skills without risking cross-checking penalties, there are several strategies to consider:
- Proper Stick Positioning: Keep your hands close together on the stick to avoid the appearance of preparing for a cross-check.
- Focus on Footwork: Improve your ability to stay in front of opponents using quick, lateral movements rather than relying on your stick to impede their progress.
- Practice Legal Checks: Master the art of poke checks and slap checks, which are legal ways to dislodge the ball from an opponent.
- Develop Body Positioning: Learn to use your body effectively to guide opponents away from scoring opportunities without resorting to illegal stick use.
- Stay Calm Under Pressure: Avoid the temptation to use your stick aggressively when frustrated or outplayed.
By focusing on these aspects of defensive play, lacrosse players can maintain an effective presence on the field while avoiding costly penalties.
The Role of Coaching in Preventing Cross-Checking
Coaches play a pivotal role in reducing the occurrence of cross-checking penalties in lacrosse. Their influence extends beyond just teaching the rules; they shape the culture and ethics of their team. Here are some ways coaches can contribute to preventing cross-checking:
- Emphasize Sportsmanship: Foster a team culture that values fair play and respect for opponents.
- Teach Proper Technique: Dedicate practice time to demonstrating and drilling legal defensive techniques.
- Address Violations Promptly: If a player shows a tendency towards cross-checking, address it immediately in practice or games.
- Educate on Consequences: Ensure players understand not just the in-game penalties, but the potential for injuries and long-term consequences of cross-checking.
- Lead by Example: Maintain composure on the sidelines and avoid encouraging aggressive or illegal play.
By taking these steps, coaches can significantly reduce the likelihood of their players committing cross-checking fouls and contribute to a safer, more enjoyable lacrosse experience for all involved.
Cross-Checking in Different Levels of Lacrosse
The interpretation and enforcement of cross-checking rules can vary across different levels of lacrosse play. Understanding these differences is crucial for players as they progress through their lacrosse careers:
Youth Lacrosse
At the youth level, the focus is primarily on player safety and skill development. As such, cross-checking is strictly prohibited and heavily penalized. Referees tend to call these fouls more frequently to discourage dangerous play and instill proper techniques early on.
High School Lacrosse
In high school play, while still illegal, there may be slightly more leniency in how cross-checking is called. Referees often consider the intent and force behind the action. Penalties typically range from 1 to 3 minutes, depending on severity.
College Lacrosse
NCAA lacrosse sees the strictest enforcement of cross-checking rules. The higher skill level and physicality of play mean that cross-checks can be more dangerous. Penalties can include ejections and suspensions for severe or repeated violations.
Professional Lacrosse
In professional leagues, while cross-checking remains illegal, players often play with more physical contact. Referees may allow more leeway for minor infractions but will still penalize clear and dangerous cross-checks.
Box Lacrosse
Uniquely, box lacrosse (indoor lacrosse) allows a limited form of cross-checking. However, there are still restrictions on where and how these checks can be applied to maintain player safety.
Understanding these nuances helps players adapt their style of play appropriately as they move between different levels of the sport.
Lacrosse Cross-Checking Penalty
Home>Sports>Lacrosse>Lacrosse Penalties
PreviousNext
The cross-checking penalty in lacrosse is a personal foul enforced when a referee judges a player’s safety is at risk. A cross-checking foul occurs when an opposing player extends the shaft of their stick into a player running towards them. The call is dependent on the location of impact and the referee’s discretion to be called.
Table of Contents
- Definition
- Result
- Referee Signal
- Examples
- Helpful Links
- Similar Penalties to Cross-Checking
- FAQ
Definition
The official definition of cross-checking varies from league and level of play; according to the official NCAA Men’s Lacrosse rules, the foul occurs when a player hits an opposing player with the middle of their shaft and the player’s hands are placed wide apart on the stick. Conversely, the NFHS and Youth Lacrosse rules define the penalty as a player performing a check by using the middle of their shaft to thrust or extend away from their body, using the area between their hands to hit their opponent.
Regardless of league, the act of extending the cross-section of the shaft into the opponent is a typical dead giveaway to referees to make the call. The penalty is dependent on the referee witnessing the rule being broken firsthand. If the foul is observed, the referee will throw a flag and assess a personal foul to the offending player. This call can result in a one to three-minute penalty for the player who performed the illegal cross-check and even ejection from the remainder of the game, depending on the severity of the offense.
Result
The result for a cross-checking penalty varies by league, but it is typically counted as a personal foul on the offending player. In men’s high school lacrosse, the foul generally comes with a one to three-minute period in the penalty box. The NCAA is stricter with its enforcement and can even lead to ejection and suspension from games. The only formally recognized lacrosse league to allow any form of cross-checking is box lacrosse.
When the referee witnesses a cross-check being performed by a player, they throw a penalty flag and wait for a loose ball or change of possession to stop play. They then signal the penalty by pushing both of their arms straight in and out in a pushing manner with closed fists to imitate the cross-checking motion. The referee will assess the personal foul on the player being penalized and announce the penalty time they must serve, based on the level of the transgression.
Examples
- A defender thrusts their stick illegally into an opposing attacker and hits their head.
- A player uses the shaft of their stick as the initial point of contact while playing defense on another player.
- A player uses the cross-section of their stick to level an opponent in an aggressive or dangerous manner.
- How It Works: Cross-Checking
- Beginner Lacrosse: Lacrosse Penalties
- USA Lacrosse Rules
- NCAA Men’s Lacrosse Rules
- Video: Cross-Checking
Similar Penalties to Cross-Checking
- Illegal Body Check
- Unnecessary Roughness
- Unsportsmanlike Conduct
- Spearing
FAQ
What is cross-checking in lacrosse?
Cross-checking is the act of extending the cross-section of the shaft into an opponent to impede their movement, making contact with your hands spread apart.
This penalty is called when the stick is not being used properly by a player and could potentially lead to danger or injury for other opposing players. What does and does not constitute cross-checking is ultimately up to the referee’s discretion and will be called differently at various levels of play.
What are the consequences of being called for cross-checking in lacrosse?
The consequence for a cross-checking penalty varies by league and level of play. In most recognized leagues, the action is classified as a personal foul and comes with a time penalty between one and three minutes for the player who performed the cross-check. Some leagues may even eject the player if the action is violent and dangerous enough; this is dictated by the referee’s judgment.
How are body checking and cross checking different in lacrosse?
Body checking may be similar to cross checking, but it is not the same. Body checking is defined as a player using their body to try and take the ball away from an opponent during play.
Like cross checking, it can be considered a foul if performed in a dangerous manner; this is left to the referee’s judgment can be slightly ambiguous. Both rules focus on the point of contact, but body checking is concentrated on shoulder-to-shoulder contact instead of the location of contact the stick makes with the opponent, as seen in cross checking.
PreviousNext
Pages Related to Lacrosse Cross-Checking Penalty
- Lacrosse Illegal Body Check Penalty
- Types Of Lacrosse Sticks
- Lacrosse Penalties
- Lacrosse Holding Penalty
- Lacrosse Face-Off Violation
- Top 10 Lacrosse Brands
PreviousNext
Lloydminster Brutes Lacrosse : Website by RAMP InterActive
The cross-check in the game of box lacrosse is a legal play. Rule 40 of the CLA Rulebook states:
“A legal cross-check shall be defined as a check applied with the portion of the stick held between the hands, on an opponent:
- From the front or side
- Below the shoulders
- Above the waist
- The extension of the arms while the check is being delivered is permissible.
”
”The game of Box Lacrosse allows the cross-checking of players with the ball and without the ball. In Pee Wee and younger, the non-ball carrier can only be cross-checked inside the dotted line. In Bantam and older, the non-ball carrier can be cross-checked in the defensive zone.
The purpose of Rule 40 is to provide the guidelines of what is a legal and an illegal cross-check. The game of lacrosse is a physical game and the rules are in place to ensure fairness and player safety.
The cross-check is a skill that is part of playing defense. From a coaching perspective, it is critical that we teach players to play defense first. To know where the ball is, where the opposing player is, and how to prepare to help a teammate. A defender uses the cross-check on the ball carrier to stop the opposing player from getting into the prime scoring areas. A defender uses the cross-check on the non-ball carrier to stop the opposing player from advancing into the prime scoring areas to receive a pass.
For example, if a non-ball carrier cuts through the middle of the floor, the defender can cross-check that player to deter their path towards the net.
The “Clear the House” mentality of playing defense needs to stop! Excessive force on the non-ball carrier is illegal and is a penalty. The referee has the discretion on whether a player is defending their zone or using excessive force against an opponent. Players need to use the cross-check as part of their defensive strategy, not in an attempt to hurt or intimidate opposing players.
Coaches can make a significant difference in the game by understanding the purpose of cross-checking, in its function and its implementation in the sport. The game of Box Lacrosse is inherently physical, it is why many people love the sport. The speed and contact make it a great game to play and watch. However, it is important to play the game within the rules, in order for the game to be safe for all participants.
/cloud/ablax/files/Blog%20Posts/Cross-Checking%20in%20the%20Game%20of%20Box%20Lacrosse.
pdf
RAMP Registration
Join thousands of association partners using RAMP Registration Solutions.
More Information
RAMP Official Assigning
#1 with Officials…for very good reasons.
More Information
RAMP Websites
Manage your identity from the palm of your hand to the top of your desk.
More Information
RAMP Team App
Keep your coaches, parents, athletes, and fans connected, seamlessly.
More Information
What is cross-validation | Data Science
Cross-validation ( Cross-validation ) is a method for evaluating an analytical model and its behavior on independent data. When evaluating the model, the available data is divided into k parts. Then, the model is trained on k−1 parts of the data, and the rest of the data is used for testing. The procedure is repeated k times; in the end, each of the k pieces of data is used for testing. The result is an estimate of the effectiveness of the chosen model with the most uniform use of the available data.
Typically cross-validation is used in situations where the goal is prediction and one would like to evaluate how the predictive model is able to perform in practice. One round of cross-validation involves splitting the dataset into parts, then building the model on one part (called the training set), and validating the model on the other part (called the test set). To reduce the scatter of results, different cross-validation rounds are run on different partitions, and the validation results are averaged over all rounds.
Cross-validation is important to guard against data-driven hypotheses (“Type III errors”), especially when obtaining additional data is difficult or impossible.
Suppose we have a model with one or more unknown parameters, and a dataset on which this model can be optimized (training set). The fitting process optimizes the model parameters and makes the model as fit to the training set as possible. If we now take an independent sample of data to validate the model from the same source as we took the training set from, we usually find that the model describes the test data worse than the training set.
This is called overfitting, and is especially common in situations where the size of the training set is small, or when the number of parameters in the model is large. Cross-validation is a way to evaluate the ability of a model to work on a hypothetical test set when such a set cannot be obtained explicitly.
Common types of cross-validation
K-fold cross-validation
In this case, the original data set is split into K blocks of the same size. Of the K blocks, one is left to test the model, and the remaining K-1 blocks are used as a training set. The process is repeated K times, and each of the blocks is used once as a test set. K results are obtained, one for each block, and they are averaged or combined in some other way to give one score. The advantage of this method over random subsampling is that all observations are used for both training and testing of the model, and each observation is used for testing exactly once. Cross-validation on 10 blocks is often used, but there are no specific recommendations for choosing the number of blocks.
In layered cross-validation, blocks are selected so that the average of the model response is approximately equal across all blocks.
Random subsampling validation
This method randomly splits the dataset into training and test sets. For each such split, the model is fitted to the training data and the prediction accuracy is evaluated on the test set. The results are then averaged over all partitions. The advantage of this method over cross-validation on K blocks is that the proportions of the training and test sets do not depend on the number of repetitions (blocks). The disadvantage of the method is that some observations may never be included in the test set, while others may be included in it more than once. In other words, test cases may overlap. Also, since the splits are random, the results will be different if the analysis is repeated.
In the layered version of this method, random samples are generated in such a way that the average response of the model is equal across the training and test sets.
This is especially useful when the model response is binary, with unequal proportions of responses across the data.
Element-wise cross-validation (Leave-one-out, LOO)
Here, a single observation is used as a test dataset, and the remaining observations from the original dataset are used as a training one. The cycle is repeated until each observation is used once as a test. This is the same as K-box cross-validation, where K is equal to the number of observations in the original dataset.
Model fit assessment
The purpose of cross-validation is to assess the expected level of fit of the model to data independent of the data on which the model was trained. It can be used to evaluate any quantitative measure of fit that is appropriate for the data and model. For example, for a binary classification problem, each case in the test set will be predicted correctly or incorrectly. In this situation, the error rate can be used as a fit score, although other scores can be used.
If the predictor is continuously distributed, the standard error, the root of the standard error, or the median absolute deviation can be used to evaluate the fit.
Cross-validation applications
Cross-validation can be used to compare the results of different predictive modeling procedures. For example, suppose that we are interested in optical character recognition, and we are considering using either support vectors (Support Vector Machines, SVM), or k nearest neighbors (k nearest neighbors, KNN). With cross-validation, we could objectively compare the two methods in terms of their relative misclassification rates. If we simply compare these methods by their training set errors, KNN is likely to perform better because it is more flexible and therefore more prone to overfitting than SVM.
Cross-validation can also be used for parameter selection. Suppose we have 20 parameters that we could use in the model. The task is to choose the parameters, the use of which will give a model with the best predictive abilities.
If we compare subsets of parameters by their errors on the test set, the best results will be obtained when using all parameters. However, with cross-validation, the model with the best generalizability usually includes only some subset of the parameters that are sufficiently informative.
Computational performance issues
Most forms of cross-validation are fairly easy to implement if there is a ready-made implementation of the prediction method. In particular, the prediction method is needed only in the form of a “black box”, there is no need to get into the details of its implementation. If the prediction method is resource-intensive enough in training, cross-validation can be slow because training is performed many times sequentially. In some cases, such as least squares or kernel regression, cross-validation can be greatly accelerated by precomputing some values that are reused in training, or by using “update rules” such as the Sherman-Morrison formula. However, care must be taken to ensure that the validation dataset is completely separated from the training dataset, otherwise bias may occur.
An extreme example of speeding up cross-validation occurs in the case of linear regression, where the results of cross-validation have an explicit analytical form known as PRESS (prediction residual error sum of squares).
Limitations and misuse of cross-validation
Cross-validation only gives meaningful results when the training set and the test data set come from the same source, from the same population. In many applications of predictive models, the structure of the system under study changes over time. This can induce systematic deviations of the training and validation datasets. For example, if a stock price prediction model is trained on data from a particular five-year period, it is unrealistic to consider the subsequent five-year period as a sample from the same population.
If performed correctly and the datasets are from the same population, cross-validation results with little or no bias. However, there are many ways to misuse cross-validation. In this case, the prediction error on the actual validation data set is likely to be much worse than expected from the cross-validation results.
Ways to misuse cross-validation:
1. Use cross-validation on multiple models, and take only the results of the best model.
2. Conduct an initial analysis to determine the most informative set of parameters using the full set of data. If parameter selection is required in a prediction model, it must be performed sequentially on each training set. If cross-validation is used to determine the set of parameters used by the model, internal cross-validation must be performed on each training set to determine the set of parameters.
3. Allowing some training data to also fall into the test set – this can happen due to the existence of duplicate observations in the original set.
Source
personal fouls – Termwiki, millions of terms defined by people like you
personal fouls
Personal fouls may include cross-checking, cutting or any rough play that the referee considers excessively rough or extreme. Offending by sending the field for 1 to 3 minutes and the ball is given to the opposing team player may result in a personal foul.
(Sign in to edit the definition.)
This information has been generated automatically. You can help us improve it.
Add Image
- Part of speech: noun
- Synonym(s):
- Vocabulary:
- Industry/Operation: Sports
- Category: Lacrosse
- Company:
- Item:
- Acronym:
More
Add to My Glossary
Select another language:
- personal fouls
- Add term
- Add term
- Faltas personales
- Add term
- Add term
- 個人ファウル
- pribadi pelanggaran
- Add term
- Add term
- Add term
Extras
News terms
Billy Morgan
Sports; Snowboarding
British snowboarder Billy Morgan landed the first ever 1800 Quadruple Sport Cork.
The rider, who represented Great Britain at the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, was in Livigno, Italy when he reached the manoeuvre. It includes flipping four times while the body also spins five full turns on the axle, side or front side …
Marzia Afkham
Television and radio broadcasting and reception; News
Afkham Marziya, who is the country’s first foreign ministry spokesman, will lead missions in East Asia, the State News Agency reported. It’s not clear which country she will be posted to as her destination has yet to be officially announced.
Afkham will be only the second female ambassador Iran has. Under the last rule …
Per package
Language; Services online; Slang; Internet
Weekly Packet or “Paquete Participation” as it is known in Cuba is a term used to describe information collected from the Internet by Cubans outside of Cuba and stored on hard drives for transportation within Cuba itself. The packages are then sold to Cubans without access to the Internet, allowing them to receive information days – and sometimes hours – after it .
..
Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB)
Banking; Investment Banking
The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) is an international financial institution for infrastructure development in Asia. By 2020, Asia will need $800 billion annually to build new roads, ports, power plants and other infrastructure projects, according to the Asian Development Bank.
Originally initiated by China in …
Spartan
Online services; Internet
Spartan is the codename for the new Microsoft Windows 10 browser that will replace Microsoft Windows Internet Explorer.
The new browser will be built from the ground up and ignoring any code from the IE platform. It has a new rendering engine that is built to be compatible with the way the web is written today.
Name …
Special terms
NatashaB
- 0
Terms
- 0
Glossaries
90 076
- 1
Followers
Industry/Operation: Automotive Terms Category: Makes and Models
Launched in October 2013, the Lamborghini Veneno Roadster is one of the most expensive cars ever made in the world, selling at ./cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/60855529/Tomsik4513rotator.0.jpg)
