How does the lacrosse wind-up impact shot performance. What are the key phases of a lacrosse shot. How can players improve their wind-up technique for better results. What role does body mechanics play in an effective lacrosse shot.
The Anatomy of a Lacrosse Shot: Breaking Down the Wind-Up
Understanding the intricacies of a lacrosse shot is crucial for players looking to improve their performance on the field. The wind-up, also known as the crank-back, is a fundamental component of the shot that sets the stage for power and accuracy. By dissecting the mechanics of a lacrosse shot, we can identify key areas for improvement and optimization.
Three Crucial Phases of a Lacrosse Shot
A lacrosse shot can be divided into three distinct phases:
- Crank-back (Wind-up)
- Acceleration
- Follow-through
Each phase plays a vital role in the overall effectiveness of the shot. The crank-back, or wind-up, is particularly important as it initiates the entire shooting motion and sets the foundation for the power generated in the subsequent phases.
The Science Behind the Lacrosse Wind-Up
The wind-up in lacrosse is more than just a preparatory movement; it’s a complex biomechanical process that involves multiple body segments working in harmony. During this phase, players generate potential energy that will be converted into kinetic energy during the acceleration phase.
Key Components of an Effective Wind-Up
- Proper body positioning
- Rotational torso movement
- Arm and stick placement
- Weight transfer
How does body positioning affect the wind-up? Proper stance and alignment allow for maximum rotation and power generation. Players should focus on creating a stable base with their legs while allowing their upper body to coil like a spring.
Maximizing Power Through Shoulder-to-Pelvis Separation
One of the most critical aspects of the lacrosse wind-up is the shoulder-to-pelvis separation, often referred to as the “X-factor” in similar rotational sports like golf. This separation is directly associated with ball velocity and overall shot power.
Why is shoulder-to-pelvis separation important? It allows players to store elastic energy in their trunk muscles, which can then be explosively released during the acceleration phase. The greater the separation, the more potential energy is created, leading to a more powerful shot.
Techniques to Improve Shoulder-to-Pelvis Separation
- Core strengthening exercises
- Rotational flexibility drills
- Practice slow-motion wind-ups to increase awareness
- Video analysis to identify areas for improvement
The Role of Timing in the Lacrosse Shot Cycle
Timing is everything in a lacrosse shot, and understanding the shot cycle is crucial for optimizing performance. Research has shown that the shot cycle can be broken down into percentages, with the lead foot plant marking 0% and ball release marking 100% of the cycle.
How can players use this information to improve their shots? By focusing on the timing of each phase, athletes can work on synchronizing their body movements for maximum efficiency. For example, ensuring that the maximum angular velocities of different body segments occur in the correct sequence can lead to a more powerful and accurate shot.
Key Timing Points in the Lacrosse Shot Cycle
- Lead foot plant (0%)
- Maximum crank-back
- Initiation of forward acceleration
- Ball release (100%)
- Maximum shoulder-to-pelvis separation (>100%)
Biomechanical Analysis: The Kinetic Chain in Lacrosse Shooting
Understanding the kinetic chain in lacrosse shooting can help players optimize their wind-up and overall shot mechanics. The kinetic chain refers to the sequential activation of body segments, starting from the ground up, that contributes to the final velocity of the crosse and ball.
Sequence of Angular Velocities
Research has shown that an effective lacrosse shot involves a specific sequence of angular velocities:
- Pelvis rotation
- Trunk rotation
- Shoulder rotation
- Crosse acceleration
Why is this sequence important? Each segment builds upon the velocity of the previous one, creating a cumulative effect that results in maximum ball speed at release. Players who can master this sequence will see significant improvements in their shot power and accuracy.
Enhancing Wind-Up Mechanics for Improved Shot Performance
To enhance wind-up mechanics, players should focus on several key areas:
1. Posture and Alignment
Maintaining proper posture throughout the wind-up is crucial. Players should keep their spine neutral and engage their core muscles to create a stable platform for rotation.
2. Range of Motion
Increasing flexibility and range of motion in the shoulders, hips, and trunk can lead to a more extensive wind-up, potentially storing more elastic energy for the shot.
3. Balance and Weight Transfer
Effective weight transfer from the back foot to the lead foot during the wind-up and acceleration phases is essential for generating power. Players should practice smooth, controlled movements to maintain balance throughout the shot.
4. Arm and Stick Position
The position of the arms and crosse during the wind-up can significantly impact shot accuracy and power. Players should experiment with different arm angles and stick placements to find their optimal setup.
Advanced Training Techniques for Lacrosse Wind-Up Mastery
To take wind-up skills to the next level, players can incorporate advanced training techniques into their practice routines:
1. Resistance Band Training
Using resistance bands can help players develop the specific muscles used in the wind-up and increase overall shot power.
2. Plyometric Exercises
Incorporating explosive movements like medicine ball throws can improve the speed and power of the trunk rotation during the wind-up.
3. Slow-Motion Practice
Performing wind-ups and shots in slow motion can help players develop a better feel for proper mechanics and identify areas for improvement.
4. Video Analysis
Regularly recording and analyzing shot mechanics can provide valuable insights into wind-up technique and help track progress over time.
Common Wind-Up Mistakes and How to Correct Them
Even experienced players can fall into bad habits when it comes to their wind-up technique. Here are some common mistakes and tips for correction:
1. Overrotation
Rotating too far during the wind-up can lead to a loss of control and accuracy. Players should find a balance between generating power and maintaining control.
2. Insufficient Hip Turn
Not engaging the hips fully during the wind-up limits power generation. Focus on initiating the rotation from the ground up, starting with the hips.
3. Dropping the Stick
Lowering the stick too much during the wind-up can slow down the shot and telegraph intentions to defenders. Maintain a higher stick position for quicker release.
4. Rushing the Wind-Up
A hasty wind-up often results in poor form and reduced power. Practice maintaining a smooth, controlled motion throughout the entire shot cycle.
Integrating Wind-Up Improvements into Game Situations
Perfecting wind-up technique in practice is one thing, but applying these improvements in game situations is the ultimate goal. Here are strategies for integrating enhanced wind-up mechanics into real play:
1. Situational Drills
Design drills that mimic game scenarios, forcing players to execute proper wind-up technique under pressure.
2. Variable Speed Training
Practice wind-ups and shots at different speeds to develop adaptability in various game situations.
3. Decision-Making Exercises
Incorporate decision-making elements into shooting drills to simulate the mental demands of game play while focusing on proper wind-up mechanics.
4. Position-Specific Wind-Up Variations
Tailor wind-up techniques to specific playing positions, recognizing that midfielders may need different approaches compared to attackmen.
By focusing on these advanced aspects of the lacrosse wind-up, players can significantly enhance their shooting performance. Remember that consistent practice and attention to detail are key to mastering this crucial element of the game. As players refine their wind-up technique, they’ll likely see improvements in shot power, accuracy, and overall effectiveness on the field.
Key phases of the lacrosse shot used for this analysis. (A) Phase 1:…
Context 1
… and Nielson 20 provided a detailed description of multiple phases of a lacrosse shot that has been simplified in our recent work. 30 Key phases related to the lacrosse shot were selected due to reliable reproduction in our motion analysis. Still images of these phases and the respective events are depicted in Figure 1, A and B. The images include the player and the crosse (the stick capped with a strung net). The 3 phases include the crank-back, acceleration, and follow-through (Figure 1). The crank- back is the preparatory movement that represents the wind-up that precedes the acceleration of the crosse stick. Immediately after crank-back, there is a drive forward with the lead foot. The lead foot plant initiates the acceleration phase. The acceleration phase involves increasing angular velocities of the body segments (pelvis, trunk, shoulders) and crosse to prepare for ball release.
The ball release is the event that terminates the acceleration phase and is used to define the end of the shot. The final phase of the lacrosse shot is the follow-through. This phase involves the relative trunk-to-pelvis separation motion and deceleration of the body segment rotations. The maximal shoulder-to- pelvis separation is the final event of the lacrosse shot. For our data analysis, we defined the starting event of the motion as the lead foot plant event (0%) and the final event of ball release as the end of the shot (100%). Follow-through occurred after ball release (>100% of the shot cycle). 1 …
Context 2
… and Nielson 20 provided a detailed description of multiple phases of a lacrosse shot that has been simplified in our recent work. 30 Key phases related to the lacrosse shot were selected due to reliable reproduction in our motion analysis. Still images of these phases and the respective events are depicted in Figure 1, A and B. The images include the player and the crosse (the stick capped with a strung net). The 3 phases include the crank-back, acceleration, and follow-through (Figure 1). The crank- back is the preparatory movement that represents the wind-up that precedes the acceleration of the crosse stick. Immediately after crank-back, there is a drive forward with the lead foot. The lead foot plant initiates the acceleration phase. The acceleration phase involves increasing angular velocities of the body segments (pelvis, trunk, shoulders) and crosse to prepare for ball release. The ball release is the event that terminates the acceleration phase and is used to define the end of the shot. The final phase of the lacrosse shot is the follow-through. This phase involves the relative trunk-to-pelvis separation motion and deceleration of the body segment rotations. The maximal shoulder-to- pelvis separation is the final event of the lacrosse shot. For our data analysis, we defined the starting event of the motion as the lead foot plant event (0%) and the final event of ball release as the end of the shot (100%).
Follow-through occurred after ball release (>100% of the shot cycle). 1 …
Context 3
… kinematic events were expressed as a percent of the shot cycle using available software (MATLAB; Math- works Inc). The software was used to calculate angular velocities of the pelvis, trunk, and shoulder at key shot cycle events; the relative orientation of the pelvis and trunk; and joint angles at foot contact and ball release. A summary of the kinematic measurements most relevant to back motion are provided in Figure 1. The shoulder-to-pelvis separation represents the intersegment linking between the pelvis and trunk, similar to the ”X-factor” used in golf analysis, 3 and is associated with ball velocity. 7 This represents the coiling of the trunk that is capable of storing elastic energy 28 to be transferred to the forward motion and maximal crosse velocity and ball release. The differences in maximal angu- lar velocities from pelvis to trunk, from trunk to shoulders, and from shoulder to the crosse were calculated to deter- mine the sequential addition of rotational velocity to body segments and crosse before ball .
..
Context 4
… phases and events of the shot cycle are shown in Figure 1. In preparation for a shot, crank-back occurs, where the throwing arm abducts, and the trunk turns away from the target (phase 1). The crosse is then brought for- ward for acceleration of the shot (phase 2). Here, the throw- ing arm moves anteriorly toward the target. After ball release, the shoulder-to-pelvis separation continues into the follow-through (phase 3). This is the point of maximal shoulder-to-pelvis separation. The maximum angular velocity and the time at which the maximum angular veloc- ity occurred were identified for the pelvis, trunk, shoulders, and crosse (expressed as percent of the shot cycle). The range of motion (ROM) values of knee flexion, shoulder rotation in the transverse plane, pelvis tilt in the sagittal plane, and pelvis rotation in the transverse plane were cal- culated from the difference between the maximal and min- imal angular position values, from 0% to 100% of the shot cycle.
Trunk anterior lean in the sagittal plane was calcu- lated from the difference between the maximal and mini- mal angular position values, from -50% of the shot cycle to the end of follow-through. Finally, the total transverse ROM of the pelvis and shoulders was determined by sum- ming the absolute value of crank-back and follow-through pelvis-to-shoulder separation …
Don’t Shoot Sidearm!
Don’t be this guy… (Sorry if you are and reading this!)
We’ve all been there. You have a wide-open shot, drop your stick, wind up, and rip it sidearm. You miss the net. Your coach yells, “Luke, I swear to God, never shoot sidearm again.” It happens. You young players may think sidearm is the best shot. Does it look cool? Yes! But, does it give you a better chance of scoring? No! So, ask yourself this, would you rather score one cool sidearm goal, or a hat trick with overhand shots? Can the sidearm shot be beneficial at times? Absolutely. If you shoot sidearm around your man, using him as a screen, it’s a great shot.
Sometimes you have no other choice; however, overhand should be your bread and butter shot.
Sidearm shots are inconsistent. Sometimes players drill the back of the net. Sometimes they miss wide right on easy lay-ups. By shooting overhand, your shot is more consistent. Consistency is what makes good players great. I notice a huge difference when I shoot both ways. Aiming and hitting corners is much easier when I shoot overhand.
I alluded to it above, but you’ll be more accurate with overhand shots. It also makes it tougher on opposing goalies. The goalie has to keep his stick high, which makes lower shots harder to save. By shooting sidearm, you drop your stick, which in turn makes the goalie drop his. His stick is then mid-level in net. He is 50% of the way for a high or low shot. Unless you can change direction shooting sidearm, you are not accurate enough to use it.
It’s easier for defensemen to stop a sidearm shooter because they hang sticks. Shooting sidearm is a great way to get disarmed.
I hate trail checks, but a lot of guys will pull off successful trail checks on a sidearm shooter guilty of hanging his stick.
Below I’ve placed a video showing how to successfully trail check an offensive player. The content is informative but I mainly linked it to show what happens when you hang your stick. Let me reiterate one last time. By shooting sidearm, you hang your stick and are open to having this occur!
Shooting sidearm is bad enough, but for the love of God, do not pass sidearm! These passes always turn into ugly lobs that get picked off. One guy on my team used to throw these sidearm passes that skipped up mid-air and always got picked off. Our coach hated it! Just pass overhand. If you watch any good college lacrosse team, they rarely pass sidearm. They don’t use it at their level, so you shouldn’t use it at yours.
As stated earlier, the sidearm shot has its uses. There are times to utilize it; however, too many young players use it as their primary shot.
It should be a secondary shot. If you can’t shoot overhand, you shouldn’t be shooting sidearm. High school kids that only shoot sidearm die out in the college ranks. Defensemen and goalies eat them up. That is if they even get on the field (many don’t). I want you to get on the field, which is why I published this article. You owe it to yourself to use the best moves in lacrosse. Do yourself a favor and don’t primarily shoot sidearm.
Conclusion
Agree with my article? Do you only shoot sidearm? Is sidearm better than overhand? Whatever your thoughts, let me know by connecting with me on Twitter or Instagram. You can also subscribe to my website to directly comment onto this article. By subscribing, you will be notified whenever I publish a new article. I greatly appreciate any form of support! Thank you for reading and let’s keep growing this beautiful game.
Kinematics of Shooting in High School and Collegiate Lacrosse Players With and Without Low Back Pain
Orthop J Sports Med.
2016 Jul; 4(7): 2325967116657535.
, BS,*, MS,* and , PhD, FACSM*†
Joseph G. Wasser
*Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Division of Research, Interdisciplinary Center for Musculoskeletal Training and Research, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA.
Cong Chen
*Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Division of Research, Interdisciplinary Center for Musculoskeletal Training and Research, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA.
Heather K. Vincent
*Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Division of Research, Interdisciplinary Center for Musculoskeletal Training and Research, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA.
*Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Division of Research, Interdisciplinary Center for Musculoskeletal Training and Research, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA.
Investigation performed at Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA
†Heather K. Vincent, PhD, FACSM, Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Division of Research, UF Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine Institute (OSMI), PO Box 112727, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA (email: ude.lfu.ohtro@khecniv).This article has been cited by other articles in PMC.
Abstract
Background:
Low back pain (LBP) and motion alterations can occur in athletes who engage in high-speed throwing motions. The relationship between LBP and shooting motion in lacrosse players is not yet known.
Purpose:
To quantify the effects of LBP on key kinematic parameters of the lacrosse shot and determine the contribution of the severity of LBP on specific kinematic parameters of the shooting motion.
Study Design:
Controlled laboratory study.
Methods:
High school and collegiate players (N = 24) were stratified into 2 groups based on back pain symptoms (LBP or no pain).
Three-dimensional motion capture of overhead throws was used to collect data on knee, pelvis, trunk, and shoulder kinematics as well as crosse stick (the stick capped with a strung net) and ball speed.
Results:
Mean low back numeric pain rating scale (NRSpain) score was 2.9. Knee flexion at ball release was greater in the LBP than no pain group, indicating a more bent knee (P = .04). The LBP group demonstrated less angular velocity transfer from pelvis to trunk than the no pain group (P = .05). Total range of motion of the pelvis and shoulders during the shot and follow-through were less in the LBP group than the no pain group (83.6° ± 24.5° vs 75.9° ± 24.5°, P = .05). Age- and sex-adjusted regression analyses revealed that the low back NRSpain rating contributed 6.3% to 25.0% of the variance to the models of shoulder transverse rotation range of motion, trunk and shoulder rotation angular velocities, and knee flexion angle (P < .
05).
Conclusion:
LBP severity significantly contributes to trunk and shoulder motion restriction during lacrosse shooting. Inclusion of lumbopelvic and core training and prehabilitation programs for high school and collegiate players may reduce pain in affected players as well as help them to attain appropriate motion parameters and avoid secondary musculoskeletal injuries.
Clinical Relevance:
This research identified a prehabilitation need in the understudied lacrosse population. Therapeutic strategies can be developed to strengthen the throwing motion, which could control mechanical loading patterns on the low back and minimize pain symptoms in players with chronic LBP.
Keywords: lacrosse, lumbar, biomechanics, motion analysis/kinesiology
Lacrosse continues to increase in popularity in the United States. Despite rising participation rates, the understanding of basic lacrosse mechanics and their contributions to injury is not widely known.
Among the several actions in lacrosse play, a key motion is the shot. Shooting precision and mechanics are dependent on the appropriate muscle activation patterns, adequate rotation of the shoulders over the pelvis, and sequencing of peak body segment rotational velocity.2,11,12,16,32 Like other overhead athletes, lacrosse players develop high ball speeds by generating initial forces at the start of the shot and transferring that energy along the kinetic chain to ball release.21,32 There are several potential factors that can affect force development and timing of the mechanics, including musculoskeletal or joint pain. Alternatively, the high forces generated by the shooting motion itself may place mechanical stresses on the body and may contribute to the development of musculoskeletal pain or injury. The lumbar spine and associated musculature transfer energy of the throwing motion from the lower to the upper body via rapid rotation, and these structures are involved with the acceleration and deceleration of the upper body during a shot.
12,32 This led to the following question: Are there specific motion characteristics of players with and without low back pain (LBP)?
Large evidence gaps exist with respect to the potential relationships between mechanical factors of lacrosse shooting and the presence or severity of LBP.34 This is problematic because high school lacrosse surveillance data have revealed that back injuries occur at a rate of 60 to 80 cases per 1000 athletic exposures.15 LBP may adversely affect motion by interfering with the transfer of energy from the lower body to the upper body. Peak angular velocities of the hip, trunk, and shoulders and timing of these peak velocities produced during the throw would be negatively affected by pain. Moreover, if the normal kinematic sequence and coordination is altered in a throwing activity, the forces produced in the throwing motion are transferred to distal body segments, which may lead to injury elsewhere.33 Moreover, restrictions in rotation of body segments engaged in earlier phases of the shot (eg, pelvis or torso) may increase the mechanical demands to segments engaged later in the shot such as the upper arm.
The first essential step toward understanding the relationship between LBP and shooting mechanics in lacrosse players is to characterize the difference in mechanics between players with and without LBP.
Therefore, the purposes of this study were to (1) determine the differences in key kinematic motion parameters of the lacrosse shot between players with and without LBP and (2) quantify the contribution of LBP to the variance of kinematic parameters of the lacrosse shot. We hypothesized that players with LBP would demonstrate differences in shot speed and rotational excursions of the pelvis and shoulder and that LBP would be a significant contributor to rotational range of motion of the shoulders and pelvis and peak angular velocities of the pelvis, trunk, and shoulders.
Methods
Study Design
This study and its procedures were approved by University of Florida’s Institutional Review Board, and all participants provided written informed consent.
Participants
Players were stratified into 2 groups based on the presence of any mild to moderate LBP: no pain and LBP (presence of LBP during shooting movement).
A total of 24 lacrosse players were enrolled. Goalies were excluded from the analysis due to their different lacrosse equipment and less positional emphasis on shooting.
Characteristics
Participant demographics were self-reported. Height and weight were measured using a medical-grade scale. Participants completed a study-specific questionnaire that detailed their history of lacrosse play, which included sessions per week, seasons per year played, and current training sessions similar to that reported in other studies.22 Moreover, leg lengths were measured for both left and right legs using a cloth tape measure. For arm lengths, testers measured the distance between the shoulder acromion and the radial styloid process, and for leg lengths, the distance between the anterior superior iliac spine and the medial malleolus was measured.
Muscle Strength and Endurance
Dynamic muscle strength and endurance were assessed using leg press, seated row, and a seated shoulder press machine (MedX).
Maximal strength testing consisted of reaching a 1-repetition maximum (1RM) for each of the 3 machines. After a standard warm-up of light repetitions, the resistance was progressively increased until only 1 repetition could be performed with good form. Subjective rating of perceived exertion values from the participant were used to set the resistance loads for each exercise. After conducting the 1RM tests, participants were allowed to rest and recover until they were ready to complete the endurance tests. Endurance testing for the shoulder press and seated row consisted of performing as many repetitions as possible during 1 minute using a resistance load of 50% of their 1RM value.
Low Back Pain
LBP with movement was self-reported using an 11-point numeric pain rating scale (NRSpain; 0 = no pain and 10 = worst possible pain). The NRSpain measure is an established, well-accepted outcome for chronic conditions, as described in the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials.
9 This assessment is valid and reliable for assessing pain intensity31 in otherwise healthy college-aged students and children.10,26 Participants indicated that pain was a low-grade chronic pain that was not caused by traumatic injury but developed over time.
Lacrosse Shot Description
Mercer and Nielson20 provided a detailed description of multiple phases of a lacrosse shot that has been simplified in our recent work.30 Key phases related to the lacrosse shot were selected due to reliable reproduction in our motion analysis. Still images of these phases and the respective events are depicted in , and . The images include the player and the crosse (the stick capped with a strung net). The 3 phases include the crank-back, acceleration, and follow-through (). The crank-back is the preparatory movement that represents the wind-up that precedes the acceleration of the crosse stick. Immediately after crank-back, there is a drive forward with the lead foot.
The lead foot plant initiates the acceleration phase. The acceleration phase involves increasing angular velocities of the body segments (pelvis, trunk, shoulders) and crosse to prepare for ball release. The ball release is the event that terminates the acceleration phase and is used to define the end of the shot. The final phase of the lacrosse shot is the follow-through. This phase involves the relative trunk-to-pelvis separation motion and deceleration of the body segment rotations. The maximal shoulder-to-pelvis separation is the final event of the lacrosse shot. For our data analysis, we defined the starting event of the motion as the lead foot plant event (0%) and the final event of ball release as the end of the shot (100%). Follow-through occurred after ball release (>100% of the shot cycle).1
Key phases of the lacrosse shot used for this analysis. (A) Phase 1: Crank-back. The wind-up phase in which the shooting shoulder abducts and the trunk turns away from the target as the lead foot makes contact with the ground. (B) Phase 2: Acceleration. The phase in which angular velocities of the body segments (pelvis, trunk, upper arm about the shoulder) and crosse are increased to prepare for ball release. (C) Phase 3: Follow-through. The phase in which the maximal shoulder-to-pelvis crossover occurs toward the goal.
Motion Analysis Procedure
Motion was captured using a high-speed, 12-camera optical motion capture system (Motion Analysis Corp). The details of this technique have been previously described.30 Data were captured at 200 Hz. Reflective markers were applied to the following anatomical landmarks: right scapula (offset), acromion processes, lateral epicondyles of the elbow, midway between the ulnar and radial styloid processes, third metacarpal, posterior superior iliac spines, anterior superior iliac spines, greater trochanters, lateral femoral epicondyles, lateral malleoli, heels, and the hallux. Markers and reflective tape were also placed on the stick end of the crosse, the crosse shaft, and the right and left sides of the net. Only reflective tape was used on a standard lacrosse ball ().
Experimental reflective marker placement used to capture the lacrosse shot motion. (A) Anterior view. (B) Posterior view.
After 5 minutes of throwing the ball as a warm-up, participants performed overhead shots with their dominant arm within the camera capture volume area. Participants used their own crosses. The dominant arm was defined as the arm with which the participant uses to write. The overhead shot was selected because it is a basic skill of the sport and is easily replicated by players. Each player was provided a set of standardized instructions to release the ball with as much speed and accuracy as possible, without compromising form for the sake of speed. Accuracy was defined as the ability of the ball to hit a marked area on a wall net that was the exact size of the goal. If the ball did not land in the goal target, the trial was excluded from analysis. The data from 3 trials were averaged to determine the average shooting motion.
Kinematic Measures
Specific kinematic events were expressed as a percent of the shot cycle using available software (MATLAB; Mathworks Inc). The software was used to calculate angular velocities of the pelvis, trunk, and shoulder at key shot cycle events; the relative orientation of the pelvis and trunk; and joint angles at foot contact and ball release. A summary of the kinematic measurements most relevant to back motion are provided in . The shoulder-to-pelvis separation represents the intersegment linking between the pelvis and trunk, similar to the “X-factor” used in golf analysis,3 and is associated with ball velocity.7 This represents the coiling of the trunk that is capable of storing elastic energy28 to be transferred to the forward motion and maximal crosse velocity and ball release. The differences in maximal angular velocities from pelvis to trunk, from trunk to shoulders, and from shoulder to the crosse were calculated to determine the sequential addition of rotational velocity to body segments and crosse before ball release.
These phases and events of the shot cycle are shown in . In preparation for a shot, crank-back occurs, where the throwing arm abducts, and the trunk turns away from the target (phase 1). The crosse is then brought forward for acceleration of the shot (phase 2). Here, the throwing arm moves anteriorly toward the target. After ball release, the shoulder-to-pelvis separation continues into the follow-through (phase 3). This is the point of maximal shoulder-to-pelvis separation. The maximum angular velocity and the time at which the maximum angular velocity occurred were identified for the pelvis, trunk, shoulders, and crosse (expressed as percent of the shot cycle). The range of motion (ROM) values of knee flexion, shoulder rotation in the transverse plane, pelvis tilt in the sagittal plane, and pelvis rotation in the transverse plane were calculated from the difference between the maximal and minimal angular position values, from 0% to 100% of the shot cycle. Trunk anterior lean in the sagittal plane was calculated from the difference between the maximal and minimal angular position values, from –50% of the shot cycle to the end of follow-through. Finally, the total transverse ROM of the pelvis and shoulders was determined by summing the absolute value of crank-back and follow-through pelvis-to-shoulder separation angles.
Statistical Analysis
Statistical analyses were performed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS version 23.0; IBM Corp). Data were managed using Research Electronic Data Capture.14 Descriptive statistics were obtained to characterize the study groups (means and SDs, frequencies). After testing the skewness of the data, t tests were used to determine whether differences existed between the 2 groups of players (no pain, LBP) in the demographics, training volume and frequency, kinematic parameters, joint ranges of motion during the shot cycle, and ball speed. Chi-square (χ2) tests were used to determine whether differences existed between the 2 study groups for categorical variables (sex, play position, level of play, LBP severity).
To determine whether the severity of LBP predicted shooting motion, variables, and ball speed in this population, hierarchical regression models were generated. The dependent variables were transverse ROM of the pelvis and shoulder; peak angular velocities of the pelvis, torso, and shoulders; and ball speed. The factors that likely contribute to variations in the dependent variables were entered into the models first (age and sex), followed by the severity of LBP as the final variable. A priori alpha levels were established at 0.05 for all statistical tests.
Results
Participant Characteristics
provides participant characteristics. No significant differences were found between the no pain and LBP groups for any characteristic except for the NRSpain score for back pain during shooting movement and the maximum reps on the seated row endurance test (P < .05).
TABLE 1
Participant Characteristics of Lacrosse Players With and Without Low Back Paina
| No Pain (n = 16) | Low Back Pain (n = 8) | P | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, y | 18.8 ± 4.1 | 18.1 ± 2.4 | .671 |
| Women, % | 56.3 | 37.5 | .490 |
| Height, cm | 174.3 ± 10.6 | 171.1 ± 9.4 | .473 |
| Weight, kg | 70.1 ± 14.3 | 69.5 ± 11.8 | .908 |
| Lean mass, % | 81.9 ± 5.8 | 77.5 ± 6.2 | .096 |
| Fat-free mass, kg | 61.4 ± 17.5 | 54.0 ± 10.4 | .261 |
| Years of play | 7.3 ± 4.7 | 6.6 ± 3.5 | .733 |
| Current sessions per week | 3.0 ± 1.5 | 2.0 ± 1.5 | .076 |
| High school/collegiate athlete, % | 56/44 | 50/50 | .653 |
| Position, % | |||
| Attack | 50.0 | 37.5 | |
| Midfield | 31.2 | 50.0 | |
| Defense | 18.8 | 12.5 | .787 |
| LBP severity, NRSpain score | 0.0 | 2.9 ± 2.2 | .0001 |
| Muscle strength (1RM), N·m | |||
| Seated row | 384.9 ± 144.9 | 354.4 ± 141.0 | .607 |
| Leg press | 610.4 ± 103.2 | 614.3 ± 98.7 | .925 |
| Shoulder press | 376.2 ± 162.6 | 327.3 ± 154.3 | .462 |
| Muscle endurance, repetitions/min | |||
| Seated row | 37.65 ± 7.4 | 33.1 ± 2.6 | .006 |
| Shoulder press | 30.07 ± 6.1 | 29.7 ± 6.3 | .887 |
| Leg length, cm | |||
| Right leg | 89.8 ± 8.2 | 85.6 ± 10.4 | .220 |
| Left leg | 89.8 ± 8.1 | 85.4 ± 9.8 | .201 |
Joint Angles and ROM
provides the kinematic parameters generated during the lacrosse throwing motion from participants with and without LBP. There was a significantly greater knee flexion angle (bent leg) at ball release in the no pain group compared with the LBP group (P = .04). Compared with a straight vertical reference, a greater knee flexion angle represented a greater knee bend. There were no significant differences in the remaining joint angles, pelvic tilt, maximal shoulder abduction, and ROM values (transverse foot rotation, knee flexion, transverse pelvis, trunk lean, and transverse shoulder motion) during the shot cycle (all P > .05). However, the total transverse ROM of the pelvis and shoulders from foot contact to follow-through was significantly less in the LBP group (P = .05).
TABLE 2
Stride Length, Joint Angles, and Range of Motion Generated During a Lacrosse Shota
| No Pain (n = 16) | Low Back Pain (n = 8) | P | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stride length, m | 0.94 ± 0.17 | 0.94 ± 0.15 | .94 |
| Stride-to-height ratio | 0.53 ± 0.08 | 0.54 ± 0.08 | .77 |
| Joint angle, deg | |||
| Lead foot angle at foot contact | 25.5 ± 26.2 | 24.7 ± 20.6 | .93 |
| Lead foot angle at ball release | 22.0 ± 19.4 | 16.0 ± 21.1 | .49 |
| Knee flexion angle at foot contact | 163.9 ± 11.4 | 164.3 ± 5.9 | .92 |
| Knee flexion angle at ball release | 160.6 ± 8.4 | 151.1 ± 13.0 | .04c |
| Pelvic tilt at foot contact | 20.2 ± 6.8 | 19.3 ± 4.9 | .48 |
| Pelvic tilt at ball release | 26.2 ± 6.8 | 22.8 ± 5.1 | .23 |
| Trunk lean at ball release | 12.4 ± 11.2 | 12.0 ± 13.3 | .94 |
| Maximal shoulder abduction | 50.8 ± 18.6 | 53.9 ± 23.1 | .72 |
| ROM, deg | |||
| Transverse lead foot rotation | 3.5 ± 8.9 | 8.7 ± 14.0 | .27 |
| Sagittal knee flexion | 22.5 ± 7.4 | 24.2 ± 11.4 | .64 |
| Transverse pelvis | 63.8 ± 25.5 | 53.5 ± 32.1 | .41 |
| Sagittal trunk lean | 32.8 ± 11.1 | 31.5 ± 17.1 | .82 |
| Transverse shoulder | 94.4 ± 27.9 | 73.3 ± 43.6 | .17 |
| Total pelvis and shoulderb | 83.6 ± 24.5 | 75.9 ± 24.5 | .05c |
Relative Shoulder-to-Pelvis Crossover, Angular Velocities, and Timing
provides the magnitude of the shoulder-to-pelvis separation and the values of peak pelvis, trunk, and shoulder angular velocities during a shot. Maximal trunk angular velocity was lower in the LBP group compared with the no pain group (P = .05). While there was an incremental increase in maximal angular velocities from pelvis to the crosse in both groups during the shot, the LBP group demonstrated less increase than the no pain group (P = .05). No statistical differences were found between players with and without LBP with respect to the timing of peak angular velocities of the pelvis, trunk, and shoulder during the shot ().
TABLE 3
Relative Shoulder and Pelvis Rotation and Maximal Angular Velocities During a Lacrosse Shota
| No Pain (n = 16) | Low Back Pain (n = 8) | P | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shoulder-to-pelvis separation | |||
| Crank-back, deg | –30.7 ± 12.1 | –28.5 ± 15.5 | .69 |
| Follow-through, deg | 52.9 ± 20.1 | 46.5 ± 16.4 | .44 |
| Maximal angular velocity | |||
| Pelvis, deg/s | 534 ± 166 | 428 ± 179 | .16 |
| Trunk, deg/s | 677 ± 198 | 515 ± 253 | .05b |
| Shoulders, deg/s | 898 ± 257 | 700 ± 316 | .11 |
| Crosse, deg/s | 1570 ± 428 | 1345 ± 441 | .24 |
| Incremental change in angular velocity | |||
| From pelvis to trunk, deg/s | 151 ± 77 | 87 ± 83 | .05b |
| From trunk to shoulders, deg/s | 185 ± 76 | 240 ± 85 | .14 |
| From shoulders to crosse, deg/s | 645 ± 191 | 671 ± 281 | .81 |
| Ball velocity, km/h | 103.3 ± 24.7 | 90.6 ± 7.2 | .30 |
TABLE 4
Temporal Patterns of Maximal Segmental Angular Velocities During a Lacrosse Shota
| No Pain (n = 16) | Low Back Pain (n = 8) | P | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pelvis, % | 56.4 ± 28.7 | 62.6 ± 16.4 | .60 |
| Trunk, % | 71.7 ± 16.9 | 78.2 ± 18.3 | .39 |
| Shoulders, % | 80.4 ± 12.2 | 83.4 ± 21.4 | .66 |
Regression Analyses
Our second aim was to quantify the contribution of LBP severity on the statistical variance of specific shooting kinematics (rotational motion of the pelvis and shoulders; peak angular velocities of the pelvis, trunk, and shoulder; knee flexion angle at ball release; and ball speed). Separate regression models were created for each kinematic variable. The results of these age- and sex-adjusted regression models are shown in . LBP severity contributed 6.3% to 7.9% of the variance to the models for transverse shoulder ROM and trunk and shoulder peak angular velocity at ball release (all P < .05). A striking finding was that LBP severity contributed 25% of the variance to the model for knee flexion at ball release (P = .010). For every 1-point increase in LBP severity, there was a 2.9° increase in knee flexion. The B coefficients indicated that the greater the LBP severity, the lower rotational ROM of the shoulder, the lower the peak angular velocities of the trunk and shoulders, and the stiffer the knee at ball release.
TABLE 5
Hierarchal Regression Analyses for Kinematic Parameters of a Lacrosse Shota
| Parameter | R | R 2 | R 2 Change | Significant F | B (95% CI)b |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pelvis rotation ROM in transverse plane | 0.809 | 0.654 | 0.008 | .52 | –1.4 (–5.7 to 3.0) |
| Shoulder rotation ROM in transverse plane | 0.851 | 0.723 | 0.063 | .05c | –16.2 (–33.1 to 0.6) |
| Peak angular velocity, pelvis | 0.812 | 0.659 | 0.037 | .15 | –18.5 (–44.6 to 7.6) |
| Peak angular velocity, trunk | 0.834 | 0.696 | 0.079 | .03c | –34.5 (–66.9 to –1.9) |
| Peak angular velocity, shoulder | 0.840 | 0.706 | 0.069 | .04c | –41.4 (–81.4 to –1.4) |
| Knee flexion angle at ball release | 0.644 | 0.415 | 0.250 | .01c | –2.9 (–5.1 to –0.8) |
| Ball speed | 0.865 | 0.748 | 0.024 | .17 | –1.5 (–3.7 to 0.7) |
Discussion
To our knowledge, this is the first examination of the relationship between LBP and shooting performance in lacrosse players. While many kinematic parameters of motion were similar between participants with and without LBP, those with chronic mild to moderate pain shot the lacrosse ball with greater knee flexion and slower peak trunk angular velocities. There was less incremental increase in angular velocities from pelvis to trunk in players with pain. LBP severity significantly contributed to several kinematic variables, including trunk and shoulder peak angular velocities and knee flexion at ball release. There are 2 possible interpretations of these findings: (1) the trigger of back pain may cause players to self-restrict high-speed rotation of segments that may exacerbate pain or (2) the motion itself over time caused the pain to develop. While this study was not able to measure pain onset longitudinally, the first possibility is explored.
Our findings are in partial agreement with other high-speed rotational sports that involve long lever arm equipment, such as golf or tennis, or that involve similar sequences of angular velocities from the pelvis, trunk, shoulder, and lever arm (eg, golf club, tennis racquet). Studies of golf swing motion demonstrate that players with symptomatic LBP used more lateral side bending on the backswing and had trunk flexion velocities during the downswing that were 2 times slower than players without pain.18 During neutral stance, the golfers with pain had less trunk rotation during the swing than players without, indicating that the relative spine rotation was elevated during the backswing. Tsai et al28 reported minimal differences in trunk kinematics. Biomechanical studies of tennis players also revealed minimal motion differences between players with and without LBP. In 1 study of tennis players (N = 21), serving kinematics were characterized by greater lateral pelvic tilt, lower lumbar and pelvic ROM, and anterior pelvic tilt in players with LBP compared with healthy players. Peak knee and hip flexion angles did not differ, but time to peak knee extension was earlier in players with and without LBP.4 In contrast, Campbell et al5 found that mean values of forehand or backhand groundstroke motion parameters did not differ in adolescent players with pain (N = 7) compared with those who had no pain (N = 12).
Pain may change the normal muscle activation of the muscles of the trunk that control the amount of spine rotation and rotational velocity. For example, LBP causes continual activation of the mulitifidus and longissimus muscles during axial rotation, which allows these muscles to then act as stabilizers.17 LBP may also increase pelvic stiffness and thereby negatively affect the transfer of angular rotational velocities to the trunk further up the kinematic chain.27 Our data support this possibility, as the LBP group had smaller incremental velocity from trunk to pelvis compared with the no pain group. Shooting motions require effective coordination of the timing and angular velocities of the proximal to distal segments to optimize ball speed. Variations in the timing or velocities can disrupt coordination and reduce performance.29 Here, the timing of these velocities were not different, but the maximal angular velocities of the trunk were significantly lower during a throwing motion in participants with LBP. Additionally, total pelvis and shoulder ROM was significantly lower, suggesting that pain may not disrupt motion timing but rather induce a guarding effect on the lumbopelvic region restricting motion, which subsequently restricts angular velocities.
A striking finding was that greater low back NRSpain scores were related to a greater knee flexion angle (more knee bend). An interpretation of this finding is that bending more at the knee can provide additional stabilization during spine rotation in players with LBP. Limited evidence from lacrosse, softball, and tennis players shows that the coactivation of lower extremity muscle groups (biceps femoris, rectus femoris, gastrocnemius) and the core (rectus abdominis, external obliques, and lumbar erector spinae) is essential for stabilization of the lower body as the upper body rotates over the pelvis.6,21,23 LBP-related lumbar muscle strength deficiencies may foster greater knee flexion to improve the base of support during the throw. On the other hand, a secondary proposed reason for greater knee flexion (bend) is to allow a safe dissipation of linear forces. For many overhead sports, trunk flexion allows for the dissipation of forward linear motion, but with restricted lumbopelvic motion, a secondary compensation of knee flexion may allow for these linear forces to safely dissipate, similar to a follow-through. Additional research of the timing and magnitude of the lower extremity and core muscle activation in players with and without LBP would address this issue and provide therapeutic muscle targets for rehabilitation specialists and trainers who work with lacrosse players.
Strengths and Limitations
Some limitations and strengths of this study deserve comment. It is not yet clear whether mechanical deficiencies caused LBP or whether preexisting LBP changes the mechanics of the lacrosse throw. Dynamic strength values or endurance did not differ between the 2 groups, but we cannot rule out possible differences in muscle activation patterns that could overload the low back. Additional study of the electromyography patterns of the core and lower extremity muscles during the shot would be insightful. Other research groups indicate that sport motions that involve segmental rotations at the end of the ROM at high velocities may be an underlying mechanism for pain.4,5 Epidemiological evidence suggests that exposure to high-velocity throwing or asymmetric loading sports over a lifetime or amount of practice contributes to the development of LBP.8,13,19,24,25 Additional prospective injury tracking simultaneous motion analysis would help address this question. A larger sample size of lacrosse players would permit stratification of LBP presence and severity among positions and training volume. An important point is that these motions were captured in a laboratory setting without the presence of game conditions such as defenders, time pressure, or throwing on the run. These real-time factors may increase the “stakes” of each shot and may increase the risk for injuries to occur.
Conclusion
Lacrosse players with LBP have slower peak trunk angular velocities and greater knee flexion during a shot motion than players with no pain. Training and prehabilitation programs may be targeted to the lumbopelvic and core regions to help players with LBP maintain lacrosse shot motions and minimize or abolish pain. Future research should include prospective longitudinal research tracking LBP and throwing motion through a season to determine the relationship of pain onset to mechanics in this population.
Footnotes
The authors declared that they have no conflicts of interest in the authorship and publication of this contribution.
References
1.
Ahmad CS, Dick RW, Snell E, et al.
Major and Minor League Baseball hamstring injuries: epidemiologic findings from the Major League Baseball Injury Surveillance System. Am J Sports Med. 2014;42:1464–1470. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]2.
Atwater AE.
Biomechanics of overarm throwing movements and of throwing injuries. Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 1979;7:43–85. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]3.
Brown SJ, Selbie WS, Wallace ES.
The X-Factor: an evaluation of common methods used to analyse major inter-segment kinematics during the golf swing. J Sports Sci. 2013;31:1156–1163. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]4.
Campbell A, O’Sullivan P, Straker L, Elliott B, Reid M.
Back pain in tennis players: a link with lumbar serve kinematics and range of motion. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2014;46:351–357. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]5.
Campbell A, Straker L, Whiteside D, O’Sullivan P, Elliott B, Reid M.
Lumbar mechanics in tennis groundstrokes: differences in elite adolescent players with and without low back pain. J Appl Biomech. 2016;32:32–39. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]6.
Chow JW, Shim JH, Lim YT.
Lower trunk muscle activity during the tennis serve. J Sci Med Sport. 2003;6:512–518. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]7.
Chu Y, Sell TC, Lephart SM.
The relationship between biomechanical variables and driving performance during the golf swing. J Sports Sci. 2010;28:1251–1259. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]8.
Dick R, Sauers EL, Agel J, et al.
Descriptive epidemiology of collegiate men’s baseball injuries: National Collegiate Athletic Association Injury Surveillance System, 1988-1989 through 2003-2004. J Athl Train. 2007;42:183–193. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]9.
Dworkin RH, Turk DC, Wyrwich KW, et al.
Interpreting the clinical importance of treatment outcomes in chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations. J Pain. 2008;9:105–121. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]10.
Ferreira-Valente MA, Pais-Ribeiro JL, Jensen MP.
Validity of four pain intensity rating scales. Pain. 2011;152:2399–2404. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]11.
Fleisig GS, Barrentine SW, Zheng N, Escamilla RF, Andrews JR.
Kinematic and kinetic comparison of baseball pitching among various levels of development. J Biomech. 1999;32:1371–1375. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]12.
Glazier PS.
Is the “crunch factor” an important consideration in the aetiology of lumbar spine pathology in cricket fast bowlers?
Sports Med Auckl NZ. 2010;40:809–815. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]13.
Hangai M, Kaneoka K, Okubo Y, et al.
Relationship between low back pain and competitive sports activities during youth. Am J Sports Med. 2010;38:791–796. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]14.
Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG.
Research electronic data capture (REDCap)—a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42:377–381. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]15.
Hinton RY, Lincoln AE, Almquist JL, Douoguih WA, Sharma KM.
Epidemiology of lacrosse injuries in high school-aged girls and boys: a 3-year prospective study. Am J Sports Med. 2005;33:1305–1314. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]16.
Kageyama M, Sugiyama T, Takai Y, Kanehisa H, Maeda A.
Kinematic and kinetic profiles of trunk and lower limbs during baseball pitching in collegiate pitchers. J Sports Sci Med. 2014;13:742–750. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]17.
Kuriyama N, Ito H.
Electromyographic functional analysis of the lumbar spinal muscles with low back pain. J Nippon Med Sch. 2005;72:165–173. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]18.
Lindsay D, Horton J.
Comparison of spine motion in elite golfers with and without low back pain. J Sports Sci. 2002;20:599–605. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]19.
McCarroll JR.
The frequency of golf injuries. Clin Sports Med. 1996;15:1–7. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]22.
Noormohammadpour P, Rostami M, Mansournia MA, Farahbakhsh F, Pourgharib Shahi MH, Kordi R.
Low back pain status of female university students in relation to different sport activities. Eur Spine J. 2016;25:1196–1203. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]23.
Oliver GD, Plummer HA, Keeley DW.
Muscle activation patterns of the upper and lower extremity during the windmill softball pitch. J Strength Cond Res. 2011;25:1653–1658. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]25.
Posner M, Cameron KL, Wolf JM, Belmont PJ, Owens BD.
Epidemiology of Major League Baseball injuries. Am J Sports Med. 2011;39:1676–1680. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]26.
Ruskin D, Lalloo C, Amaria K, et al.
Assessing pain intensity in children with chronic pain: convergent and discriminant validity of the 0 to 10 numerical rating scale in clinical practice. Pain Res Manag. 2014;19:141–148. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]27.
Sung PS.
Disability and back muscle fatigability changes following two therapeutic exercise interventions in participants with recurrent low back pain. Med Sci Monit. 2013;19:40–48. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]28.
Tsai Y-S, Sell TC, Smoliga JM, Myers JB, Learman KE, Lephart SM.
A comparison of physical characteristics and swing mechanics between golfers with and without a history of low back pain. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2010;40:430–438. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]29.
Urbin MA, Fleisig GS, Abebe A, Andrews JR.
Associations between timing in the baseball pitch and shoulder kinetics, elbow kinetics, and ball speed. Am J Sports Med. 2013;41:336–342. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]30.
Vincent HK, Chen C, Zdziarski LA, Montes J, Vincent KR.
Shooting motion in high school, collegiate and professional men’s lacrosse. Sports Biomech. 2015;14:448–458. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]31.
Von Korff M, Jensen MP, Karoly P.
Assessing global pain severity by self-report in clinical and health services research. Spine. 2000;25:3140–3151. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]32.
Weber AE, Kontaxis A, O’Brien SJ, Bedi A.
The biomechanics of throwing: simplified and cogent. Sports Med Arthrosc. 2014;22:72–79. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]34.
Xiang J, Collins CL, Liu D, McKenzie LB, Comstock RD.
Lacrosse injuries among high school boys and girls in the United States: academic years 2008-2009 through 2011-2012. Am J Sports Med. 2014;42:2082–2088. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
JM3 Attack/Midfield Academy
A first-of-its-kind course to drastically improve your skills in 90 days
Course curriculum
Week 1
1
Getting Started
Next Steps
Typical Schedule
2
Introduction
Welcome from Your Coach!
Drill List
3
Chapter 1 Skill Focus: Triple Threat Position
Message from Jamie Munro
Triple Threat Position and Applications
Skill Quiz – Triple Threat Position
4
Chapter 1 – Footwork
Intro to Footwork
High Knees Skip (2x)
Lateral Skips (2x)
Backward Skips (2x)
Karaoke Skip (2x)
Speed Ladder – Ickey Shuffle Wind Ups (4x)
Speed Ladder – New Ickey Wind Ups (4x)
Speed Ladder – 3 Step Wind Up (4x)
U Drill (4x)
DBR the Line (4x)
5-10-5 (Pro-Agility) Drill (4x)
5
Chapter 1 – Wall Ball
Intro to Wall Ball (75x each drill)
Switch Hands Quicksticks
One Hand Release witch Hands Wall Ball Quicksticks
Forehand/Backhand Quicksticks
Backhand to Backhand Quicksticks
BTB Switch Hands Quicksticks
Crank Passing Wall Ball
Crank passing Back Peddle Hitch
6
Chapter 1 – Bounce Back Workouts
Intro to Bounce Back drills (50x each hand)
Wristers
Snap Back Wristers
BTB Wristers
Double Threat to Triple Threat Wristers
Wristers Double Threat with Powless Pump
7
Chapter 1 – Catch & Shoot
Catch and Shoot Drills (30-45 mins)
Intro to Catch & Shoot
Circle The Cone, Set your Feet, and Shoot with Quick Release
Circle the Cone Wind Up Hitch & Go
Circle the Cone Wind Up Face Dodge
Circle the Cone Wind Up Face Dodge Roll Back
Circle the Cone Wind Up Double Hitch
Cut to the Cone Shooting
Cut to the Cone Shooting with Hitch & Go
Cut to the Cone Shooting with Face Dodge
Cut to the Cone Shooting with Face Dodge Roll Backs
8
Chapter 1 – Crank Passing
Crank Passing Explanation
Crank Passing (20 mins)
9
Chapter 1 – Shoot on a Goalie
Shooting on a Goalie (30-45 mins)
Intro to Shooting on a Goalie
Micro Training – Time and Room Shooting
10
Chapter 1 – Windup 1v1s
Intro to 1v1’s (30 mins)
Wind Up 1v1’s
Wind Up 1v1’s
11
Chapter 1 – Pickup Games
Pick up Game Video
Pick up Game Explanation
12
Chapter 1 – IQ Lesson – Big Little Invert
JM3 IQ Training
Big Little Micro Training
Big Little IQ Quiz
13
Chapter 1 – For Parents
Recruiting Webinar
Parent Information
14
Chapter 2 Overview
Message From Jamie Munro
Drill List
Double Threat Position and Applications
Facedodge Finish Applications
Skill Quiz – Double Threat Position
15
Chapter 2 – Footwork
Footwork Intro
5-10-5 (Pro Agility) Slide Dodge (4x each)
5-10-5 (Pro Agility) Drift Dodge (4x each)
New Ickey Wind Up (4x)
3 Step Ladder Split Dodges (4x)
3 Step Ladder Rollbacks (4x)
Zig Zag Roll Back With Shuffle Hesitation (4x)
16
Chapter 2 – Wall Ball
Wall Ball Intro (75x per drill)
Question Marks
Pop Out Feeds
Rocker Roll Back
Jump Stop Split 3 Step
17
Chapter 2 – Bounce Back
Bounce Back Intro (50x each hand per drill)
Face Dodge Split Wristers
Fake Far Twister
Fake Near Reach Far
Lever Wristers
Double to Triple Jump Powless Pump Wristers
18
Chapter 2 – Crank Passing
Crank Passing Intro (20 minutes)
Crank Passing – From Double Threat Position
19
Chapter 2 – Catch & Shoot
Catch and Shoot Intro (30-45 mins)
Sneak 1 Timers
2 Cage Finishing
Double to Triple Threat Shooting
Powless Pump
20
Chapter 2 – 1v1’s
1v1’s Intro (30 mins)
Drift Dodge on Both Wings
Approach 1v1’s
Alley 1v1’s – Bounce To Double Threat
21
Chapter 2 – Shooting On a Goalie
Shooting on a Goalie Intro (30-45 mins)
Double to Triple Threat Shooting
Powless Pump
Finishing on Dad
Face Dodge Finish
22
Chapter 2 – Pick Up Games
Pick Up Games Intro
3v2 Version Video
Pick Up Game Explanation
23
Chapter 2 – IQ Lesson – 141 Basics and Hot Spots
JM3 IQ Training
141 Basics and Hot Spots Intro
141 Basics and Hot Spots Micro Training
141 Basics and Hot Spots Quiz
24
Chapter 2 – For Parents
Parent Education
Recruiting Advice From Penn State Coach, Jeff Tambroni
25
Chapter 3 – Overview
Message From Jamie Munro
Drill List
Hesitation Moves Video
Hesitation Moves Skill Quiz
Change of Direction Moves Video
Change of Direction Skill Quiz
26
Chapter 3 – Footwork
Footwork Intro
Skaters (2x)
3 Step Skaters (2x)
Speed Ladder – 3 Step Splits (2x)
Speed Ladder – 3 Step Roll Backs (2x)
Speed Ladder – Double Ladder Splits (2x)
Zig Zag Roll Backs (2x)
Zig Zag Roll Backs – Quick Hitches (2x)
Zig Zag Roll Backs – Skip Hesitation (2x)
Zig Zag Roll Backs – One Foot Hesitation (2x)
27
Chapter 3 – Wall Ball
Wall Ball Intro (75x per drill)
Switch Hands Quicksticks
One Hand Release Switch Hands Wall Ball Quicksticks
Forehand/Backhand Quicksticks
Backhand to Backhand Quicksticks
BTB Switch Hands Quicksticks
Crank Passing Wall Ball
Crank Passing Back Peddle Hitch
28
Chapter 3 – Bounce Back
Bounce Back Intro (50x per drill each hand)
Face Dodge Split Wristers
Fake Far Twister
Fake Near Reach Far
Lever Wristers
Double to Triple Jump Powless Pump Wristers
29
Chapter 3 – Dodge and Shoot
Dodge and Shoot Intro (30 mins)
Dodge & Shoot Workout
Split Dodge Shoot on the Run
Split Dodge Roll Back Shooting
Split Dodge….Roll Back….Hesitation move…. Shoot on the Run
Split Dodge….Hesitation move…. Roll Back….Shoot on the Run
Split Dodge….Hesitation Move…. Roll Back…. Hesitation Move…. Shoot on the Run
30
Chapter 3 – Shooting on a Goalie
Shooting on a Goalie Intro (30 mins)
Finishing – Over the Shoulder Catch Finishing
Circle the Cone – Time & Room Shooting
Circle the Cone – Hitch and Go
Circle the Cone – Double Hitch Shooting
Split Dodge Roll Back Shooting
Shooting on Goalies
31
Chapter 3 – 1v1’s
1v1’s Intro (30 mins)
Alley 1v1’s – Roll Backs
Alley 1v1’s – Cut Backs
Split the Alley or Split to X, Hesitate, Roll Back
Split Dodge Hesitation to get Underneath
32
Chapter 3 – Pick Up Game
Pick Up Game Intro
Pick Up Game Explanation
2v2 or 3v3 + Goalie
33
Chapter 3 – IQ Training
IQ Intro
IQ Training – Exchanges in the 141 Offense
IQ Training Video
Exchanges in the 141 Offense Quiz
34
Chapter 3 – For Parents
Words of Wisdom from Dom Starsia
Parent Video
35
Chapter 4 – Overview
Message From Jamie Munro
Drill List
V Cut / Split Dodge Skill Video
V Cut / Split Dodge Skill Quiz
36
Chapter 4 – Footwork
Footwork Intro
High Knees Skip (2x)
Lateral Skips (2x)
Backward Skips (2x)
Karaoke Skip (2x)
Zig Zag Splits 2 Foot Landing (2x)
Speed Ladder – Ickey Splits (2x)
Speed Ladder – 3 Step Splits (2x)
Speed Ladder – Double Ladder Splits (2x)
37
Chapter 4 – Wall Ball
Wall Ball Intro (75x per drill)
Question Marks
Pop Out Feeds
Rocker Roll Back
Jump Stop Split 3 Step
38
Chapter 4 – Bounce Back
Bounce Back Intro (50x each hand per drill)
Wristers
Snap Back Wristers
BTB Wristers
Double Threat to Triple Threat Wristers
Wristers Double Threat with Powless Pump
39
Chapter 4 – Dodge and Shoot
Dodge and Shoot Intro (30 mins)
3 Step V Cut Split Dodge Shooting
Split Dodge Shoot on the Run Inside Out and Outside In
40
Chapter 4 – 1v1’s
1v1’s Intro (30 mins)
1v1’s From X
1v1’s From the Wing
1v1’s – Inside Out and Outside In Split Dodges
41
Chapter 4 – Shooting on a Goalie
Shooting on a Goalie Intro (30 mins)
Shooting Teeter Totters and Leaners
42
Chapter 4 – Pick Up Games
Pick Up Games Intro
Pick Up Game Directions
3v3 3x Rules With Mirrors
3v3 3x Rules With 2 Man Game
43
Chapter 4 – IQ Training
IQ Intro
IQ Training – 141 Pairs Looks and Motions
IQ Training Video
IQ Quiz
44
Chapter 4 – For Parents
Parent Video Part 1 (Recruiting) with Dave Pietramala
Parent Video Part 2 (Box Lacrosse Players) with Dave Pietramala
45
Chapter 5 – Overview
Message From Jamie Munro
Drill List
Pop Outs Skill Video
Pop Outs Skill Quiz
Passing Skill Video
Passing Skill Quiz
Jeff Teat vs. Brown 1st Quarter Analysis
46
Chapter 5 – Footwork
Footwork Intro
Speed Ladder – 3 Step Wind Ups & Pop Outs
U Drill
5-10-5 (Pro Agility)
5-10-5 (Pro Agility) – Slide Dodge
5-10-5 (Pro Agility) – Drift Dodge
Zig Zag Pop Outs
47
Chapter 5 – Wall Ball
Wall Ball Intro
Question Marks
Pop Out Feeds
Rocker Roll Back
Jump Stop Split 3 Step
48
Chapter 5 – Bounce Back
Bounce Back Intro
Face Dodge Split Wristers
Question Marks
Fade Shot
Lever Wristers
BTB Wristers
49
Chapter 5 – Stick Work
Stick Work Intro
Circle Passing
Circle Passing – Pull Passes
Circle Passing – Hands High
Throw Backs – Rocker Question Mark
50
Chapter 5 – Cut, Catch, and Shoot
Cut Catch and Shoot Intro
Sneak 1 Timer Crank Passes
Over the Shoulder Catches
Cut to the Cone Shooting
Cut to the Cone Hitch and Go Shooting
Cut to the Cone Face Dodge Shooting
Cut to the Cone Face Dodge Roll Back Shooting
51
Chapter 5 – Shooting on a Goalie
Shooting on a Goalie Intro
Time and Room
Question Mark Shooting Around the Cone
Split Dodge Shoot on the Run
Split Dodge Roll Back Shoot on the Run
Drift Dodge Turn the Corner Shoot on the Run
Catch and Finish – Face Dodge Finish
Catch and Finish – Reach Far or Twister Near
Catch and Finish – Behind the Back Fake Reach
52
Chapter 5 – 1v1’s
1v1’s Intro
Alley 1v1’s – Roll Backs
Alley 1v1’s – Cut Backs
Alley 1v1’s – Bounce to Double Threat
Short 1v1’s – Z Dodges
Tight 1v1’s – Question Marks
MJ Moves
DBR the Line
Tight 1v1’s – Rockers, Question Marks, Fade Shots, and Screen Shots
Question Mark Technique Nuances
53
Chapter 5 – Pick Up Game
Pick Up Game Intro
Pick Up Game Video
54
Chapter 5 – IQ Training
IQ Intro
IQ Training Video – Clearing 101
IQ Quiz
55
Chapter 5 – For Parents
Parent Video – Brian Holman’s Advice On Recruiting and Development
56
Chapter 6 – Overview
Message From Jamie Munro
Drill List
End Of Dodge Skill Video
End of Dodge Skill Quiz
57
Chapter 6 – Footwork
Tight Zig Zag Roll Backs
Tight Zig Zag Roll Backs – Street
Speed Ladder – 3 Step Wind Up / Pop Out
Double Ladder – 3 Step Wind Up / Pop Out
U Drill
5-10-5 (Pro Agility) – Drift Dodge
DBR The Line
58
Chapter 6 – Wall Ball
Switch Hands Quicksticks
One Hand Release witch Hands Wall Ball Quicksticks
Forehand/Backhand Quicksticks
Backhand to Backhand Quicksticks
BTB Switch Hands Quicksticks
Crank Passing Wall Ball
Crank passing Back Peddle Hitch
59
Chapter 6 – Shooting on a Goalie
Shooting on a Goalie Intro
Double Shot Catch and Shoot
John Grant Jr. Shooting Demo
60
Chapter 6 – 1v1’s
1v1’s Intro
Tight 1v1’s
Tight 1v1’s – Question Marks
Tight 1v1’s + Slide / Crease Man
61
Chapter 6 – Pick Up Game
Pick Up Game Intro
Pick Up Game Video
62
Chapter 6 – IQ
IQ Training Video
IQ Quiz
63
Chapter 6 – For Parents
Parent Video – Gerry Byrne Defensive Coordinator at Notre Dame
A Lacrosse Weekend 2.15.20
Uncategorized
Feb 15, 2020
Welcome to “A Lacrosse Weekend” my weekly compilation of thoughts, ideas, stories, myths, truths, about the great game of lacrosse. I hope you enjoy it!
Phi-Lacrosse-ophy Podcast “In Season” Edition
“In Season” Edition with PLL Chaos Head Coach Andy Towers is in full swing! There’s nothing I like doing more than talking lacrosse with AT. His takes are thoughtful and often times hilarious! Like when he said of Ric Beardsley doing the color commentary for the Syracuse-Colgate game, “You could smell the cologne right through the TV!” We try and get a weekend recap of AT’s top 20 every Monday by 5pm ET!
Click here to listen to the AT podcast!
Inside The 8 with Colleen Magarity
This is a new podcast focused on women’s lacrosse! Colleen was a 3x National Champion and All-American at Northwestern, coached at Colorado for 3 years and helped get the program off the ground and into the NCAA Tourney, and is currently Head Coach at Penn Charter School in Philly and Director of HHH Lacrosse Club. She’s also a great person, mentor and friend! There needs to be more women’s lacrosse content and we are trying to ramp it up!
Here’s what we covered in Episode #1:
Analysis of DI Games: Florida/Colorado, Jacksonville/Michigan, Syracuse/Stony Brook and Northwestern/Duke
Coaching Women’s Lacrosse: Zone Offense, various Zone Defenses, the Michigan “Fade” concept, 2man game, Post up moves and much more!
College Lacrosse Recruiting: Colleen touched on the “X” factor every girl must have!
Special Guests: this week we chatted with UMass Defensive Coordinator Jana Drummond on the heels of their huge “W” versus Boston College.
Click here to listen to the Inside the 8 Podcast!
Some Sick Clips!
I am constantly scouring the internet for interesting video clips that I can use to teach, learn, and share the great game of lacrosse! This time of year is an absolute extravaganza for sick clips! I hope you enjoy these and the analysis!
Getting Close To Your Man
The easiest way to beat your man, is getting as close to your defender as possible, get their feet to slow down or stop and completely eliminate their cushion. This dodging posture with a low cradle I call Double Threat Position, is in my opinion the most impactful technique in the game because it controls defenders, backs them off, digs them in, and puts you in the driver’s seat.
Kobe Jab Hesitation Move
The late, great Kobe Bryant uses his Double Threat posture to get close and use a Jab Hesitation move to completely “Root” the feet of his man. Counter intuitive in lacrosse, but but commonplace in basketball, if you jab hard (if you’re close enough!) your man will shift his weight in the direction of your jab. If you attack while he is shifting back, he’s done! I have come up with a sick “Punch Move” technique in this vein that you will love!
Setting up a Screen Shot
Another application of Double Threat position is perfectly executed by Zack Greer from the Seals game in Vegas. Watch this clip closely and you will notice that when Greer realizes he has a shot opportunity, he sells his dodging posture to back defenders off setting up is shot! This is a common technique used by Canadian box lacrosse players.
Crowley Gotcha Fake
One of the advantages of playing super close to your man, whether squared up or posted up, is it is easier to fake your defender. Here Crowley is using post ups, Double Threat, Hip Swivel Technique, and a sick “Gotcha” fake that turns the head of his defender. Then Crowley easily swims his man to make a play.
Noble Exaggerated Face dodge
This is such an interesting clip if you watch it closely. The longer Noble can wait to execute his face dodge, the more the defenders have to wait, cringe and cover up! It looks like Noble is arching his back as if to shoot a Twister Shot which actually creates an added delay. Finally, you’ll notice one defender gets completely turned around because Noble’s Twister Face Dodge doubles as a Hard Pump that sold shot. The morale of the story is to hitch, hitch, hitch and sell shot for as long as you can!
Staats Hang up 2man
This video is what “Fluency” in the sport of box lacrosse looks like. Here Austin Staats uses his Double Threat Carry to engage the switch, then he re-engages his own man by opening up to him so he has both defenders on the hook allowing Greer to roll to the net amidst defensive confusion. Finally, before sliding a beautiful pass through the defense, Staats engages the goalie, making it so much easier for Greer to score.
Mahomes’s Double Fake
We all saw this clip from the Super Bowl a couple of weeks ago, but I wanted to comment on a couple things. First, the fact that he double faked the pitch is what made the play! All defenders can react to one fake, but when you fake twice they bite hard! The key here is the way Mahomes fakes early enough on the first fake to have time for the second fake. Such a think of beauty! The double fake concept applies in lacrosse in many ways! Faking goalies, split dodges, and pumping through gaps to name a few!
Jack Kelly Fakes Through the Gap
Here’s a sweet example Penn State’s Jack Kelly Pumping Through the Gap which is very similar to Mahomes’s Fake Pitch touchdown! When a dodger is attacking towards a help perimeter defender and fakes a few interesting things happen: first, his own man both under plays him towards the help and often can’t see if the dodger actually passed the ball and therefore will bite harder of fakes. Simultaneously, the help defender will react to the fake just enough to get the dodger through the gap!
Fox Spin Hook Move
Last week everyone seemed to love the Spin Hook clip so I found another one! This is NY Riptide’s Jake Fox executing it perfectly! Enjoy!
The Low-High Wind up
Canadians are known as the best shooters in the world (with some exceptions of course like Marcus Holman and Will Manny!). While Americans are worrying about mechanics, Canadians are learning deception. One of the most common deceptive shots you will see in Canadian Box Lacrosse is the Low-High Wind up which is a deadly technique! This technique will hold a goalie up, creates a hesitation in your release, and allows you to use deception of both the “Where’ and “When” in your shot release. here the shooter holds the goalie up and yanks it down.
Low-High Wind up 8 Meter Leaner
This technique is money in women’s lacrosse on 8 meter shots. Here the shooter holds the goalie up, then leans down and throws it stick side high. Watch the goalie’s stick.
Want to learn how to teach or learn all these skills?
Here’s how:
- Become a subscriber to JM3 Content! The content I’ve created is like nothing you will find on the internet and it literally evolves every day! Click here for a FREE TRIAL!
- Become a JM3 Athlete: I work with boys and girls through a remote coaching model leveraging my JM3 Content and expertise, which has been wildly effective!
- JM3 Coaching Support: I work with coaches (and dads) one on one (or with the entire staff) problem solving, watching film, practice planning, etc. It is a total blast!
Have a great weekend!
Coaches Corner – Crofton Girls Lacrosse
This page is dedicated to content for coaches who are looking for drills to use at practice and other helpful coaching content.
Thanks to William Endo for providing the catalyst content below!
The Lacrosse Institute (TLI)
2’s – Passing Drills
Sticks Outside
Sticks Inside
Shuffle Quick Stick
Shuffle Wind Up
Shuffle Wind Up Face Dodge
Windup Facedodge Flip
Backward Sticks Outside
Backward Sticks Inside
3’s Passing Drills
Sides
https://vimeo.com/153023175
Figure 8
Lighthouses
Going Away
Trilogy
Stickwork
4 Point Touch
Baseball Passing
Big Box Passing
Dish and Tap
House Passing
Pizza Passing
Star Chaos
Chaos
Inside out Star
Bowtie Passing
Ground Ball Drills
GB Dish
GB Rally
Mirror T
Partner Turn Find
3:3 Battle
Sideline GBs
Shooting
Figure 8 Shooting
High Curl
Two Point Touch
Pick and Roll Double Shot
Triangle Inside Shooting
Box Shooting
Dodging
High Low Movement
3 Pont Dodge
4 Cone Dodge
Zig Zag dodge
Defense
Flash and Crash
Hold the Line
Double Out Crease
ABDC Triangles
Defense Box add in
Transition
Pressure and Reverse
All in Transition
Small Sided Drills
Split the 8
DaD Drill
Numbers
5v5 Build Up
2 Grid Possession
Ring of Fire
Eastside boys lacrosse coach returns six months after brain surgery
Eastside coach back on the sidelines after brain surgery
Eastside High School boys lacrosse coach Mike McCallan is back on the sidelines six months after brain surgery.
BART BOATWRIGHT/Staff
TAYLORS — The nurse asked a normal question for someone about to undergo brain surgery, inquiring whether Mike McCallan had a will and power of attorney written.
“Ma’am, I’m 27,” he said. “I had no idea that I would need that at this age.”
Then again, McCallan had no idea he would wind up needing brain surgery and no idea he would wind up in South Carolina.
In September 2015, McCallan, a Long Island native, was diagnosed with a brain tumor. Since then, he has moved to the Upstate, become Eastside High School’s boys lacrosse coach, figuratively added to his family and literally cleared his head.
McCallan underwent surgery in September and is back to coaching.
“It definitely showed us he practices what he preaches,” said Bryce Black, a senior member of the Eastside lacrosse team. “He’s willing to fight through hard stuff, push through everything, get the work done and become a better person.”
“When I walked out here Day One, I kind of had a moment with myself,” McCallan said before a practice earlier this week. “I came out here a little extra early and kind of walked the field. I couldn’t believe it. I was like, ‘I’m here. I went through this surgery, and I’m still able to be here and do what I love and help these kids out.’ Yeah, it was probably a little bit emotional.”
RELATED: Lacrosse talent spreads in Greenville County
Lacrosse has always been a safe place for McCallan, who grew up in West Islip with a bunch of other kids who began playing the sport at a very young age.
His high school team won county, state and national championships, and then he played at NCAA Division II New York Institute of Technology.
Upon graduation, McCallan was working full time in finance and serving in the National Guard, stationed in Fort Hamilton (Brooklyn).
When McCallan was getting off the plane and heading to basic training, he received a text from his father, Michael McCallan Sr.
“He said, ‘Don’t ever quit on me,’ and that just stuck in my head forever,” the younger McCallan said. “He would write the same thing at the end of each letter.”
In 2015, McCallan began having “signicant headaches.”
“I had to get a second opinion because the first neurosurgeon thought it was just a cyst,” McCallan said. “Thankfully, I did.”
In September, he was diagnosed with a brain tumor, although he was getting varying opinions with regard to treatment, and it was uncertain as to whether it was benign or malignant.
Time for a change
McCallan, on disability at the time, decided he needed a change. He went on Laxpower.com, a website for all levels of lacrosse, and began looking for coaching positions, specifically in the Carolinas.
He checked into those at Riverside and Eastside; the Riverside job had just been filled, but he got a call back from Eastside assistant athletic director Jack Kosmicki.
“He’s another New Yorker, so we got each other, and it was great,” McCallan said. “Against doctor’s orders, I got on a plane and came down.”
He went to Eastside’s practice and met former Eagles coach Ed Ryan, as well as Ryan’s former assistant, Dr. Michael Bucci. They took McCallan out to dinner that night and explained the lacrosse situation to him. He explained his medical situation to them, and Bucci became his neurosurgeon.
McCallan accepted the job a few weeks after that, in late 2015.
“I was trying to find a place to live, and I couldn’t find one,” McCallan said. “Ed Ryan and his wife, (Deborah), God bless them, they opened their home to me for six months. He had met me one time, and I hadn’t even met his wife.
“It was cool, because I got to witness that Southern hospitality really quick.”
Still, he needed full-time work. Bucci connected McCallan with St. Francis Hospital, and since April 2016, he’s been working for the vice president of finance as special projects coordinator.
McCallan had been getting six-month checkups, and the tumor had been shrinking. Then this past summer, it grew again. Bucci did the surgery to remove the tumor Sept. 27.
RELATED: Blue Ridge softball player overcomes two knee surgeries
“We were praying for him and hoping everything would turn out all right and that he’d get back as fast as possible,” said Black. “I actually went and saw him in the hospital after the surgery, and he was looking pretty good, so I felt better about the entire situation.”
The pathology report revealed that the entire tumor had been removed and that it was benign, McCallan said. He left the hospital Sept. 29.
He has never left that feeling behind. His father was here for the surgery, but McCallan learned so much about his extended family.
“The support from Eastside, the support from my team, from everyone was really awesome to have, because here I am, I don’t have family down here,” McCallan said. “There were prayers being said, and it just made me feel at home. The support level was overwhelming.”
While he was in the hospital, McCallan said all he could think about was getting back on the field and preparing for the upcoming season.
Team has made progress
In McCallan’s first two seasons, Eastside has made positive strides: a playoff appearance the first year followed by the first playoff victory in the program’s history last year.
This season, the Eagles are 2-6, although four of the six losses have been by one goal, including last week’s 11-10 defeat against Nation Ford. After that game, McCallan suffered his first setback since the surgery.
“I got two shooting pains in my head, and they kind of crippled me,” he said. “I had a little bit of blurred vision. I just had to sit down. The trainer had to come take a look at me. I didn’t know what was going on.”
“At first, I saw him crying and I just thought he was really emotional from the loss,” said Christian Jones, a senior on McCallan’s team. “Then you kind of realized it wasn’t just the loss. It was everything that was going on in his head. I’ve never really had someone with a brain problem go through something in front of me, so it was kind of scary.”
McCallan contacted Bucci, and they decided he should rest for a couple days, but the inactivity got to him, and he was at Eastside’s game Friday against Christ Church. The lacrosse field remains a place for him to get away from the stresses in life.
In turn, it’s become a place where his players can easily find motivation.
“If he can get through a brain tumor, we can get through some sprints,” Black said. “That’s easy stuff.”
“He works really hard to be the same person, even going through what he’s going through, especially with all the symptoms he’s had,” said Jones. “It’s an inspiration to me.”
McCallan admits he feels like he’s still fighting a battle against an unknown opponent. He said there’s no prognosis as of yet, and he’s still in the “monitoring stage.” But he also considers the alternative.
“At the end of the day, it comes down to just being very thankful,” he said. “Things could have gone different. I could have struggled with the surgery, or my recovery could have gone longer. My total recovery time was like two weeks, which according to doctors is unbelievable.
“It’s still a process. I still have headaches, little quirky things like trying to get my balance and memory. I probably still have another six months until I finally start to feel like myself. I’m still not there yet, which for me is a little tough because I can’t really comprehend and do all the things that I’d like to do. At the same time, I’m still giving it all I’ve got, regardless of me being 100 percent or not.”
He’ll never quit. Whatever is going on in his head, those words are still stuck in there.
Moscow | Why not: Michkov rated his lacrosse goal to Sweden
Photo: Instagram / russiahockey
The forward of the Russian national hockey team Matvey Michkov said that he did not think about a lacrosse goal in the Karjala Cup match with Sweden.
– The puck went right, and I decided to try, why not. Everyone congratulated me, – said the athlete.
If you can score like that, then why not, Michkov TASS quotes him as saying.
On November 13, it was reported that Michkov became the youngest goal scorer in the history of the national hockey teams of Russia and the USSR. The striker scored the puck in the match between Russia and Sweden at the first stage of the Eurotour – the Karjala Cup. Nevertheless, the Russian team lost to the Swedes with a score of 2: 4.
The hockey player, who is currently 16 years old and 339 days old, distinguished himself in the 22nd minute. Thus, he renewed the achievement of “Washington” striker Alexander Ovechkin, who distinguished himself at the age of 17 years and 355 days.In the 2018/19 season, Michkov broke Ovechkin’s record with 109 points in 26 matches of the Moscow Open Hockey Championship.
On the same day, Ovechkin commented on his recently acquired fourth position on the list of the best snipers in the history of the National Hockey League (NHL). According to him, this is a special moment for him, his parents, brother, wife and children.
Ivan Yuminov
Related news from neighboring regions:
Kungur meteorite.16-year-old Matvey Michkov became the protagonist of the Karjala Cup
No matter how the Karjala Cup, the first stage of the hockey Eurotour of the season, ended yesterday, the name of its protagonist became known in advance.
16:26 15.11.2021 St. Petersburg Vedomosti – St. Petersburg
A native of Kungur, Matvey Michkov entered the history of national hockey
The forward of the Russian national team scored a goal against Sweden on November 13 and became the youngest striker – he is 16 years old 11 months 4 days.
11:11 15.11.2021 Newspaper Iskra – Kungur
SKA hockey player scored the “youngest” goal in the history of the Russian national team
The “youngest” goal in the history of the Russian national team was scored by SKA hockey player Matvey Michkov.
13:42 11/14/2021 TC Saint Petersburg – Saint Petersburg
Sensation: 16-year-old Perm has broken the record of famous hockey player Alexander Ovechkin with his super goal
Matvey Michkov became the youngest hockey player in the national teams of Russia and the USSR.
15:33 14.11.2021 V-Kurse.Ru – Perm
The Russian national ice hockey team lost to Sweden in the Karjala Cup match
The match ended with a score of 2: 4.
vk.com / Hockey of Russia
The Russian national ice hockey team lost 2: 4 to the Swedish team in the match of the second round of the first stage of the Eurotour – the Karjala Cup.
07:50 14.11.2021 IA Nevskie Novosti – Saint Petersburg
Russia – Czech Republic: third chance for the national team not to lose in the Karjala Cup
Match Czech Republic – Russia in the Karjala Cup. Photo: FHR
The Russian national ice hockey team will meet with the Czech team at the Karjala Cup, the first stage of the Euro Hockey Tour.
03:10 14.11.2021 Nevsky Sport – Saint Petersburg
News of the day at NVsport: Michkov scored historic lacrosse goal, Karpin lit at press conference ahead of Croatia
Matvey Michkov.Photo: fhr.ru
16-year-old Russian hockey player Matvey Michkov scored a lacrosse goal against the Swedes at the Karjala Cup.
00:20 14.11.2021 Nevsky Sport – Saint Petersburg
Swedish goalkeeper – about Michkov’s goal: “I will remember this puck for a long time”
Matvey Michkov. Photo: fhr.ru
Sweden hockey team goalkeeper Gustav Lindvall shared his impressions after missing a lacrosse goal from Russian national team striker Matvey Michkov at the Karjala Cup.
21:40 13.11.2021 Nevsky Sport – Saint Petersburg
16-year-old hockey player became the youngest author of an abandoned puck in the history of the Russian national team
Photo: © RIA Novosti / Grigory Sysoev
Forward Matvey Michkov became the youngest author of an abandoned puck in the history of the Russian national ice hockey team at the age of 16, Gazeta reports.RU.
20:11 13.11.2021 47 news – Len
Hockey player Michkov became the youngest scorer in the national teams of Russia and the USSR
SKA St. Petersburg forward Matvey Michkov scored in the match between the Russian and Swedish national hockey teams at the first stage of the Eurotour – the Karjala Cup.
20:53 13.11.2021 Pln-Pskov.Ru – Pskov
Hockey player Matvey Michkov became the youngest goalscorer in the history of the national team, but this did not help to beat the Swedes
Matvey Michkov broke the record of Alexander Ovechkin, scoring not only the youngest goal for the national team, but also making it in the lacrosse style.
19:10 13.11.2021 Moika78.Ru – Saint Petersburg
Michkov scored the youngest goal for the national team in the history of the Red Machine in the match Sweden – Russia at the Karjala Cup
The Russian national ice hockey team has not yet won a single match at the Karjala Cup.
02:20 14.11.2021 Sport25.Pro – Vladivostok
The Russian national ice hockey team lost to Sweden in the Karjala Cup match
Russian hockey players were defeated by the Swedish national team in the second round of the Karjala Cup in Finland.
18:20 13.11.2021 Sama-Samara.Ru – Samara
Michkov became the youngest scorer in the history of the Russian national ice hockey team
The forward of the Russian national team Matvey Michkov set a record for the national team, becoming the youngest goalscorer in its history.
18:20 13.11.2021 Sama-Samara.Ru – Samara
Goal of the record-holder Michkov did not save the team from defeat: lost to the Swedes
Russian national ice hockey team. Photo: Instagram team
The Russian national team lost to Sweden in the match at the Karjala Cup with a score of 2: 4.
18:00 13.11.2021 Nevsky Sport – Saint Petersburg
Michkov scored Sweden’s lacrosse puck: player is the youngest scorer in the national team
Matvey Michkov.Photo HC SKA
Russian national team striker Matvey Michkov scored a lacrosse goal against Sweden at the Karjala Cup.
16:40 13.11.2021 Nevsky Sport – Saint Petersburg
Ovechkin on the fourth place in goals in the NHL: When you start playing, you don’t think that you can be next to such names
Alexander Ovechkin.Photo – NHL website
Washington striker Alexander Ovechkin spoke about the emotions of the 742nd goal in the National Hockey League.
11:51 13.11.2021 Nevsky Sport – Saint Petersburg
Alexander Ovechkin ranked 4th among snipers in NHL history
The 36-year-old has scored his 742nd goal in the best league in the world.
11:20 13.11.2021 Hometown of Volgograd – Volgograd
Hockey Czech Republic – Russia at the Karjala Cup 2021: what time and where to watch on TV
On Sunday, November 14, in the final match of the Karjala Cup, which is a stage of the Euro Hockey Tour, the Russian national team will play with the Czech Republic.
13:33 11/13/2021 Newspaper Rodnye Berega – Novosibirsk
“Wolfsburg” is no longer the first :: Football :: RBK Sport
The fairy tale for “Wolfsburg” is over.This team no longer leads the Bundesliga standings. In the match of the 14th round, the ex-leaders of the German championship lost to “Hamburg” with a score of 1: 3, leading during the meeting 1: 0. And now “Bavaria” alone leads the championship standings.
Read us at
news
news
The fairy tale for “Wolfsburg” is over.This team no longer leads the Bundesliga standings. In the match of the 14th round, the ex-leaders of the German championship lost to “Hamburg” with a score of 1: 3, leading during the meeting 1: 0. And now “Bavaria” alone leads the championship standings.
Bayern Munich played on Saturday when they beat Kaiserslautern 3-1. Therefore, the Wolfsburg players were under pressure. They needed to win, and they had no right to make mistakes. However, for “Wolfsburg” it all started quite optimistically.Already in the first minute one of the best scorers of the team Brdaric opened the scoring in the match –1: 0.
Then the game went pretty calm. “Wolfsburg” tried to “freeze” the game and control the ball longer, but at the end of the first half, “Hamburg” still leveled the score. Not from the game, but from the standard! Kevin Hofland broke the rules right in the center in front of his own penalty area. The home team played a free kick, and van Buyten shot straight into the goalkeeper’s projectile. Note that the ball flew under the “wall” of the players, who also parted after the standard was played.
This goal gave Hamburg strength, and in the last minutes the team could have scored a couple more goals. However, the owners managed to excel once again. Sergei Barbares got the ball to the left of Takahara, entered the penalty area and powerfully shot at the goal of Wolfsburg. The goalkeeper reacted to the blow, but he was so strong that he still flew into the goal from the hands of the goalkeeper – 2: 1. After that, Takahara himself ran out one on one with the Wolfsburg goalkeeper, beat him, but hesitated and shot past the empty net! So the second half ended with a score of 2: 1, in which the teams left for a break.
The second half was much more boring than the first. The teams did not spoil the spectators with dangerous moments, and “Hamburg” generally switched to counterattacks. This is understandable – “Wolfsburg” had to recoup. And at the 71st minute, it became doubly difficult for the guests to do this – they were left with ten men.
The last 15 minutes of the match were played in the same vein as the previous ones. Guests could not offer “Hamburg” absolutely nothing new in the attack, the hosts quietly sat back, quite often, however, frightening Takahara’s insidious forays.And at the end of the match Romeo, after a cross, Rama drove the third ball into the already empty net of Wolfsburg – 3: 1. Hamburg won while Wolfsburg remained in second place.
Hamburg – Wolfsburg 3: 1
Goals: Van Buyten, 39, Barbares, 45, Romeo, 90 – Brdarich,
Nuremberg – Hanover 1: 1
Goals: Mintal, 81 – Shtendel, 56
1. Bayern Munich 14 games, 29 points
2. Wolfsburg 14 27
3. Schalke 04 14 27
4. Stuttgart 14 26
5.Hanover 14 24
6. Arminia 14 23
7. Mainz 14 22
8. Werder 14 21
9. Hertha 14 19
10. Hamburg 14 19
11. Bayer 14 19
12. Borussia D 14 17
13. Nuremberg 14 17
14. Borussia M 14 16
15. Kaiserslautern 14 14
16. Bochum 14 11
17. Freiburg 14 10
18. Hansa 14 9
Duke University scandal: did the chest open so easily?
I read today in the New York Times an article by Nicholas Christophe about the scandal in
Duquet.For my non-American friends: this is a scandal that is already
the USA has been shaking for several months. In short, it was like this:
varsity lacrosse team celebrated sports
successes. There was a booze and strippers. One of the strippers after drinking
stated that she was raped. Group. An important detail: athletes,
like most of Duke’s students are white. The stripper is black.
He studies at a nearby black university. An excellent pupil. She served in the Navy.
He moonlights as a strip – well, there is not enough money for training that
make?
The direction of the scandal is quite understandable: white beasts rape black
girl.The noise is terrible. The president of the university took the team off
competitions until the end of the season. How much did the parents of the children pay for
lawyers – scary to think. The audience thinks it is right. If
athletes are condemned, then they will be sexual predators all their lives – a stigma,
with whom it is difficult to live in the USA.
And then inconsistencies begin to appear in the case. DNA analysis
showed that the girl had no sperm from athletes – and she said that
raped without condoms. Found, however, the sperm of some three
completely strangers men.Judging by the filming of video cameras, she came out
after being raped in normal condition, the clothes were in order.
One of the alleged rapists, judging by the telephone log, during
rape made several calls, ordering a taxi: that is
it turns out that he fucked the girl, ordered a taxi, fucked again,
checked the order and so on. She did not immediately declare the rape,
then withdrew the application, then filed it again. Her friends who worked
at that booze, they say she’s lying. She visited several times
insane asylum.And several times without reason she told the police,
that she was raped. In general, the victim’s psyche is not very stable,
alibi, DNA …
I learned about another circumstance from Christoph’s article. Most
the scandal was fanned by the prosecutor, Mike Nifong. It is quite possible that he
this violated the rules of ethics: according to the rules, the prosecutor can give interviews
in the media, but he has no right to stir up passions and incite the public
on those under investigation. So, at that very time the election of the prosecutor was going on.There were three candidates: two black and one white. This same Mike Nifong.
And without black votes, he could lose the election.
Yes, he won the elections. That’s it.
Metallurg is stronger than Dynamo, Vovchenko scores a lacrosse goal. Day Review – Hockey News
The game program of the day began in Nur-Sultan, where the hosts, having received three goals from Torpedo, were unable to close the gap and lost. In Magnitogorsk, Metallurg continued to take off, again beating Moscow Dynamo, the goalkeeper of Traktor Roman Will became the hero of the match in Chelyabinsk, and his colleague Janis Kalninsh shone in Ufa, who did not allow Salavat Yulaev’s attack to excel.In Sochi, the hosts managed to outplay Neftekhimik, Ak Bars were stronger at home than Dynamo Minsk, Severstal, due to a masterpiece goal from Daniil Vovchenko, defeated Spartak.
Rubtsov’s double brings Sochi victory
4 – 2
0: 04: 20: 0
11.12.2020
Neftekhimik
Nizhnekamsk
91.Shafigullin Bulat 22 ‘
22:14 is equal to
24.Poryadin Pavel 27 ‘
27:26
In equality
Neftekhimik’s losing streak has already made four matches.At the same time, Vyacheslav Butsaev, in comparison with the meeting against Spartak, left the first two links unchanged and again entrusted the place at the gate to Konstantin Barulin. For the first time since September 6, the Sochi coaching staff released goalkeeper Ivan Kulbakov, who played only his second match in the KHL. Forward Daniil Ogirchuk and defender Konstantin Klimontov appeared in the fourth link.
The first and second periods came out equal according to statistics. The opponents showed similar indicators in shots (11-11 and 9-9) and in attack time.But how different in content and implementation these segments turned out to be. In the starting period, the goalkeepers were the soloists, who did not allow their opponents to excel even once. And after the break, viewers saw six goals at once during the period. The goalless silence was interrupted by Bulat Shafigulin who completed an excellent combination with one-touch passes. It took German Rubtsov less than one minute to enter the zone and shoot Barulin into the near corner.
The next doublet shot happened at 26 and 27 minutes. The teams’ pucks were separated by 46 seconds.First, Maxim Mineev took his team forward for the first time in the match, and then Pavel Poryadin made a 2-in-1 exit. At the equator of the match, Neftekhimik grabbed the first send-off, and Daniil Miromanov converted it. Completed the super-productive period, German Rubtsov, who completed the first double in his career in the KHL.
Having flared up in the second period, in the third period the game moved into a more rational channel. “Sochi” played competently according to the score. The Leopards have achieved their third victory in their last six meetings, and are close to the playoff zone by 12 points.Neftekhimik suffered a fifth defeat in a row.
Ak Bars defeated Dynamo Minsk
Ak Bars
Kazan
7 – 2
2: 02: 13: 1
11.12.2020
7.Falkovsky Stepan 35 ‘
35:24
In equality
9.Lodnya Ivan 58 ‘
58:05
In the majority
Dynamo Minsk started their four-game away streak. Earlier this season, the teams played an effective game in the capital of Belarus, then the victory remained with the Kazan team with a score of 5: 4.Ak Bars goalkeepers Adam Reideborn and Timur Bilyalov had a dry streak of more than one match. Dmitry Kvartalnov entrusted this meeting to start to Timur Bilyalov.
At the beginning of the match, Artyom Galimov opened the scoring by successfully finishing off the puck after his own shot. For Galimov, this match was the first since October 30, and he only recently recovered from an injury. Even in the first period, Ak Bars doubled its advantage – the host’s captain Danis Zaripov watched over the rebound and sent the puck into an empty net.In the second period, Artyom Lukoyanov scored the third goal, distinguishing himself in the minority.
At the 35th minute of the game, Mikhail Fisenko was sent off until the end of the match for hitting with a stick, but the Minskers were unable to spend all five minutes in the majority. Surprisingly, it was in the “4 by 4” format that the dimensional defender Stepan Falkovsky made an individual solo and stopped Bilyalov’s dry streak. At the end of the period, the Minskers were close to their second goal, but in the end they got a counterattack on their own goal, which was completed by Kirill Petrov.
In the third period Danny Taylor took his place in the Dynamo goal, but he failed to complete his part of the match to zero. At the 49th minute of the meeting, Dmitry Yudin made the score 5: 1 with a long-range shot. At the end, the teams scored three more goals, first Stefan Da Costa scored the sixth goal in a counterattack, Dynamo Minsk responded with Ivan Lodny’s puck, and the final score was set by Nigel Daws – 7: 2.
39 Kalnins’ rescues bring Jokerit the fifth consecutive victory in Ufa
Salavat Yulaev
Ufa
0 – 3
0: 10: 10: 1
11.12.2020
Jokerit
Helsinki
51.Grant Alex 18 ‘
18:41
Mostly
10. Schroeder Jordan 38′
38:36
Equal
71.Ensen Niklas 58 ‘
58:06
In equality
“Jokerit” is an extremely inconvenient opponent for “Salavat Yulaev”, which was confirmed by the recent meeting in Helsinki. It ended in a victory for the hosts with a score of 3: 1. In addition, Salavat Yulaev have lost their last four home games to Jokerit. It is also worth adding to this statistics that the Bashkir team lost in three meetings in a row.
Tomi Lyamsa reacted to this by transferring Alexander Alekseev to the second pair in defense, and Evgeny Lisovets to the third. Eduard Gimatov could not take part in this match, having caught the puck on his face in the previous meeting with Metallurg. Lauri Maryamaki continued rotation in the goalkeeper position, Janis Kalninsh played in Ufa. Niklas Freeman came out in the second pair of defense.
In the opening of the match, the hosts looked preferable. They spent more time in the opponent’s zone (04:02 – 02:40), threw more often (11-7) and completely dominated the face-offs (14-3).However, “Salavat Yulaev” failed the sending-off at the end of the first period. Alex Grant stitched Juhu Metsola with a mighty click from the blue line.
After the break, a more open game began, in which the goalkeepers were the main characters. Kalnins pulled out a lethal throw by Dmitry Kugryshev, Sakari Manninen hit the crosspiece. Metsola passed only after finishing off Jordan Schroeder just before the break. A couple of minutes before that, Veli-Matti Savinainen scored, but the referees canceled the goal due to the game with a high stick.
In the third period, the hosts had several chances to save the match. In the middle of the period, “Jokerit” retired three times in a row, but the special brigade of “Salavat Yulaev” could never realize the majority. Tema Hartikainen had a gorgeous moment, but from close range he could not beat Kalnins. But in the end, the guests scored again: Niklas Jensen completed the 2-in-1 exit in touch. And the main hero of the match was Janis Kalnins, who made 39 rescues.
Double Varone did not help Barys
Barys
Nur-Sultan
26.Varone Filip 30’26. Varone Filip 37 ‘
2 – 3
0: 12: 20: 0
11.12.2020
Torpedo NN
Nizhny Novgorod Region
27. Honcharuk Sergey 10′
10:06
V equality
18.Milkhailo Varnakov 22 ‘
22:33
In equality
25.Clus Justin 27′
27:01
In equality
Yuri Mikhailis’s players finished their home streak today, where they took maximum points in the previous four matches. The coaches made several changes to the play combinations, but Henrik Karlsson was again selected as the main goalkeeper.Torpedo arrived in Kazakhstan after being defeated by CSKA (1: 2), the team’s bid remained virtually unchanged. Statistics spoke against Nizhny Novgorod: they lost the last seven meetings in Nur-Sultan.
The rivals did not look closely at each other for a long time, immediately starting to create dangerous moments. Karlsson and his counterpart Alexey Melnichuk often had to enter the game, reflecting the throws almost point-blank, but the goalkeepers were invariably luckier. On the 11th minute the score was opened: after Barys’s mistake in the middle zone, Sergei Goncharuk rushed to the goal and scored with a throw under the crossbar.Dry series of Karlsson was interrupted at around 75 minutes. After the goal Nizhny Novgorod firmly seized the initiative, following the results of the first period, throwing the hosts with a score of 11-6.
The start of the second period also remained with Torpedo, which quickly consolidated its advantage. The author of the abandoned puck was the forward Mikhail Varnakov, who took advantage of the most beautiful pass from Goncharuk. At the 28th minute, the score was already 3: 0 in favor of the Volzhan, striker Justin Klus recorded an accurate shot. “Barys” did not give up and soon closed the gap with the efforts of Philip Varone, who successfully played on the finishing move in the majority.Shortly before the break, Varone scored again with a masterful one-touch shot from an average distance.
In the third dvadtsatiminutke “Barys” with renewed vigor rushed to compare the score, but Melnichuk and the guests’ defense acted confidently and reliably. “Torpedo” also did not sit out in defense, snapping back with quick counterattacks. In the end, the Nizhny Novgorod team grabbed the sending-off, presenting the hosts with an excellent chance to complete the comeback. Barça removed the goalkeeper and spent two minutes in the Volzhan zone, but the matter was limited to only a couple of dangerous throws.Torpedo kept the winning score and for the first time since 2017 took away the victory from Kazakhstan – 3: 2.
Metallurg beat Dynamo for the second time in 11 days
Metallurg
Magnitogorsk
44. Yakovlev Yegor K. 5’44. Yakovlev Yegor K. 31’40.Rasmussen Dennis 38 ‘
3 – 1
1 : 02: 00: 1
11.12.2020
Dynamo M
Moscow
65. Efremov Vladislav 57 ‘
57:11
In equality
As Ilya Vorobyov, Mikhail Pashnin, who was injured in the match, noted before the start of the game with Ak Bars, will return to the ice after a pause for the Eurotrip.Therefore, in the game against Dynamo, Grigory Dronov got a place in the squad. Termination of the contract with Harry Pesonen allowed Yegor Korobkin to return to the roster (albeit as the 13th striker), who has not played since November 19. And despite the fact that Vasily Koshechkin beat Dynamo in Moscow, this time in Metallurg Juho Olkinuore was entrusted with the last line from the start. As part of the blue and white, Emil Garipov played the first match after moving from Avangard as the main goalkeeper.
But already in the sixth minute it was printed by Yegor Yakovlev – the defender was at the forefront of the attack, received an elegant pass on the free ice from Andrey Chibisov and aimed a shot at the far top corner.Four minutes before the break, Dronov went back to the locker room – Oscar Lidberg committed a brutal offensive foul, met Metallurg’s defender with his knee to the knee and received a large disciplinary penalty.
Dronov returned in the second period, while Dynamo lost their second center. Magnitogorsk were close to a goal, but neither before the break, nor after the majority did not work out. In the second game in a row, the “steelworkers” cannot turn a fireproof penalty into a goal. But the second attempt in the “5 by 4” format was successful: Yakovlev went on the offensive again, played baseball on finishing moves and scored a double.And at the end of the second 20-minute, Dennis Rasmussen asked Garipov from a nickle, having received a magnificent pass from Sergei Plotnikov.
The third period was without sensations. Dynamo did not take advantage of the chance to save themselves, having received almost two minutes of the majority in the “5 on 3” format. “Magnitka” played in a row, helped Olkinuore several times. Only in the 58th minute, Vladislav Efremov successfully substituted a club on a nickle, printing out the same to Olkinuora and reducing the gap. Metallurg is still on fire – this is their sixth win in their last seven matches and their second over Dynamo Moscow this December.
25 Villa saves bring success to Traktor
Tractor
Chelyabinsk
40. Kalinin Sergey 23’71.Avtsin Alexander 30 ‘
2 – 0
0: 02: 00: 0
11.12.2020
Siberia
Novosibirsk Region
Both teams came to the reporting match with a streak of two defeats in a row. This season, the Novosibirsk team beat Anvar Gatiyatulin’s team 2: 1 on their home ice. For the first time since November 15, goalkeeper Anton Krasotkin got into Sibir’s bid, having recovered from an injury.Czech goalkeeper Roman Will took the place at the hosts’ goal.
In the first period, “Traktor” had a noticeable territorial advantage, but at the same time made only four shots on goal by Harry Sateri. The second period began with a fast puck from Chelyabinsk. Pontus Oberg threw from an acute angle, and Sergei Kalinin watched the rebound and added the puck into the empty net. In the middle of the match, Alexander Avtsin doubled his team’s power play with an excellent wrist throw.
The teams tried to spend the third period actively, but both goalkeepers performed excellently.Will played a clean sheet for the third time this season and helped Traktor take revenge for their defeat this season.
Vovchenko’s lacrosse goal becomes victorious for Severstal
4 – 3
1: 11: 12: 1
12/11/2020
Spartak
Moscow
52. Sergey Shirokov 7 ‘
07:31
In the majority
28.Zubarev Andrey 34 ‘
34:33
In equality
3.Yuse Emil 53′
53:01
In equality
Severstal and Spartak approached the third meeting between themselves in the championship with almost identical statistics.An equal number of points (38 each), the number of victories in regulation time (11 each), in overtime (4), and the first two matches of the Cherepovets and the red-whites ended with the same score – 4: 3, exchanging victories, with that only difference that Spartak won in overtime. Both matches were held in Moscow, and now Spartak will have two visits to Cherepovets. The red and whites overcame a prolonged slump and won two victories in a row, Severstal had a winning streak of three matches.
Compared to the victorious match against Neftekhimik, Spartak made two changes: Martin Bakosha and Roman Lyubimov were replaced by Lukash Radil, who returned to the striking team for Yori Lechter and Sergei Shirokov, and Maksim Mayorov.At Severstal, Egor Yakovlev was replaced by Nikita Guslistov in the third link, Dmitry Moiseev appeared in the fourth link.
The first period turned out to be equal, with an abundance of power struggles. “Spartak” twice got the opportunity to play in the majority and realized the second chance. It is interesting that Severstal earned two minutes of the penalty not for a violation on the ice – the head coach of the hosts Andrei Razin received a disciplinary penalty. It took “Spartak” only ten seconds to implement – Sergei Shirokov shot from afar, extending the streak with the points scored to four matches.Before the break, Severstal was able to recoup by organizing a quick two-on-one attack, 18-year-old Guslistov eluded Damir Musin, closed the pass of Yegor Morozov and scored his first point in the KHL.
In the second period, the tight tough game continued, in the 30th minute the fight between Yakov Rylov and Mikhail Tikhonov led to the fact that Spartak was again in the minority and conceded a second time – Vladislav Kodolu was taken to the final throw.
