Age verification - is this going to change club lacrosse?

[Anonymous]

https://www.usalacrosse.com/nlf

They’re phasing it in with younger kids, but this is a June 1 cut off, i.e. you can’t turn 19 before June of your senior year.

[Anonymous]

So you can still be a year older, just not 2 years older?

[Anonymous]

Good. About time. Also the correct way to do it. HS can have holdbacks but at the youth level you have to play with your peers. The 15 month window seems like a good compromise to allow for the summer birthdays where parents hold back kids from entering kindergartner before they are ready. For example, my youngest is a summer birthday. He went into kindergarten with his peers but we probably should have held him back for a year - he was academically ready but socially wasn't quite there. So i can see parents dealing with those situations. This also prevents the kid whose a September birthday and already the oldest kid in the class from being held back a year and could essentially be 2 years older than other kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good. About time. Also the correct way to do it. HS can have holdbacks but at the youth level you have to play with your peers. The 15 month window seems like a good compromise to allow for the summer birthdays where parents hold back kids from entering kindergartner before they are ready. For example, my youngest is a summer birthday. He went into kindergarten with his peers but we probably should have held him back for a year - he was academically ready but socially wasn't quite there. So i can see parents dealing with those situations. This also prevents the kid whose a September birthday and already the oldest kid in the class from being held back a year and could essentially be 2 years older than other kids.

I agree as long as there is an established rule and all follow consistently it will be fair. Rec lacrosse has always had a two year window

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So you can still be a year older, just not 2 years older?

No. See the chart about halfway down the FAQ page. https://www.usalacrosse.com/nlf-usal-partnership-faqs

As a way of an example, if you were born in January 2010 - you have to play on a 2028 team. You wouldn't be eligible to play for a 2029 team. Only summer birthdays get a reprieve and as I said above, it does make sense. So if you were born in June of 2010, you would be eligible to play for a 2028 team or 2029 team.

[Anonymous]

Not clear if this will apply to girls as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good. About time. Also the correct way to do it. HS can have holdbacks but at the youth level you have to play with your peers. The 15 month window seems like a good compromise to allow for the summer birthdays where parents hold back kids from entering kindergartner before they are ready. For example, my youngest is a summer birthday. He went into kindergarten with his peers but we probably should have held him back for a year - he was academically ready but socially wasn't quite there. So i can see parents dealing with those situations. This also prevents the kid whose a September birthday and already the oldest kid in the class from being held back a year and could essentially be 2 years older than other kids.

I agree as long as there is an established rule and all follow consistently it will be fair. Rec lacrosse has always had a two year window

My middle son played in a tournament last fall, where there was age verification. Needed to provide a headshot and birth certificate that was uploaded and sent to the organization. I am sure some programs will cheat but this at least places some parameters to catch them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good. About time. Also the correct way to do it. HS can have holdbacks but at the youth level you have to play with your peers. The 15 month window seems like a good compromise to allow for the summer birthdays where parents hold back kids from entering kindergartner before they are ready. For example, my youngest is a summer birthday. He went into kindergarten with his peers but we probably should have held him back for a year - he was academically ready but socially wasn't quite there. So i can see parents dealing with those situations. This also prevents the kid whose a September birthday and already the oldest kid in the class from being held back a year and could essentially be 2 years older than other kids.

I agree as long as there is an established rule and all follow consistently it will be fair. Rec lacrosse has always had a two year window

My middle son played in a tournament last fall, where there was age verification. Needed to provide a headshot and birth certificate that was uploaded and sent to the organization. I am sure some programs will cheat but this at least places some parameters to catch them.

The Circuit did this, and while it was a slight pain, if we can reuse it then it's worth it.

[Anonymous]

It’s unfortunate for my son who has a May 2010 birthday and started school late, so he’s in 6th grade. He’ll have to leave the team he’s been on for 3 years with all his friends and classmates. But I guess it’s a safety thing. So from my understanding once you get to HS you’ll be able to play on a team according to your graduation year? So he’ll be on a 2028 team for 7th and 8th grades and then can be back on a 2029 team in 9th since that’s his graduation year?

[Anonymous]

Not sure how this will work for kids with late May birthdays who for developmental reasons -- not trying to game the system in sports -- were put into pre-K/junior K programs ages ago and now have to play up.

The rule is what it is but if a kid is graduating in 2031 and now has to play with the 2030s, what happens in high school? They play back down with their club team for tournaments and outside of the Spring? The graduation year is what it is (in this case 2031) and presumably the purpose and effect of this is not to deny these kids a year of tournaments and such with a club team their senior year when the 2030 team is off in college. It may seem great now in concept, but when these kids have been playing a year up from their graduation year and then show up to play with their club teams in high school (with the benefit of having played up a year), they will be competing for the same slots they once had on their younger teams.

I get the point of the rule, but there is a group of kids here that were never redshirted or held back for athletic reasons that will be impacted.

[Anonymous]

If the standard is to be 5 when you start K (usually by a September cut off), it can't be that large of a group of kids separated from their grade by a sports cut off June 1, which is already at least three months earlier than the grade cut off. How many kids are older than 5 years and 3 months and don't start K that year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If the standard is to be 5 when you start K (usually by a September cut off), it can't be that large of a group of kids separated from their grade by a sports cut off June 1, which is already at least three months earlier than the grade cut off. How many kids are older than 5 years and 3 months and don't start K that year?

Plenty of school districts have a Dec 31 cut off for birthdays.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not sure how this will work for kids with late May birthdays who for developmental reasons -- not trying to game the system in sports -- were put into pre-K/junior K programs ages ago and now have to play up.

The rule is what it is but if a kid is graduating in 2031 and now has to play with the 2030s, what happens in high school? They play back down with their club team for tournaments and outside of the Spring? The graduation year is what it is (in this case 2031) and presumably the purpose and effect of this is not to deny these kids a year of tournaments and such with a club team their senior year when the 2030 team is off in college. It may seem great now in concept, but when these kids have been playing a year up from their graduation year and then show up to play with their club teams in high school (with the benefit of having played up a year), they will be competing for the same slots they once had on their younger teams.

I get the point of the rule, but there is a group of kids here that were never redshirted or held back for athletic reasons that will be impacted.

You need a cut off somewhere and June 1st seems like a logical date. It gives kids with summer birthdays (and May isn't the summer) that were held back for a variety of reasons back in pre-K and K - mostly for development reasons to be covered by the rule. If we go by your kids birthday of sometime in May, what is to stop someone to argue about his kid in April or February or September the year before. Are some kids going to have to move teams - yes - as the NLF admits some will but if they were going by age year (like soccer), which was one of the proposals, they would be playing with their age peers already.

[Anonymous]

I think they should’ve just moved it to age and kept it simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think they should’ve just moved it to age and kept it simple.

Which is much more disruptive based on most kids like to play with kids in the same grade - just like they do at the rec level. Most other sports outside of soccer do not do it by age but based on the school calendar year with some modifications i.e., basketball, volleyball, baseball, etc. The only reason soccer does it based on age is because that is what the rest of the world does it and there were changes to soccer about 8-9 years ago that moved it from grade to age year.