Private School Lacrosse Thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are the Bullis kidsvredshirted like prep and Landon. Are kids competeing with much older kids for a position on the team?

I've heard that. And for spots in top classes that might have limited numbers, like one section of an AP class.

[Anonymous]

What's an illegal stick?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What's an illegal stick?

It means the pocket is deeper than regulation, and not allowed in girls lacrosse because it gives an unfair advantage. A deeper pocket means it’s much easier to keep in your stick,for one thing. Sticks are checked at the beginning of the game so if 4 girls had illegal pockets in one short half it was intentionally done most likely - you can rig it to appear legal for the ref check and then punch it back to be illegal again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What is the point? Stop trying to insert Holton into the conversation, they are not at the same level as Visi & SSSA when it comes to lacrosse.

And Visitation is nowhere near Holton Arms when it comes to academics.

+1000

I would take the great academics and very strong (even if not top two) lacrosse any day over Visi and SSSA.

First, Holton's academics are not that much better than Visi's. Both regularly send many girls to top colleges and universities, AND in the context of this thread and conversation, Visi sends significantly more girls to play lacrosse at Ivies and other top schools than Holton does, by a looong shot. Second, Holton is not a "very strong lacrosse" program. It is mediocre at best. SSSAS and Visi have nationally lacrosse recognized programs. Holton isnt even a minor player. Its a nonentity.

Why so harsh? "Mediocre" and "nonentity"? Sounds like someone's kid didn't get into Holton.

Visi sends significantly more girls to play lacrosse at Ivies top school than Holton does, by a looong shot? Let's see. Visi had 3 D1 commits in the 2017 class; Harvard, Brown and Occidental. Holton had 1; William and Mary. For the 2018 class, Visi has 2, Yale and Georgetown. Holton has 2, Stanford and Johns Hopkins. For 2019, Visi has 3, Notre Dame, Virginia Tech, and Fairfield. Holton has 2, Harvard and UC Davis. I wouldn't say either school sends a significant amount of girls to play lacrosse in college, nor would I say that Visi beats Holton by a looong shot.

Both are good schools. Holton has the edge academically, and Visi has the edge with lacrosse.

What about SSSAS?? they have more D1 commits than anyone...not to mention they are going to very difficult academic schools too. In the 2018 class; Navy, Virginia Tech, UC Davis, and two going to UVA. In the 2019 class; Princeton, UPenn, Columbia, UVA. In the 2020 class; UNC

Just saying, Holton did beat SSSAS! Holton has become a little bit of a lacrosse school, with very strong academics. Nice combination!

[Anonymous]

Madlax buying out Club Blue, and then tellong their Capital team that they will be now the B team.

Reason #4,534 never to play for Madlax or give that guy your money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Madlax buying out Club Blue, and then tellong their Capital team that they will be now the B team.

Reason #4,534 never to play for Madlax or give that guy your money.

What years?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Madlax buying out Club Blue, and then tellong their Capital team that they will be now the B team.

Reason #4,534 never to play for Madlax or give that guy your money.

What years?

Is it just 2023? What happens to DMV 23's then?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's an illegal stick?

It means the pocket is deeper than regulation, and not allowed in girls lacrosse because it gives an unfair advantage. A deeper pocket means it’s much easier to keep in your stick,for one thing. Sticks are checked at the beginning of the game so if 4 girls had illegal pockets in one short half it was intentionally done most likely - you can rig it to appear legal for the ref check and then punch it back to be illegal again.

You clearly don’t understand how stuck checks for girls work. The refs actually put a ball in the pocket for a stick check. A pocket that is legal at the beginning of a game can, especially in rain, become stretched out and no longer be legal later in the game. It’s nit that unusual nor is it that big of a deal. Plus you are talking about a tiny difference. The pockets weren’t egregious just slightly too deep. I have no connection to Visi by the way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's an illegal stick?

It means the pocket is deeper than regulation, and not allowed in girls lacrosse because it gives an unfair advantage. A deeper pocket means it’s much easier to keep in your stick,for one thing. Sticks are checked at the beginning of the game so if 4 girls had illegal pockets in one short half it was intentionally done most likely - you can rig it to appear legal for the ref check and then punch it back to be illegal again.

You clearly don’t understand how stuck checks for girls work. The refs actually put a ball in the pocket for a stick check. A pocket that is legal at the beginning of a game can, especially in rain, become stretched out and no longer be legal later in the game. It’s nit that unusual nor is it that big of a deal. Plus you are talking about a tiny difference. The pockets weren’t egregious just slightly too deep. I have no connection to Visi by the way.

And girls don’t “punch” their strings either - at least not girls who know what they are doing. That’s not how you work the strings in a girls stick.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's an illegal stick?

It means the pocket is deeper than regulation, and not allowed in girls lacrosse because it gives an unfair advantage. A deeper pocket means it’s much easier to keep in your stick,for one thing. Sticks are checked at the beginning of the game so if 4 girls had illegal pockets in one short half it was intentionally done most likely - you can rig it to appear legal for the ref check and then punch it back to be illegal again.

You clearly don’t understand how stuck checks for girls work. The refs actually put a ball in the pocket for a stick check. A pocket that is legal at the beginning of a game can, especially in rain, become stretched out and no longer be legal later in the game. It’s nit that unusual nor is it that big of a deal. Plus you are talking about a tiny difference. The pockets weren’t egregious just slightly too deep. I have no connection to Visi by the way.

And girls don’t “punch” their strings either - at least not girls who know what they are doing. That’s not how you work the strings in a girls stick.

Explain all you want but it smacks of cheating either way when four sticks were illegal in one half. And the point earlier about those girls posing with the illegal sticks post game just shows they were proud of flaunting the rules.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's an illegal stick?

It means the pocket is deeper than regulation, and not allowed in girls lacrosse because it gives an unfair advantage. A deeper pocket means it’s much easier to keep in your stick,for one thing. Sticks are checked at the beginning of the game so if 4 girls had illegal pockets in one short half it was intentionally done most likely - you can rig it to appear legal for the ref check and then punch it back to be illegal again.

You clearly don’t understand how stuck checks for girls work. The refs actually put a ball in the pocket for a stick check. A pocket that is legal at the beginning of a game can, especially in rain, become stretched out and no longer be legal later in the game. It’s nit that unusual nor is it that big of a deal. Plus you are talking about a tiny difference. The pockets weren’t egregious just slightly too deep. I have no connection to Visi by the way.

And girls don’t “punch” their strings either - at least not girls who know what they are doing. That’s not how you work the strings in a girls stick.

Explain all you want but it smacks of cheating either way when four sticks were illegal in one half. And the point earlier about those girls posing with the illegal sticks post game just shows they were proud of flaunting the rules.

Given weather conditions, it just smacks of science.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's an illegal stick?

It means the pocket is deeper than regulation, and not allowed in girls lacrosse because it gives an unfair advantage. A deeper pocket means it’s much easier to keep in your stick,for one thing. Sticks are checked at the beginning of the game so if 4 girls had illegal pockets in one short half it was intentionally done most likely - you can rig it to appear legal for the ref check and then punch it back to be illegal again.

You clearly don’t understand how stuck checks for girls work. The refs actually put a ball in the pocket for a stick check. A pocket that is legal at the beginning of a game can, especially in rain, become stretched out and no longer be legal later in the game. It’s nit that unusual nor is it that big of a deal. Plus you are talking about a tiny difference. The pockets weren’t egregious just slightly too deep. I have no connection to Visi by the way.

And girls don’t “punch” their strings either - at least not girls who know what they are doing. That’s not how you work the strings in a girls stick.

This is correct for traditional stringing, although now mesh is permitted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's an illegal stick?

It means the pocket is deeper than regulation, and not allowed in girls lacrosse because it gives an unfair advantage. A deeper pocket means it’s much easier to keep in your stick,for one thing. Sticks are checked at the beginning of the game so if 4 girls had illegal pockets in one short half it was intentionally done most likely - you can rig it to appear legal for the ref check and then punch it back to be illegal again.

You clearly don’t understand how stuck checks for girls work. The refs actually put a ball in the pocket for a stick check. A pocket that is legal at the beginning of a game can, especially in rain, become stretched out and no longer be legal later in the game. It’s nit that unusual nor is it that big of a deal. Plus you are talking about a tiny difference. The pockets weren’t egregious just slightly too deep. I have no connection to Visi by the way.

And girls don’t “punch” their strings either - at least not girls who know what they are doing. That’s not how you work the strings in a girls stick.

Explain all you want but it smacks of cheating either way when four sticks were illegal in one half. And the point earlier about those girls posing with the illegal sticks post game just shows they were proud of flaunting the rules.

Given weather conditions, it just smacks of science.

Wouldn't the Holton sticks be the same way too? Why were the illegal sticks all Visi's? Why did Visi have an illegal stick in the game against Stone Ridge on Saturday, when it was sunny and in the 90's?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's an illegal stick?

It means the pocket is deeper than regulation, and not allowed in girls lacrosse because it gives an unfair advantage. A deeper pocket means it’s much easier to keep in your stick,for one thing. Sticks are checked at the beginning of the game so if 4 girls had illegal pockets in one short half it was intentionally done most likely - you can rig it to appear legal for the ref check and then punch it back to be illegal again.

You clearly don’t understand how stuck checks for girls work. The refs actually put a ball in the pocket for a stick check. A pocket that is legal at the beginning of a game can, especially in rain, become stretched out and no longer be legal later in the game. It’s nit that unusual nor is it that big of a deal. Plus you are talking about a tiny difference. The pockets weren’t egregious just slightly too deep. I have no connection to Visi by the way.

And girls don’t “punch” their strings either - at least not girls who know what they are doing. That’s not how you work the strings in a girls stick.

Explain all you want but it smacks of cheating either way when four sticks were illegal in one half. And the point earlier about those girls posing with the illegal sticks post game just shows they were proud of flaunting the rules.

The girls weren't posing with the illegal sticks, it was the COACH who said for them to put the illegal sticks front and center for the team picture.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's an illegal stick?

It means the pocket is deeper than regulation, and not allowed in girls lacrosse because it gives an unfair advantage. A deeper pocket means it’s much easier to keep in your stick,for one thing. Sticks are checked at the beginning of the game so if 4 girls had illegal pockets in one short half it was intentionally done most likely - you can rig it to appear legal for the ref check and then punch it back to be illegal again.

You clearly don’t understand how stuck checks for girls work. The refs actually put a ball in the pocket for a stick check. A pocket that is legal at the beginning of a game can, especially in rain, become stretched out and no longer be legal later in the game. It’s nit that unusual nor is it that big of a deal. Plus you are talking about a tiny difference. The pockets weren’t egregious just slightly too deep. I have no connection to Visi by the way.

And girls don’t “punch” their strings either - at least not girls who know what they are doing. That’s not how you work the strings in a girls stick.

Explain all you want but it smacks of cheating either way when four sticks were illegal in one half. And the point earlier about those girls posing with the illegal sticks post game just shows they were proud of flaunting the rules.

Given weather conditions, it just smacks of science.

Wouldn't the Holton sticks be the same way too? Why were the illegal sticks all Visi's? Why did Visi have an illegal stick in the game against Stone Ridge on Saturday, when it was sunny and in the 90's?

Assuming that there was a stick check that was passed on resumption, my guess is that the Visi sticks were closer to the line barely passing the stick check and the Holton sticks had a greater margin.