Pulling himself up from Drake Porter’s feet, Duke’s Joe Robertson grabbed his teammates to celebrate the opening goal last Sunday. A year ago, the play would’ve been wiped out.

Robertson beat Tyson Bomberry on a dodge and turned to the crease on Porter’s right. As he flicked the ball into the net, Grant Murphy bulldozed the attack and fell forward into the six-yard circle.

Prior to the 2019 season, the NCAA announced several rule changes for men’s lacrosse. A new 80-second shot clock was implemented to increase scoring, and the crease-dive was brought back to do the same. On Sunday, that meant Robertson’s goal stood, as did Murphy’s penalty.

The goal wouldn’t have counted last season because Robertson had landed in the crease. Murphy still could’ve been given the same dead-ball penalty he got on Sunday, but the Orange would’ve gone man-down.

“I know it’s a work in progress,” Syracuse head coach John Desko said of the new rule earlier in March, “but I know we’ll be discussing it even further.”

For No. 8 Syracuse (5-2, 1-1 Atlantic Coast), the rule change has resulted in as much head-scratching as goal-scoring. Every crease-dive goal seems to have a matching push, disallowment or questionable dive at the other end. SU players, coaches and multiple opponents have asked for consistency when enforcing the rule, but each officiating crew brings a different interpretation. Halfway through the first season of the new crease-dive era, Desko is already saying the period will be short-lived.

“I think you’re going to have a lot of discussion of the dive being taken out of the game,” Desko said on March 20, “when they (the rules committee) meet another year from now.”

The rule was proposed to reintroduce acrobatic offensive plays on net while also protecting goalies. To do this, offensive players are still barred from diving toward the goal “mouth,” defined in the 2019 NCAA rule book as “the area directly in front of the goal cage, including the goal line, where the goalkeeper is located and plays his position.”

There are three main factors considered in assessing goals and penalties with the new rule: the direction of the dive, any checks from defenders and when the ball crosses the line versus when contact — with either the goalie or ground — occurs.

An attack can be assessed a crease violation if they dive toward the goal mouth. If they lunge away from goal and get checked into the goalie by a defender, they’ll only be assessed a penalty if the ball doesn’t go in before contact. If the check is illegal, the defender earns a penalty only if the goal doesn’t count.

Porter has played with similar rules his whole life. At St. Andrew’s College, a Canadian preparatory academy, and on various club teams, Porter followed the international standards. If he made contact with an attack before the ball crossed the goal line, no score was awarded. But now, in his first year as a starter, Porter said it was “rare” to see the NCAA remove a player-safety rule.

Each week, he meets with the coaching staff to review how to approach specific dives. Then, Porter confers with his defenders. But on gameday, with different officiating crews week-to-week, it’s impossible for Porter to develop a ploy to counter the strategy.

“The problem without consistency, as a goaltender, it’s really tough,” Porter said. “Do I go out, play the guy, hit him so it’s a no-goal? But maybe they call it one week and they don’t the next.”

Anna Henderson | Digital Design Editor

It falls on the officials to determine if a player dove at the goal mouth and whether or not a push occurred, and when. They’re also tasked with simultaneously watching when and if contact with a goalie occurs and whether or not the ball goes in, and when. They do this all without the aid of any video review mechanism. Previously, all goals were disallowed if an offensive player breached the crease.

The current leeway allows for more offense and, in turn, more controversy. SU attack Griffin Cook dove into the crease on Feb. 24 against Army, scoring and colliding with goalie AJ Barretto. Meanwhile, a defender checked Cook mid-air.

On the play, there was no call for a push on Army or any violation on SU. The officials deemed that Cook didn’t dive at Barretto or the goal mouth, so officials deemed it a score.

Army head coach Joe Alberici erupted on the sideline, railing against the officials and their explanation — which he declined to share postgame. He ranted long enough to receive an unsportsmanlike penalty for one minute of man-down action.

“It was about as obvious a call that I’ve ever seen missed on a lacrosse field,” Alberici said postgame. “The kid was clearly in the cylinder, he clearly hit my goalie, and that’s as simple as it goes. That’s a penalty.”

While driving players have exploited the gray areas of the rule, defenders are still searching for the best tactics to defend it. Syracuse’s overall strategy, redshirt junior defender Nick Mellen said, is to stay in front of attackers. If a ball-handler is in position to make a move on the crease, Mellen said, the defender will already get beat.

Within any specific play, a defender’s decision to check or not rests on their ability to discern whether the diver is heading toward or away from the goalie. If a defender can read a player diving toward the goalie or goal mouth, they should keep their hands off them to avoid drawing a penalty and vice versa, Mellen said. It’s idealistic to ask any defender to try and do this regularly.

“If they’re clearly going to the crease, it’s hard to be like, ‘Yeah, don’t touch him,’” Mellen said. “Because at the same time, you’re trying to prevent him from getting there and preventing him from scoring. … It’s pretty tricky. You’re kind of walking on eggshells.”

Right now, SU’s coaches haven’t offered specific direction to defenders on how to play crease dives, partially because they’re not even sure what to say. Offensive players are free to make plays around the crease as opportunities arise, but defenders are limited in what they can do when an opponent goes airborne.

With no change imminent and officials still calling the same rule different ways, there are no clear answers for SU going forward.

“I think the rule is exciting, and it’s fun for the game and makes people want to watch it more,” SU attack Owen Seebold said. “But I think there definitely needs to be some more specification on exactly what the rule is.”

Assistant Sports Editor Nick Alvarez and Sports Editor Michael McCleary contributed reporting to this story.

Published on March 28, 2019 at 1:02 am

Contact Andrew: aegraham@syr.edu | @A_E_Graham