The history of violence in lacrosse is a difficult thing to validate. Years ago, Jesuit priests emphasized this quality in the early versions of the game, but everything they had written was done from a very skewed lens. A common misconception is that the historical game was a stand in for war. I have even heard people go so far as to say that losing was punishable by death, which is false and unfair to the First Nations.
Historical games were definitely aggressive, there is no doubt about that. Reports say that it wasn’t uncommon to see a scuffle between two opponents as the game continued around them. These early games were a way to prove one’s physical fortitude, and playing an aggressive game got young men ready for what was, by all modern standards, a rough and taxing life. Obviously, there is also a prominent spiritual element of the game, but that is a topic that can be touched on at a later time.
The institutionalization of the game by the Canadians resulted in a sort-of softening of the sport. Future acceptance by Ivy League colleges in the United States tamed the game further, and in recent years, the governing body of US Lacrosse has done away with a large amount of the game’s historical aggressiveness by completely removing checking from the younger age brackets.
Modern box lacrosse has remained as an aggressive form of the game. It has developed separately from the field game over the past few decades. To this day, it is not uncommon to see fist fights and scuffles among players. In summary, there is a history of violence in lacrosse. I don’t intend to sway you one way or another, but rather to give those new to the game an understanding of the past. That being said, there’s no room for a suplex in lacrosse! ;)