Checking being moved on to later ages.

[zebra_steve 11]

It's already been mentioned about consistently calling the dangerous and illegal hits, and teaching how to angle, hit, and receive a hit beginning at an early age.

You want to make a difference? TAKE THE BIG HIT OUT OF THE GAME... MAKE IT UNACCEPTABLE INSTEAD OF REWARDED.

This is from the Standard of Play and Rules emphasis at the front of the rules book:

"The goal of the enforcement standard is to reduce restraining

infractions in the game and not to remove legal body checking or

body contact. A hard body check or using body contact/position

(non-checking classifications) to gain a competitive advantage over

the opponent should not be penalized as long as it is performed

within the rules."

And:

"In addition to the above mentioned enforcement standards, all

other infractions, including contact to the head, checking from

behind, cross checking, high sticking and roughing (including late

avoidable check) shall be penalized to a strict enforcement standard.

Players shall body check within the rules. Any use of the hands or

stick or extension of the arms to body check an opponent will be

penalized as unnecessary roughness.

Any avoidable contact after the whistle shall be penalized strictly,

including scrum situations around the goal. Officials are instructed

to assess an additional penalty to those players acting as the

aggressor or who instigates any contact after the whistle."

And:

"Coaches are expected to teach proper skills and hold their players

accountable for illegal and dangerous actions, regardless as to

whether they are properly penalized, or not."

If this is the Rule book definition of a body check:

A legal body check is one in which a player checks an opponent

who is in possession of the puck, by using his hip or body from

the front, diagonally from the front or straight from the side, and

does not take more than two fast steps in executing the check.

Legitimate body checking must be done only with the trunk of

the body (hips and shoulders) and must be above the opponent’s

knees and below the neck. If body checking is unnecessarily

rough, it must be penalized.

And this is Boarding according to the book:

A minor or a major penalty, at the discretion of the Referee

based upon the degree of violence of the impact with the

boards, shall be imposed on any player who body-checks,

cross-checks, elbows, charges or trips an opponent in such a

manner that causes the opponent to be thrown violently into

the boards.

So think about those definitions, some of the hits you've seen, and given all of the new anecdotal evidence coming out linking concussions and head\brain impacts to ALS and you decide..... SHOULD THE BIG HIT STILL HAVE ANY PLACE IN OUR GAME?

[chk hrd 164]

I think one problem in todays game is a lack of respect for the game and players. To many people (coaches, players, parents) push the big hit every time. I call them highlight hits, because everybody wants to see themselves on ESPN. There is a time and a place for a big hit, it can turn a games momentum. If you are winning or loosing by a good margin it isn't needed. If you see a player coming with thier head down a hit that puts them off the puck still keeps you in the game and takes them out. I always coached that a check is meant to seperate the player from the puck, not the players head from his body.

[Chadd 916]

It's already been mentioned about consistently calling the dangerous and illegal hits, and teaching how to angle, hit, and receive a hit beginning at an early age.

You want to make a difference? TAKE THE BIG HIT OUT OF THE GAME... MAKE IT UNACCEPTABLE INSTEAD OF REWARDED.

This is from the Standard of Play and Rules emphasis at the front of the rules book:

"The goal of the enforcement standard is to reduce restraining

infractions in the game and not to remove legal body checking or

body contact. A hard body check or using body contact/position

(non-checking classifications) to gain a competitive advantage over

the opponent should not be penalized as long as it is performed

within the rules."

And:

"In addition to the above mentioned enforcement standards, all

other infractions, including contact to the head, checking from

behind, cross checking, high sticking and roughing (including late

avoidable check) shall be penalized to a strict enforcement standard.

Players shall body check within the rules. Any use of the hands or

stick or extension of the arms to body check an opponent will be

penalized as unnecessary roughness.

Any avoidable contact after the whistle shall be penalized strictly,

including scrum situations around the goal. Officials are instructed

to assess an additional penalty to those players acting as the

aggressor or who instigates any contact after the whistle."

And:

"Coaches are expected to teach proper skills and hold their players

accountable for illegal and dangerous actions, regardless as to

whether they are properly penalized, or not."

If this is the Rule book definition of a body check:

A legal body check is one in which a player checks an opponent

who is in possession of the puck, by using his hip or body from

the front, diagonally from the front or straight from the side, and

does not take more than two fast steps in executing the check.

Legitimate body checking must be done only with the trunk of

the body (hips and shoulders) and must be above the opponent’s

knees and below the neck. If body checking is unnecessarily

rough, it must be penalized.

And this is Boarding according to the book:

A minor or a major penalty, at the discretion of the Referee

based upon the degree of violence of the impact with the

boards, shall be imposed on any player who body-checks,

cross-checks, elbows, charges or trips an opponent in such a

manner that causes the opponent to be thrown violently into

the boards.

So think about those definitions, some of the hits you've seen, and given all of the new anecdotal evidence coming out linking concussions and head\brain impacts to ALS and you decide..... SHOULD THE BIG HIT STILL HAVE ANY PLACE IN OUR GAME?

You know as well as I do, if anyone calls a game based on those words; their partner will hang them out to dry, they will get a call from the local head guy and will not get as many (if any) high level games. As soon as USA Hockey put out their new standards, the district RIC's started watering it down immediately. USA Hockey keeps the old guard happy because they don't enforce any of the words they have written but those words make it look like they're actually doing something so people on the outside are happy.

[17D1998 1]

I think checking should be taught as early as possible (notice TAUGHT). Where I'm from, checking (open ice hits aren't even tolerated) is only for CC level and higher and that's completely stupid cause two summers ago I went to a hockey camp and just because A is the highest level I ever played, I was getting hammered all the time. Hockey is more fun anyway when there's contact.

[zebra_steve 11]

You know as well as I do, if anyone calls a game based on those words; their partner will hang them out to dry, they will get a call from the local head guy and will not get as many (if any) high level games. As soon as USA Hockey put out their new standards, the district RIC's started watering it down immediately. USA Hockey keeps the old guard happy because they don't enforce any of the words they have written but those words make it look like they're actually doing something so people on the outside are happy.

The wording has not changed for many, many, many years. The only changes have been what has been "accepted" as part of the game by the participants. This crap oozed into the game slowly over the years.... until it was commonplace in the game we seen on TV and that the kids emulated on the weekends. The point is that, to nearly every casual fan, a whole lot of parents, coaches, and players, those big hits are to be lauded as "good hard nosed hockey"... They are cheered! It is currently the accepted standard no matter what is written. "Take the body", "finish your check", "hit them hard and often"..... That is the attitude that needs to change - across the board. The question is not whether the push needs to be grass roots ground up or from Mount Olympus down, but will the hockey community as a whole to buy into it. Those that refuse to change are the same ones that resisted the new standard of play. Maybe the newest findings regarding concussion, head contact, and ALS will be be the impetus for change?

As for your comment about the RIC's and watering stuff down, etc.... Well you have nearly 2000 officials in Mid-Am alone and before you can tighten anything up you have to get them all calling the same relative standard. ..... and we do pull our hair out over those officials and those areas that call it to their own version of the rules book.... The days of only calling the penalties that are needed are over.... We expect the guys to know the rules book, and call the penalties that are there... no matter the time of the game. For the most part, we have them in the same book and are trying to get them on the same page....

[Chadd 916]

The wording has not changed for many, many, many years. The only changes have been what has been "accepted" as part of the game by the participants. This crap oozed into the game slowly over the years.... until it was commonplace in the game we seen on TV and that the kids emulated on the weekends. The point is that, to nearly every casual fan, a whole lot of parents, coaches, and players, those big hits are to be lauded as "good hard nosed hockey"... They are cheered! It is currently the accepted standard no matter what is written. "Take the body", "finish your check", "hit them hard and often"..... That is the attitude that needs to change - across the board. The question is not whether the push needs to be grass roots ground up or from Mount Olympus down, but will the hockey community as a whole to buy into it. Those that refuse to change are the same ones that resisted the new standard of play. Maybe the newest findings regarding concussion, head contact, and ALS will be be the impetus for change?

As for your comment about the RIC's and watering stuff down, etc.... Well you have nearly 2000 officials in Mid-Am alone and before you can tighten anything up you have to get them all calling the same relative standard. ..... and we do pull our hair out over those officials and those areas that call it to their own version of the rules book.... The days of only calling the penalties that are needed are over.... We expect the guys to know the rules book, and call the penalties that are there... no matter the time of the game. For the most part, we have them in the same book and are trying to get them on the same page....

I've gone to clinics in several different parts of the Atlantic district and every instructor I've seen work a game doesn't call it anything like the alleged new standard. If the instructors won't do it, you'll never get anyone else to do it. Especially when they tell refs that they called too many penalties without actually seeing the game. You can have 40 on the score sheet and not called enough or five and called too many. Then again, they refuse to do evaluations in my area. A couple guys get together and decide who is good enough to do each level, often without actually working with or seeing a guy work.

[zebra_steve 11]

I've gone to clinics in several different parts of the Atlantic district and every instructor I've seen work a game doesn't call it anything like the alleged new standard. If the instructors won't do it, you'll never get anyone else to do it. Especially when they tell refs that they called too many penalties without actually seeing the game. You can have 40 on the score sheet and not called enough or five and called too many. Then again, they refuse to do evaluations in my area. A couple guys get together and decide who is good enough to do each level, often without actually working with or seeing a guy work.

I have seen the standard all over the map as I travel around. Some call it tight, some call it almost old school... I have realized that I have slipped into old habits on occasion and have had to remind myself to call instead of manage. Not saying that is right, but it happens. Also, it's a heck of a lot harder for someone that's "managed the game" for 15 or 20 years to change their mindset to "it's black and white", than it is to train a new official to the new standard. As for calling too many penalties... Yes, there are games that NEED 30 or more penalties called. If I look a score sheet and I see 35 penalties called and 30 are hooks and interference with the other 5 bench minors then I DO wonder if the official was calling it too tight - usually calling hooks on stick lifts and such where there was no glove contact or competitive advantage. This is different from 15 - 30 aggressive fouls. With that many aggressive fouls, I wonder if the teams wanted to play hockey or kill each other. Yes, we did have that many hooks when the new standard was introduced the same way the NHL did - we were retraining the mindset and habits of the players as well as trying make it more cut and dried on what was a penalty.

What facet of the rules are not called to the standard - ie: which calls, in your opinion, are not being made? Hooks, holds, slash, inteference, head contact?

As for the evaluations or "refusal" to do them... If it's like Mid-Am, it is a small and all volunteer staff - NO compensation other than satisfaction of helping to develop officials. If you don't have someone qualified to do them local then someone has to travel. If a volunteer can't or won't go there, then what do you do? I know it's hard to get guys looked at in Altoona and State College so I suspect that you are no different on the Atlantic side in Harrisburg, or York. If you have a suggestion on how to improve this situation please let me know.... Maybe you should work to join the Atlantic division staff and handle the Evaluations in your area? I too used to think that "the powers" got together and "just decided" who was good enough.... then I stepped behind the curtain for a look and saw that there was a tremendous amount of communication going on.... Reports from other officials, team managers, coaches, league officials.... There is a reason we tell you that "you never know who is in the building".

[Justin Liedloff 13]

OK, as per my usual MO, I didn't read this whole thread, and barely skimmed the first page.

I think it's a mistake to move the hitting age up (or back). Think about this. Players first learning how to hit are the most dangerous. Learning how to take a hit is equally dangerous. Why on earth would you wait until the kids are BIGGER to unleash them on each other. If anything, it's only going to cause more problems, because the lack of hitting technique, combined with the larger size is a problem waiting to happen.

I say, teach them the fundamentals of hitting at an earlier age. The arguments about brain injuries at a young age are moot. The fact is, a properly placed check will dislodge the player from the puck, and not the players head from his shoulders. Rather than focus on the consequences, focus on the actions.

Teach the players at a younger age to hit properly, shoulder to shoulder, and penalize those that hit high, from behind, with their elbows, etc. Also, don't neglect the art of receiving a hit, as learning to take a hit properly is equally as important as learning to give a hit properly.

To this day, I remember watching kids learn to check (I played goalie), and every other drill someone got the wind knocked out of them because they opened up and took the hit right in the chest.

If you teach them at an age where they simply can not skate fast enough, and don't have the weight behind the hits to really hurt someone, by the time they are big enough and fast enough, they'll know how to place a proper body check, and how to receive one as well.