This is exactly how I feel about it. Once the adjustments are made everyone will work with it. As theref mentioned they used this rule @ selects last year and didn't see any issues. I think the players and coaches would adjust just fine.RLStars wrote:Why do youth players at the lower level "ice the puck" when short handed? It's because they are taught to do that.
If the icing rule while on the penalty kill was changed, you would have some adjustment time for the players that have been taught to "ice the puck" rather then control it and pass or skate it over center ice, then throw it to the corner. Once these kids and coaches are taught that icing while short handed is no longer acceptable, I believe you will see that flow of the game would increase and stoppages lessen.
Short Handed Icing
Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)
-
- Posts: 67
- Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 1:12 pm
Who's idea is it to keep trying to make the punishments more severe? We went from 1:30 penalties in a 15 minute period to 2 minutes like the pro's have for a 20 minute period. Then we added Fair Play points. Now someone wants to remove icing? Why stop there? Why don't we skip all of that and just award the offended team a goal? Because that still wouldn't be serious enough, would it? We could start criminal investigations. Then we'd need sentencing guidelines... it could go on and on...
Just leave it alone- put the effort into consistant enforcement of the rules we have.
Just leave it alone- put the effort into consistant enforcement of the rules we have.
-
- Posts: 611
- Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:45 am
Actually, a very well stated argument, and perfectly legitimate.theref wrote:We used the no icing rule during the select 15 Nationals in St. Cloud this summer and the kids seem to have no problem with it.
Here is my personal feeling on the situation. Why should a team that is shorthanded be allowed to not follow a rule because of something that they did. A team is short handed because they took a penalty. You are now allowing them to do something that they cannot normally do, even though they did something wrong to put themselves in that position. Sorry, I realize that may be stated oddly for some or that it may be confusing. I guess to try to state it clearly
A team should not be allowed a different advantage just because they took a penalty.
You are just leveling the playing field a little, but then that defeats the purpose of having penalties.
Agreed!!

I can understand all the arguments for keeping the rule the same. Besides if you can't hang on to the puck with a man advantage maybe it deserves to be iced. I still like the idea of teaching the players how to play out of pressure while being down a player because if you really are concerned about player development I see the following happeningWayOutWest wrote:Actually, a very well stated argument, and perfectly legitimate.theref wrote:We used the no icing rule during the select 15 Nationals in St. Cloud this summer and the kids seem to have no problem with it.
Here is my personal feeling on the situation. Why should a team that is shorthanded be allowed to not follow a rule because of something that they did. A team is short handed because they took a penalty. You are now allowing them to do something that they cannot normally do, even though they did something wrong to put themselves in that position. Sorry, I realize that may be stated oddly for some or that it may be confusing. I guess to try to state it clearly
A team should not be allowed a different advantage just because they took a penalty.
You are just leveling the playing field a little, but then that defeats the purpose of having penalties.
Agreed!!
1) more players getting an opportunity on the penalty kill because of work rate having to be even higher in the pressure and organization you would have to have in your own zone
2) Players could still get the stoppage by icing it to change up or reorganize
3) requires players to make better decisions between can we play it out or do I need the ice
4) makes face-offs more important, so an opportunity to hone this important skill
If it ever did happen, and I doubt it will, the initial period of introduction would probably result in far more stoppages.
I do think though if this was ever address the HEP point also needs to be addressed .
That's all good if the coaches and parents are willing to except "Skill Development" over wins and losses. Like I said, I like all of the reasons for it, but it will come down to chosing win/lose over skill devleopment.RLStars wrote:Why do youth players at the lower level "ice the puck" when short handed? It's because they are taught to do that.
If the icing rule while on the penalty kill was changed, you would have some adjustment time for the players that have been taught to "ice the puck" rather then control it and pass or skate it over center ice, then throw it to the corner. Once these kids and coaches are taught that icing while short handed is no longer acceptable, I believe you will see that flow of the game would increase and stoppages lessen.
Hey "Ref"!. You're not helping me decrease the amount of times I have to skate the length of the ice for an icing call.

Yep...but you get a little gassed after a couple...It would be much easier if they gave us our toe picks back, just to break up the skill part of showing off.tomASS wrote:hiptzech wrote: Hey "Ref"!. You're not helping me decrease the amount of times I have to skate the length of the ice for an icing call.
I thought you guys like showing off your speed and skating skills during that trip up the ice
Whomever comes up with stuff doesn't grasp hockey very well. 2 reasons really stood out to me:
1)Handling the puck while important isn't the desired method of getting the puck up ice, it's passing the puck. If USA Hockey really wanted kids to have to handle the puck under pressure they'd go away from automatic offsides and let teams dump the puck and forcheck. Again USA Hockey's emphisis on individual skill is frightening.
2) An automatic whistle gives the advantage to the penalized team. They now would get a free wholesale change, where they don't with no icing. The penalized team can releive pressure but more often than not can't change their defensemen, an automatic whistle rewards the penalized team.
1)Handling the puck while important isn't the desired method of getting the puck up ice, it's passing the puck. If USA Hockey really wanted kids to have to handle the puck under pressure they'd go away from automatic offsides and let teams dump the puck and forcheck. Again USA Hockey's emphisis on individual skill is frightening.
2) An automatic whistle gives the advantage to the penalized team. They now would get a free wholesale change, where they don't with no icing. The penalized team can releive pressure but more often than not can't change their defensemen, an automatic whistle rewards the penalized team.
Hey, you and I know that it will help weed out the guys that can't handle the few extra icings for a while. Might help push those into retirement that need to be there.hiptzech wrote:Yep...but you get a little gassed after a couple...It would be much easier if they gave us our toe picks back, just to break up the skill part of showing off.tomASS wrote:hiptzech wrote: Hey "Ref"!. You're not helping me decrease the amount of times I have to skate the length of the ice for an icing call.
I thought you guys like showing off your speed and skating skills during that trip up the ice

"Fans have to remember that we don't care if you are watching us or not and that we don't give a rats behind what your opinion is about our calls. If you don't like it then lace em up!"[/quote]
Refs should have to have at least played the level they are reffing...looks to me, judging by the way they skate, that most did not play a peewees.
but back to the question.
Keep the icing in the game. That is part of the history of the game. quit messing with stuff.
Refs should have to have at least played the level they are reffing...looks to me, judging by the way they skate, that most did not play a peewees.
but back to the question.
Keep the icing in the game. That is part of the history of the game. quit messing with stuff.
We are talking about icing, either stay on topic or find another bored. If you don't like the job refs do, then I suggest you sign up next year.wheels wrote:"Fans have to remember that we don't care if you are watching us or not and that we don't give a rats behind what your opinion is about our calls. If you don't like it then lace em up!
Refs should have to have at least played the level they are reffing...looks to me, judging by the way they skate, that most did not play a peewees.
but back to the question.
Keep the icing in the game. That is part of the history of the game. quit messing with stuff.
Here let me help you out. Mark your calendar for the end of Sept next year to go to the link attached below. Good Luck, I would suggest hitting the elliptical at about the same time for a little conditioning…theref wrote:We are talking about icing, either stay on topic or find another bored. If you don't like the job refs do, then I suggest you sign up next year.wheels wrote:"Fans have to remember that we don't care if you are watching us or not and that we don't give a rats behind what your opinion is about our calls. If you don't like it then lace em up!
Refs should have to have at least played the level they are reffing...looks to me, judging by the way they skate, that most did not play a peewees.
but back to the question.
Keep the icing in the game. That is part of the history of the game. quit messing with stuff.

http://www.usahockey.com//Template_Usah ... 3&ID=20208
Think he'll put up or shut up Hiptzech?hiptzech wrote:Here let me help you out. Mark your calendar for the end of Sept next year to go to the link attached below. Good Luck, I would suggest hitting the elliptical at about the same time for a little conditioning…theref wrote:We are talking about icing, either stay on topic or find another bored. If you don't like the job refs do, then I suggest you sign up next year.wheels wrote:"Fans have to remember that we don't care if you are watching us or not and that we don't give a rats behind what your opinion is about our calls. If you don't like it then lace em up!
Refs should have to have at least played the level they are reffing...looks to me, judging by the way they skate, that most did not play a peewees.
but back to the question.
Keep the icing in the game. That is part of the history of the game. quit messing with stuff.![]()
http://www.usahockey.com//Template_Usah ... 3&ID=20208
-
- Posts: 533
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2002 3:51 pm
I think if we want kids to develop better under pressure and learn to move the puck more, then we should eliminate the forward pass, like the real old days and maybe make right handed players play left handed and vice versa while killing penalties. If you want to develop skills these two changes should do it!
He is still thinking about it….He started the below post Dec 2006. It’s a tough decision, but I do appreciate his interest…theref wrote:Think he'll put up or shut up Hiptzech?hiptzech wrote:Here let me help you out. Mark your calendar for the end of Sept next year to go to the link attached below. Good Luck, I would suggest hitting the elliptical at about the same time for a little conditioning…theref wrote: We are talking about icing, either stay on topic or find another bored. If you don't like the job refs do, then I suggest you sign up next year.![]()
http://www.usahockey.com//Template_Usah ... 3&ID=20208
http://www.ushsho.com/forums/viewtopic. ... ht=#158110

Good call, that's okay, we don't need another Jarvis on the ice anyway. If you are lost to that reference, send me a message and I'll point you in the right direction.hiptzech wrote:He is still thinking about it….He started the below post Dec 2006. It’s a tough decision, but I do appreciate his interest…theref wrote:Think he'll put up or shut up Hiptzech?hiptzech wrote: Here let me help you out. Mark your calendar for the end of Sept next year to go to the link attached below. Good Luck, I would suggest hitting the elliptical at about the same time for a little conditioning…![]()
http://www.usahockey.com//Template_Usah ... 3&ID=20208
http://www.ushsho.com/forums/viewtopic. ... ht=#158110
your hand signal is called having a smart enough goalie to come out and play the puck.skatehardordie wrote:Along those same lines, I would like to see a team that is about to benefit from the other team iceing the puck to be able to "decline" the iceing. you could have the netminder make a hand signal indicating that his team declines the iceing and the play continues. if football can handle such a hand signal for a fair catch, no reason that hockey can discern the same during live play in a hockey game.
a team might wanna decline in order to have a certain possession of the puck, rather than risk losing the faceoff at the other end.
-
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 4:54 pm
I totally agree, there will be people who say, "Just don't take penalties", but they're a part of hockey, it would be extremely hard to get the puck out of the zone, and if your team had to kill a penalty, there's a good chance you would be scored on. Also how about the major penalties? Double minors could see 2 goals scored on a power play because teams cant clear and ice the puck out of the zone to get a change. In major penalties multiples of two goals could be scored. Leave the rule as it is.HockeyMN1 wrote:It would make it way too hard to kill a penalty. Being able to ice the puck is a good rule.
