Since the rules change for Peewee checking in a game and was supposed to be taught in the teams practices, my question is this being done. I would like to find out just which peewee teams are teaching proper checking during their practices and which teams are not.
If you feel the need to remain confidential please ppm Elliott 70 with the information.
Karl could this be also a sticky till the Mn Hockey winter meeting in Jan?
Are Peewee Coaches Teaching checking
Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)
I'll tell a funny story from PeeWee years.
Players love to pound their best friends more than a game opponent. Don't really know why but they seemed to relish smashing their buds but then wouldn't be nearly as aggessive in games. Probably just more opportunities in pratices to lay some beautiful hits. My sons PeeWee teams had as many checking related injuries from practices as they did in games.
Teaching introductory checking will be different as opposed to them already playing full checking in practices but it is an interesting dynamic.
Players love to pound their best friends more than a game opponent. Don't really know why but they seemed to relish smashing their buds but then wouldn't be nearly as aggessive in games. Probably just more opportunities in pratices to lay some beautiful hits. My sons PeeWee teams had as many checking related injuries from practices as they did in games.
Teaching introductory checking will be different as opposed to them already playing full checking in practices but it is an interesting dynamic.
-
Wildcathcky
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 9:19 am
I help coach an A peewee team. All of our practices allow "full checking." We work on some specific aspect of angling, body position, body contact, etc... in every practice. The purpose of "separating the player from the puck" is constantly preached and we have not had big blow up hits in practice. Unfortunately, it has been tough to get the players to fully commit to learning these skills since they can't use all of them in games. The players seem reluctant to embrace the contact in practice due to fear that it will lead to penalties in games (depsite the fact that the coach said he doesn't care if they take a few checking penalties when a rub out crosses the line into a check).
In games, players have often completely ignored the angling/body contact principles once a penalty is called for checking (on either team). They resort to "fishing for the puck." When that isn't succesful, the frustration sets in. In the end, we often see both teams giving too much space to the opponent and a bunch of "toe drag" rushes follow.
I opposed the rule change, but approached the year with an open mind that this may be the right direction for long-term development. Although it is still way too early to reach a final verdict on the effectiveness of this rule change, I don't like what I've seen in A peewee hockey this winter. Instead of seeing the less talented players improve because they don't need to fear being hit, I see the more talented players simply holding onto the puck more. The end result appears to be that the "better" players are developing bad habits while the "weaker" players don't get any more opportunities to improve than they did under the checking system. In fact, the weaker players may be falling further behind.
In games, players have often completely ignored the angling/body contact principles once a penalty is called for checking (on either team). They resort to "fishing for the puck." When that isn't succesful, the frustration sets in. In the end, we often see both teams giving too much space to the opponent and a bunch of "toe drag" rushes follow.
I opposed the rule change, but approached the year with an open mind that this may be the right direction for long-term development. Although it is still way too early to reach a final verdict on the effectiveness of this rule change, I don't like what I've seen in A peewee hockey this winter. Instead of seeing the less talented players improve because they don't need to fear being hit, I see the more talented players simply holding onto the puck more. The end result appears to be that the "better" players are developing bad habits while the "weaker" players don't get any more opportunities to improve than they did under the checking system. In fact, the weaker players may be falling further behind.
-
Cornermukker
- Posts: 165
- Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:20 am
Are pee wee coaches teaching checking?
Please PM me if your local association peewee coaches are or are not teaching checking. Please base it on a reasonable basis.
It can be done anonomously.
Simply say:
(as an example
Association name: XYZ
peewee A - yes
peewee B - no
peewee C - not sure
Just trying to get a good feel for it to discuss amongst District Directors.
Thank you.
Please PM me if your local association peewee coaches are or are not teaching checking. Please base it on a reasonable basis.
It can be done anonomously.
Simply say:
(as an example
Association name: XYZ
peewee A - yes
peewee B - no
peewee C - not sure
Just trying to get a good feel for it to discuss amongst District Directors.
Thank you.
Last edited by elliott70 on Thu Dec 22, 2011 12:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Our Edina Peewee B2 team has spent parts of two practices doing angling and rubbing out drills. There have also been parts of other practices where covering people physically (taking the man instead of swiping at the puck) has been practiced, as well as many demonstrations off ice where the difference between interference, covering, rubbing out on the boards rather than hitting at or into the boards. I know for a fact that at least one of the Edina Peewee B1 teams spend more time than we do on this.
I've found the reffing in D6 to be inconsistent when it comes to calling hitting. I've seen major hits not called on partial breakaways where the hittee(strong, sturdy kid) had to be helped off, and bodychecking called on what seemed to be jostling at most. I've found that the refs in other Districts seem to let more go in general, though there was a frustrating incident recently where one of our players rubbed out a player along the boards in textbook fashion, with little hard contact and zero arm extension (the hittee was still on his feet and had possession of the puck)yet he was called for a hit. The kid did the hit perfectly- exactly how we taught it and how we perceive that USAH wants it done.
I've found the reffing in D6 to be inconsistent when it comes to calling hitting. I've seen major hits not called on partial breakaways where the hittee(strong, sturdy kid) had to be helped off, and bodychecking called on what seemed to be jostling at most. I've found that the refs in other Districts seem to let more go in general, though there was a frustrating incident recently where one of our players rubbed out a player along the boards in textbook fashion, with little hard contact and zero arm extension (the hittee was still on his feet and had possession of the puck)yet he was called for a hit. The kid did the hit perfectly- exactly how we taught it and how we perceive that USAH wants it done.
-
DumpandChase1
- Posts: 200
- Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 2:37 pm
So you really think that pee wee coaches should have to take time out of their $200+ per hour ice and work on something that the players can't do in a game. That makes absolutely no sense to me. Why doesn't USA hockey buy their own ice and teach these kids to check on their dime in the summer. I think pee wee coaches have enough things to work on, like teaching kids how to play the game with these stupid new rules and keeping hep points. Our coaches are trying to teach the kids to use body position and taking the hands away, but some refs still call that checking. I have noticed that there is a lot more stick work with the no checking rules.
-
DumpandChase1
- Posts: 200
- Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 2:37 pm
Mark, the statement is not directed at you or greybeard, it is somewhat rhetorical. It is directed at the USA Hockey higher up's, many which I know well and have discussed this issue with them. According to them, rough play and injuries is not a Minnesota problem, but it is a problem in other areas of the country, so we have to suffer with the rule.
I strongly feel that either we register our pee wee's as minor bantams, which some are, or withdraw from USA Hockey completely and go independent. If not, then we may as well go to birthyear for the age cutoff like the rest of the country.
I strongly feel that either we register our pee wee's as minor bantams, which some are, or withdraw from USA Hockey completely and go independent. If not, then we may as well go to birthyear for the age cutoff like the rest of the country.
Good points...DumpandChase1 wrote:Mark, the statement is not directed at you or greybeard, it is somewhat rhetorical. It is directed at the USA Hockey higher up's, many which I know well and have discussed this issue with them. According to them, rough play and injuries is not a Minnesota problem, but it is a problem in other areas of the country, so we have to suffer with the rule.
I strongly feel that either we register our pee wee's as minor bantams, which some are, or withdraw from USA Hockey completely and go independent. If not, then we may as well go to birthyear for the age cutoff like the rest of the country.
But dumping USAH would bring on its own set of problems.
Play 'em as bantams would be the easiest right now since they are USAH bantam registered anyway.
As a referee, you can clearly see which teams have spent the time on angling and separating players from pucks (legally) and which have chosen not to. I, too, was against no-check PWs but am starting to change my mind.
Coaches, if you take the time to teach the good angling, moving in on the hands, etc, you will be doing your bantam and HS coaches a great favor. This requires the player to keep moving his feet to get to the position to be legal. When there was checking, the kids would often just "line up" the opponent and then, when the opponent kept moving, would either be left with hitting him from behind, with committing a stick offense, or missing completely. The base of staying ahead of the opponent will put them in great position for making a solid check when that opportunity arrives!!
Just remember, no check doesn't mean no contact. I had a big hit the other night when a player moved laterally to avoid an offsides call. He moved directly into the line of a player going to the puck. The moving player did not change his direction of travel or his foot speed and was entitled to his path. It resulted in a big collision, but not an illegal hit (unless you wanted to call interference on the kid that got lit up. . . and that wasn't going to happen from me!!!)
Bottom line, it's here. I've seen some really good examples this year of kids who use their basic skills to their advantage. The good players are still passing. They are still skating. They are still working to get into position. They are now having to learn additional angles to get ahead of the puck carrier to separate him from the puck.
Blessings to all as they celebrate our sport, but most importantly, our Saviour!!
Coaches, if you take the time to teach the good angling, moving in on the hands, etc, you will be doing your bantam and HS coaches a great favor. This requires the player to keep moving his feet to get to the position to be legal. When there was checking, the kids would often just "line up" the opponent and then, when the opponent kept moving, would either be left with hitting him from behind, with committing a stick offense, or missing completely. The base of staying ahead of the opponent will put them in great position for making a solid check when that opportunity arrives!!
Just remember, no check doesn't mean no contact. I had a big hit the other night when a player moved laterally to avoid an offsides call. He moved directly into the line of a player going to the puck. The moving player did not change his direction of travel or his foot speed and was entitled to his path. It resulted in a big collision, but not an illegal hit (unless you wanted to call interference on the kid that got lit up. . . and that wasn't going to happen from me!!!)
Bottom line, it's here. I've seen some really good examples this year of kids who use their basic skills to their advantage. The good players are still passing. They are still skating. They are still working to get into position. They are now having to learn additional angles to get ahead of the puck carrier to separate him from the puck.
Blessings to all as they celebrate our sport, but most importantly, our Saviour!!
-
skills_coach1
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 9:47 am
Great post Woodly!! Agree on all fronts here... The game depends on moving your feet, keeping the stick down, clean, fast play of the game and we as coaches should be teaching that regardless...woodley wrote:As a referee, you can clearly see which teams have spent the time on angling and separating players from pucks (legally) and which have chosen not to. I, too, was against no-check PWs but am starting to change my mind.
Coaches, if you take the time to teach the good angling, moving in on the hands, etc, you will be doing your bantam and HS coaches a great favor. This requires the player to keep moving his feet to get to the position to be legal. When there was checking, the kids would often just "line up" the opponent and then, when the opponent kept moving, would either be left with hitting him from behind, with committing a stick offense, or missing completely. The base of staying ahead of the opponent will put them in great position for making a solid check when that opportunity arrives!!
Just remember, no check doesn't mean no contact. I had a big hit the other night when a player moved laterally to avoid an offsides call. He moved directly into the line of a player going to the puck. The moving player did not change his direction of travel or his foot speed and was entitled to his path. It resulted in a big collision, but not an illegal hit (unless you wanted to call interference on the kid that got lit up. . . and that wasn't going to happen from me!!!)
Bottom line, it's here. I've seen some really good examples this year of kids who use their basic skills to their advantage. The good players are still passing. They are still skating. They are still working to get into position. They are now having to learn additional angles to get ahead of the puck carrier to separate him from the puck.
Blessings to all as they celebrate our sport, but most importantly, our Saviour!!
I saw two Choice Peewee games at MN Made. These were full contact checking games. I was impressed. I felt the games the seemed faster than the association peewee games I have seen this winter. One thing I did notice was that the players did move the puck more, quite b bit of passing.
A side note one player was ejected from the game because he received three penalties. There is a three penalties rule.
A side note one player was ejected from the game because he received three penalties. There is a three penalties rule.
I believe all the metro district leagues use the 3 penalty rule for peewees and bantams.scrapiron wrote:I saw two Choice Peewee games at MN Made. These were full contact checking games. I was impressed. I felt the games the seemed faster than the association peewee games I have seen this winter. One thing I did notice was that the players did move the puck more, quite b bit of passing.
A side note one player was ejected from the game because he received three penalties. There is a three penalties rule.
USAH rule is 5.