MSHSL Major Penalty Changes take effect 1/16

[nota612er]

Question that has bounced through my head before, but seems more unclear now; How does this apply to games MSHSL teams play outside the state? ex:Htown plays Superior (WI) in Wisconsin tonight in an LSC game. USA Hockey rules apply?

[HShockeywatcher]

* Forward trying to go around a defenseman ducks to avoid the hit. D throws a legal hip check and hits the forward in the head. Now what?

Hip-checks generally happen into the boards, so if that happens it's now a major anyway. Unless you're talking about a giant or a midget, how does one duck and get hit in the head from a hip check?

As to the concussions. . . how many of those came from what is being penalized as head contact. Not what I've seen and I watch an awful lot of HS hockey. The existing (for 1 more day) rule not only allowed, but directed, that if a penalty such as head contact resulted in injury, a major and game misconduct was to be assessed.

My primary point was that MSHSL has reacted rashly. I'd be willing to bet that they can't even tell you how many head contact penalties were assessed, much less those that resulted in injury. How do you proclaim that you're preventing injuries when you haven't done your due diligence!!! We are all guessing here. . . the facts haven't been laid out.

The issue with this line of thinking is the unknown. There are players who get concussions from "minor" hits to the head. There are players who get concussions [or related symptoms] days later after being hit. There are football/hockey players who get serious brain damage after a "minor" hit later on in life because of the constant hitting as a child. The list of examples go on and on. Many players that love the game have to quit because of being hit in the head.

The only people that need to worry about whether it is a 5 minute major, a 2 minute minor, an ejection or anything are the people that are making illegal plays. Period. Play the game by the rules and it won't matter. This is about the safety of children playing a game.

[almostashappy]

Quote from the High School League staff member in today's article""Even if you don't have data, you can't argue with our rationale, which is safety of the students," Perry said."

So when do they break out the flags for MSHSL-sanctioned football games? Same logic applies.

Seems like there are a few ways to go here, now that the rules are in place. Either:

a) New penalties are enforced with zero tolerance, and without any relaxation by the refs a couple of weeks down the road. Standing-room-only in the boxes until the years of instruction/training/muscle memory are overcome.

b) Refs call the game the same way that they have been calling them this season (either now, or after a few weeks). We'll see two or three majors each game for boarding/hits to the head (same call rate, just longer penalties). Kids still "finish their checks" behind the play, forwards still crash the boards, defense still get away with hands to the face whenever somebody on the other team looks at their goalie funny.

c) Refs call even fewer boarding and head-contact penalties than they've been calling this season, because they don't think the sentence fits the crime. Everything becomes "roughing" or "high-sticking," the same way that plays that were always called checking from behind in Bantams are reclassified as boarding penalties once the kids get into high school programs.

I probably could live with any of these 3 scenarios, as long as they are consistently applied across the entire State. That way, the players, coaches, and fans know what to expect going into each and every game. My fear is that this won't happen, though, and you'll have individual refs (or individual sections/leagues/regions) doing their own thing.

[inthestands]

That way, the players, coaches, and fans know what to expect going into each and every game.

The players, coaches and officials know exactly what to expect. The same communication went to all parties involved, and was the same across the board.

The rules enforcement should be as uniform as in the past. Good or bad, why would that change? The officials are calling the game as they see it, and attempting to enforce the rules as written.

Now if you really expect that the fans will fit into that category of knowing what to expect, you have some issues that won't be fixed on any message board..

[goldy313]

Question that has bounced through my head before, but seems more unclear now; How does this apply to games MSHSL teams play outside the state? ex:Htown plays Superior (WI) in Wisconsin tonight in an LSC game. USA Hockey rules apply?

You play under that states rules. Games played in Superior Wisconsin would not be affcted by the MSHSL changes, however when Superior plays a game in Minnesota the new rules will be in effect. LaCrescent plays a largely Wisconsin schedule, they will be affected the most of any Minnesota school as their home games will have one set of penalties and their road games another set.

[HShockeywatcher]

Question that has bounced through my head before, but seems more unclear now; How does this apply to games MSHSL teams play outside the state? ex:Htown plays Superior (WI) in Wisconsin tonight in an LSC game. USA Hockey rules apply?

You play under that states rules. Games played in Superior Wisconsin would not be affcted by the MSHSL changes, however when Superior plays a game in Minnesota the new rules will be in effect. LaCrescent plays a largely Wisconsin schedule, they will be affected the most of any Minnesota school as their home games will have one set of penalties and their road games another set.

Luckily for all of them there is one thing that will be consistent in both states; if they don't hit anyone in the head, from behind or violently into the boards, they will not be called for a penalty

[nahc]

We all agree that the events in recent weeks have certainly led us all to take a view on player safety and how to weave that into this great game of hockey. We don't ever want another Jack J happening out there on the ice. Am wondering though about a couple of items. First is that checking now does not begin until Bantams. To me, this is a train wreck waiting to happen the first few weeks of the season. I may be very off base here, but if kids aren't ready to check before the Bantam level which is a faster more physical game, why should we not expect more challenges? Kids can't drive a vehicle until they are 16 yet look at how many accidents occur at these young ages simply because the kids have not had enough experience driving. I know this has been spoken of before, but we need to expose kids as young as possible to checking, ie squirts? Again, just one person's opinion.........but for safety reasons, this does seem like a logical conclusion.

Last question concerns a couple of posters who mentioned a 6ft kid making a check on a 5'7 opposing player. The taller skaters shoulder could very easily contact the head due to the size difference. Will this be a 5 minute penalty? What about a skater who "ducks" a little bit prior to getting hit along the boards, another 5 minute penalty? These are the nuances of the rule that will be interpreted differantly by every ref and drive us all crazy........safety is the main concern.......absolutely.......but lets also take a close look at what we are asking for........just one opinion...

[bubblehockey27]

I'm not sure if I completely agree with the new rules. Personally, I think there is a large "grey" area when calling these types of penalties. Refs seem to have enough trouble calling a simple trip or roughing, but now they're going to be assesing major penalties for head contact, boarding and hits from behind?! I actually think players turning from checks (being hit from behind) is a HUGE problem is high school. I know for a fact players are taught to turn their backs, which in my opinion is completely unsafe. I do agree checking needs to be taught better at the youth levels to ensure players' safety when they're older, but I don't believe these rule changes are going to cut it. Again, my personal opinion, it's too late for these HS players to change the way they check, especially midseason. It needs to start at the youth level. The hockey community needs to do more to teach younger players how to properly check.

Obviously with the community supporting Jablonski these rules were made effective immediatly, but after the years end (when they can review whether these rule changes are effective) the MSHSL really needs to evaluate if this is going to help players check properly and if the rules are actually protecting the players.

[almostashappy]

The players, coaches and officials know exactly what to expect. The same communication went to all parties involved, and was the same across the board.

The rules enforcement should be as uniform as in the past...

Yeah, that's my point. If the rules of the game are applied now as evenly as they have been in the past, then there won't be any uniformity. The refs call them like they see 'em. It's just that some refs see a lot less (or a lot more) than others. And there are regional differences in how the game is called. Not saying that it is right, just saying that is the way that it is.

So here's an example that's been bandied about in this thread...according to the unwritten code, defensemen are allowed to aggressively protect their own goaltender. Nobody blinks an eye when a d-man gets in between the goalie and the offending forward and "encourages" that forward to back away...quite often by getting a glove up into (or under) that forward's mask. That is, by definition, head-contact, and according to the rules, now a 5-minute major penalty. Right? So I'll start seeing this called now?

[inthestands]

The players, coaches and officials know exactly what to expect. The same communication went to all parties involved, and was the same across the board.

The rules enforcement should be as uniform as in the past...

Yeah, that's my point. If the rules of the game are applied now as evenly as they have been in the past, then there won't be any uniformity. The refs call them like they see 'em. It's just that some refs see a lot less (or a lot more) than others. And there are regional differences in how the game is called. Not saying that it is right, just saying that is the way that it is.

So here's an example that's been bandied about in this thread...according to the unwritten code, defensemen are allowed to aggressively protect their own goaltender. Nobody blinks an eye when a d-man gets in between the goalie and the offending forward and "encourages" that forward to back away...quite often by getting a glove up into (or under) that forward's mask. That is, by definition, head-contact, and according to the rules, now a 5-minute major penalty. Right? So I'll start seeing this called now?

I'm gonna take a stab at this one.. The rules have not changed. Speculation might dictate you'll see a bit more emphasis on calling the check from behind, instead of faking off a cross check or something else.

The only change from the start of the season is, the minimum penalty guidlelines have gone from a minor penalty option, to only a major penalty, and possible misconduct or game misconduct from there.

What the players have seen shouldn't change dramatically. The time in the box will change, as well as the ability to get out when the opponent scores a goal. Now the offending player sits the entire 5 minutes no matter what.

If you have a good idea about how to apply rules more consistently, I'm confident the MSHSL and USA hockey would be open to those thougths.

[almostashappy]

Luckily for all of them there is one thing that will be consistent in both states; if they don't hit anyone in the head, from behind or violently into the boards, they will not be called for a penalty

HShockeywather...you have an elegant argument. Unfortunately, it's not that simple (as many have here have pointed out).

If I don't drive over the speed limit, I can be reasonably confident that I will not get a speeding ticket. Whether I am caught speeding has (theoretically) nothing to do with any of the other drivers on the road...there actions don't influence my outcome.

But it takes two to tango in hockey...the other player's actions can influence whether a legal body check remains a legal body check...when (for example) that player turns his back into the check at the last moment. Or when he lowers his head as he barrels towards an opponent. Or when a players is nominally "injured," only to make a miraculous recovery in time for their next shift.

It happens. You can't convince me otherwise. I saw it happen Saturday, when a Burnsville player who was supposedly too hurt to serve his two-minute penalty was back out on the ice 45 seconds later (reference: mnhockeyhub's game track comments).

If you insist on a zero tolerance policy on calling dangerous illegal checks, then you need to articulate a policy for the few bad apples that fake it...or worse, invite it.

[HShockeywatcher]

Luckily for all of them there is one thing that will be consistent in both states; if they don't hit anyone in the head, from behind or violently into the boards, they will not be called for a penalty

HShockeywather...you have an elegant argument. Unfortunately, it's not that simple (as many have here have pointed out).

If I don't drive over the speed limit, I can be reasonably confident that I will not get a speeding ticket. Whether I am caught speeding has (theoretically) nothing to do with any of the other drivers on the road...there actions don't influence my outcome.

But it takes two to tango in hockey...the other player's actions can influence whether a legal body check remains a legal body check...when (for example) that player turns his back into the check at the last moment. Or when he lowers his head as he barrels towards an opponent. Or when a players is nominally "injured," only to make a miraculous recovery in time for their next shift.

It happens. You can't convince me otherwise. I saw it happen Saturday, when a Burnsville player who was supposedly too hurt to serve his two-minute penalty was back out on the ice 45 seconds later (reference: mnhockeyhub's game track comments).

If you insist on a zero tolerance policy on calling dangerous illegal checks, then you need to articulate a policy for the few bad apples that fake it...or worse, invite it.

There's a couple points in that post:

Unless I've missed something, most have been saying that while hitting in the head is illegal, it should be a minor penalty.

From what I've read and had explained to me from people on here, it would be very difficult for someone to be attempting a 100% legal hit, have someone turn at the last second and then hit them illegally or be unable to stop from hitting them.
I completely agree that a minor could turn into a major, or what is now a major could become one with worse injury, but what it sounds more like is intentional illegal hits, that were not being called, turning into bad hits, now majors because kids believe it'll only "happen to someone else."

And, while subjective, I agree 100% this should be punished if possible.

[muckandgrind]

IMO, they should've split the difference and went to a double-minor for these infractions instead of a Major. Now a single bad call by a ref could easily determine the outcome of a game like never before.

[Oldtimehockeyguy23]

The MSHSL's quote in the paper "even if you don't have data, you can't argue with our rationale, which is the safety of the students." might be the dumbest quote I have ever read.

It highlights the very problem with the new rules.

By saying, "even if you don't have data"... you say well we have no idea whether the new rules will EVEN WORK....

not to mention the quality the remaining games in the season will lack... To make this rule change mid-season is crazy, and hockey will pay the price.

[blueliner5]

IMO, they should've split the difference and went to a double-minor for these infractions instead of a Major. Now a single bad call by a ref could easily determine the outcome of a game like never before.

Totally agree. Last 5 minutes of a tight game the referee can determine the outcome. MSHSL moved way to fast on making this rule change. Undoubtedly, they had to do something, but pushed it to an extreme where a 5 minute major could end up costing a team a couple of goals for a bad call. I was watching a game tonight and it sure changes the game quite a bit. Three of these calls is worth a period of being shorthanded

[MNHockeyFan]

Now a single bad call by a ref could easily determine the outcome of a game like never before.

Maybe once players realize this they'll play more intelligently and take away the opportunity for the refs to determine the outcome of a game. After all, the whole purpose of the harsher penalties is to influence the behavior of the players so that the game becomes safer for everybody.

[nota612er]

Question that has bounced through my head before, but seems more unclear now; How does this apply to games MSHSL teams play outside the state? ex:Htown plays Superior (WI) in Wisconsin tonight in an LSC game. USA Hockey rules apply?

You play under that states rules. Games played in Superior Wisconsin would not be affcted by the MSHSL changes, however when Superior plays a game in Minnesota the new rules will be in effect. LaCrescent plays a largely Wisconsin schedule, they will be affected the most of any Minnesota school as their home games will have one set of penalties and their road games another set.

They must follow MSHSL rules for Lake Superior Conference Games as a nasty, textbook check from behind toward the end of the game tonight drew a 5 minute major and 10 minute misconduct. The play was exactly what the new rules were meant to address. 1,000 people at the game go quiet and Htown player fortunately gets up. While Htown scored within 2 minutes (old guidelines), the penalty still cost Superior the game. Do you think it would matter that they won the game if the Htown kid did not get up? My original thoughts on this was that implementing mid-year was knee-jerk by MSHSL. I get all the arguments of what will happen to penalties (ex:head contact becomes roughing) with the rule changes, but if a kid can make such a dangerous play after all the exposure on this, he deserves to miss the rest of the game he's in and the next at a minimum.

[wildfan6866]

This is by far the most frustrating thing I have seen in hockey in a long
time. I really do understand the serverity of the hit and how wrong it
was, but its been happening for years and it will still keep happening. The
reason for this is, kids are not being taught the right ways of approching a
puck (and i'm not blaming what happened on the kids that were hurt either). You can take away checking from the Pee Wee level, (which is completly riduclous)you can add more serverity to penalties, and what i see is some coming is lets get rid of checking all around. Well then don't play the game or ask someone that knows the game to teach you the right way to play. Kids should start checking in Squirt A's and I'm not saying all out drilling each other, rubbing out hard is what i"m talking about. The earlier they learn how, the safer it becomes. As a former Pee Wee A coach I taught the basics but i also taught a kid how to approch the puck so these things dont happen. I taught them how to take a check and give one. Here are a couple of easy ways, in practice start telling them to look at the glass to look for reflextions, the earlier they learn this the easier it gets(i still do it and play nocheck in old man league). Take a different approch at the puck, dont have your back to the guy thats behind you, angle so that when you do get hit your getting hit in the shoulder. Im sure there are more people out there also with good ideas on how to do protect yourself. So people ask your coaches to teach your childeren these simple ways to protect themselves. Also you need to teach kids when to pull up and where and what a good hits is. You can keep on adding stiffer penalties and more rules but if your kids are not taught the correct ways it will keep on happening. Here' one example of what your new rules are doing. Kid crosses the red line enterning the offensvie zone spins gets hit in open ice in the back, refs arm goes up, kid lost puck, pops up gos after the puck team mate gets control, the kid that was hit goes to the slot for a pass they lose control whistle blows(where the check in the corner to make them lose control was alot harder of a hit). Guess what hapened, mind you all happened in seconds. A checking from behind a 5 min and a 10. Well atleast they are learning how to sit in the box and not how to play the game. Oh and yes I do have a son playing high school hockey if you were wondering.

[goldy313]

So there was a hit from behind? I thought the new rules were intended to eliminate this, also under the old rule it was either a 2 minute minor plus a 10 minute misconduct or a 5 minute major and a game misconduct. If the hit was as you stated then it should have been a major plus a game, now it's less of a penalty?

[muckandgrind]

Now a single bad call by a ref could easily determine the outcome of a game like never before.

Maybe once players realize this they'll play more intelligently and take away the opportunity for the refs to determine the outcome of a game. After all, the whole purpose of the harsher penalties is to influence the behavior of the players so that the game becomes safer for everybody.

But wouldn't a double-minor have accomplished the same thing (influence the behavior of the player) without such a drastic effect on the outcome of the game itself?

[pioneers]

I was at the H-M EP game last night. There were quite a few occassions along the boards that in the past you would have seen a check thrown and the kids just didn't throw the check. There were two majors called, one for checking from behind and one boarding. One on each team.

[Green and White Fan]

I am not sure how many of you watched Russia play Sweden in the World Junior Final. Now that is hockey. Skilled players passing, skating and flying around the rink. An occassional hit or a rub out along the boards, but none of this North American kill everyone in sight mentality. For me, I enjoy seeing the skilled players play the game. Hopefully over time, our game will take on more of the European flair!

[inthestands]

I am not sure how many of you watched Russia play Sweden in the World Junior Final. Now that is hockey. Skilled players passing, skating and flying around the rink. An occassional hit or a rub out along the boards, but none of this North American kill everyone in sight mentality. For me, I enjoy seeing the skilled players play the game. Hopefully over time, our game will take on more of the European flair!

This is why we see so many non-US players in the NHL. Goals win games, and big hits get the crowd going.

There's a place for both at the higher levels, but less need below as you go down in age and ability.

From the description of the HM game, it sounds like the coaches did a good job of explaining the MSHSL message and the players listened.

[Duluth 4]

This rule change saved H-Town's perfect season last night as a typical 2 minute checking from behind turned into a 5 minute major with 330 left, Hermantown scored the tying and game winner in that span.

[MNHockeyFan]

Maybe once players realize this they'll play more intelligently and take away the opportunity for the refs to determine the outcome of a game. After all, the whole purpose of the harsher penalties is to influence the behavior of the players so that the game becomes safer for everybody.

But wouldn't a double-minor have accomplished the same thing (influence the behavior of the player) without such a drastic effect on the outcome of the game itself?

If the MSHSL had decided to just impose a double minor instead of a five minute major, no I do not believe it would have had the same effect on player behavior. The whole purpose is for such infractions to have "a drastic effect on the outcome of the game itself" - if players and coaches knew it wouldn't be any big deal then what reason would they have to change their behavior?