RLStars wrote:The OP was not calling for checking to removed from the game at every level, he specifically questions the need for checking at the HS level, thence the topic subject named "High School Hockey without checking?". I on the other hand, question whether or not USA hockey would be better off removing it from the peewee and or bantam level and instead, let the HS or Midgets coaches teach the proper way to give and receive a body check.
It kinda sounds like you are saying Pee Wee and Bantam coaches don't know how to teach the proper way to check.
As was said before, there is certain risk involved in most everything you choose to do in life. I had a friend who's parents didn't allow him to play. He still says it pisses him off to this day. Back in the old days they fought all the time and never wore helmets. Hockey is safer now than it ever has been. Man up or move on.
schwang17 wrote:Hockey is safer now than it ever has been. Man up or move on.
I agree that it's safer with respect to facial injuries, largely thanks to facemasks, but I question that it is "safer" overall. Today's game is much more physical than it used to be. The players are bigger, faster, better and stronger, and collisions are harder and more frequent, which inevitably leads to other types of injuries. Not saying that this is necessarily a bad thing, as long as the hits are clean and the rules against illegal contact are enforced vigorously and consistently.
In today's game, you better have your head up and be able to protect yourself at all times. If you want to make it through the whole season uninjured, do not put yourself in a vulnerable position, especially when near the boards.
If you watch the pro game, the players are very adept at taking advantage of momentary lapses of opponents that are caught off guard, and they pay the consequences.
I watched my son go through his career and every game, there was concern of being checked from behind. I cannot recall how many times I told him NEVER put yourself into position as to get hit into the boards from behind. It did happen. He's O.K. I also told him numerous times that he cannot hit anyone from behind when they are in a vulnerable position. It happened once. The other player is O.K.
My point is, either one of those hits could have turned out differently. Hockey is a game of speed finesse and strength. Proper teaching of the skills of checking is important in order for kids to continue playing the game safely and for fun.
Horrible idea. Without checking hockey wouldn't be the great sport that it is. It is a MAN'S game... you might was well have high school hockey be co-ed if people want to take the checking out of it. Checking from behind is a very serious offense and should be stressed in practice. The kids who commit that type of penalty should be suspended for a number of games. This act is a career/life threatening action. Kids should learn how to play the game fair and just with strength. intensity, speed, and flow.
a1puck wrote:Is the problem checking, or anger? Always amazes me the amount of anger that can be conjured up by trying to get a little biscuit in a net.
Usually more frustration than anger. Hockey is very frustrating, especially for the good player. After almost every shift he thinks he could have done more, or something different. And it's frustrating for the less talented player just trying to just keep up and not get beat. When anger replaces frustration, stupidity often takes over.
muckandgrind wrote:The problem isn't checking, it's the refs that refuse to call the blatant cheap shots and allow the game to get out of hand. I've seen it all too many times and chalked up to "let 'em play".
If the refs would pull their whistles out of their pockets and call the interferences, boardings, elbows, roughings, that would go a long way towards curbing some of the injuries.
While I don't disagree with you, it is just impractical. As soon as a ref starts to call a game the way it is written the coaches get all over him, and it only escalates from there. Every few years USA Hockey comes out with "points of emphasis" every time they do this the tight calls last a couple of weeks before reverting back to the "old way".
One of the biggest problems hockey and really all sports face is a lack of quality officials. Few want the headache, the politics, the whole kit and kabootle that goes along with officiating. I gave it up after 20+ years because of all the BS (though I still do football because there is far less BS) and many of my contemporaries left as well around the same time.
My personal feeling is parents invest so much into their kids hockey development they don't want to see a game filled with penalties. Instead of working to reduce penalties they and their boards work to reduce the quality of officials. Unless USA Hockey decides to take a stand nothing will ever happen on a local or state level. At levels USA Hockey run, along with the NHL you have a much higher caliber of referee, the same call that gets a pro 5 minutes for high sticking gets a Bantam nothing. The same call that gets a kid in the USHL tossed out of game gets a Bantam nothing. I'm not advocating getting those refs to do a bantam game, I am adocating that there has to be a better process for evaluating, training, and mentoring officials.
Good post Goldy.
Let me also point out that while the "points of emphasis" are strong with USA and High School Hockey, they are not treated the same way by Districts and Associations. Your point about calling penalties and having a coach all over you is very true. Coaches rate the officials after every game in high school, which more or less means they control who officiates their games. High School Official Associations say and want the right outcomes but when they are competing with other Associations for games, the voice of the coaches comes through loud and clear.
Bottom line, it's everyone's reponsibility to teach the rules but it's ultimately the players responsibility to act within the rules.
schwang17 wrote:Hockey is safer now than it ever has been. Man up or move on.
I agree that it's safer with respect to facial injuries, largely thanks to facemasks, but I question that it is "safer" overall. Today's game is much more physical than it used to be. The players are bigger, faster, better and stronger, and collisions are harder and more frequent, which inevitably leads to other types of injuries. Not saying that this is necessarily a bad thing, as long as the hits are clean and the rules against illegal contact are enforced vigorously and consistently.
In today's game, you better have your head up and be able to protect yourself at all times. If you want to make it through the whole season uninjured, do not put yourself in a vulnerable position, especially when near the boards.
I seem to recall several players (ex. Henry Boucha) getting hurt by vicious hits back in the day. Remember the crystal clear boards at the Civic Center? Talk about a lawsuit waiting to happen getting ran into those things. Injuries and protecting yourself has always been apart of the game - it's a rough sport. Whether you believe it or not, hockey is a safer game today than it ever has been. Checking from behind used to just be a 2 minute minor - today it is far more policed(2 and 10).
As far as keeping your head up and playing a injury free season - good luck. Playing 4-5 months and not getting hurt at all is very unlikely, just like any other sport you play. Basketball is just as bad as hockey as far as injuries go, and they tick-tack call every little bump.
schwang17 wrote:I seem to recall several players (ex. Henry Boucha) getting hurt by vicious hits back in the day. Remember the crystal clear boards at the Civic Center? Talk about a lawsuit waiting to happen getting ran into those things. Injuries and protecting yourself has always been apart of the game - it's a rough sport. Whether you believe it or not, hockey is a safer game today than it ever has been. Checking from behind used to just be a 2 minute minor - today it is far more policed(2 and 10).
It would be interesting to see some statistics on injuries, by decade. I doubt that any such statistics exist, but if they did I would be very surprised if the game has really gotten safer.
Of course most older fans remember Boucha's injury very well, mostly because it happened to such a great player in such an important game, plus it was the David vs. Goliath (Edina) story. However if you go back just a bit further, in the mid-to-late 60's, players could not even check unless they were in their defensive zone (behind their own blue line). I'm not sure exactly what year the rule was changed, but there was a lot less hitting back in those days.
Again, I'm not arguing for a change in the rules and wouldn't want to go back to the way it used to be.
I've been watching a few of my nephew's U16 games and I have to say that is really good hockey. The kids are much smarter about the hits they dish out from what I can see. High School Hockey is so much "showing people up" and "getting the big hit" and less on the game of hockey.
These U16 games remind me a lot of how HS hockey USED to be like. More passing, less aggressive hitting and smarter team play.
I tell you what, I can't remember the last time I enjoyed hockey this much. Check out a U16 game sometime.
WB6162 wrote:I've been watching a few of my nephew's U16 games and I have to say that is really good hockey. The kids are much smarter about the hits they dish out from what I can see. High School Hockey is so much "showing people up" and "getting the big hit" and less on the game of hockey.
These U16 games remind me a lot of how HS hockey USED to be like. More passing, less aggressive hitting and smarter team play.
I tell you what, I can't remember the last time I enjoyed hockey this much. Check out a U16 game sometime.
I have watched about 10 HS games this year and I must say I disagree whole-heartedly. The players at the HS level are bigger, faster, stronger, and more talented. There is still some very, very good hockey being played at the HS level and confusing a few bad apples for the whole thing is ludicrous. The HS team I watch most has very bad defense and doesn't hit anybody in front of their net. They are playing the way you are an advocate for and are gettin' taken to the woodshed because of it. It isn't good hockey at all.
WB6162 wrote:I've been watching a few of my nephew's U16 games and I have to say that is really good hockey. The kids are much smarter about the hits they dish out from what I can see. High School Hockey is so much "showing people up" and "getting the big hit" and less on the game of hockey.
These U16 games remind me a lot of how HS hockey USED to be like. More passing, less aggressive hitting and smarter team play.
I tell you what, I can't remember the last time I enjoyed hockey this much. Check out a U16 game sometime.
I have watched about 10 HS games this year and I must say I disagree whole-heartedly. The players at the HS level are bigger, faster, stronger, and more talented. There is still some very, very good hockey being played at the HS level and confusing a few bad apples for the whole thing is ludicrous. The HS team I watch most has very bad defense and doesn't hit anybody in front of their net. They are playing the way you are an advocate for and are gettin' taken to the woodshed because of it. It isn't good hockey at all.
I hear ya and thanks for the reply. Obviously these kids are not as talented or schooled in hockey as the Varsity. Many of them play other sports and focus on their academics much more than sports so this U16 hockey is more of a "love of the game" league and less about being the best.
It is good hockey though, these kids play and fight hard for the wins, you can see the pride in them. How they ended up U16 and not Varsity? Every one of them has his own story but regardless, it's very good hockey.
ummm lets see to take checking away from hockey....wow i cant believe someone would think of such a dumb thing to do to such a wonderful sport, no offense or anything but checking is a MAJOR part of hockey and to remove it from the sport would be an injustice to everyone who has played, plays, or is going to play, such a statement is comparable to the dumbass out in massachusettes who wants icing to be called on a penalty kill if the team dumps the puck out of the zone, it would ruin the sport, it would ruin the toughness of the sport, and to be blunt yeah you may get hurt but thats hockey, idk if you cant take the beating of hockey go play basketball
