MSHSL Major Penalty Changes take effect 1/16

[starmvp]

Hockey is a fast game. Things can happen in the blink of an eye. One player can turn his back or duck his head at the last second and take a nasty hit for which you can't blame the other player who hit them. We see 6'2" players laying clean checks on a players 5'5" and inadvertently hits him in the head. Is that dirty? Does that player deserve a major penalty for no other reason than he is taller then the other player and couldn't avoid the incidental contact to the head?

How about the player who turns his back at the last second along the boards to shield the puck from the opponent who can't stop in time to avoid contact. Is that a dirty hit? How many times have we seen that called checking from behind? Now it will be a major penalty and the "offending" player isn't even at fault!!!

You're right, some of those things are going to happen. How often though? If those few instances are the indirect result of stricter rules when it comes to contact to the head and checking from behind I'm okay with that. Also, the 6'2" player can and should be aware that when he is going to check a 5'5" player he needs to use his lower body significantly more.

Maybe we should have drills where we practice hitting shorter players or the 5'5" guy stands straight up. That is about the most ridiculous statements made. Maybe shorter players can wear a colored stripe on their helment so defending players can significantly lower their body when checking them. Nobody likes to see injuries, but this is starting to get out of hand. Maybe just adopt the girls rules?

Okay let's just forget about safety in the game then?

[mulefarm]

You're right, some of those things are going to happen. How often though? If those few instances are the indirect result of stricter rules when it comes to contact to the head and checking from behind I'm okay with that. Also, the 6'2" player can and should be aware that when he is going to check a 5'5" player he needs to use his lower body significantly more.

Maybe we should have drills where we practice hitting shorter players or the 5'5" guy stands straight up. That is about the most ridiculous statements made. Maybe shorter players can wear a colored stripe on their helment so defending players can significantly lower their body when checking them. Nobody likes to see injuries, but this is starting to get out of hand. Maybe just adopt the girls rules?

Okay let's just forget about safety in the game then?

Who said forget about safety?

[starmvp]

Maybe we should have drills where we practice hitting shorter players or the 5'5" guy stands straight up. That is about the most ridiculous statements made. Maybe shorter players can wear a colored stripe on their helment so defending players can significantly lower their body when checking them. Nobody likes to see injuries, but this is starting to get out of hand. Maybe just adopt the girls rules?

Okay let's just forget about safety in the game then?

Who said forget about safety?

How is it getting out of hand?

[muckandgrind]

Okay let's just forget about safety in the game then?

Who said forget about safety?

How is it getting out of hand?

How is it getting out of hand? How about these knee-jerk, emotion-driven radical rule changes imposed without any discussion or study done to indicate these changes will work in the long run?

[mulefarm]

Let's say a tall D makes a pass and a shorter player is going to check him, and taller players arm or elbow come into contact with shorter players head as check is being make. 5 min major for head contact. You tell me what taller player should do? How many head contact penalties would Zdeno Chara recieve under these rule?

[starmvp]

Let's say a tall D makes a pass and a shorter player is going to check him, and taller players arm or elbow come into contact with shorter players head as check is being make. 5 min major for head contact. You tell me what taller player should do? How many head contact penalties would Zdeno Chara recieve under these rule?

A taller player doesn't need to blast the kid in the head, and I'd hope that tall player would be bending there knees which wouldn't make them that much taller anyways

[muckandgrind]

Let's say a tall D makes a pass and a shorter player is going to check him, and taller players arm or elbow come into contact with shorter players head as check is being make. 5 min major for head contact. You tell me what taller player should do? How many head contact penalties would Zdeno Chara recieve under these rule?

A taller player doesn't need to blast the kid in the head, and I'd hope that tall player would be bending there knees which wouldn't make them that much taller anyways

...and I suppose that the smaller players don't bend their knees as well? Maybe they should be forced to skate upright to make them taller??

[mulefarm]

Let's say a tall D makes a pass and a shorter player is going to check him, and taller players arm or elbow come into contact with shorter players head as check is being make. 5 min major for head contact. You tell me what taller player should do? How many head contact penalties would Zdeno Chara recieve under these rule?

A taller player doesn't need to blast the kid in the head, and I'd hope that tall player would be bending there knees which wouldn't make them that much taller anyways

Glad to know shorter players don't bend their knees? Didn't say blast them in the head or even initiate contact, shorter player did and had head contact with taller players arm.

[starmvp]

Let's say a tall D makes a pass and a shorter player is going to check him, and taller players arm or elbow come into contact with shorter players head as check is being make. 5 min major for head contact. You tell me what taller player should do? How many head contact penalties would Zdeno Chara recieve under these rule?

A taller player doesn't need to blast the kid in the head, and I'd hope that tall player would be bending there knees which wouldn't make them that much taller anyways

Glad to know shorter players don't bend their knees? Didn't say blast them in the head or even initiate contact, shorter player did and had head contact with taller players arm.

Experiment for you, put two players that have an 8 inch height difference in a squat next to each other, the height difference will barely be noticeable

[mulefarm]

A taller player doesn't need to blast the kid in the head, and I'd hope that tall player would be bending there knees which wouldn't make them that much taller anyways

Glad to know shorter players don't bend their knees? Didn't say blast them in the head or even initiate contact, shorter player did and had head contact with taller players arm.

Experiment for you, put two players that have an 8 inch height difference in a squat next to each other, the height difference will barely be noticeable

What does that have to do with safety? Your experiment confuses me, just tell me the answer so I can disagree with you some more!

[starmvp]

Glad to know shorter players don't bend their knees? Didn't say blast them in the head or even initiate contact, shorter player did and had head contact with taller players arm.

Experiment for you, put two players that have an 8 inch height difference in a squat next to each other, the height difference will barely be noticeable

What does that have to do with safety? Your experiment confuses me, just tell me the answer so I can disagree with you some more!

Bottomline, hits to the head are avoidable

[mulefarm]

Experiment for you, put two players that have an 8 inch height difference in a squat next to each other, the height difference will barely be noticeable

What does that have to do with safety? Your experiment confuses me, just tell me the answer so I can disagree with you some more!

Bottomline, hits to the head are avoidable

My point is sometimes the player initiating the contact causes the contact to the head, how can this be considered a penalty , and now by rules a major penalty. Thinking about your experiment, a squat position would not be relevant in that skaters do not bend their knees to 90 degrees. angles

[muckandgrind]

Experiment for you, put two players that have an 8 inch height difference in a squat next to each other, the height difference will barely be noticeable

What does that have to do with safety? Your experiment confuses me, just tell me the answer so I can disagree with you some more!

Bottomline, hits to the head are avoidable

Sometimes they are, sometimes they aren't.

[HShockeywatcher]

If you wanna hit in the head, do it with your stick; SSM player called for high sticking tonight, 2 min minor for stick to the face.

[Pens4]

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).

love it..I haven't heard this since Jim "bone-cusher" Kite said it in the 80's. Only difference
was he used it because he was legally deaf and couldn't hear his defensive partner. I prefer just checking your shoulder for the pressure.

[inthestands]

If you wanna hit in the head, do it with your stick; SSM player called for high sticking tonight, 2 min minor for stick to the face.

Most often, the head contact penalty is going to be called for checking.

The high sticking penalty is usually an inadvertant brush to the helmet or facemask. There is a difference between the two.

Although stick contact isn't always on purpose, a penalty should be called. If the contact was done purposely, the 5 minute should be called.

[almostashappy]

If you wanna hit in the head, do it with your stick; SSM player called for high sticking tonight, 2 min minor for stick to the face.

Most often, the head contact penalty is going to be called for checking.

The high sticking penalty is usually an inadvertant brush to the helmet or facemask. There is a difference between the two.

Although stick contact isn't always on purpose, a penalty should be called. If the contact was done purposely, the 5 minute should be called.

From mshsl.org:

Contact to the head also now becomes an automatic major penalty — five minutes — instead of the option of either a two-minute minor penalty or a five-minute major penalty. The rule states, “No player shall make contact with an opposing player’s head or neck area in any manner.”

I don't see any wiggle room here for inadvertent contact, unless you take the position that the phrase "No player shall make contact" implies intention...but then it would have been a simple matter to add one word, and say that "No player shall intentionally make contact..."

If the new rule is strictly enforced, then any head contact, in any manner, should result in a 5-minute major.

[inthestands]

If you wanna hit in the head, do it with your stick; SSM player called for high sticking tonight, 2 min minor for stick to the face.

Most often, the head contact penalty is going to be called for checking.

The high sticking penalty is usually an inadvertant brush to the helmet or facemask. There is a difference between the two.

Although stick contact isn't always on purpose, a penalty should be called. If the contact was done purposely, the 5 minute should be called.

From mshsl.org:

Contact to the head also now becomes an automatic major penalty — five minutes — instead of the option of either a two-minute minor penalty or a five-minute major penalty. The rule states, “No player shall make contact with an opposing player’s head or neck area in any manner.”

I don't see any wiggle room here for inadvertent contact, unless you take the position that the phrase "No player shall make contact" implies intention...but then it would have been a simple matter to add one word, and say that "No player shall intentionally make contact..."

If the new rule is strictly enforced, then any head contact, in any manner, should result in a 5-minute major.

The penalty infraction hasn't changed. The minimum time for the call did.

When there has been inadvertant contact to the head with a stick in the past, it's been called high sticking from what I've seen.

I understand how the rule reads, but I also see how those calls have been and will be made.

That shouldn't be changing.

[karl(east)]

The penalty infraction hasn't changed. The minimum time for the call did.

When there has been inadvertant contact to the head with a stick in the past, it's been called high sticking from what I've seen.

I understand how the rule reads, but I also see how those calls have been and will be made.

That shouldn't be changing.

This sort of incident apparently came up in the East-Apple Valley game the other night. The game's one major penalty was called when a player's stick inadvertently came up around a player's head. (These are the words of Pete Waggoner from OTSN, who I'd consider an impartial observer.) So, at least for those referees, the incidental contact still warranted the major penalty for head contact and a game misconduct.

To me, this seems excessive. Definitely a penalty, maybe even a major given the new emphasis, but forcing a player to sit out a game for something incidental?

The team in question was told they could send a tape to the MSHSL for further review; I doubt that will achieve anything, but at least the option is there.

[inthestands]

The penalty infraction hasn't changed. The minimum time for the call did.

When there has been inadvertant contact to the head with a stick in the past, it's been called high sticking from what I've seen.

I understand how the rule reads, but I also see how those calls have been and will be made.

That shouldn't be changing.

This sort of incident apparently came up in the East-Apple Valley game the other night. The game's one major penalty was called when a player's stick inadvertently came up around a player's head. (These are the words of Pete Waggoner from OTSN, who I'd consider an impartial observer.) So, at least for those referees, the incidental contact still warranted the major penalty for head contact and a game misconduct.

To me, this seems excessive. Definitely a penalty, maybe even a major given the new emphasis, but forcing a player to sit out a game for something incidental?

The team in question was told they could send a tape to the MSHSL for further review; I doubt that will achieve anything, but at least the option is there.

In the end, everything boils down to interpretation..

[MNHockeyFan]

This article appeared in the paper edition of the Star Tribune this morning:

http://www.mnhockeyhub.com/news_article/show/129564

""Some referees think because the high school league is cracking down they need to call more major penalties. We've stressed it to our membership that this doesn't change what's called, and that's how it should be approached."

[muckandgrind]

I'll say it again that I think this was rushed into implementation way too fast. What they should've done is take a deep breath, open this subject up to discussion between the HS League and coaches, determine a plan of attack, spend the off season educating both officials and coaches on what the changes will be, and start next season with whatever new changes they come up with.

Hasty decisions and knee-jerk reactions almost always lead to poor decisions in the long run. I hope I'm wrong.

[almostashappy]

I'll say it again that I think this was rushed into implementation way too fast. What they should've done is take a deep breath, open this subject up to discussion between the HS League and coaches, determine a plan of attack, spend the off season educating both officials and coaches on what the changes will be, and start next season with whatever new changes they come up with.

Hasty decisions and knee-jerk reactions almost always lead to poor decisions in the long run. I hope I'm wrong.

I agree, but I also agree with Murphy's Law, and acknowledge the power of CYA.

Can you imagine the outrage if another serious injury occurred while the MSHSL was taking that deep breath?

[HShockeywatcher]

The penalty infraction hasn't changed. The minimum time for the call did.

When there has been inadvertant contact to the head with a stick in the past, it's been called high sticking from what I've seen.

I understand how the rule reads, but I also see how those calls have been and will be made.

That shouldn't be changing.

This sort of incident apparently came up in the East-Apple Valley game the other night. The game's one major penalty was called when a player's stick inadvertently came up around a player's head. (These are the words of Pete Waggoner from OTSN, who I'd consider an impartial observer.) So, at least for those referees, the incidental contact still warranted the major penalty for head contact and a game misconduct.

To me, this seems excessive. Definitely a penalty, maybe even a major given the new emphasis, but forcing a player to sit out a game for something incidental?

The team in question was told they could send a tape to the MSHSL for further review; I doubt that will achieve anything, but at least the option is there.

In the end, everything boils down to interpretation..

If you are trying to interpret, “No player shall make contact with an opposing player’s head or neck area in any manner” you are doing something wrong. There's nothing to be interpret, if you touch their head or neck, you sit in the box for 5 minutes.

[almostashappy]

If you are trying to interpret, “No player shall make contact with an opposing player’s head or neck area in any manner” you are doing something wrong. There's nothing to be interpret, if you touch their head or neck, you sit in the box for 5 minutes.

Yes, the rule is clear. Unfortunately, sight lines aren't always as clear.

There are only three refs on the ice (two in JV games). They aren't always in perfect position to spot infractions, and even if they were they can't see everything.

So what happens if it's not an obvious head contact at center ice, with a ref watching from 10 feet away? What if the ref thinks that there might have been head contact, but wasn't 100% certain? Calling it elbowing or high-sticking is one way to deal with the uncertainty.