I posted proposed USAH rule changes in youth section but thought some on this forum may be interested.
Looks like checking in peewees will not be allowed. This rule is scheduled for passing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Opionions on effect on HS hockey?????
USAH to ban checking in pee-wee hockey
Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)
In my opinion it will make the game more violent and put the smaller kids at a greater risk for injury. It also will be really hard on the officials, at least at first, as kids come up with less instruction on how to hit and protect themselves from a check.
We don't teaching kids how to pitch or hit a baseball in 8th grade, we don't start to block and tackle in the 8th grade, we do it earlier when the game is slower which allows the development of fundementals and confidence. This rule change makes no sense to me.
My biggest fear is that in many areas 9th graders play high school hockey, to put them in that situation with only 1 year of checking behind them could be really catostrophic.
We don't teaching kids how to pitch or hit a baseball in 8th grade, we don't start to block and tackle in the 8th grade, we do it earlier when the game is slower which allows the development of fundementals and confidence. This rule change makes no sense to me.
My biggest fear is that in many areas 9th graders play high school hockey, to put them in that situation with only 1 year of checking behind them could be really catostrophic.
-
TTpuckster
- Posts: 2784
- Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 8:26 am
- Location: State of Hockey
Re: USAH to ban checking in pee-wee hockey
Elliot,elliott70 wrote:I posted proposed USAH rule changes in youth section but thought some on this forum may be interested.
Looks like checking in peewees will not be allowed. This rule is scheduled for passing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Opionions on effect on HS hockey?????
Why the proposed change?
What are the concerns?
Has there been a lot of injuries from checking at the Pee Wee level?
Totally crazy, dangerous, and not very insightful. Very disappointed in leadership on this one. They really need to pick up their game and focus on real solutions. Coaching camps, clinics, videos, roving experts from USA Hockey. It's disappointing because I'm not seeing the necessary activity from USA Hockey. Extremely weak decision making.
It was mentioned one of the primary reasons is declining numbers and registration revenue, after Squirts, is due, it's suspected, because of checking. Wrong. It's because checking wasn't taught properly at the Squirt level so the players are prepared for PeeWee. The first few PeeWee games for a small first player probably are scary as he's usually totally unprepared.
The declining revenue and numbers situation should be addressed through recruiting new players to the game only.
If it's a liability issue shame on leadership for not providing instruction. The injuries will be worse and more frequent waiting for bantam to introduce checking to the game. PeeWee players all kind of learn together. At bantam some will be very good at it (the football players and those coached by smart coaches) and other will be toast. Squished.
Are they even paying attention to the way the game is evolving? Even in the NHL it's now about passing, puck control and staying out of the box.
The refs can play a huge role too. Make the calls and things change quickly. Skate to the bench before the game and politely explain to both teams how you call things and then stick to it. Hands high, hits to the head, unnecessary "finishing", etc. You're in charge, take control. Help with the instruction by talking with the coaches and the players before the game. Be leaders.
It was mentioned one of the primary reasons is declining numbers and registration revenue, after Squirts, is due, it's suspected, because of checking. Wrong. It's because checking wasn't taught properly at the Squirt level so the players are prepared for PeeWee. The first few PeeWee games for a small first player probably are scary as he's usually totally unprepared.
The declining revenue and numbers situation should be addressed through recruiting new players to the game only.
If it's a liability issue shame on leadership for not providing instruction. The injuries will be worse and more frequent waiting for bantam to introduce checking to the game. PeeWee players all kind of learn together. At bantam some will be very good at it (the football players and those coached by smart coaches) and other will be toast. Squished.
Are they even paying attention to the way the game is evolving? Even in the NHL it's now about passing, puck control and staying out of the box.
The refs can play a huge role too. Make the calls and things change quickly. Skate to the bench before the game and politely explain to both teams how you call things and then stick to it. Hands high, hits to the head, unnecessary "finishing", etc. You're in charge, take control. Help with the instruction by talking with the coaches and the players before the game. Be leaders.
Last edited by observer on Tue Jan 04, 2011 1:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
seek & destroy
- Posts: 328
- Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 2:38 pm
Very good points...goldy313 wrote:In my opinion it will make the game more violent and put the smaller kids at a greater risk for injury...my biggest fear is that in many areas 9th graders play high school hockey, to put them in that situation with only 1 year of checking behind them could be really catostrophic.
I don't understand why they would make this rule change given the increase in regulation via programs like HEP etc.. It seems like those programs have helped improve the overall situation and this will bring us backwards a little from where we are right now. Kids learning to check before their bodies have developed (i.e. typical peewee age) helps them prepare for the physical side of hockey that really starts at Bantams and then H.S.. Peewee checking has never been overly physical because most of them do not have the big bodies to do damage but it was a very good time to learn the proper and effective use of checking.
I would assume that the new rule will not apply to AAA hockey which will really give some of those kids a little advantage as they go into Bantam/H.S. hockey.
704
You got that right.salol44 wrote:Canada should be happy about this rule. The USA hardly played the body last night in the world junior semi finals against them so those Canadians will be happy to know that they will be hit even less in the future.
This is just ridiculous... I am not saying that this is the straw that broke the camel's back, but it's stuff like this (the little things) that is making people wusses. I understand you want to protect children.. yada yada (we've all heard it). BUT WHERE DO YOU DRAW THE LINE!?
I completely agree. This will happen; we all know it.goldy313 wrote:In my opinion it will make the game more violent and put the smaller kids at a greater risk for injury. It also will be really hard on the officials, at least at first, as kids come up with less instruction on how to hit and protect themselves from a check.
The Puck
LGW
LGW
-
underthenbar01
- Posts: 84
- Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 5:20 pm
- Location: Minneapolis, MN
-
old goalie85
- Posts: 3696
- Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 6:37 pm
-
old goalie85
- Posts: 3696
- Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 6:37 pm
-
supertacks
- Posts: 130
- Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 3:11 pm
Typical problem that you get a few d-bags in position of authority and they feel compelled to make change for change sake, when sometimes the best thing is to leave well enough alone!old goalie85 wrote:Elliot Why would they want to change the color of the puck from black to orange? change #25A & 25B I don't get these guys!!!!!
Sad where all this is going
Re: USAH to ban checking in pee-wee hockey
Injuries has been given the reason for a rule change - especially concussions and other head/neck/spine injuries.TTpuckster wrote:Elliot,elliott70 wrote:I posted proposed USAH rule changes in youth section but thought some on this forum may be interested.
Looks like checking in peewees will not be allowed. This rule is scheduled for passing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Opionions on effect on HS hockey?????
Why the proposed change?
What are the concerns?
Has there been a lot of injuries from checking at the Pee Wee level?
-
old goalie85
- Posts: 3696
- Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 6:37 pm
-
stmartin123
- Posts: 158
- Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 12:56 pm
When I first read about this rule change the first thing that came to my mind was the USA vs. Canada game last night. This will affect the player’s development drastically. The announcers last night mentioned something last night that was a really good point. They said that the U.S. team had not played a team like Canada the entire tournament. They had played all European teams, who play a less physical style of hockey when compared to the Canadians. The U.S. team was not use to getting bumped around. USA hockey should take a page out of Canada’s book and learn how to play physical hockey. Checking is part of the game. The sooner kids learn how to deal with checking as part of the game the better off the kids will be. Teach the kids how to hit properly and how to take hits. Eliminating checking is removing a vital part of the game. I understand that they don’t want kids to get hurt, but it almost seems like USA hockey is taking the easy way out by eliminating it as a whole rather than addressing the issue head on.salol44 wrote:Canada should be happy about this rule. The USA hardly played the body last night in the world junior semi finals against them so those Canadians will be happy to know that they will be hit even less in the future.
Don't hate STA. I wouldn't want to lose either.
As an official who used to do hockey and still does football this seems like a really knee jerk reaction if it is indeed implemented to prevent injuries.
In football there used to be a rule that you had to block with your arms in and palms facing your body, they changed it to also allow open hand blocking with your arms extended provided your arms stay within the frame of your body. A common sense rule change to acknowledge the reality of the game. Just last summer at an officials conference I had a conversation with a couple of guys, one being a RIC from Illinois ( Ithink it was Ill.) about checking. The easiest solution to implement would be to penalize the hitter if his arms come up or away from his body by more than 45 degrees from anatomical neutral, arms at the side. If the arms come up then the hit is being delivered with the hands, forearm, or elbow which is illegal.
The reason I brought up the football analogy is the determination of a penalty, usually holding, isn't always the act of grabbing the opponent, it's the position of the arm(s) which requires good coaching and good technique. In hockey instead of focusing on good coaching and good technique they're just going to ban it outright which is little more than sticking their head in the sand. There is such a simple solution, in my opinion at least, that it makes me wonder what the heck is going on with USA Hockey.
In football there used to be a rule that you had to block with your arms in and palms facing your body, they changed it to also allow open hand blocking with your arms extended provided your arms stay within the frame of your body. A common sense rule change to acknowledge the reality of the game. Just last summer at an officials conference I had a conversation with a couple of guys, one being a RIC from Illinois ( Ithink it was Ill.) about checking. The easiest solution to implement would be to penalize the hitter if his arms come up or away from his body by more than 45 degrees from anatomical neutral, arms at the side. If the arms come up then the hit is being delivered with the hands, forearm, or elbow which is illegal.
The reason I brought up the football analogy is the determination of a penalty, usually holding, isn't always the act of grabbing the opponent, it's the position of the arm(s) which requires good coaching and good technique. In hockey instead of focusing on good coaching and good technique they're just going to ban it outright which is little more than sticking their head in the sand. There is such a simple solution, in my opinion at least, that it makes me wonder what the heck is going on with USA Hockey.
-
TTpuckster
- Posts: 2784
- Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 8:26 am
- Location: State of Hockey
-
High Flyer
- Posts: 464
- Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 12:13 am
I must admit, refs need to do a better job of calling a high hits or targeting the head. They all should be an automatic match penalty and repeat offenders, both player and coach should have additional consequences that escalate each time they re-occur.
In one high school game last week, I watched a player from one team make three high hits on three different guys in the same game. 2 of the 3 players ended up with stitches and one with a possible concussion. In all three cases, no penalties were called.
I don't think that playing the body (checking) is the problem, it's the lack of enforcement and education of current rules that needs to be the focus.
As my budy Beratta would say, "Don't do the crime, if you can't do the time".
In one high school game last week, I watched a player from one team make three high hits on three different guys in the same game. 2 of the 3 players ended up with stitches and one with a possible concussion. In all three cases, no penalties were called.
I don't think that playing the body (checking) is the problem, it's the lack of enforcement and education of current rules that needs to be the focus.
As my budy Beratta would say, "Don't do the crime, if you can't do the time".
-
hockeyfan893
- Posts: 338
- Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 10:25 am
-
High Flyer
- Posts: 464
- Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 12:13 am
Re: USAH to ban checking in pee-wee hockey
Found this article:elliott70 wrote:Injuries has been given the reason for a rule change - especially concussions and other head/neck/spine injuries.TTpuckster wrote:Elliot,elliott70 wrote:I posted proposed USAH rule changes in youth section but thought some on this forum may be interested.
Looks like checking in peewees will not be allowed. This rule is scheduled for passing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Opionions on effect on HS hockey?????
Why the proposed change?
What are the concerns?
Has there been a lot of injuries from checking at the Pee Wee level?
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-0 ... ebate.html
All the important people in MH are telling me it is NOT a done deal, but then they say it is a good thing for hockey.TTpuckster wrote:Mark,
can it be stopped?
checking will be outlawed but not body contact, angling, bumping etc...
like in the girls' game.
Refs will be all over the place with this and coaches will learn to ride the refs on this issue also....
Can it be stopped? Can you move a mountain?
The more negative repsonses they get and the sooner, the better the opportunity to stop it.
email everyone you know and ahve them email everyon with a vote or a say including MH board members.
This may be the death of me and USAH.