HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

The Minnesota Hockey Board of Directors voted unanimously at its winter board meeting to strengthen the severity of the penalty issued to players who are cited for boarding and checking-from-behind infractions. These rule changes are being adopted on a pilot basis and will be reevaluated at the conclusion of the 2012 Minnesota Hockey season. Minnesota Hockey will continue to work with the hockey community to evaluate the effectiveness of these changes.

http://www.minnesotahockey.org/news_art ... r_id=80568

Haute hockeymom wrote:The Minnesota Hockey Board of Directors voted unanimously at its winter board meeting to strengthen the severity of the penalty issued to players who are cited for boarding and checking-from-behind infractions. These rule changes are being adopted on a pilot basis and will be reevaluated at the conclusion of the 2012 Minnesota Hockey season. Minnesota Hockey will continue to work with the hockey community to evaluate the effectiveness of these changes.

http://www.minnesotahockey.org/news_art ... r_id=80568

Question...What will happen to the 2 and a 10? Is the 5 min. in place of? If I was the opposing coach, I would want a 5 min.

Defensive Zone wrote:
Question...What will happen to the 2 and a 10? Is the 5 min. in place of? If I was the opposing coach, I would want a 5 min.

I saw a checking from behind this weekend. The kid was given a 5 and 10.

CFB is a 5 & 10.

This has been an option for severity at teh refs discretion.

Now the options are a 5 & 10 or
5 & 10 and game DQ.

There is a thread on the youth hockey site for this.

Haute hockeymom wrote:The Minnesota Hockey Board of Directors voted unanimously at its winter board meeting to strengthen the severity of the penalty issued to players who are cited for boarding and checking-from-behind infractions. These rule changes are being adopted on a pilot basis and will be reevaluated at the conclusion of the 2012 Minnesota Hockey season. Minnesota Hockey will continue to work with the hockey community to evaluate the effectiveness of these changes.

http://www.minnesotahockey.org/news_art ... r_id=80568

So Minnesota Hockey falls in line behind MSHSL...except, apparently, for not making head contact a 5-minute major. And they are only pilot rule changes that will be reviewed at the end of season?

Hmmph...that must mean that the Minnesota Hockey board of directors doesn't care about player safety as much as the MSHSL does, right?

almostashappy wrote:

Haute hockeymom wrote:The Minnesota Hockey Board of Directors voted unanimously at its winter board meeting to strengthen the severity of the penalty issued to players who are cited for boarding and checking-from-behind infractions. These rule changes are being adopted on a pilot basis and will be reevaluated at the conclusion of the 2012 Minnesota Hockey season. Minnesota Hockey will continue to work with the hockey community to evaluate the effectiveness of these changes.

http://www.minnesotahockey.org/news_art ... r_id=80568

So Minnesota Hockey falls in line behind MSHSL...except, apparently, for not making head contact a 5-minute major. And they are only pilot rule changes that will be reviewed at the end of season?

Hmmph...that must mean that the Minnesota Hockey board of directors doesn't care about player safety as much as the MSHSL does, right?

Look, in all reality the rules were there, the culture just relaxed a little until someone else got hurt. In watching many a hockey game at all different youth and hs levels I witnessed a check from behind being called either a 2 min minor, 2 min minor for boarding...or just ignored all together. The funny thing is that Jablonski was not the first to be paralyzed from something like this...I congratulate any effort that is made to make this safer wether it is more awareness, actually enforcing the rules as is or making more severe penalties.
In the end the problem is way bigger than reffing and penalties though.

First I want to make it very clear I agree 100% with cleaning up the game. However in my 30 plus years of coaching and playing I don't think I have come across but a handful of players and or coaches that their intent is to go out an hurt another player intentionally. Yes we need to make sure those individuals are dealt with. My concern is we are going to hurt the game of hockey with some of these rule changes. Players are going to play scared and be a lot less aggressive.

In my experience I see two plays that happen quite often. The first one is when you have two players racing for a puck - there may be a little jostling for position- not a penalty - called a 50/50 both players have a right to the puck. Then one player catches or loses an edge and crashes head first into the boards. It looks really bad from the stands, but in my opinion the opposing player did nothing wrong and it is not a dirty play. That player would have to sit for a minimum of 5 minutes for nothing.

The second offense I see quite often is players making quick escape moves to avoid opposing players. They are taught to escape toward the boards so you can protect the puck. If you are an opposing player and you have the puck carrier lined up perfectly and you already commit to a good clean hit then suddenly the puck carrier does that quick escape move that becomes a check from behind. Once again in my opinion the player that is making the hit did nothing wrong but will have to sit out 5 minutes and maybe longer depending on the ref's call.

I compare hockey to watching a movie in that the fans are watching the game in slow motion - the coaches and ref's see the game at regular speed and the players see it in fast forward. The game unfolds so clearly from the stands - however from a players perspective it is way faster. They really only have a split second in most cases to make their decision. That is why they may not see the open player that everyone in the stands did or why they may not be able to hold back on their check when a player makes that quick escape move.

I think what happened to Jack Jablonksi is a tragedy and I have prayed for him every night. I do feel the hockey community may have reacted to quick to a tragic event. We should really make sure the changes are for the better. In my opinion if we wanted to make a positive impact on hockey we should make every squirt and pee-wee attend mandatory checking clinics. We know that most coaches won't teach if if they can't use it. So lets make it mandatory that associations host checking clinics and each squirt and pee-wee must attend x number of checking clinics. Teach kids how to angle - the purpose of a check is to separate the opposing player form the puck not separate his head from his shoulders - how to be prepared to receive a hit - never put your head down - don't ever go straight at the boards - always go at an angle so if you do lose an edge you are not going head first into the boards. Besides if you go straight at the boards you have to slow down to get the puck vs. taking an angle so you can pick up the puck with speed. I really believe the solution lies in teaching the players the right way to hit and how to be prepared to take a hit. I believe it should start with the more experienced mites learning how to angle and go through the hands - then at squirts you can get a little more detailed with your training. Then allow them to hit a pee-wees when they are smaller and they can apply what they have learned - also keep having them attend the clinics so you can reinforce what they have been taught and are using. Then by Bantams when you have 2nd year bantams that are through puberty and lifting weights and first year bantams on the ice together the first years have a chance because they have been taught for 4 plus years and had 2 years of using what they were taught. I want the players to be protected as much as anyone and I think one thing we can all agree on is we love the sport of hockey and we want it to be as fun / competitive / safe as possible.

I brought these points up to our association last night - They seemed pretty receptive to the checking clinics. I really hope we follow through on the idea. Everyone has their opinions and because we are dealing with this after a tragedy emotions are high. I know we all have agreed on some things and disagreed on others, but let's not bash each other instead let's try to work together as a hockey community to protect the game we all love. I stated multiple times these are only my opinions based of my experiences. If you agree great if you don't great - let me us know your thoughts in a constructive manner.

hockeyfan74 wrote:First I want to make it very clear I agree 100% with cleaning up the game. However in my 30 plus years of coaching and playing I don't think I have come across but a handful of players and or coaches that their intent is to go out an hurt another player intentionally. Yes we need to make sure those individuals are dealt with. My concern is we are going to hurt the game of hockey with some of these rule changes. Players are going to play scared and be a lot less aggressive.

In my experience I see two plays that happen quite often. The first one is when you have two players racing for a puck - there may be a little jostling for position- not a penalty - called a 50/50 both players have a right to the puck. Then one player catches or loses an edge and crashes head first into the boards. It looks really bad from the stands, but in my opinion the opposing player did nothing wrong and it is not a dirty play. That player would have to sit for a minimum of 5 minutes for nothing.

The second offense I see quite often is players making quick escape moves to avoid opposing players. They are taught to escape toward the boards so you can protect the puck. If you are an opposing player and you have the puck carrier lined up perfectly and you already commit to a good clean hit then suddenly the puck carrier does that quick escape move that becomes a check from behind. Once again in my opinion the player that is making the hit did nothing wrong but will have to sit out 5 minutes and maybe longer depending on the ref's call.

I compare hockey to watching a movie in that the fans are watching the game in slow motion - the coaches and ref's see the game at regular speed and the players see it in fast forward. The game unfolds so clearly from the stands - however from a players perspective it is way faster. They really only have a split second in most cases to make their decision. That is why they may not see the open player that everyone in the stands did or why they may not be able to hold back on their check when a player makes that quick escape move.

I think what happened to Jack Jablonksi is a tragedy and I have prayed for him every night. I do feel the hockey community may have reacted to quick to a tragic event. We should really make sure the changes are for the better. In my opinion if we wanted to make a positive impact on hockey we should make every squirt and pee-wee attend mandatory checking clinics. We know that most coaches won't teach if if they can't use it. So lets make it mandatory that associations host checking clinics and each squirt and pee-wee must attend x number of checking clinics. Teach kids how to angle - the purpose of a check is to separate the opposing player form the puck not separate his head from his shoulders - how to be prepared to receive a hit - never put your head down - don't ever go straight at the boards - always go at an angle so if you do lose an edge you are not going head first into the boards. Besides if you go straight at the boards you have to slow down to get the puck vs. taking an angle so you can pick up the puck with speed. I really believe the solution lies in teaching the players the right way to hit and how to be prepared to take a hit. I believe it should start with the more experienced mites learning how to angle and go through the hands - then at squirts you can get a little more detailed with your training. Then allow them to hit a pee-wees when they are smaller and they can apply what they have learned - also keep having them attend the clinics so you can reinforce what they have been taught and are using. Then by Bantams when you have 2nd year bantams that are through puberty and lifting weights and first year bantams on the ice together the first years have a chance because they have been taught for 4 plus years and had 2 years of using what they were taught. I want the players to be protected as much as anyone and I think one thing we can all agree on is we love the sport of hockey and we want it to be as fun / competitive / safe as possible.

I brought these points up to our association last night - They seemed pretty receptive to the checking clinics. I really hope we follow through on the idea. Everyone has their opinions and because we are dealing with this after a tragedy emotions are high. I know we all have agreed on some things and disagreed on others, but let's not bash each other instead let's try to work together as a hockey community to protect the game we all love. I stated multiple times these are only my opinions based of my experiences. If you agree great if you don't great - let me us know your thoughts in a constructive manner.

100% AGREE!!

Star Tribune story:

http://www.startribune.com/sports/preps/137906483.html

rudy wrote:Star Tribune story:

http://www.startribune.com/sports/preps/137906483.html

Key quote from that story:

Minnesota Hockey President Dave Margenau said that his organization declined to include head contact, choosing to "concentrate on those areas where the highest risk of injury would occur in context with the boards."

Wow, look at that...a reasonable and (relatively) measured response.