HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

SITUATION: After Team A shoots puck on goalkeeper B, who is in
crease, goal keeper B traps puck in equipment or catches puck in glove. A1 digs
at puck or taps at puck and stick makes contact with goalkeeper B, (a) prior to
official’s whistle, (b) after official’s whistle. RULING: (a) and (b) same, no player
shall commit any foul against a goalkeeper who is in his crease. (minor or major
penalty)

The way I read this, if the puck is covered, any contact with the goaltender is a penalty whether or not the whistle has blown. I can't count how many times I have seen goalies speared after the whistle and the officials do absolutely nothing. I've also seen them warn players that if they do it again they'll call a penalty on them. The only situation where a penalty isn't a penalty because you speared the goalie in the guts and not a forward. Also the only situation where you get a warning instead of 2 minutes.

Another problem I have with this non call is the officials leave it up to the players to protect their goalie, then, when a player flattens an opposing player for spearing their goalie, the officials throw both players in the box or sometimes only the player that is defending their goalie. How does this teach kids that the tender is not a pincushion?

I'd love to hear from officials on this one.

There are a couple of ways to look at this. Maybe this will answer the question. If not, let me know what isn't clear and I can try to be more clear.

First off, the goalies are the most padded players on the ice, so a little stick tap or otherwise the goalies don't even feel.

If the goalie catches the puck from a shot and then an attacking player hits the glove of the goalie, you should always see a penalty for slashing.

If there is a battle in front and the goalie covers the puck, if the goalies hit after the whistle, you should see a penalty.

If the puck is dumped in and the goalie covers it and it is obvious, any contact should result in a penalty.

If a player "defending" the goalie drops a player to the ice, depending on what the attacking player did, you may only see 1 penalty. Most of the time you will see coincidental.

I'd argue that the most ignored rule in hockey is the mouthguard rule..

But, as to your spearing comment it's unlikely that's the situation. Although there is quite a lot of activity around a goaltender, spearing isn't a common practice at any of the games I've attended.

There are many situations that create issue. Puck isn't completely covered is just one.

I've not often seen a goaltender "speared" wtih no call being made for that action.

MN_Bowhunter wrote:SITUATION: After Team A shoots puck on goalkeeper B, who is in
crease, goal keeper B traps puck in equipment or catches puck in glove. A1 digs
at puck or taps at puck and stick makes contact with goalkeeper B, (a) prior to
official’s whistle, (b) after official’s whistle. RULING: (a) and (b) same, no player
shall commit any foul against a goalkeeper who is in his crease. (minor or major
penalty)

The way I read this, if the puck is covered, any contact with the goaltender is a penalty whether or not the whistle has blown. I can't count how many times I have seen goalies speared after the whistle and the officials do absolutely nothing. I've also seen them warn players that if they do it again they'll call a penalty on them. The only situation where a penalty isn't a penalty because you speared the goalie in the guts and not a forward. Also the only situation where you get a warning instead of 2 minutes.

Another problem I have with this non call is the officials leave it up to the players to protect their goalie, then, when a player flattens an opposing player for spearing their goalie, the officials throw both players in the box or sometimes only the player that is defending their goalie. How does this teach kids that the tender is not a pincushion?

I'd love to hear from officials on this one.

Not really much of an issue here.... I discuss it with the captains in the pre-game meeting. Basically any kind of chop, late entry by the attacker, or swinging of the stick will buy you 2 free minutes. Quick whistles around the net will always help, when warranted. Sometimes you get a simultaneous cover that will have a little "stick" on it, and other times that puck is just bouncing around in there which normally causes a gathering and a few free "sticks"... Not much "spearing" going on tho...!

We also discuss the "protecting of the goalie". Normally an over-reaction by one of the defenseman and often happens so quick there's no chance to intervene... If it's to aggressive, 2 free minutes usually sends the message....

Thanks for chiming in Ref.

I have a son and daughter playing HS hockey and I see a difference between the two games regarding this issue. Maybe the quality of officiating is worse at the girls level? Maybe the boys do a fairly good job of policing themselves, once you've had your head knocked off by a 200 pound senior defenseman you'll be less likely to come in late the next time? I've seen girls literally move the goaltender 2 or 3 feet with their stick and nothing is called. I think the main reason is a lot of girls don't respond like the boys do, if there's no scrum after the whistle that the ref has to break up, it's easier to just pick up the puck and skate to the dot than it is to haul a kid over to the box.

I think Bowhunter has a valid point. Most ignored rule is an exageration, but I definitely see sticks jabbing goalie after goalie has the puck completely covered.

Happened in a game last night. Defender gets sent to the box for "protecting the goalie," and on the very next save a skater comes in and jabs goalie in the belly several times after the puck was completely covered & controlled in her leg pads. The rushing offensive player made no attempt to play the puck--just jabbed the goalie's belly. No call. I'm guessing she was hoping that a defender would put her on her butt to draw another penalty, but no such luck.

I'd say you wouldn't have much roughing after the play if the refs were strict on goalie contact.

it's easier to just pick up the puck and skate to the dot than it is to haul a kid over to the box.

That's an ignorant comment.. Hopefully in jest..

In addition, the guy picking up the puck and going to the face off dot doesn't call penalties.

You mean a linesman? Sure wish we had one of those for our games, maybe they wouldn't miss as many offsides calls. I know you feel like you're the only smart hockey fan on this forum and everybody else is ignorant, is it possible that some of us do understand the game? Is it possible that a fair amount of officials aren't that good? Is it possible that a grown man who can't out-skate 13 to 18 year old girls shouldn't be officiating their games? Is it possible that you're not a condescending a$$ and you just come off that way?

MN_Bowhunter wrote:You mean a linesman? Sure wish we had one of those for our games, maybe they wouldn't miss as many offsides calls. I know you feel like you're the only smart hockey fan on this forum and everybody else is ignorant, is it possible that some of us do understand the game? Is it possible that a fair amount of officials aren't that good? Is it possible that a grown man who can't out-skate 13 to 18 year old girls shouldn't be officiating their games? Is it possible that you're not a condescending a$$ and you just come off that way?

Most the answers to your questions could be yes..

Your conference selects the number of officials.. 3 is always better than 2, but some of the check writers don't see it that way.

I don't feel like I'm the only smart fan on this or any forum, but there are times when posters prove they are not.

Some do understand the game. Wish there were more.

100% agree officials that can't keep up with play, shouldn't be out there.

I'll leave the last one up to you. You made an ignorant comment, I pointed it out. If that's being a condescending ass, I guess that qualifies me.

My opinion would be there are more fans that don't keep up with the game, than officials. Although the guys wearing stripes certainly are scrutinized by all.

to clear up some things with this "spearing" discussion.

most officials view this as a judgement call. you have to be able to tell what the kid is exactly trying to accomplish. is it play until the whistle, is it to beat the goalies glove to the puck, is it to just give the goalie a whack? most of the time, it is simply trying to get the puck before the whistle blows, and you really should never see this called on a first offense. maybe a warning if it seems to be pretty bad, but otherwise this is typically just viewed as a harmless play unless it continues. if a player wants to take it into their own hands...fine. but they have to know the consequensec of that even if they do send a message to the offending team.

and to clear up the discussion on officials doing girls games...there just isnt a supply where you can pick and choose a lot of times. good officials are either going to be doing boys games or high end girls games. thats just the way it is. there arent enough high quality officials to be doing every game. there arent enough people interested, partly because of the politics involved in officiating, and partly because of all the scrutiny. officiating high school hockey is probably the toughest high school sport to officiate, and not a lot of people sign up to do it.

My understanding is that the "play to the whistle" does not apply if the goalie is in control of the puck and it is covered. Slashing is still slashing and spearing is still spearing, even on a goalie, whistle or no whistle. The original point is valid this is not called as often as it should.

electricsaber wrote:The original point is valid this is not called as often as it should.

I'm a long-time Gopher mens hockey season ticket holder, and I can tell you that the WCHA refs are much more protective of the goalies than are those who do high school games, both boys and girls. This includes virtually any physical contact with the goaltender, either with the body or the stick. Exceptions where no penalty is called include when a player is checked or pushed into the goalie by an opponent; on a rush when a goal is scored and the player cannot possibly avoid making contact with the goaltender; or incidental contact during goal mouth scrambles when the goalie does not have the puck covered and the whistle has not yet blown.

In the last several years I've noticed the officials in the WCHA have become much stricter about calling penalties in an obvious attempt to protect the goalies, and the players have come to understand this and now do whatever they can to avoid making contact and getting whistled for it.

Maybe they could start doing more of this at the high school level?

P.S. I've also observed that the college refs were much quicker to call a major penalty for 'checking from behind' and 'contact to the head' than in high school...until the Jack Jablonski incident which changed everything (for the better, I might add). But the college officials were ahead of the game on these types of infractions as well.

2 Things. First, until the mouth guard rule is changed to enforce that it is actually fully in the mouth, it is a completely useless rule and shouldn't be enforced. It provides no protection against concussion unless it is in your mouth.

Second, slashing on the goalie is by far the most ignored rule. I've only seen it enforced twice in the last 4 years. One of those occasions was because the coaches were riding the refs about it. It isn't just ignored, it is blatantly ignored. Most officials won't even blow their whistle until the goalie has covered the puck and a player from the other team has hit the goalies glove. I see the rough play escalating every time the goalie gets hit without the call being made. The offensive team sees the lack of call as a reason to keep making the slash in hopes of getting the puck to pop out. The defensive team has to start taking a more aggressive approach to protecting the goalie. It builds until there is lots of shoving, then fights. At that point the goalie is in danger because he is down on the ice and now players are falling on him. Like most penalties, make the calls early, often and consistent and the behavior will cease.

According to USAH, wearing a mouth guard has not been proved to lessen the incidence of concussions.

57special wrote:According to USAH, wearing a mouth guard has not been proved to lessen the incidence of concussions.

Perhaps true, but they do help prevent dental injuries and oral/facial fractures. Even the doctors refuting mouthguard's concussion protection recommend they still be worn.