NO CHECKING UNTILL BANTAMS

[DMom]

Not in favor. Mainly because, legal or not, there is going to be checking at Pee Wee level, sometimes accidental, sometimes not. You can make all the rules against it you want.

And then in doing so, we have, yet ANOTHER, gray area of officiating.

If they're going to do anything, make a headshot a massive penalty, accidental or not.

But that won't happen; no one has the balls. Much easier way out to just push a blanket no checking instead.

Checking won't occur if theres a rule against it: yeah, right

USA Hockey is getting a bit to power hungry for my tastes.

Having watched quite a few bantam games and peewee games in the last few years I have to say that you cannot make head contact a "massive penalty". Unfortunately when you have a kid who is 6 foot tall playing against kids who are 5 foot tall you are going to get A LOT of incidental head contact. The kids can't help it, the alternative is to NOT check at all at the bantam level too. For those of you who are comforting yourself with the idea that the size disparity only exists at the peewee level, you are wrong, it gets even bigger at the bantam level.

Also, I would take a guess that there are three times as many injuries (if not more) on A level teams than on all the B level and below teams. Watch any A level game at this time of year and there will be kids not dressing for the game, check out the benches at other level games???? I am trying to remember the last time I heard of a B or below kid sitting out due to a checking injury. To me it is the speed that is doing the damage, not the checking. (or the ultra-competitiveness or the "pleasing the parents with big hits syndrome").

The other thing I HATE to see is kids turning their back on the attacking player, thinking the kid will pull up to avoid a penalty?? Seriously, I bet I see it once a game and it makes me sick to my stomach because that kid is going to take that hit once and that's all it takes to really get hurt. My kid did it last week and I grounded him.

I have had one of my kids taken out on a stretcher and it's the worse experience a parent can have, but I agree with those that say that waiting until the Bantam level to hit will only cause worse injuries. That first month of peewees is crazy while they all run around hitting each other, do you really want that with 150 pound near men, and remember the 5 foot, 80 pound pre-puberty kids will still be out there with them.

Frankly with all the tripping going on at Squirts, I think they should lower the age and let them hit. Some of those trips near the boards are just as dangerous and those kids seem to bounce right up (thank God).

[Mailman]

I think the main purpose of the rule would be to reduce head injuries and concussions that result because of big open ice hits and irresponsible head contact hits along the boards. Let's be honest, having more knowledge about brain development and concussions comes with more responsibility. The NHL and NCAA have set a standard in recent years of cracking down on blind side open ice hits and head contact along the boards because of the concussion and brain damage risk. In these leagues, suspensions and monetary fines are doled out in an effort to reduce the behavior.

Since USA hockey cannot hand out fines and (from experience) suspensions do not work at all on youth players, the next best option is to teach proper contact techniques.

I am not certain that taking checking out of peewees is the right thing to do, but I am all in favor of a mandatory program to teach angling and body checking techniques to young players. Women's hockey does not allow "body checking" but the speed of the game and competitiveness increase in the last 10 years has led to contact being inevitable and tolerated.

If taking checking out of peewees will, in fact, reduce the number of concussions to our 12/13 year old's growing/fragile brains then let's take it out, but not if it will increase the problem 1-2 years later at Bantams. Hockey Canada teaches types of body contact and rub outs at the higher mite ages and still focuses on skill development, instead of separating a head from a body. USA hockey is not wrong in considering this issue, but they must create an appropriate system to teach the game, checking and all.

For those old school hockey folks out there, the only thing I can say is I feel your pain, I am a traditionalist too, but you must admit we know more about brain development now then we did then, and just as you would not take your kid's face mask away, USA hockey is actually trying to protect the game and the kids.

Thats exactly part of my point; the NHL and NCAA have "cracked down" on hits, shots, etc. ? Could have fooled me; it's worse than ever. Hell, they can't even agree (GRAY AREA ALERT) on what is a head shot !?!?

Why ? Because no one has the balls to:

a. make a massive penalty for doing the act. Suspensions and money aren't even close to being it, if the purpose is actually to reduce the items involved.
b. even more important, enforce it. Consistently. Period.

The players know this, the fans know this, even the organizations themselves know this. It's the elephant in the room.

In other words, such rules are only for feel good reasons. In reality, they accomplish nothing.

But whatever, the rule will be passed, whether anyone likes it or not.

Just don't be surprised when it creates more problems than solves.

[Mailman]

Not in favor. Mainly because, legal or not, there is going to be checking at Pee Wee level, sometimes accidental, sometimes not. You can make all the rules against it you want.

And then in doing so, we have, yet ANOTHER, gray area of officiating.

If they're going to do anything, make a headshot a massive penalty, accidental or not.

But that won't happen; no one has the balls. Much easier way out to just push a blanket no checking instead.

Checking won't occur if theres a rule against it: yeah, right

USA Hockey is getting a bit to power hungry for my tastes.

Having watched quite a few bantam games and peewee games in the last few years I have to say that you cannot make head contact a "massive penalty". Unfortunately when you have a kid who is 6 foot tall playing against kids who are 5 foot tall you are going to get A LOT of incidental head contact. The kids can't help it, the alternative is to NOT check at all at the bantam level too. For those of you who are comforting yourself with the idea that the size disparity only exists at the peewee level, you are wrong, it gets even bigger at the bantam level.

Also, I would take a guess that there are three times as many injuries (if not more) on A level teams than on all the B level and below teams. Watch any A level game at this time of year and there will be kids not dressing for the game, check out the benches at other level games???? I am trying to remember the last time I heard of a B or below kid sitting out due to a checking injury. To me it is the speed that is doing the damage, not the checking. (or the ultra-competitiveness or the "pleasing the parents with big hits syndrome").

The other thing I HATE to see is kids turning their back on the attacking player, thinking the kid will pull up to avoid a penalty?? Seriously, I bet I see it once a game and it makes me sick to my stomach because that kid is going to take that hit once and that's all it takes to really get hurt. My kid did it last week and I grounded him.

I have had one of my kids taken out on a stretcher and it's the worse experience a parent can have, but I agree with those that say that waiting until the Bantam level to hit will only cause worse injuries. That first month of peewees is crazy while they all run around hitting each other, do you really want that with 150 pound near men, and remember the 5 foot, 80 pound pre-puberty kids will still be out there with them.

Frankly with all the tripping going on at Squirts, I think they should lower the age and let them hit. Some of those trips near the boards are just as dangerous and those kids seem to bounce right up (thank God).

Regarding size difference, if there is a massive penalty for a head shot, etc., I believe the kids would learn not to even try for a check in the first place, to reduce the chance of being called.

You can make head contact any penalty you want, and such penalty would produce the desired behavior.
But only if its consistently enforced (the million dollar question involved more than anything).

[elliott70]

I think it is idiotic! Then again I think a lot of things MN Hockey does are. I usually try to refrain from posting on subjects like this, but I think Mn hockey has been heading in wrong direction for a few years now. They limit the younger athletes already too much. Why not put an education program out on how to check and how to take a check. To wait until bantams to start hitting is to late. The kids are so big and strong at that age and if they don't know how to hit or have experience in hitting the injuries will go up at Bantams. So we save a few Pee-wee injuries to increase them at Bantams. Pee-wees is the perfect age to start hitting - just put some guidelines in to help enforce that kids are learning the proper way to hit and take a hit. I have a first year pee-wee and he knows how to get low and strong to avoid the big hit and he knows that the purpose of a body check is to separate the opponent from the puck not separate his head from his shoulders. He does play at the A level so he sees some very big, strong and skilled players and he has done fine all year. In fact I have yet to see any major injuries in any of his games that are a result of checking. In my opinion just another mistake by Mn Hockey - which does not surprise me. As much as I don't like certain programs out there if this rule goes in effect we may have to look at other options next year.

MH is NOT the one studying this.
USAH and CAHA with outside assistance are studying this issue.
MH will not have a say in the matter other than a small vote ate the USAH congress.

[elliott70]

If they are going to remove checking, they should put in a program at the peewee level that teaches kids how to properly check (defined as separating a player from the puck) and allow that kind of checking to still occur.

European youth hockey teaches proper body positioning and removing a player from the puck through checking the players hands.

Unfortunately, North American hockey - combined with the invention of facemasks - has caused kids to go higher and higher with their checks. Further, the emphasis on a big hit or "finishing your check (when a player has already relaxed because the puck is on the other side of the rink)" being coached by coaches has made the game too dangerous.

This year our association has had a kid backboarded and out for the season due to a high, but legal hit (the same game had two prior checking from behinds). I have seen kids in the past get hurt just as seriously (temporarily paralyzed due to someone 'finishing a check').

For the hockey purists that feel it needs to be part of the game, sign your kid up for rugby and let them get their concussions and neck injuries there. Kids are faster, stronger, and the checking is higher and higher - and the boards are not padded.

Never thought I would say this.....but it is time to change the game for the safety of the kids. Just as the hooking, grabbing, and slashing got cracked down on hard a few years ago....may take a year to implement, but would be better for the kids and the game.

MH has developed a program for teaching checking to pee-wees. The video is available and has been distributed to every program in MH.

[elliott70]

There are two other things being considered:

Checking in squirts. Introduce it at at younger age with less violence (smaller objects and a lesser speed).


Checking in the D zone by D players and no checkng in the neutral zone at the pee wee level.

[silentbutdeadly3139]

There are two other things being considered:

Checking in squirts. Introduce it at at younger age with less violence (smaller objects and a lesser speed).


Checking in the D zone by D players and no checkng in the neutral zone at the pee wee level.

May help a little but the injuries i see happen just as often or more often in the D zone. As "No Political Connections" said it best, the rules are in place they just need to be enforced consistently. Keep from leading with the elbows and the late hits that some call "finishing the check".

When I look at the team that we have now and imagine having our first checking allowed with kids who are 6ft vs kids who are 5ft or small I just shiver.

Thats what PeeWee hockey has become. To me, there is a bigger disparity in size in peewee than ever before but enforcement of rules hasn't adjusted IMO.

[elliott70]

There are two other things being considered:

Checking in squirts. Introduce it at at younger age with less violence (smaller objects and a lesser speed).


Checking in the D zone by D players and no checkng in the neutral zone at the pee wee level.

May help a little but the injuries i see happen just as often or more often in the D zone. As "No Political Connections" said it best, the rules are in place they just need to be enforced consistently. Keep from leading with the elbows and the late hits that some call "finishing the check".

When I look at the team that we have now and imagine having our first checking allowed with kids who are 6ft vs kids who are 5ft or small I just shiver.

Thats what PeeWee hockey has become. To me, there is a bigger disparity in size in peewee than ever before but enforcement of rules hasn't adjusted IMO.

Enforcement of the rules!
I agree 100%.

[nahc]

A lot of very good comments. Does anyone out there have the actual stats, ie concussions sustained at the Squirt (no checking), Pee Wee, and Bantam levels? I have not seen any of these numbers.......and also would like to know how the concussion occurred, ie checking, falling into boards, tripped and head hit ice, etc..

[elliott70]

There are two other things being considered:

Checking in squirts. Introduce it at at younger age with less violence (smaller objects and a lesser speed).


Checking in the D zone by D players and no checkng in the neutral zone at the pee wee level.

May help a little but the injuries i see happen just as often or more often in the D zone. As "No Political Connections" said it best, the rules are in place they just need to be enforced consistently. Keep from leading with the elbows and the late hits that some call "finishing the check".

When I look at the team that we have now and imagine having our first checking allowed with kids who are 6ft vs kids who are 5ft or small I just shiver.

Thats what PeeWee hockey has become. To me, there is a bigger disparity in size in peewee than ever before but enforcement of rules hasn't adjusted IMO.

Enforcement of the rules!
I agree 100%.

That is one of the reasons I did not agree with 1 1/2 minute penalties.
Of course, we still use 2 minutes in D16.

[kopernicus]

I absolutely hate the checks where the skaters either lead with their elbow or leave their skates.

I suspect the ongoing quality of checking skill of the skaters is so poor across the board (both on the giving and receiving ends), that if the refs followed the letter of the law, there would be penalties called constantly.

[DMom]

Allow checking at B level and below all the way through Bantams, that'll even the playing field during high school tryouts

So there's more education teaching kids to hit better, that's great, but along with that are two more years of kids not learning to keep their heads up, not learning to watch for defenders, not learning to pass the puck (preferably to a teammate) to avoid a hit, not learning to face their attackers as often as possible and now the attacker is 6 foot and shaves daily???? I just think that is a bad idea.

But, I have also been through a concussion with one of my sons and it was so much worse than I would have imagined. He didn't move for five days, had severe nausea, didn't eat and lost ten pounds in a week. He had daily headaches for two weeks and fell way behind in his school work because he couldn't concentrate. Do I want any kid to go through that for a game? No. But I know another kid who got a concussion while playing hacky sack.

I am glad there are people looking at ways to prevent a concussion and worse, and it the studies bear it out, than make the move, but I hope they've been to a few youth games at every level.

[hockeyfan74]

A lot of good points and in my opinion most of the issues would not get better by waiting until bantams to check. High hits / Kids trying to take each others heads off / hard hits will only be worse if you wait until bantams. The kids are so big, fast and strong at that age it would backfire. In stead like has been pointed out most issues with checking would get better by going the other way and letting squirts hit. Teach them while they are younger and smaller so when you get to Pee-wees and Bantams the players have some experience in the proper techniques. I made some calls and I know of 10 Pee-wee players out with injuries on various teams and NOT one of them was from a check. I know of a couple players with broken wrists due to slashing - bad leg due to leg tripping - Bad ankle due to blocking a shot - bad shoulder lost an edge crashed into the boards. That doesn't mean there are not any injuries out there because of checking, but you are not going to eliminate injuries. Unfortunately injuries are a part of all sports. The best way to reduce them is through education. As I said before let's focus our energy on teaching kids and coaches how to check / why to check / how to take a check. I also know of quite a few players that said they would definitely look at other options for winter hockey next year if they pass this rule. I know someone that is hoping this rule does pass because his pocket book will grow and his Pee-wee supplemental league will not be supplemental anymore. Not my first choice but it might be my only choice.

[Educator29]

This all comes back to education, teaching. Not many PW or Bantam coaches even consider teaching how to give and recieve a check. How many Truely Know the Rules of the game? Due to the standards of play and the increase awareness of body contact injuries, the game is not the same as it was when most coaches played the game. I also take this back to the Parents in the Stands. Stop and listen to the parents in stands once. Some constantly Scream at the top of their lungs "HIT EM" Some only consider it a check if they put the player in the 5th row. Checking / Body contact is not about how far the player can fly after you hit them, its about playing angles, Gap Control, eliminating space, by using your shoulders and hips. Kids react to parents and coaches emotions of the game and the degree of body contact increases. IMO.

[elliott70]

This all comes back to education, teaching. Not many PW or Bantam coaches even consider teaching how to give and recieve a check. How many Truely Know the Rules of the game? Due to the standards of play and the increase awareness of body contact injuries, the game is not the same as it was when most coaches played the game. I also take this back to the Parents in the Stands. Stop and listen to the parents in stands once. Some constantly Scream at the top of their lungs "HIT EM" Some only consider it a check if they put the player in the 5th row. Checking / Body contact is not about how far the player can fly after you hit them, its about playing angles, Gap Control, eliminating space, by using your shoulders and hips. Kids react to parents and coaches emotions of the game and the degree of body contact increases. IMO.

Are you on a youth board, district or MH board or committee?
No, then sign up, we need commn sense, rational minds.

[silentbutdeadly3139]

This all comes back to education, teaching. Not many PW or Bantam coaches even consider teaching how to give and recieve a check. How many Truely Know the Rules of the game? Due to the standards of play and the increase awareness of body contact injuries, the game is not the same as it was when most coaches played the game. I also take this back to the Parents in the Stands. Stop and listen to the parents in stands once. Some constantly Scream at the top of their lungs "HIT EM" Some only consider it a check if they put the player in the 5th row. Checking / Body contact is not about how far the player can fly after you hit them, its about playing angles, Gap Control, eliminating space, by using your shoulders and hips. Kids react to parents and coaches emotions of the game and the degree of body contact increases. IMO.

Spot on. Along with the parents screaming in the stands, the coaches also have to consider what they teach. Do they teach their players to hit for purpose or hit hard to punish the opponent for touching the puck including just after they pass the puck. That may be fine and good when they are older and of similar size and skill, but teaching youth to punish others for touching the puck is dangerous when the size and skills are so varied. Leave that type of checking for the "next" level".

[observer]

I don't agree with the idea of delaying checking until Bantam. You're delaying the inevitable. Frankly, the injuries will be worse at Bantam than PeeWee because some of the players will be very good at it and some will have never even tried it.

It's teaching proper purpose and technique by the coaches and proper enforcement by the refs. The game is evolving quickly and teams that run around trying to check (big blow up ones) are finding themselves behind the play, creating odd man situations going the other way, and getting diced by superior skating and passing teams. Or, finding themselves shorthanded and going down 3-0 in the first 10 minutes of the game. The purpose is to gain control of the puck and skate off with it. Squirt and girls style. Not two players staggering around with neither winning possession of the puck.

I read a funny post on the high school forum about the new coach of Bemidji professing a “physical style” of play. What, did the guy step out of a time capsule. Has he watched the NHL recently where in some games there’s almost no checking. There’s not time for it. Your opponents are too good. He’s doing a disservice to the players by not working on the skill game that’s being played by the top teams. Love to play his teams any day and watch them burn a path to the box and dice them 8-0.

[Mite-dad]

I never played hockey but have watched a lot of it over the last several years from mites all the way through PW. What I noticed is that kids with good skating skills are better at just about everything from stick handling, passing, shooting to checking. Therefore, while it seems that allowing checking at the squirt level would be beneficial, I don't see it that way at all. Kids in our association are still in the middle stages of learning to skate. Some just starting hockey. They have a difficult time skating with their heads up w/ the puck, transitioning, etc. I think allowing checking would be a recipe for disaster. Same thing is true to some degree with PWs. Many in our association are still learning to skate. I think it is a good idea to put it off til bantams for that reason. When kids know how to skate, they can better deliver and better receive/avoid a check.

[silentbutdeadly3139]

I don't agree with the idea of delaying checking until Bantam. You're delaying the inevitable. Frankly, the injuries will be worse at Bantam than PeeWee because some of the players will be very good at it and some will have never even tried it.

It's teaching proper purpose and technique by the coaches and proper enforcement by the refs. The game is evolving quickly and teams that run around trying to check (big blow up ones) are finding themselves behind the play, creating odd man situations going the other way, and getting diced by superior skating and passing teams. Or, finding themselves shorthanded and going down 3-0 in the first 10 minutes of the game. The purpose is to gain control of the puck and skate off with it. Squirt and girls style. Not two players staggering around with neither winning possession of the puck.

I read a funny post on the high school forum about the new coach of Bemidji professing a “physical style” of play. What, did the guy step out of a time capsule. Has he watched the NHL recently where in some games there’s almost no checking. There’s not time for it. Your opponents are too good. He’s doing a disservice to the players by not working on the skill game that’s being played by the top teams. Love to play his teams any day and watch them burn a path to the box and dice them 8-0.

I agree have checking at Peewees and everything you say but If refs aren't enforcing the rules you won't have that burned path to the box but the EMT will have burned a path to many parts of the rink. That late hit after your player has made the pass may have resulted in a goal but back behind the play there is a player seeing stars and parents and coaches applauding the big hit.

[O-townClown]

U.S.A. Hockey wants to do away with checking for 11 and 12 yr plds. They say the kids are not physically or mentally advanced to protect themselfs. This would start fall of 2011.[Next season]

Old:

Do you have any more information? The ADM guy for our area talked this summer about delaying full checking until Bantams while introducing body contact at a lower age like Squirts.

Your headline - ALL CAPS I MIGHT ADD - is pretty alarmist. Can't someone say CONTACT HOCKEY FOR SQUIRTS and be just as accurate?

Two ways to present the information I was given. Who cares about Pee Wees laying out kids in open ice or taking a run at a helpless runt in the corner? Lets make using your body to get the puck part of the game as early as possible.

[council member retired]

This seems to be picking up steam throughout USA Hockey ( for the earlier poster, this is not a MN thing, but we would likely follow )
Assuming this becomes law in 2011, but they allow some body contact at checking what would that be? No straight on hits, but rubouts are ok? I see some benefit in that aspect. I also believe that this isn't all about concussions but how much more the skilled the player may become handling the puck.

[SEC Scotty]

The like the idea of teaching how to check properly at the Pee-Wee level and to start checking at the Bantam. Lets let kids learn how to skate with there heads up first. This is something you used to learn playing outside playing pond hockey without having to worry about getting your head taken off. Skill developement, Skill developement, skill developement!!

At the youth level it should be about seperating the player from the puck, not putting a kid in the hospital.

Major penalties at the Bantam and high school levels for elbows or any blow to the head with match penalties for intent to injure. To many guys running around trying to hurt someone.

I'm glad USA hockey has the balls to do the right thing,

Just my opinion.

[InigoMontoya]

Observation: refs are all over the board when it comes to contact penalties. I've been to games this year where every time a kid was knocked down, the arm went up; one game the refs had apparently run out of ideas to call it, roughing, contact to the head, charging, boarding must have all been used up because they started calling interference - not a kid finishing a check after a pass or shot, but while they were in possession. I've also been to games where it's Annie, bar the door.

[SECoach]

In North American hockey the focus is on the hit, with the skill play secondary. In the rest of the hockey playing world the focus is on skill play, with the hit being secondary. Have you watched a Pee Wee, Bantam, or High School game? The big hit that's irrelivent to the play is what drives the players and the fans. When you see a high school game between two good teams, the big hits seem to be less important. Until the skill of the game becomes more important than the big, hands to face, send someone to the hospital hits, American Hockey will lag behind he rest of the world.

Body contact is allowed at Mites, Squirts, Girls, etc. Girls for example learn to separate a player from the puck without putting them through the boards and giving the fans a show. They make contact, but don't crush them.

Have you not watched a Pee Wee or Bantam player running around looking for the big hit, but ending up looking like an unskilled fool? Take the priority off checking and play better hockey.

[the_juiceman]

In North American hockey the focus is on the hit, with the skill play secondary. In the rest of the hockey playing world the focus is on skill play, with the hit being secondary. Have you watched a Pee Wee, Bantam, or High School game? The big hit that's irrelivent to the play is what drives the players and the fans. When you see a high school game between two good teams, the big hits seem to be less important. Until the skill of the game becomes more important than the big, hands to face, send someone to the hospital hits, American Hockey will lag behind he rest of the world.

Body contact is allowed at Mites, Squirts, Girls, etc. Girls for example learn to separate a player from the puck without putting them through the boards and giving the fans a show. They make contact, but don't crush them.

Have you not watched a Pee Wee or Bantam player running around looking for the big hit, but ending up looking like an unskilled fool? Take the priority off checking and play better hockey.

american hockey lag behind the rest of the world? How'd the latest world championships turn-out? or the world juniors?