View Single Post
05-09-2013, 08:40 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 805
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by topchowda View Post
I wasnt calling out Quebec hockey, I was just trying to idenitfy if the size difference may be one possibility. What works in Quebec wont work in AB type thing. All I can speak of is my personal experience. I played bantam probaly 6-7 years ago and it way a very rough league, especially against the farm teams.

I just cant agree with the statistics till I see a province/state that went from hitting in peewee to hitting in bantam and see the % change in injuries. If the studies show that delaying hitting till bantam decreased injuries in bantam kids from the time periods when kids came in knowing how to hit vs the kids who come in just learning how to hit.

Common sense tells me injuries in bantam will increase when kids are learning how to hit, essantially delaying a kids injury by a year. And once they enter bantam, those size difference in kids will grow, magnifying any injuries. In peewee a 5 foot kid will run into a 4'6 kid, in bantam a 5'7 kid will run into 4'9 kid

I cannot be fully nuetral since I just finished playing hockey, but I am in favour of teaching them early. Lacrosse does it, then helped me adjust in that sport when I was in novice, and its parlayed into hockey, so when I when into peewee hockey I had little problems.
Your size argument is exactly why the results we're worded the results... data strongly supports.... there could be some factors that come into play that haven't been identified. But for now, knowing what they do about brain injuries, that teaching them young has no proven benefit, lets err on the side of caution.

You're throwing out height numbers here and there to benefit your view point. What about the 5'11" 150 lbs 2nd year PeeWee kid who runs over the 4'6" 96lbs 1 year Pee Wee kid? You forgot them in your argument about hitting.

The data doesn't support the argument that teaching them early helps. All hockey players need to learn to skate with the head up -hitting or no hitting. How do you pass, deke or shoot without you're head up. You don't need hitting to teach that skill. There is no data on the size component and as much as one would think it makes a little sense its easy to poke holes in that too. Is it really the size of the hitter that matters or the speed he's going at? Is AB hockey faster than QC hockey? Is it the size of the hitter that matters or is it the size difference that matters .... ie 5'6" 140lbs hitting a 4'6" 106lbs or 5'11" 170lbs hitting a 5'4" 140lbs. who will get hurt more? How much was speed a factor? We don't know. We just know brain injuries are bad. We know statistically speaking that teaching hitting in PeeWee doesn't change the risk of injury in Bantam.

Everyone agrees the year you introducing hitting will see a rise in injuries, whether its Atom, PW or Bantam. There is no doubt. Terry Jones had a article about it and I brought it up yesterday. Whichever year you introduce hitting, you should split the kids by year. Introduce Major/Minor Bantam (or PeeWee) so that the first year kdis just learning are only playing first year kids who are also learning. Great idea.

Its hard to be fully neutral also. I have two kids coming up through hockey and I'm glad they moved it to Bantam. Statistics say neither kid is going to make it to the NHL, so why add more risk.

If teaching them at a young age makes them safer and better in Bantm and Midget, why don't we start teaching out kids to drive @ 8 years old? Then by the time they're 16 they'll be experts!

Bobblehead is offline   Reply With Quote