HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Rink
The Rink For the not so ready for prime-time players, coaches, referees, and the people that have to live with them. Discuss experiences in local leagues, coaching tips, equipment, and training.

USA Hockey goes with NHL Standard of Play

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-11-2006, 11:55 AM
  #1
FLYLine24*
 
FLYLine24*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 29,102
vCash: 500
USA Hockey goes with NHL Standard of Play

First started from the NCAA then going to the NHL and now it seems to be going to all hockey slowly. USA Hockey wants referees to call the game exactly how the NHL is called now. Everything that provides the defense with a illegal advantage will be called.

http://www.usahockey.com/

As a referee..this is going to get ugly in the first month with half the parents having no idea what the hell is going on, and even some coaches will be dumbfounded why their kid is going to the box(those are the worst coaches since they dint even read anything USA Hockey sends them)

FLYLine24* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2006, 11:59 AM
  #2
xeric716x
Born To Expire
 
xeric716x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: New Jack City
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 10,921
vCash: 500
thay have already stated in the senior league i play in, that starting this coming winter session they will be calling it like the do in the NHL.

xeric716x is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2006, 12:04 PM
  #3
Hugh Madbrough
Registered User
 
Hugh Madbrough's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: NoVA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,612
vCash: 500
Same here. People in my league are flipping out about it but I don't see it as a big deal. You aren't supposed to be hooking and holding anyway..

Hugh Madbrough is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2006, 12:17 PM
  #4
Icer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 160
vCash: 500
I just attended a league meeting and we were told that any stickwork above the knee is going to get called. Similarly, if your hand comes off your stick and you wrap up the other player, you're gone for 2.

Icer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2006, 12:29 PM
  #5
Gino 14
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 812
vCash: 500
Had my ref clinic yesterday and that was the word that came down. Also, the parents of all players are required to attend a parenting class before their child can play, no class, no play. Watched part of a midget game after the clinic and the refs were calling it like they are now supposed to, we'll see what happens.

Gino 14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2006, 02:04 PM
  #6
The Tikkanen
Pest
 
The Tikkanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Yorba Linda
Country: United States
Posts: 6,378
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to The Tikkanen
We have been using those rules this season as well. Personally, as a rec league player I like it. If you can't skate, if you're out of shape or you lack fundamentals you will not be as good as the guy who worked hard to get where he is at.

The Tikkanen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2006, 03:18 PM
  #7
technophile
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Austin, TX
Country: United States
Posts: 148
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to technophile
Quote:
Originally Posted by JM47 View Post
Same here. People in my league are flipping out about it but I don't see it as a big deal. You aren't supposed to be hooking and holding anyway..
Our league started this last season, and it takes some getting used to on the part of the refs (and the players, of course). The biggest change (as a D-man) is that you have to be really careful in scrums around the net, esp. if the puck isn't there. We were actually told that lifting the stick (unless the puck is literally at your feet) is a penalty, which bothers me.

We were also told that if you leave your feet and end up tripping an opposing player (with your stick, your body, whatever), it's an automatic 2 minutes, no ref interpretation at all, even if you got the puck first. I don't know if that's just the local league, or if that's a valid interpretation of the new USAH rules, but there you go.

Some of this stuff I'm a little sketched out by, even though overall I welcome it because it does improve flow. (Mostly. Sometimes it results in an entire period playing a man down. Not that I'm bitter. :p)

technophile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2006, 03:20 PM
  #8
sc37
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: OH-IO
Country: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,517
vCash: 450
I got a message from USA Hockey in my email about this...but it's goofy. First game of the adult league session, and we were practically playing full-checking hockey, things got a little rough, and lotta stuff went uncalled.

sc37 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2006, 03:57 PM
  #9
technophile
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Austin, TX
Country: United States
Posts: 148
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to technophile
Quote:
Originally Posted by sc37 View Post
I got a message from USA Hockey in my email about this...but it's goofy. First game of the adult league session, and we were practically playing full-checking hockey, things got a little rough, and lotta stuff went uncalled.
Like I said, it takes a lot of getting used to for the refs. We played a couple of normal games last season, then they "adjusted"--way over the other way. (In one game, we had 4 guys in the box at the same time--and we're usually a very low-PIM team.) A few games after that they loosened up a little more, thankfully.

I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of leagues seesawed like that for much of the first season. I'm sitting out this season (unrelated reasons), so we'll see if they've figured it out by next year.

technophile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2006, 04:09 PM
  #10
CaptBrannigan
Registered User
 
CaptBrannigan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Tampa
Country: United States
Posts: 2,765
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by technophile View Post

We were also told that if you leave your feet and end up tripping an opposing player (with your stick, your body, whatever), it's an automatic 2 minutes, no ref interpretation at all, even if you got the puck first. I don't know if that's just the local league, or if that's a valid interpretation of the new USAH rules, but there you go.
I don't think this is new, at least the refs in my league have always called it like this.

I work as a scorekeeper at my local rink, they started the new standard yesterday and there were quite a few penalties. I could even see from just the first day that the more skilled players will benefit greatly from this.

CaptBrannigan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2006, 10:16 PM
  #11
MikeD
Registered User
 
MikeD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Buffalo NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,066
vCash: 500
My youngest just played a Toruney In jamestown NY. One team of Refs called it under the new standards and the other two temas went by the last season standards. I agree with the interpretations regarding the interference, obstruction type infractions but it sure doesnt help when the refs arent on the same page. Unless its called evenly and consistantly the youth players wont learn from the penalties they serve. The Refs also need to do a better job of explaining the rule to the youth players as they escort them to the box. Education will be the key to getting the game flowing. The goal is not to keep teams playing down a man...

MikeD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2006, 05:45 AM
  #12
Gino 14
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 812
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeD View Post
The Refs also need to do a better job of explaining the rule to the youth players as they escort them to the box. Education will be the key to getting the game flowing. The goal is not to keep teams playing down a man...
It's not the responsibility of the ref to explain the rules to the kids, that's a function that goes to the coaches. Once the coaches explain the rulings to the kids, it will be very clear.

Gino 14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2006, 09:24 AM
  #13
ceber
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Wyoming, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 3,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gino 14 View Post
It's not the responsibility of the ref to explain the rules to the kids, that's a function that goes to the coaches. Once the coaches explain the rulings to the kids, it will be very clear.
It's still a good idea for the refs to reinforce the learning.

ceber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2006, 09:57 AM
  #14
technophile
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Austin, TX
Country: United States
Posts: 148
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to technophile
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gino 14 View Post
It's not the responsibility of the ref to explain the rules to the kids, that's a function that goes to the coaches. Once the coaches explain the rulings to the kids, it will be very clear.
Even if the coach explains the rules, a lot of times it's hard to understand why a particular call was made. Even in adult leagues, even with people who have been playing a long time and know the rules, it's possible to be confused about what call was made and why, and refs should explain that -- in all age groups.

technophile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2006, 10:15 AM
  #15
Gino 14
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 812
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ceber View Post
It's still a good idea for the refs to reinforce the learning.
In theory, it's a good idea, but in practice it will usually not accomplish anything useful. More times than not, if a ref is explaining a call, it comes out looking like they are trying to justify what they called. This doesn't help the credibilty of the ref. In adult leagues, the player going to the box either knows exactly why he's going or will deny to the day he dies that he did anything wrong. That's why it's a coaching issue, not the ref's. The ref reinforces the learning by making the call.

Gino 14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2006, 01:24 PM
  #16
FLYLine24*
 
FLYLine24*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 29,102
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by technophile View Post

We were also told that if you leave your feet and end up tripping an opposing player (with your stick, your body, whatever), it's an automatic 2 minutes, no ref interpretation at all, even if you got the puck first. I don't know if that's just the local league, or if that's a valid interpretation of the new USAH rules, but there you go.

p)
Its always been that way with USA Hockey rules. Canada and the NHL though if you get the puck first its not a penalty.

FLYLine24* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2006, 01:30 PM
  #17
Hugh Madbrough
Registered User
 
Hugh Madbrough's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: NoVA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,612
vCash: 500
I haven't read or seen anything regarding lifting the stick as a penalty. If it's called like that then that is complete bs.

Hugh Madbrough is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2006, 02:08 PM
  #18
Nbr-17
Registered User
 
Nbr-17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Stouffville, ON
Country: Germany
Posts: 516
vCash: 500
From -> http://www.gthlcanada.com/rinkside/RulesEmph.pdf
Quote:
Lift Check (a type of stick check where one temporarily lifts or knocks an opponent’s stick upwards with one’s own stick followed immediately by an attempt to steal the puck): Lift checks are legal provided that the opponent is the puck-carrier, the act is not violent, the lift is not prolonged and no hooking or tugging action is involved.
Yup, the 'new' rules are coming all the way down into minor hockey.

Nbr-17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2006, 03:22 PM
  #19
technophile
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Austin, TX
Country: United States
Posts: 148
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to technophile
Quote:
Originally Posted by JM47 View Post
I haven't read or seen anything regarding lifting the stick as a penalty. If it's called like that then that is complete bs.
The video USAH put out to discuss the rule changes mentions it specifically.

If you lift the stick of a player who does not have possession of the puck, it's an infraction. If they have the puck and you're doing it to get possession or strip him, then it's not a penalty.

(The video is online at http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...7&q=USA+Hockey if you want to watch it.)

technophile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2006, 04:02 PM
  #20
MikeD
Registered User
 
MikeD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Buffalo NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,066
vCash: 500
Refs do on many occassion explain to the player what and why they made a specific call, esp when its a newer interpretation under new guidelines. Some take the time to do so(as they go to the box) and some dont.

For instance many times I have heard a ref explain to a player that the elbow or ruff was called bacause the player lifted their arm/s into a check. While its a natural defensive action it can result in a call against. Typical to the younger players new to checking, for those not intending a foul it sure helps a kid come back into the game and not repeat the offense.

I agree that in some cases the explanation can seem like the ref is trying to justify the call. FOr players who are obviously in disagreement with the call or those at the batam/midget level I wouldnt expect a Ref to explain. That would be a waste of breath for a Ref, likely to just encourage more LIP from an already bent player.


Last edited by MikeD: 09-12-2006 at 04:09 PM.
MikeD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-13-2006, 06:04 AM
  #21
Gino 14
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 812
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by technophile View Post
The video USAH put out to discuss the rule changes mentions it specifically.

If you lift the stick of a player who does not have possession of the puck, it's an infraction. If they have the puck and you're doing it to get possession or strip him, then it's not a penalty.

(The video is online at http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...7&q=USA+Hockey if you want to watch it.)

i went back through the video again and it specifically states that lifting the stick is legal if you are trying to gain possesion of the puck or are trying to prevent an opponent from playing the puck. It's at about 5:20 of the video.

Gino 14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-13-2006, 07:12 AM
  #22
Grave77digger
Registered User
 
Grave77digger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,550
vCash: 500
I love the "new" rules. we played our 2nd game last night with the enforced obstruction rules and I really like it. Our team has had pver 40 shots each game. We have always played kind of soft and were always getting roughed up as the ref let everything go. Our first game was 7-3 win and the second was a 7-1 win. I cant wait to see what happens when we play the guys that goon it up crosschecking in front of the net. Some of the calls have abeen a bt flakey but they are going both ways.

One BS call last night was the opposing forward chipped the puck past our dman along the boards then PLOWED straight into the dman nearly bowling him over. Our guy got an interference penalty... It looked more like a charge to me.

Grave77digger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-13-2006, 09:49 AM
  #23
technophile
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Austin, TX
Country: United States
Posts: 148
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to technophile
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gino 14 View Post
i went back through the video again and it specifically states that lifting the stick is legal if you are trying to gain possesion of the puck or are trying to prevent an opponent from playing the puck. It's at about 5:20 of the video.
...which is exactly what both I, and Nbr-17, said.

technophile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-13-2006, 10:29 AM
  #24
Gino 14
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 812
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by technophile View Post
...which is exactly what both I, and Nbr-17, said.
No, what you said was
Quote:
If you lift the stick of a player who does not have possession of the puck, it's an infraction.
Which is wrong. A player going for the puck is fair game, he does not have possession and it's not an infraction.

Gino 14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-13-2006, 11:43 AM
  #25
MikeD
Registered User
 
MikeD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Buffalo NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,066
vCash: 500
check it again...it isn't about preventing them from gaining possession. Its about preventing PLAY(ie stick handling or passing) if they do not have possession and you stick check with a lift it will likely be called. THEY MUST HAVE POSSESSION. Your timing on the stick lift against a player receiving the puck MUST be near perfect. The puck must be there and viewed as with-in the ability to reach/posses.


one example is the defensive player at the front of his creasewho is lifting the stick of an offensive player while the puck is not with in reach of that offensive player...such as in the corner or at the boards. You can look at the time as much like that of pass interference in american football. make contact early and its an infraction.


Last edited by MikeD: 09-13-2006 at 11:56 AM.
MikeD is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:55 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.