HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Notices

Ot:hockey alberta eliminates body checking in peewee division

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-08-2013, 03:56 PM
  #76
Q Continuum
You are Wrong
 
Q Continuum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,932
vCash: 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lacaar View Post
Bob Mckenzie Blog.

http://www.tsn.ca/blogs/bob_mckenzie/?id=331558

An interesting quote that seems to be occurring on this thread.

"You can't rationalize having kids injured earlier in life and more often, so I think later is better."
I'll be sure to email Bob then when some 5'3 150 lbs kid gets seriously hurt by a 6'0 200 lbs kid because of the size difference while just learning to hit.

Canadian Major Junior can't be happy about this either. That's more players with less contact experience.

Q Continuum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2013, 03:56 PM
  #77
Master Lok
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 6,631
vCash: 500
Does a kid getting their first concussion at 9 or 10, has the same recovery as getting their concussion at 12 or 13?

I would think that may have some bearing on the discussion.

Master Lok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2013, 04:02 PM
  #78
Lacaar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,377
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewOilRising View Post
I'll be sure to email Bob then when some 5'3 150 lbs kid gets seriously hurt by a 6'0 200 lbs kid because of the size difference while just learning to hit.

Canadian Major Junior can't be happy about this either. That's more players with less contact experience.
Are you inferring you can tell a kid was hurt because the kid who hit him didn't know how to body check properly?

I'm actually more liable to believe a kid would more likely get hurt by a more experienced body checker.

Where is this research to support uneducated body contact causes more serious injuries than educated?

The only thing we know is Body checking causes more serious injuries. Not inexperienced body checking causing serious injuries.

Lacaar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2013, 04:04 PM
  #79
Slats432
Registered User
 
Slats432's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,440
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lacaar View Post
Bob Mckenzie Blog.

http://www.tsn.ca/blogs/bob_mckenzie/?id=331558

An interesting quote that seems to be occurring on this thread.

"You can't rationalize having kids injured earlier in life and more often, so I think later is better."
Another interesting quote. "No, that's not hockey. Hockey's a physical game and you've got to learn to keep your head up."

Why should a kid suffer a life long concussion issue because on one day, one pass in the skates got his lights knocked out?

I saw this year alone, 5 or 6 concussions on the ice. And someone asked about defining a minor concussion. My son's was minor. Zero symptoms in two days.

When he got hit, the player 5'10 or so 12 year old hit him, and he lost balance and crashed face first(Standing) into the boards. Large pupils. Headache. A little disoriented. Shut him down for the game.

Two days later no evidence of a problem. Took him to the doctor and he was cleared to play the next game.

Most kids play for the love of the game. Chances are, one, maybe two kids playing in Edmonton right now will make the NHL. That leaves everyone else. What is the benefit of our kids being subject to physical punishment this early in life?

Slats432 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2013, 04:06 PM
  #80
Slats432
Registered User
 
Slats432's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,440
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewOilRising View Post
I'll be sure to email Bob then when some 5'3 150 lbs kid gets seriously hurt by a 6'0 200 lbs kid because of the size difference while just learning to hit.

Canadian Major Junior can't be happy about this either. That's more players with less contact experience.
The Q doesn't seem to mind. This rule was already changed in Quebec.

Slats432 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2013, 04:06 PM
  #81
Bobblehead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 670
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewOilRising View Post
I'll be sure to email Bob then when some 5'3 150 lbs kid gets seriously hurt by a 6'0 200 lbs kid because of the size difference while just learning to hit.

Canadian Major Junior can't be happy about this either. That's more players with less contact experience.
That is just a dumb comment. Did you email Bob when the 5'8" 150lbs kid plowed the 4'11" 100lbs kid into the boards in Pee Wee???

Everyone agrees and so do the studies, the first year with body checking results in more injuries. Doesn't take a rocket scientist or brain specialist to realize that.

The data from studies strongly supports the argument number of injuries in Bantam does not decrease because kids were introduced to hitting earlier. There is no benefit in terms of number of injuries. If there is no benefit, why risk hurting younger kids. Why alienate more players and have them quit in PeeWee becuase of contact. There is no good evidence to suggest there is any benefit to introducing hitting in PeeWee. There is only people opinions that are not backed up by facts.

Bobblehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2013, 04:07 PM
  #82
Bobblehead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 670
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slats432 View Post
The Q doesn't seem to mind. This rule was already changed in Quebec.

Bobblehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2013, 04:07 PM
  #83
Q Continuum
You are Wrong
 
Q Continuum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,932
vCash: 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slats432 View Post

Most kids play for the love of the game. Chances are, one, maybe two kids playing in Edmonton right now will make the NHL. That leaves everyone else. What is the benefit of our kids being subject to physical punishment this early in life?
Those kids can play in a no contact league then.

It scares me what we could start seeing in Major Junior with this. Some kid who has barely learned about checking being hit by a guy much bigger and stronger than him?

This is going to get bad, quick. Kids may start quitting even more when they see the size differences among 14/15 year olds and, oh ****, we were never taught to hit.

Q Continuum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2013, 04:10 PM
  #84
Bobblehead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 670
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Lok View Post
Does a kid getting their first concussion at 9 or 10, has the same recovery as getting their concussion at 12 or 13?

I would think that may have some bearing on the discussion.
Don't think there's that type of data available. REcovering from concussionsdoesn;t seem to be linear. All we know is more concussions = bad. So by reducing the risk of concussions when kids are fully developed physiologically can't be a bad thing.

Bobblehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2013, 04:12 PM
  #85
Bobblehead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 670
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewOilRising View Post
Those kids can play in a no contact league then.

It scares me what we could start seeing in Major Junior with this. Some kid who has barely learned about checking being hit by a guy much bigger and stronger than him?

This is going to get bad, quick. Kids may start quitting even more when they see the size differences among 14/15 year olds and, oh ****, we were never taught to hit.
Last 2 Memorial Cup champs from Quebec Major Junior League. Looks like that no checking in Pee Wee is really hurting them. Surprised they weren't all out with concussions after not learning to take a check at 10years old.

Bobblehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2013, 04:14 PM
  #86
Peter Zezel
CDN Werewolf in LDN
 
Peter Zezel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: London, UK
Posts: 373
vCash: 50
I doubt there is stats on it, but I'd like to know when they pushed everyone up a year to level the player sizes out if it reduced concussions at all.

Anyways, I'm not sure how I feel about the move but if they stay on players in peewee to keep their heads up it could be a okay decision. Hitting is an important part of the game, but it's not the hardest skill to learn.

Peter Zezel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2013, 04:24 PM
  #87
I am the Liquor
Registered User
 
I am the Liquor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sunnyvale
Country: Canada
Posts: 34,239
vCash: 8345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slats432 View Post
Another interesting quote. "No, that's not hockey. Hockey's a physical game and you've got to learn to keep your head up."

Why should a kid suffer a life long concussion issue because on one day, one pass in the skates got his lights knocked out?

I saw this year alone, 5 or 6 concussions on the ice. And someone asked about defining a minor concussion. My son's was minor. Zero symptoms in two days.

When he got hit, the player 5'10 or so 12 year old hit him, and he lost balance and crashed face first(Standing) into the boards. Large pupils. Headache. A little disoriented. Shut him down for the game.

Two days later no evidence of a problem. Took him to the doctor and he was cleared to play the next game.

Most kids play for the love of the game. Chances are, one, maybe two kids playing in Edmonton right now will make the NHL. That leaves everyone else. What is the benefit of our kids being subject to physical punishment this early in life?
That is why there should be two leagues. One with contact and the other without. Those that dont want it can register for the nhl.

Kids who intend to play contact hockey should learn the game that way from the start, not at some point along the way. Too many bad habits will be formed along the way making them more vulnerable later than they otherwise would have been if they had been brought up with hitting from the start.

However those kids who dont want to play in the contact league should always have the option to play in a no contact league. No question.

I am the Liquor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2013, 04:26 PM
  #88
Bobblehead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 670
vCash: 500
I think some Albertans are ticked off by this because they don't like following Quebec!

Bobblehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2013, 04:27 PM
  #89
Q Continuum
You are Wrong
 
Q Continuum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,932
vCash: 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am the Liquor View Post
That is why there should be two leagues. One with contact and the other without. Those that dont want it can register for the nhl.

Kids who intend to play contact hockey should learn the game that way from the start, not at some point along the way. Too many bad habits will be formed along the way making them more vulnerable later than they otherwise would have been if they had been brought up with hitting from the start.

However those kids who dont want to play in the contact league should always have the option to play in a no contact league. No question.
This, and much more eloquently than I could have put it.

Q Continuum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2013, 04:27 PM
  #90
Yukon Joe
Registered User
 
Yukon Joe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: YWG -> YXY -> YEG
Posts: 1,386
vCash: 624
Quote:
Originally Posted by joestevens29 View Post
Quebec doesn't allow hitting until Bantam, but injuries are the same as Alberta that does allow hitting earlier. So...
This shows the argument that "you need to learn how to take a hit to avoid injury" is false. Alberta kids have been learning to take hits in peewee, while Quebec kids haven't. Yet they both suffer the same rate of injury in bantam.

Yukon Joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2013, 04:29 PM
  #91
Q Continuum
You are Wrong
 
Q Continuum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,932
vCash: 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yukon Joe View Post
This shows the argument that "you need to learn how to take a hit to avoid injury" is false. Alberta kids have been learning to take hits in peewee, while Quebec kids haven't. Yet they both suffer the same rate of injury in bantam.
It also shows that introducing contact later has no reduction in injuries.

Q Continuum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2013, 04:32 PM
  #92
Bobblehead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 670
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewOilRising View Post
It also shows that introducing contact later has no reduction in injuries.
Dead wrong!!!!

It doesn't reduce the injuries in Bantam, that's what the data says, but you've avoided a TON of injuries in peewee where there is no checking. You saved a bunch of 10-11 year old kids, whose brains are still developing, you've saved them from head trauma.

Bobblehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2013, 04:33 PM
  #93
Q Continuum
You are Wrong
 
Q Continuum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,932
vCash: 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobblehead View Post
Dead wrong!!!!

It doesn't reduce the injuries in Bantam, that's what the data says, but you've avoided a TON of injuries in peewee where there is no checking. You saved a bunch of 10-11 year old kids, whose brains are still developing, you've saved them from head trauma.
And at the same time put them at risk to get their bell rung even worse in Bantam and beyond.

Q Continuum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2013, 04:35 PM
  #94
Bobblehead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 670
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewOilRising View Post
And at the same time put them at risk to get their bell rung even worse in Bantam and beyond.
Dead Wrong again!!

The data says Bantam kids in Quebec suffer no greater frequency of injuries or concussions than their Alberta comparables.

I suggest you read the information provided on the Hockey Alberta website. Its pretty clear.

Bobblehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2013, 04:42 PM
  #95
Agron
BELIEVE.
 
Agron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,007
vCash: 500
Kids are gonna learn playing with their heads down....

Agron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2013, 04:52 PM
  #96
timekeep
Registered User
 
timekeep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,316
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thrill22 View Post
I'd be okay with this, if there was some way in PeeWee they can come up with some kind of leeway in incidental contact - they can't continue to call 2 mins for body contact because they bump shoulders fighting for the puck and the little guy falls down. What's that teaching them?

An actual thrown body check? Sure, penalty. An accidental full on body check? Doesn't matter, penalty. One kid makes a great play taking away the puck, but bumps the other kid, let it go.

Leave the zero tolerance in Atom, I'm all for that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobblehead View Post
Tha hockey Alberta site says that body contact isn't ruled out, just checking is ruled out. Not sure how a 16year old refereee will be able to always tell the difference. Sounds like more abuse to be heeped on officials, here's the quote....

There will be no body checking allowed at the Peewee level, there will still be body contact allowed at the Peewee level."
Body contact (rub-outs) has been aloud in Atom and now Peewee, its body checking that isn't allowed. This very hard for referees, especially the ones that allow the rubouts, seems like the refs that call all contact seem to get the least hassle. It is very difficult to differentiate between a body check and rubout for some of these referees and especially hockey moms.

timekeep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2013, 04:52 PM
  #97
CorpseFX
Registered User
 
CorpseFX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Milwaukee
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 7,674
vCash: 872
Quote:
Originally Posted by joestevens29 View Post
The reasoning was at peewee kids bodies are changing far too much and aren't on an even playing field. Add hormones and it was suggested that kids that learn to hit when there is less testostrone would learn the safe way to hit.
i dont buy this at all.

anyone who has played hockey growing up in any legit format (travel teams, etc) understands where injuries come from a majority of the time.

a) most kids know and are skilled enough to keep their head up in MOST situations to avoid hits.
b) most injuries i can remember came from SKETCHY players hitting people in vulnerable situations or just trying to be straight up mother-f'ers. i cant think of any major injuries between me AND my brother where a legit body check did some major damage on someone. there was plenty of cheap, sketchy hits that caused major problems, though. kids flying through the air crosschecking from behind to the head. sticks to throats. hits in the back. summed up: it was never a problem of "hitting technique".

pretty indifferent to the decision (meaning, im fine with it... wherever it takes place). but all this hilarious "sport science" garbage is out to lunch.

"yeah we ran this study and we made up a theory that if kids start to learn proper bodychecking at age 10 they wont be ****** at 13-16 when theyre raging with hormones, think theyre hot crap and are just stepping into Macho Zone. and the penalties for being a ***** is slim to nil in any grand scheme."


Last edited by CorpseFX: 05-08-2013 at 04:57 PM.
CorpseFX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2013, 04:55 PM
  #98
CorpseFX
Registered User
 
CorpseFX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Milwaukee
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 7,674
vCash: 872
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobblehead View Post
Dead wrong!!!!

It doesn't reduce the injuries in Bantam, that's what the data says, but you've avoided a TON of injuries in peewee where there is no checking. You saved a bunch of 10-11 year old kids, whose brains are still developing, you've saved them from head trauma.
i agree with this. and tons of kids probably quit before bantams/midget anyhow.

people just want to hold on tight to that macho tradition so some ridiculous identity doesnt "fade"

/"THEYRE KILLING CANADA AND THE GAME. OUR CHILDREN ARE SUFFERING."

CorpseFX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2013, 05:00 PM
  #99
Yukon Joe
Registered User
 
Yukon Joe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: YWG -> YXY -> YEG
Posts: 1,386
vCash: 624
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am the Liquor View Post
That is why there should be two leagues. One with contact and the other without. Those that dont want it can register for the nhl.

Kids who intend to play contact hockey should learn the game that way from the start, not at some point along the way. Too many bad habits will be formed along the way making them more vulnerable later than they otherwise would have been if they had been brought up with hitting from the start.

However those kids who dont want to play in the contact league should always have the option to play in a no contact league. No question.
You're asking a 10 year old to decide "oh, I'm never going to make the NHL, so I'll go no-contact".

There doesn't seem to be any evidence that suggests "learning to take and receive a hit" reduces injuries. None.

It's as if people aren't following the news, or reading the studies. Personally, I like hitting in hockey. I like fighting, I like the general violence. But the studies are pretty damn conclusive, specially when it comes to kids.

Yukon Joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2013, 05:00 PM
  #100
Billybaroo*
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 737
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobblehead View Post
You said it. My opinion is just as valid as yours. To me hitting in PeeWee is frankly ridiculous.
And I think banning hitting all together is frankly stupid

Billybaroo* 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 02:51 AM.

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.