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
05-11-2013, 01:57 AM
  #276
Lacaar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,360
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by goaliedad29 View Post
And you should read the actual study and not just what HA posted on their website. The study found that there was a 33% reduction in serious injuries (injuries that required a player to miss 10 or more days) for Alberta bantam players who had learned to body check as peewees as compared to Quebec bantam players who were being introduced to bodychecking for the first time. Although concussion rates were similiar, the overall number of serious injuries was significantly greater for the bantam players in Quebec. I think this does provide some food for thought for those who say that introducing bodychecking at a younger age has no "protective" value as the kids get older, stronger and faster.
So introduce long term health concerns via concussions in peewee to save a few broken legs in bantam. Gotcha.

I doubt many parents are worried much about a serious injury their kid will make a full recovery from. I know myself as a parent accept that risk.

Lacaar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2013, 02:57 AM
  #277
Mentallydull
Registered User
 
Mentallydull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Oil Country
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,077
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobblehead View Post
Enjoyed the give and take.
Cheers man, it's good to have a nice debate every now and then, even if we're on opposite sides of the fence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lacaar View Post
So introduce long term health concerns via concussions in peewee to save a few broken legs in bantam. Gotcha.

I doubt many parents are worried much about a serious injury their kid will make a full recovery from. I know myself as a parent accept that risk.
What? Recovering from a broken leg, or a separated shoulder, or even a torn ligament isn't exactly easy and can absolutely have long term effects.

People wanted data on terms of injury risk of Quebec vs. Alberta, it was produced, and now... it's being trivialized?

That doesn't make any sense at all...


Last edited by Bryanbryoil: 05-11-2013 at 03:39 AM. Reason: clean up
Mentallydull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2013, 03:43 AM
  #278
Bryanbryoil
Moderator
I Know A Thing Or 6
 
Bryanbryoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: About Winning
Posts: 50,625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mentallydull View Post
I bet your family are very nice people!
Infraction FTW!

Joking aside the pissing matches are done or there will be some unhappy people in short order.

__________________
Treat Others As You Would Like To Be Treated
Bryanbryoil is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2013, 10:53 AM
  #279
Everest
Registered User
 
Everest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 10,392
vCash: 500
What an uproar. Wow. And we knew it was going to happen as soon as this change was...finally...made.

Some of the response I read on twitter the other day in regards to this change...honestly....was embarassing. There's still way too many ignorant bullies out there. The past week really re-enforced that for me.

I just had my first son last month. He will be starting skating in 4 or 5 years. Who knows what kind of "size" he will have at the Pee Wee age...but...I'd like to believe that if he is below average size around that time...it won't be a death blow to his chances of HAVING FUN playing the greatest sport on earth.

I remember what it was like for me as a 1rst year Pee Wee. I was the best skater and the best stick handler on my team. It wasn't even close...and yet...as a smaller kid...I spent most of that year either sitting on the bench watching the much bigger 2nd year guys having all the fun...or...in the little bit of ice time I did get...I was really just out there trying to survive most of the time. It was honestly terrifying and it did VERY LITTLE for my skills or my self confidence to be playing "full contact" back then.

Even worse...I am certain the ability for the bigger stronger kids to intimidate & over power opponents simply with the advantadge of size...was something that really took away from THEIR skill development. Those kids ( and their parents) were disillusioned at where their development & ability curves actually were...and...5-10 years later...most of them were out of hockey or fading to the back of the pack on their respective teams.

I think...player safety MUST be the most important focus and I KNOW this has been something theyve considered and evaluated for a LONG time. It was talked about 20 years ago. Its not a "knee jerk decision". Not at all.

As for what it does or doesn't do in terms of skill development...its debatable. I acknoweledge this. But I think its worth a try. It will take some time to get the new system perfected...but...Im willing to give it a chance.

Hockey shouldn't be such a "tough game" for CHILDREN to play. That part of it can come later...much later.

Everest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2013, 12:41 PM
  #280
Replacement
Now with 9% more zen
 
Replacement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hockey Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 35,645
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Everest View Post
What an uproar. Wow. And we knew it was going to happen as soon as this change was...finally...made.

Some of the response I read on twitter the other day in regards to this change...honestly....was embarassing. There's still way too many ignorant bullies out there. The past week really re-enforced that for me.

I just had my first son last month. He will be starting skating in 4 or 5 years. Who knows what kind of "size" he will have at the Pee Wee age...but...I'd like to believe that if he is below average size around that time...it won't be a death blow to his chances of HAVING FUN playing the greatest sport on earth.

I remember what it was like for me as a 1rst year Pee Wee. I was the best skater and the best stick handler on my team. It wasn't even close...and yet...as a smaller kid...I spent most of that year either sitting on the bench watching the much bigger 2nd year guys having all the fun...or...in the little bit of ice time I did get...I was really just out there trying to survive most of the time. It was honestly terrifying and it did VERY LITTLE for my skills or my self confidence to be playing "full contact" back then.

Even worse...I am certain the ability for the bigger stronger kids to intimidate & over power opponents simply with the advantadge of size...was something that really took away from THEIR skill development. Those kids ( and their parents) were disillusioned at where their development & ability curves actually were...and...5-10 years later...most of them were out of hockey or fading to the back of the pack on their respective teams.

I think...player safety MUST be the most important focus and I KNOW this has been something theyve considered and evaluated for a LONG time. It was talked about 20 years ago. Its not a "knee jerk decision". Not at all.

As for what it does or doesn't do in terms of skill development...its debatable. I acknoweledge this. But I think its worth a try. It will take some time to get the new system perfected...but...Im willing to give it a chance.

Hockey shouldn't be such a "tough game" for CHILDREN to play. That part of it can come later...much later.
As per usual excellent post and perspective on the matter. I share your memories rarely feeling comfortable enough on ice to develop my skills on ice. Too busy "surviving" as you state due to missing a timely growth spurt that occurred too late.

I appreciate your point that skills for both bully and bullied are impacted and its a point that while obvious, is rarely stated.

The player that can simply physically dominate doesn't really need to work as hard at skill development.

Replacement is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2013, 03:50 PM
  #281
Lacaar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,360
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mentallydull View Post


What? Recovering from a broken leg, or a separated shoulder, or even a torn ligament isn't exactly easy and can absolutely have long term effects.

People wanted data on terms of injury risk of Quebec vs. Alberta, it was produced, and now... it's being trivialized?

That doesn't make any sense at all...
If you can't recognize the difference between a concussion and a torn ligament than fine.

You call it trivialize. I call it prioritize.

The point still stands. You're willing to crack skulls at an early age to save some ligaments and bones at a later age by hanging your hat on that data.

Lacaar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2013, 05:00 PM
  #282
Bobblehead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by goaliedad29 View Post
And you should read the actual study and not just what HA posted on their website. The study found that there was a 33% reduction in serious injuries (injuries that required a player to miss 10 or more days) for Alberta bantam players who had learned to body check as peewees as compared to Quebec bantam players who were being introduced to bodychecking for the first time. Although concussion rates were similiar, the overall number of serious injuries was significantly greater for the bantam players in Quebec. I think this does provide some food for thought for those who say that introducing bodychecking at a younger age has no "protective" value as the kids get older, stronger and faster.
I read the entire report. There's a difference between reading and understanding what you read. You didn't pull the exact quote. You took it out of context. and you didn't understand it. It also states IMMEDIATELY after that those results must be "interpreted due to the three- to four-fold increase in the number of concussion risk among Pee Wee players in AB...... "

It doesn't compare Bantam players in AB to Bantam players in Quebec. They already established there's no difference in the injury and concussion rates between QC and AB Bantam players. You should pull the direct quote. Its saying that there is a 33% reduction in injuries in the ALBERTA BANTAM league (and they didn't say but they're comparing it to the AB PeeWee stats). That's why the disclaimer about the high rate of injury in AB PeeWee. So for fun, using made up number

Injuries in PeeWee (AB) 75/1000
Injuries in PeeWee (QC) 20/1000
Inturies in Bantam (AB) 50/1000
Injuries in Bantam (QC) 50/1000

you get the 33% reduction in injuries in AB Bantam. YAY! But you still have WAY more kids injured unnecessarily in AB.

Next time you accuse someone of not reading, you should maybe be sure that you know what you're talking about! Everytime you pro PeeWee hitting guys post, you lose all credibility.


Last edited by Bobblehead: 05-11-2013 at 07:00 PM.
Bobblehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2013, 12:27 AM
  #283
goaliedad29
Registered User
 
goaliedad29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 55
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobblehead View Post
I read the entire report. There's a difference between reading and understanding what you read. You didn't pull the exact quote. You took it out of context. and you didn't understand it. It also states IMMEDIATELY after that those results must be "interpreted due to the three- to four-fold increase in the number of concussion risk among Pee Wee players in AB...... "

It doesn't compare Bantam players in AB to Bantam players in Quebec. They already established there's no difference in the injury and concussion rates between QC and AB Bantam players. You should pull the direct quote. Its saying that there is a 33% reduction in injuries in the ALBERTA BANTAM league (and they didn't say but they're comparing it to the AB PeeWee stats). That's why the disclaimer about the high rate of injury in AB PeeWee. So for fun, using made up number

Injuries in PeeWee (AB) 75/1000
Injuries in PeeWee (QC) 20/1000
Inturies in Bantam (AB) 50/1000
Injuries in Bantam (QC) 50/1000

you get the 33% reduction in injuries in AB Bantam. YAY! But you still have WAY more kids injured unnecessarily in AB.

Next time you accuse someone of not reading, you should maybe be sure that you know what you're talking about! Everytime you pro PeeWee hitting guys post, you lose all credibility.
What?? Here is another quote from the study... "we found that the risk of injury resulting in more than seven days of time loss from play was 33% lower among players with two years of bodychecking experience in Pee Wee (ages 1112) than among those without such bodychecking experience." They arrived at this conclusion by comparing the bantam players in Quebec and Alberta.

I treat kids with sport-related concussions on a regular basis, as well as other primarily musculoskeletal non-surgical sports injuries. Although I would agree that any injury to the brain is not good, the vast majority of concussions are not "severe" and the symptoms do generally resolve quickly and completely, and those kids return to playing their chosen sports. Flipantly dismissing the potential long-term complications of other "severe" (the authors' term) injuries such as dislocated and/or separated shoulders, cruciate ligament tears, meniscus tears, fractures, etc. shows a complete disregard for the future health and well-being for these kids, and these are the majority of injuries we see from collision sports.

My son just finished his second yr. of peewee at the AA level. In his case he is fortunate to be an early birthdate who has grown a lot (he is 5' 9", 160 lbs and just turned 13), and he loves the game, hitting and all. Over his 2 years in peewee, his teams played probably at least 100 games in total, and in each season we experienced one concussion on our team. One player missed the remainder of the season and one returned in 2 weeks with zero further complications. The player who experienced the more serious injury fell awkwardly and hit his head on the ice completely independant of a bodycheck. The player who missed 2 weeks had his head down and was hit with a legal, clean bodycheck.

I know I'm rambling a bit, but I guess my point is that in collision sports injuries unfortunately do happen. By removing bodychecking from peewee we probably will be sparing many 11-12 yr olds from injury, I just won't be seeing them in my office until they are 13-14 now.

goaliedad29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2013, 02:06 AM
  #284
Mentallydull
Registered User
 
Mentallydull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Oil Country
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,077
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Everest View Post
What an uproar. Wow. And we knew it was going to happen as soon as this change was...finally...made.

Some of the response I read on twitter the other day in regards to this change...honestly....was embarassing. There's still way too many ignorant bullies out there. The past week really re-enforced that for me.

I just had my first son last month. He will be starting skating in 4 or 5 years. Who knows what kind of "size" he will have at the Pee Wee age...but...I'd like to believe that if he is below average size around that time...it won't be a death blow to his chances of HAVING FUN playing the greatest sport on earth.

I remember what it was like for me as a 1rst year Pee Wee. I was the best skater and the best stick handler on my team. It wasn't even close...and yet...as a smaller kid...I spent most of that year either sitting on the bench watching the much bigger 2nd year guys having all the fun...or...in the little bit of ice time I did get...I was really just out there trying to survive most of the time. It was honestly terrifying and it did VERY LITTLE for my skills or my self confidence to be playing "full contact" back then.

Even worse...I am certain the ability for the bigger stronger kids to intimidate & over power opponents simply with the advantadge of size...was something that really took away from THEIR skill development. Those kids ( and their parents) were disillusioned at where their development & ability curves actually were...and...5-10 years later...most of them were out of hockey or fading to the back of the pack on their respective teams.

I think...player safety MUST be the most important focus and I KNOW this has been something theyve considered and evaluated for a LONG time. It was talked about 20 years ago. Its not a "knee jerk decision". Not at all.

As for what it does or doesn't do in terms of skill development...its debatable. I acknoweledge this. But I think its worth a try. It will take some time to get the new system perfected...but...Im willing to give it a chance.

Hockey shouldn't be such a "tough game" for CHILDREN to play. That part of it can come later...much later.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
As per usual excellent post and perspective on the matter. I share your memories rarely feeling comfortable enough on ice to develop my skills on ice. Too busy "surviving" as you state due to missing a timely growth spurt that occurred too late.

I appreciate your point that skills for both bully and bullied are impacted and its a point that while obvious, is rarely stated.

The player that can simply physically dominate doesn't really need to work as hard at skill development.
The question would be - when the size difference is even larger, wouldn't that make you feel even more uncomfortable out on the ice?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lacaar View Post
If you can't recognize the difference between a concussion and a torn ligament than fine.

You call it trivialize. I call it prioritize.

The point still stands. You're willing to crack skulls at an early age to save some ligaments and bones at a later age by hanging your hat on that data.
Here I thought this whole argument was based on some data?

Yeah, you're going to suffer some head injuries - playing hockey it's almost inevitable regardless of what age you start at.

If you can't recognize how severe some of these broken bones/torn ligaments can be, then that's fine as well.

Whichever suits your argument I suppose

Mentallydull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2013, 09:54 AM
  #285
PorkChopSandwiches
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 417
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobblehead View Post
That's why we need a development program like Hockey USA (BTW I believe they've banned checking in PeeWee nation wide, I thought I read they were considering elite levels, but cannot find it). Teach checking through clinics in PeeWee. Teach the coaches how to teach - shoulder checks, body poistioning, don't turn your back, head up, etc.... run PeeWee practices that involve checking drills and skills to initiate them. Team scrimmages with checking so kids can get used to it in a controled environment before Bantam. Don;t jsut ban it outright, ban it and come up with a plan/program for when and how to introduce it in PeeWee. But don't allow it in the games until they become proficient.
this ^

Hockey NS just released their plan for the 2013/14 season based on all the same data
http://www.hockeynovascotia.ca/hns_12370_47963.html

and my biggest fear is that there will be no real development program at the actual team level to prepare kids.

PorkChopSandwiches is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2013, 10:49 AM
  #286
Bobblehead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockey2hockey View Post
this ^

Hockey NS just released their plan for the 2013/14 season based on all the same data
http://www.hockeynovascotia.ca/hns_12370_47963.html

and my biggest fear is that there will be no real development program at the actual team level to prepare kids.
Yes they need to follow up with a plan to introduce checking through clinics, practices and other methods..... minor/major system?

Bobblehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2013, 10:57 AM
  #287
Bobblehead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by goaliedad29 View Post
What?? Here is another quote from the study... "we found that the risk of injury resulting in more than seven days of time loss from play was 33% lower among players with two years of bodychecking experience in Pee Wee (ages 1112) than among those without such bodychecking experience." They arrived at this conclusion by comparing the bantam players in Quebec and Alberta.

I treat kids with sport-related concussions on a regular basis, as well as other primarily musculoskeletal non-surgical sports injuries. Although I would agree that any injury to the brain is not good, the vast majority of concussions are not "severe" and the symptoms do generally resolve quickly and completely, and those kids return to playing their chosen sports. Flipantly dismissing the potential long-term complications of other "severe" (the authors' term) injuries such as dislocated and/or separated shoulders, cruciate ligament tears, meniscus tears, fractures, etc. shows a complete disregard for the future health and well-being for these kids, and these are the majority of injuries we see from collision sports.

My son just finished his second yr. of peewee at the AA level. In his case he is fortunate to be an early birthdate who has grown a lot (he is 5' 9", 160 lbs and just turned 13), and he loves the game, hitting and all. Over his 2 years in peewee, his teams played probably at least 100 games in total, and in each season we experienced one concussion on our team. One player missed the remainder of the season and one returned in 2 weeks with zero further complications. The player who experienced the more serious injury fell awkwardly and hit his head on the ice completely independant of a bodycheck. The player who missed 2 weeks had his head down and was hit with a legal, clean bodycheck.

I know I'm rambling a bit, but I guess my point is that in collision sports injuries unfortunately do happen. By removing bodychecking from peewee we probably will be sparing many 11-12 yr olds from injury, I just won't be seeing them in my office until they are 13-14 now.


Experts are finding that cumulative effects of concussions may be more serious than we thought. 11 and 12 year olds are more susceptible to concussions. Once you have had a concussions, you're more susceptible to future concussions. All reasons to delay body contact.

As for the 33%. WE'll agree to disagree. Why would they qualify the 33% percent with a statement about AB PeeWee players if they're comparing AB Bantam to QC Bantam players? That doesn't make ANY sense at all. What do PeeWee stats in AB have to do with AB Bantam and QC Bantam players.

Bobblehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2013, 11:03 AM
  #288
PokeCheck101
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 523
vCash: 500
Hockey Alberta Gets It Wrong

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The decision to remove body contact from pee wee is wrong. Although fostered with the right intentions, ie) player safety, this is not the solution. The solution is to introduce angling, board safety/awareness, receiving/giving a check at the atom level. In fact I introduce these elements at novice. There is an obligation on coaches to ensure their players at atom have the physical and mental capability to play contact hockey with confidence. This only happens when players have the proper instruction. This should not be left to introduce at the bantam level. With the greatest variations in size and weight occurring at bantam there surely will be a spike in injuries in AB because of this or there will be a drop in enrolment. The real solution is enhance non contact hockey leagues and provide an option.

What concerns me the most is this decision was made by adults on behalf of kids. Many many kids enjoy contact (legal) hockey. Put the effort into enhancing clinics for coaching and retaining quality coaches who can teach this aspect to kids in a safe manner. I have run many hockey camps, coached a fair share of elite athletes and you would not believe the amount of kids playing contact at pw, bantam and midget who can not hold their body weight in a push up position longer than 5 seconds. That is what is dangerous. Kids with little to no core body strength and these same parents expect me to teach their child at 14 how to body check. You can't put the cart before the horse. You require body strength. Then when you tell the parent their child is not physically in shape to safely play contact hockey, they are mortified and appalled. I think a greater degree of education and awareness is the answer. Alberta got it wrong, SHA don't follow their lead.

PokeCheck101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2013, 11:05 AM
  #289
PokeCheck101
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 523
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobblehead View Post
Yes they need to follow up with a plan to introduce checking through clinics, practices and other methods..... minor/major system?
I totally advocate a minor and major pee wee level. Make your AA/AAA rep team your major pee wee team and your minor AA team is house league/developmental. Teach them the proper skills that will keep them safe moving forward to the next year and beyond.

PokeCheck101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2013, 10:32 PM
  #290
THEWARRIOR
Registered User
 
THEWARRIOR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 571
vCash: 500
Typical Hockey Alberta ******** because they want girls to play longer, Now the first time a kid gets hit is when he in tuned by a bigger Bantam kid. No wonder the Russians are kicking your World JR *****

THEWARRIOR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2013, 10:34 PM
  #291
Tad Mikowsky
Retired
 
Tad Mikowsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,442
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by THEWARRIOR View Post
Typical Hockey Alberta ******** because they want girls to play longer, Now the first time a kid gets hit is when he in tuned by a bigger Bantam kid. No wonder the Russians are kicking your World JR *****
This is just an ignorant and pointless comment.

Tad Mikowsky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2013, 10:36 PM
  #292
molsonmuscle360
Registered User
 
molsonmuscle360's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Ft. McMurray Ab
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,271
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by THEWARRIOR View Post
Typical Hockey Alberta ******** because they want girls to play longer, Now the first time a kid gets hit is when he in tuned by a bigger Bantam kid. No wonder the Russians are kicking your World JR *****
Dude, the hardest I ever got laid out in Peewee hockey was by a chick. It was this 5'4ish 190lb chick from Whitewood, SK. She could hit like a truck, and trying to hit her was like hitting a brick wall.

molsonmuscle360 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2013, 10:56 PM
  #293
Bryanbryoil
Moderator
I Know A Thing Or 6
 
Bryanbryoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: About Winning
Posts: 50,625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by molsonmuscle360 View Post
Dude, the hardest I ever got laid out in Peewee hockey was by a chick. It was this 5'4ish 190lb chick from Whitewood, SK. She could hit like a truck, and trying to hit her was like hitting a brick wall.
THEWARRIOR would've put her in her place because he IS THEWARRIOR.

Bryanbryoil is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2013, 11:02 PM
  #294
THEWARRIOR
Registered User
 
THEWARRIOR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 571
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryanbryoil View Post
THEWARRIOR would've put her in her place because he IS THEWARRIOR.
Thank you Bryan and Hockey Alberta is a political wing that makes decisions based on the amount of money organizations make. Hockey Alberta as a whole doesn't do enough for native hockey kids

THEWARRIOR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2013, 11:12 PM
  #295
Bryanbryoil
Moderator
I Know A Thing Or 6
 
Bryanbryoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: About Winning
Posts: 50,625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by THEWARRIOR View Post
Thank you Bryan and Hockey Alberta is a political wing that makes decisions based on the amount of money organizations make. Hockey Alberta as a whole doesn't do enough for native hockey kids
I'm pretty ignorant on the subject TBH, are you back in the states?

Bryanbryoil is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2013, 11:20 PM
  #296
goaliedad29
Registered User
 
goaliedad29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 55
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobblehead View Post
Experts are finding that cumulative effects of concussions may be more serious than we thought. 11 and 12 year olds are more susceptible to concussions. Once you have had a concussions, you're more susceptible to future concussions. All reasons to delay body contact.

As for the 33%. WE'll agree to disagree. Why would they qualify the 33% percent with a statement about AB PeeWee players if they're comparing AB Bantam to QC Bantam players? That doesn't make ANY sense at all. What do PeeWee stats in AB have to do with AB Bantam and QC Bantam players.
Last comment I'll make... this statement is not about the peewee players. It is about the 33% fewer serious injuries experienced by the Bantam players in Alberta who have already had 2 years of bodychecking under their belt as compared to the Bantam players in Quebec who are bodychecking for the first time!

goaliedad29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-12-2013, 11:28 PM
  #297
Bobblehead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tad Mikowsky View Post
This is just an ignorant and pointless comment.
He forgot to mention USA is kicking our butt too! Oh, but they don't have checking in PeeWee, how can that be?

Bobblehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-25-2013, 02:19 PM
  #298
402
#ualberta
 
402's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Edmonton
Country: Egypt
Posts: 2,853
vCash: 500
@DarrenDreger: Hockey Canada federations vote in favor of removing bodychecking from Pee Wee hockey, coast to coast in Canada.

@HockeyCanada: The Hockey Canada Board of Directors has voted to eliminate body-checking from Peewee hockey.

Well there it is no checking in pee wee coast to coast

402 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-25-2013, 02:24 PM
  #299
AlowlyOilersfan
Comrade
 
AlowlyOilersfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,042
vCash: 177
As a 24 year old, maybe now I can play peewee hockey without fear of getting my head taken off.

AlowlyOilersfan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2013, 10:38 PM
  #300
Everest
Registered User
 
Everest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 10,392
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=Mentallydull;65861579]The question would be - when the size difference is even larger, wouldn't that make you feel even more uncomfortable out on the ice?

Personally, my first year of Pee Wee was the toughest. The size ratio was much more in my favor in my 2nd year of Pee Wee.

As a first year bantam, I was able to finally play with full confidence because all those biggest, strongest 2nd year Bantam kids were already harvested into the Major Bantam program.

One of the big things to remember...Pee Wee doesn't have "AAA" hockey and you tend to get a wide range of skill & size ratios on the ice at the same time. It gets levelled off much more in Bantam.

Obviously this is ONLY a "personal experience"...but...its an HONEST experience...rather than the BS so many people are spewing in protest about this rule change.

Guys going on about how they learned so much MORE by taking/giving body checks in Pee Wee...Im not buying it. It is simply NOT something that is CRITICAL at that age.

Everest 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 12:36 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.