Eddie Shore

Yes. So, I want my son to play contact hockey. Well, he can't play single A cause it's no contact. So, he plays AA or AAA. Then a few years later in Midgets all of a sudden some kid doesn't make the team, and it's unfair cause he has been play 2-hand touch hockey all is life, and now we have to change! Like I said, kids can get hurt anywhere, and taking checking out does decrease the likely hood, but it will never be fully eliminated.

I have to disagree. If there are parents out there that are so concerned about an injury that "might" happen to their kid, then don't let them play. Or, create your own league with no checking, or have them play roller hockey, but don't make all of us follow your rules. But, that's not the way we do things anymore. Some people think that something is too dangerous, so the rest of the world has to follow their rules. My son was old enough and began checking as a PeeWee, I was fine with it and so was he. Could he have gotten hurt? Sure. Has he gotten hurt? Yes, but checking didn't have anything to do with it. Sorry to come across like a jerk, but I feel we are slowly destroying the sport. I never wanted to see anyone get hurt, but it happens. Sometimes it because of checking and sometimes it's not. So, once we taking checking out, what's next? Don't say nothing, because there will always be something else to take away from the game. Eventually, it will be something you disagree with. Then, you will know how some of the rest of us feel. Just glad my kid is done after this year.

Call me a cynic, but here is how I see it happening. They will take it out of the lower levels, then a few years later some spoiled Little Johnny is going to come along and get cut from a team and Loud Mouth Hockey Mom is going to pitch a fit that it is unfair because her kid is being unfairly discriminated against and is going to cause such a stink that they are going to do away with it for everyone. Sorry to be such a downer, it's just that parents ruin everything eventually.

WOW. I too have my opinion skewed by what I think logic dictates (older, faster, stronger = more, worse injuries). I will have to spend some more time researching this. I'll let you know if I find any studies that refute this study.

Thanks for the input. I appreciate your point of view. So, let me ask you a question. You say that injuries have decreased in PeeWee's once checking was removed, and this makes sense. However, since it was removed from PeeWee's, what effect did this have on Bantams? Did it go up? I would bet it has. And, if we take checking out of Bantam's, I am am sure injuries will go down there, but I would also assume it will go up in Midgets. My point is, the longer you delay the learning process, the worse the effect will be in the older age groups (you are just creating a snowball effect), it will go up and get worse due to larger, stronger players not knowing the correct way to play. Your plan would also create a barrier to development for any kid that wants to take up hockey after PeeWee's. A kid is going to play house league (or even single A under your plan) 1st year Bantam (which is non-checking), then says, "mom i want to tryout for PPE". What happens then? All I hear on this board is that, "my kid wanted to give PPE a shot, so I said yes". How bad are they going to do coming from a non-checking league, going up against players who have been playing at a high level, and have been checking! That's just a tryout nightmare waiting to happen. I do respect your opinion, and I am all for a non-checking house league (if that's what the kid wants to do). However, we all know that this discussion is not about what the kids want at all. Thanks for input though, appreciate the point of view.

Thank you sample, I couldn't have said it better myself. I think you are spot-on with your assessment. All you see is these panic stricken parents obsess over checking, and there is no need to. I actually heard several say that once little Johnny ages out of PeeWee's they were going to pull them out of ice and put them in roller hockey just because of the fear of checking! Yes, it was much better in PeeWee's because they were all small and really couldn't hit hard if they tried. And don't get me started on the roller hockey douches who are all big tough guys, cause they know they can't get hit! I agree, USA Hockey will once again go in the wrong direction and take it out of Bantams and put it in Midgets. That's a steep one-year learning curve for any kid who wants to play Juniors at age 16 for sure.

Here is a question for the group. Does it seem that in the last 5+ years or so, there has been this major fear of having kids check? My child is grown now, but 10 years ago I can tell you this was not the case (also checking started in PeeWee's then not Bantams). I mean kids play football before the age of 13 and there is tackling in that still right? So, why this huge concern? It seems that all you hear about from parents is this huge issue they have with checking. I have my own theories, but I would like to get input from others as well.

So, was it because of checking or % rule? Which is it?

So what is the "hitting" this person was talking about, I wonder?

Is there checking in Middle School hockey?

NOTE TO EVERYONE HERE Just to let everyone know that my post above from yesterday did not cause Brooks Orpik to retire today. This is not my fault. Best wishes Brooks!

Word I got was that it will be a rule at the start of the 2019 season. My guess is some butt-hurt parents complained to USA Hockey about how little Johnny got so upset when he got laid out while dangling with his head down and all the mean kids on the other team celebrated by banging on the boards. So, instead of telling him to keep his head up, we will just create this new declaration, which is all about eliminating physical play in the new "modern game". I would love to know what USA Hockey views as the new "modern game" of hockey. My guess is the goal is to create more Conner McDavids, Austin Matthews and Nikita Kucherovs. Gone will be the Scotty Stevens, Brooks Orpiks, Tom Wilsons and Ryan Reeves (although I always hated Reeves).

I have to go with King on this one as well. His post was spot on. While it is nice that one person credited USA Hockey, it is still just one. I am so glad that my kid is now out of this mess. For me it started when they moved checking from Peewees to Bantams. They younger you get them playing contact, the earlier you can teach them the right was and the responsible way to initiate contact. For me it was a bad move. Now with this years resolution there are even more useless rules.

Don't think it's about misconduct or abuse of Officials. Below is a link to the video from Pat Kelleher, where he explains it toward the end. It is geared towards when players on the bench cheer on a teammate for making a body check (even if it is a legal body check per the Declaration of Safety Fair Play and Respect). They have deemed it "disrespectful" to bang on the boards to applaud this going forward. This is the exact wording from the declaration: UNSPORTSMANLIKE CONDUCT A bench minor penalty for unsportsmanlike conduct shall be assessed to any team whose players or team officials commit the following actions while on the players’ bench: (5) Banging the boards with a stick or other object, including skates or arms, at any time, including after a body check regardless as to whether the check is being penalized.

So, the banging of the boards after the playing of the National Anthem, and when an injured player is helped off the ice is annoying?