Hockey Alberta eliminates body checking in Pee Wee

[Drake]

Hockey Canada is expected to eliminate body checking all together in Canada at the Pee Wee level later this month in meetings. Hockey Nova Scotia has followed suit with Hockey Alberta eliminating body checking at the Pee Wee level. Hockey Nova Scotia is also eliminating body checking all together in the lower levels of Bantam and Midget levels.

Nova Scotia has become the second province to remove body checking from all levels of peewee hockey starting next season. Alberta made the same decision earlier this week.

"At its core, this decision is all about the safety of our players," said Hockey Nova Scotia's president Randy Pulsifer. "We have seen a great deal of evidence that body checking is the biggest risk factor when it comes to injuries and concussions in minor hockey."

Hockey Canada is expected to make this rule change mandatory coast-to-coast in meetings later this month.

Last fall, Hockey Nova Scotia created a commission to look at the issue, meeting with medical officials and reviewed scientific research. The coommittee recommended body checking be removed from all levels of peewee hockey and also the lower levels of bantam and midget hockey.

"This weekend, we saw overwhelming support for these recommendations," said Pulsifer in a statement. "It's great to see our hockey administrators from across the province showing real leadership in making the game safer for our players."

The decision came as welcome news to those in the medical community.
"By doing this, Hockey Nova Scotia is reducing the risk of children receiving a head injury at these levels by over two thirds," said Dr. Kevin Gordon, head of pediatric neurology at the IWK Health

http://www.tsn.ca/canadian_hockey/story/?id=423015

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

So do you care to share with us why you are not playing sr. Mens hockey?


I admit that even in my adult prime I was likely no where good enough to play, but I could not wrap my head around playing sr. Mens hockey for a stipend/free sticks etc. I like to show up for work in the morning with all my teeth in my mouth.

Time and money mostly. Working full time and coaching AA Bantam takes up a lot of energy, amongst trying to have a social life.

I've joined non-contact leagues before and don't enjoy it mostly because there was no contact. I'm not asking to be able to run over guys, but as a defenseman, being able to lean on a guy without him crumbling like Ryan Kesler would be nice.

But this is getting off-topic, I think I've clearly shown where I stand on this issue. I'll probably e able to join a league in a couple years after I'm sick of seeing my kids getting checked from behind/boarded/elbowed consistently because none of them have a clue what those things are.

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Time and money mostly. Working full time and coaching AA Bantam takes up a lot of energy, amongst trying to have a social life.

I've joined non-contact leagues before and don't enjoy it mostly because there was no contact. I'm not asking to be able to run over guys, but as a defenseman, being able to lean on a guy without him crumbling like Ryan Kesler would be nice.

But this is getting off-topic, I think I've clearly shown where I stand on this issue. I'll probably e able to join a league in a couple years after I'm sick of seeing my kids getting checked from behind/boarded/elbowed consistently because none of them have a clue what those things are.

Which club are you coaching? Flames/Northstars/Buffs/Royals?
Small community, I'm sure we know the same people.

Few more points:
I'm quite surprised as a coach of players in the AA program, you weren't first privy to the proposed rule changes within the organization & secondly, why you're disagreeing with hard data?

What's causing your disagreement? You mention seeing your players not handling the physicality --- do you propose starting the hitting earlier? Based upon what?

[The Ditch]

Could you explain your argument about how delaying bodychecking for two years somehow makes kids incapable of learning to check and also apparently will make them into goons who will (un?)intentionally injure others. Are they also injecting chemicals into their brains as part of the new legislation?

[Coach]

Ok, I will preface this by saying I have not thoroughly read the study that most people are discussing in here and my thoughts are purely based off of the observations I have made throughout the last few years of coaching.

The Ditch: My argument is not that they can't learn at that age, it's that you are now having them learn at an age when the size difference between players can be quite significant. And its not that they automatically become goons, its that they actually won't know what is legal and whats not. And it scares me a lot more with the varied size (4'10, 100 lbs - 6'2, 220 lbs) than the collisons that happen between PeeWee kids who will mostly be under about 5'6 and be in mostly the same weight class. As said above, the idea that some kids might be going from PeeWee Div 1 and 2 to Bantam AA/AAA without experience giving or receiving body checks. Just from seeing first hand the speed and the drive the kids have to be physcially involved in the game (especially considering its been delayed another two years), some of these kids could be in pretty tough.

cam: There was rumblings of this happening, but the first I learned of them legislating this was when I saw this thread. As I said above my main concern is the size differnece in Bantam vs PeeWee and the speed at which collisions happen. Maybe when that is adjusted to the brain development stage for PeeWee kids the data says it affects them more, but I'm not a doctor and statistics can have pretty large gaps that do not necessarily fit into real-life practice. But I also think it is unfair to the kids who want that as part of their game and to see it taken out because some kids/parents don't want it in. There are non-contact options for all levels so why do we need this change? If the argument that the quality of competition in non-contact is lower, well of course it is. Thats because the kids with talent and drive to play at a high level WANT to be involved in the contact. I know this because I'm around them all the time.

And to that point, my last argument is why do we need a pillow on everything? Kids will do things much more high impact and detrimental to their brain function in the school yard than they will encounter playing PeeWee hockey. They will jump off roofs, trampolines, jump staircases on skateboards, or play games that revolve purely around trying to hit other kids. Its just the nature of kids (boys in particular). Why not give them a physical outlet where they have a full suit of armour on?

EDIT: Again, purely based on my own observations and the fact that I am relatively young (23) and not far removed from the attitude of these kids.

[Derek Sutton]

Hockey Canada ‏@HockeyCanada 15m
The Hockey Canada Board of Directors has voted to eliminate body-checking from Peewee hockey.

[Zarley]

Booooooooo-urns.

[jayswin]

Crappy. Oh well.

[edn88]

I grew up with no body-contact in peewee and when I hit bantam there was an adjustment that needed to be made.

Coaching was terrible about teaching how to hit and how to receive a hit etc. I like the idea of having coaching standards on hitting (and ensuring that violent open ice hits are removed - properly enforce charging, roughing, kneeing, elbowing, etc).

[Azure]

Perhaps they should teach and allow hitting in practice, but not during the games.

[Northendzone]

That is what will likely start happening in practices in mid-January and later.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Azure

Perhaps they should teach and allow hitting in practice, but not during the games.

That idea makes a lot of sense

[valo403]

Not at all surprised to see that independent contact leagues are sprouting up

http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews...30-112610.html

[Northendzone]

not surprised, but it will be interesting to see/compare:
- the cost of his league to Brandon Minor Hockey Association (BMHA - or whatever they are called)
- Not sure how many teams are currently in Brandon, but if his league only has 5 teams, I wonder if the skill level across the team would be wider than you might expect (i.e. two kids who can wheel and three ankle benders) compared to a typical BMHA team (I have no insight into how they set up teams)
- wonder if the insurance company will use this as a chance to jack up insurance rates compared to what they have historically charged

other funny thing is that it is the parents deciding if they want little johnny to play contact - or course little johnny wants to play contact becasue kids see themselves as the one dishing out the hit - maybe johnny changes his mind about contact hockey after he gets smoked.....then what

[Northendzone]

Originally Posted by Azure

Perhaps they should teach and allow hitting in practice, but not during the games.

the only thing i don't like about this is that then you are conditioning players to do somehting in practice that they can't do in a game. it is sort of like not stopping a drill in practice because a kid is offside.

[Derek Sutton]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

the only thing i don't like about this is that then you are conditioning players to do somehting in practice that they can't do in a game. it is sort of like not stopping a drill in practice because a kid is offside.

Don't be so literal, I understand teaching and introducing body checking as doing a few drills and teaching kids what is right and what is wrong, how to, and when (which is what will be recommended to Pee Wee coaches) not full on contact scrimages.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Derek Sutton

Don't be so literal, I understand teaching and introducing body checking as doing a few drills and teaching kids what is right and what is wrong, how to, and when (which is what will be recommended to Pee Wee coaches) not full on contact scrimages.

It still creates a situation where players are developing responses to situations that involve the use of contact, and then asks them to forget that for games. It's not easy, especially for a developing player, to just switch back and forth which is something you need to consider when developing drills etc.

[Northendzone]

Originally Posted by Derek Sutton

Don't be so literal, I understand teaching and introducing body checking as doing a few drills and teaching kids what is right and what is wrong, how to, and when (which is what will be recommended to Pee Wee coaches) not full on contact scrimages.

i will note that i do understand what you are saying. Last season i was one of the assistant coaches on my sons team and when our season was done, we did pracice some hitting drills at the very end of the season.

You can still teach body position without contact.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

i will note that i do understand what you are saying. Last season i was one of the assistant coaches on my sons team and when our season was done, we did pracice some hitting drills at the very end of the season.

You can still teach body position without contact.

I wonder if hit should be introduced in stages. I am nowhere near an expert on the subject, but other sports introduce contact increasing levels with age. Perhaps there is a way it could be introduced in Atom, developed further in PeeWee and full contact by Bantam. I can't speak to how this would be undertaken, or the steps of implementation, but it might make the adjustment to hitting smoother.

Just a thought.

[Azure]

Teaching players to keep their head up is very valuable considering there can be collisions where two players don't see each other, even if hitting is illegal.