USA Hockey has ruined Youth Hockey with their New Rules for the 21-22 Season

The Crypto Guy

Registered User
Jun 26, 2017
26,577
33,819
Edit - this basically pertains to Bantam and Midget levels, the hitting levels, 13 and older.



What the hell was USA hockey thinking when they sat down this summer and thought the changes they would make would be beneficial to the sport?

Major changes:

1) Players are NO LONGER allowed to check an opponent if his stick on not on the ice and he is not actively trying to play the puck. Yes, that means all those great hits where the players keep their arms down and hit their man in the chest is now an illegal hit and called roughing. Going into the corner and want to play the man who has the puck? BOOM, your sitting for 2 minutes for roughing since you did not try to get the puck with your stick.

2) Players are NO LONGER allowed to finish a check once the puck is released. Yes, this was always pretty much a rule but there was a very short grace period. That period is now ZERO. If you land a hit and the guy does not have the puck, even for a quarter second, you are sitting for roughing.

3) A player who is actively engaged with another player made not be hit by another player. I'm ok with this. Usually, they are in vulnerable positions and have no idea someone is coming in to blindside them.

3) Tag-up offsides have been ELIMINATED in all youth levels. Everything is automatic offsides. Great way to slow the game down tremendously and cause all sorts of sloppy play in the neutral zone as players are trying to get wait for their team to get back onsides.

4) Icing the puck during a PK has now been ELIMINATED in all youth levels. Yea, slow the game down even more. Lots of whistles.

5) All major penalties are now automatic game misconducts/suspensions. Yes, no more discretion for the referee. Used to be if there was an injury it was automatic game misconduct, made things simple, now they have eliminated that wording. The player could pop right back up and it won't matter, kid is leaving the game and sitting next game. I'm fine with player safety but didn't think there were any problems how it previously was.



I referee at a pretty high level and started getting my feet wet into coaching, I can say after the first few weeks of these new rules, NOBODY is happy. Players, coaches, referees, parents....nobody wants to hit because it's not worth it anymore, everything these kids have been taught has been thrown out. Everything these kids watch on TV is now illegal.

Is this how you try and grow the games? People are going to stop playing, it has gotten that bad. From game to game, ref to ref, the calls are wildly inconsistent because they just don't allow for anything. Refereeing has always been difficult to please people, now they have made it 10x worse.

The worst part is, none of these kids will know how to hit when they start playing High School hockey, where they don't have this garbage in their rulebooks. Kids will end up seriously injured because they never prepared properly for hitting.

Shame on you USA Hockey.
 

The Crypto Guy

Registered User
Jun 26, 2017
26,577
33,819
Love to hear how other USA Hockey referees, coaches, parents, and players are adjusting to the new rules if their seasons have started..
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sweetpotato

The Crypto Guy

Registered User
Jun 26, 2017
26,577
33,819
Will USA Hockey provide a whistle stipend to on-ice officials, to cover the cost of several replacements per season? They won't last forever at this rate.
Haha I know. Games are already running late, because of the excessive amount of whistles.
 

JustJokinenAround

just a goofball
Feb 5, 2018
1,015
536
a local rink
2) Players are NO LONGER allowed to finish a check once the puck is released. Yes, this was always pretty much a rule but there was a very short grace period. That period is now ZERO. If you land a hit and the guy does not have the puck, even for a quarter second, you are sitting for roughing.
well then i could have called 100 maybe 200 penalties if thats the case this weekend
 

Alexander the Gr8

Registered User
May 2, 2013
31,814
13,130
Toronto
The forbidden icing on the PK sounds the worst. What are you supposed to do on a 5 vs 3 PK if you’re on the short handed team if you can’t ice the puck?

You probably ice it anyway because skating it up the ice against 3 guys is a guaranteed way to turn the puck over.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nerowoy nora tolad

Mr Jiggyfly

Registered User
Jan 29, 2004
34,319
19,392
What I'd like to know is why so many Americans refer to a player being offsides? Why do you plural offside?

On everything else I agree with you.

There are two sides of the blue line so I guess it sounds weird to say “offside”.

My wife is Canadian and got annoyed when I said “offsides”, so that’s how I explained it to her - but she just looked at me like I was a moron…

So I made fun of Zed and she left me alone.
 
Last edited:

LosVikingsDeChicago

Registered User
Aug 2, 2005
289
12
USA Hockey never thinks about goalies. Preventing icing on the penalty kill removes the goalie's ability to play the puck. Absolutely hate the no tag up offsides. The games really drag without.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nerowoy nora tolad

New User Name

Registered User
Jan 2, 2008
12,913
1,769
LOL A legitimate question and I get one legitimate response.

Didn't realize something so trivial could trigger so many of my fellow Americans.

By the way Zed is the way it is pronounced by the majority of the English speaking world.

Guess they didn't need a silly song to learn the alphabet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Laodongxi

Mr Jiggyfly

Registered User
Jan 29, 2004
34,319
19,392
LOL A legitimate question and I get one legitimate response.

Didn't realize something so trivial could trigger so many of my fellow Americans.

By the way Zed is the way it is pronounced by the majority of the English speaking world.

Guess they didn't need a silly song to learn the alphabet.

I’m quite aware of the history of Z, more than most since meeting my Canadian wife and exploring the history of the letter quite extensively.

However, my wife and Canadian friends are quite sensitive about ZED and it triggers a lot of them, so let’s not pretend it’s just Americans who get triggered about their language.

Sort of like why it perplexes me that many Canadians give their weight in pounds, instead of kilos.

“But you guys use the metric system… why are you using lbs…”

My wife “We just do, it’s the older generations fault, let it go. At least we don’t think water freezes at 32 degrees!”

Oh.. ok. Just thought I’d ask…

And if I discuss Canadian raising with about and house, that really seems to trigger a lot of Canadians.

I get annoyed about the half-boards thing myself when Canadians tell me it’s stupid.

So again, we all have an abundance of things we find funny that Americans/Canadians say.

It’s certainly not exclusive to Americans to be annoyed when someone questions why we say the things we do.
 
Last edited:

New User Name

Registered User
Jan 2, 2008
12,913
1,769
I’m quite aware of the history of Z, more than most since meeting my Canadian wife and exploring the history of the letter quite extensively.

However, my wife and Canadian friends are quite sensitive about ZED and it triggers a lot of them, so let’s not pretend it’s just Americans who get triggered about their language.

Sort of like why it perplexes me that many Canadians give their weight in pounds, instead of kilos.

“But you guys use the metric system… why are you using lbs…”

My wife “We just do, it’s the older generations fault, let it go. At least we don’t think water freezes at 32 degrees!”

Oh.. ok. Just thought I’d ask…

And if I discuss Canadian raising with about and house, that really seems to trigger a lot of Canadians.

I get annoyed about the half-boards thing myself when Canadians tell me it’s stupid.

So again, we all have an abundance of things we find funny that Americans/Canadians say.

It’s certainly not exclusive to Americans to be annoyed when someone questions why we say the things we do.

JMCx4 was the only one that gave a possible explanation. It was a simple question. It's not offsides in football or soccer so why hockey?

As for Z I say izzard. LOL
 

Mr Jiggyfly

Registered User
Jan 29, 2004
34,319
19,392
JMCx4 was the only one that gave a possible explanation. It was a simple question. It's not offsides in football or soccer so why hockey?

As for Z I say izzard. LOL

I thought I gave a very articulate answer to, cmon. Two sides… plural… uh…

That’s honestly all I have - my wife asked me this when we were first together and I never realized about the whole offside/offsides thing.

My coaches said offsides, my friends, dad, whomever said offsides, so I started saying it.

Somewhere long ago someone started saying offsides first and it’s that person’s fault.
 

Nerowoy nora tolad

Registered User
May 9, 2018
1,407
654
Gladstone, Australia
Edit - this basically pertains to Bantam and Midget levels, the hitting levels, 13 and older.



What the hell was USA hockey thinking when they sat down this summer and thought the changes they would make would be beneficial to the sport?

Major changes:

1) Players are NO LONGER allowed to check an opponent if his stick on not on the ice and he is not actively trying to play the puck. Yes, that means all those great hits where the players keep their arms down and hit their man in the chest is now an illegal hit and called roughing. Going into the corner and want to play the man who has the puck? BOOM, your sitting for 2 minutes for roughing since you did not try to get the puck with your stick.

2) Players are NO LONGER allowed to finish a check once the puck is released. Yes, this was always pretty much a rule but there was a very short grace period. That period is now ZERO. If you land a hit and the guy does not have the puck, even for a quarter second, you are sitting for roughing.

3) A player who is actively engaged with another player made not be hit by another player. I'm ok with this. Usually, they are in vulnerable positions and have no idea someone is coming in to blindside them.

3) Tag-up offsides have been ELIMINATED in all youth levels. Everything is automatic offsides. Great way to slow the game down tremendously and cause all sorts of sloppy play in the neutral zone as players are trying to get wait for their team to get back onsides.

4) Icing the puck during a PK has now been ELIMINATED in all youth levels. Yea, slow the game down even more. Lots of whistles.

5) All major penalties are now automatic game misconducts/suspensions. Yes, no more discretion for the referee. Used to be if there was an injury it was automatic game misconduct, made things simple, now they have eliminated that wording. The player could pop right back up and it won't matter, kid is leaving the game and sitting next game. I'm fine with player safety but didn't think there were any problems how it previously was.



I referee at a pretty high level and started getting my feet wet into coaching, I can say after the first few weeks of these new rules, NOBODY is happy. Players, coaches, referees, parents....nobody wants to hit because it's not worth it anymore, everything these kids have been taught has been thrown out. Everything these kids watch on TV is now illegal.

Is this how you try and grow the games? People are going to stop playing, it has gotten that bad. From game to game, ref to ref, the calls are wildly inconsistent because they just don't allow for anything. Refereeing has always been difficult to please people, now they have made it 10x worse.

The worst part is, none of these kids will know how to hit when they start playing High School hockey, where they don't have this garbage in their rulebooks. Kids will end up seriously injured because they never prepared properly for hitting.

Shame on you USA Hockey.

#1: Yeah this is bad. Lots of room to restrict dangerous aspects of hitting, but removing the purposeful bodycheck entirely is a loss to the sport

#2: On the one hand this is very restrictive, but Ive always felt hockey was long overdue for a crackdown on players trying to destroy each other behind the play on the basis of a puck that the hittee long since gave up control of. At the same time I think there are at least 5 or 6 ways this could be written with some sort of looser criteria for what constitutes a late hit without penalizing the player who commences contact a microsecond after the puck has left. Something like is the puck carrier controllin or within a stride of controlling the puck, then hitting is fair game.

Also if this is written as roughing, whoever wrote that needs to give their heads a shake. Its interference, and its just as important to get the penalty type right so the players can understand what they did wrong on the way to the box. An angry player sitting for two while having no idea what they did wrong is a recipe for frustration and retaliation.

On the whole though, I think this is a good rule that needed to happen. People often forget that the concept of "finishing your check" is really only an obsession since the 80s, and interference used to be called as its written in the book before the 70s or so.

#3: Again a good, probably overdue idea especially for the youth levels

#4: no tag up offsides. Just baffling. No conceivable benefit to this that I can see, and it isnt like this is a new idea that hasnt been tried before and failed badly. A bad idea at the NHL level, catastrophically bad at the youth level.

#5: no PK icing. Ive heard of the NHL wanting to implement this for a while now probably as one of the idiotic quick-fix-for-more-offence rule changes that the leagues offices formulate. I dont have a really good argument against it at the NHL level other than its one of the changes that alters the sport too much on a fundamental level.

At the youth level, this will just bleed time and money for everyone involved. Maybe you could argue it makes following the rulebook more impactful as power-plays will now be much more OP, but that leads into the last point

#6: Without getting too political, mandatory minimums almost always end up being a bad idea. In the case of hockey refereeing , the fact that calling some penalty will almost undoubtedly put the penalized team at a significant disadvantage tends to discourage those calls at all.
 

Bear of Bad News

Your Third or Fourth Favorite HFBoards Admin
Sep 27, 2005
13,549
27,109
LOL A legitimate question and I get one legitimate response.

Didn't realize something so trivial could trigger so many of my fellow Americans.

By the way Zed is the way it is pronounced by the majority of the English speaking world.

Guess they didn't need a silly song to learn the alphabet.

Why does every single thing that people respond to have to be "triggering"? Can't people just respond to shit? It's a discussion forum.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad