Checking Eliminated in Pee Wee Hockey

Checking Eliminated in Pee Wee Hockey

USA Hockey
USA Hockey

June 15th, 2011, 8:51 pm #1

"USA Hockey eliminates checking for Pee Wees"


USA Hockey, the governing body for youth hockey in the United States, voted today to remove checking for players aged 12 and under. The rule change proposal, named the "Checking Skill Development Program," was a somewhat controversial decision. Many parents, players and coaches in Western Michigan are split in their support of the move, which affects all levels of hockey, including Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III.



Previously, checking was not allowed for Squirts and Mites, or youth players 10-years-old and younger. The new rule means that birth-year 99 players who are 12-years-old this year and were able to check last season will not be able to do so this year, which will take some adjustment. Once they reach the Bantam level, which is comprised of youths aged 13-14, they may resume checking. This is frustrating for many players and coaches who will have to change their playing and coaching styles from past years. Players who have learned to hit and be hit will now have to play a completely different game for the upcoming season, one that is more based on skating, passing, and stick-handling.



USA Hockey's decision is motivated in part by growing concerns over concussions in youth hockey. Recent data compiled on youth hockey shows that the serious injury rate at Pee Wee is four times greater in checking versus non-checking leagues. According to other studies conducted by USA Hockey and in Canada, the brain of an 11 or 12-year-old is not mature enough to make the decisions necessary to protect themselves or others when checking or receiving a check. The proposal introduced by USA Hockey stated that "players at the Pee Wee level tend to either let the opponent get the puck first so that they can initiate body contact or they lay off so that they don’t get hit."



The board of governors at USA Hockey determined from their research that allowing Pee Wee players to check was hindering hockey development at an age level that is a "prime window" of acquisition for sports skills. The rule change also ties into the ADM, or American Development Model, which has been instituted by USA Hockey over the past few years. The ADM calls for more emphasis on skill development at younger ages, including the elimination of travel hockey for Mites, the introduction of cross-ice rather than full-ice games for Mites, and the elimination of a national championship for Pee Wee hockey, among other initiatives. The board has assured coaches, parents, and players that body contact will still be taught at all levels, despite being eliminated from games.



"USA Hockey has the training and support elements in place for our coaches and referees," said Ron DeGregorio, president of USA Hockey. "Parents should know that this program will better prepare their children for the physical part of the game. It should produce less risk since we will be training players in body contact at an earlier age in a progressive manner. We'll also be tightening up the standard of play for intimidation hits in the youth checking divisions."



The decision was passed "overwhelmingly" by the board, according to a released statement. Several members of the board with impressive credentials and experience supported the vote publicly.



"With the knowledge base we have on child development, this is without question the right way forward," said Bret Hedican, former NHL player and two-time Olympian. "Today is a significant one for our sport."

Quote
Share

uh
uh

June 20th, 2011, 1:29 pm #2

2 more years of playing with your head down
Quote
Share

agree
agree

June 20th, 2011, 11:51 pm #3

The pussification of America continues. Now kids with their head down will be getting crushed by 180 lbs kids now. Common sense has left the building. Girl's hockey...yeah. Games will be twice as long because of all the penalties. We will get crushed on the international stage because little johnny now plays like little Janie. Thanks USA hockey. Is Minnesota hockey adopting this rule?
Quote
Share

guest
guest

June 21st, 2011, 3:04 pm #4

Is Canada?.....Nooooo!!!
Enforce the rules(Ill refs r awful at this)regarding boarding,charging and checks
from behind and the kids learn how to check and more importantly be checked.
By waiting till Bantam the kids lose 2 years of valuable game feedback
on whats acceptable and responsible behavior on the ice.Under this rule
the first contact they will have is right about the time many of them
r hitting puberty and the testosterone starts to flow.Probably not a great
time to teach kids how to control their actions during games.
Quote
Share

Canadiens
Canadiens

June 21st, 2011, 5:13 pm #5


Results of Bodychecking in Youth Hockey Examined Canadian study finds injury rates at age 13-14 don't depend on age when kids began bodychecking

HealthDay ON Jun 20, 2011 at 12:00PM
chime in now
Add save! | | | MONDAY, June 20 (HealthDay News) -- The overall risk of injury and concussion among young ice hockey players is not affected by the age at which they're first allowed to bodycheck, according to a new study.

Canadian researchers analyzed data from youth hockey leagues in Alberta, which allowsbodychecking at the Pee Wee level (ages 11 to 12), and in Quebec, which introduces bodychecking at the Bantam level (ages 13 to 14).

The study included 995 players from 68 Bantam teams in Alberta with two years of bodychecking experience at the Pee Wee level, and 976 players from 62 Bantam teams in Quebec with no bodychecking experience.

The two groups of players had similar injury rates. During 96,907 player-hours in Alberta, there were a total of 272 injuries, including 51 concussions. During 85,464 player-hours in Quebec, there were 244 injuries, including 49 concussions, the investigators found.

Among the other findings:

•In both provinces, head and shoulder injuries were the most common.
•Previous injuries and concussions were risk factors for future injuries.
•First-year Bantam players were at higher risk for injury than second-year players.
•The risk of an injury that led to more than seven days of lost playing time was 33 percent lower in leagues where bodychecking was introduced in Pee Wee level.
"These findings need to be interpreted in light of previous evidence of more than a threefold increased risk of concussion and all injury among players aged 11 to 12 years in a league where bodychecking is permitted," the researchers concluded in the report published online June 20 in CMAJ: the Canadian Medical Association Journal.


Read More http://www.ivillage.com/results-bodyche ... z1PvoaZIet
Sign up for iVillage Special Offers
Quote
Share

YEAH
YEAH

June 22nd, 2011, 4:48 pm #6

THERE IS A STUDY THAT SHOWS THAT IF YOU WEREN'T ALLOWED TO ACTUALLY TACKLE SOMEONE IN A TACKLE FOOTBALL LEAGUE UNTIL AGE 13, THEN INJURIES WOULD BE DIMINISHED IN THE 11-12 YEAR OLD DIVISION BY 500 PERCENT.

SIGN ME UP.
Quote
Share

Checking Rule
Checking Rule

June 24th, 2011, 12:59 pm #7

Checking has to start somewhere and Bantam seems perfect based on the research, injuries, and the need for a focus on skill development.

Those who complain, why wouldn't you complain that it doesn't start in Squirt, Mite, or Pre-Mite?
Some complain just because they think its cool and tough to promote checking. Fuck that, plenty of time to check all through Bantam, High School, College.......

The rule of being able to ride off the player will be a good transition for players going from Pee Wee to Bantam.

Great job committee.
Quote
Share

Grandfather
Grandfather

June 24th, 2011, 4:03 pm #8

The no checking rule is not so great for the 99 age group that has learned to check , played 50 + games with checking, and now has to UN- Learn a skill that they have essenially been using for 15 months. There will be bad calls, probably that decide games while we unlearn this part of the game, only to start using checking again less than 12 months. This was very poor insight by the committee. Understood why they can't mix age years at the AA level, but it easily could have been done at the AAA level for a National year. Poor judgement!
Quote
Share

Hey Idiot
Hey Idiot

June 24th, 2011, 5:04 pm #9

Checking has to start somewhere and Bantam seems perfect based on the research, injuries, and the need for a focus on skill development.

Those who complain, why wouldn't you complain that it doesn't start in Squirt, Mite, or Pre-Mite?
Some complain just because they think its cool and tough to promote checking. Fuck that, plenty of time to check all through Bantam, High School, College.......

The rule of being able to ride off the player will be a good transition for players going from Pee Wee to Bantam.

Great job committee.
Maybe for your kid because he is a pussy. Go tell your little bender to try soccer. Hey was that a blue puck that just fell out of your candy ass.
Quote
Share

Anon
Anon

June 24th, 2011, 9:39 pm #10

So.... When silver sticks come around, will the kids from the US have to learn to check again up there. Just curious how that will work out?
Quote
Share