The Fine Line Between Aggressive & Violent Play

If you spend any amount of time in a hockey arena you have surely seen the following scenario played out dozens of times: A player is skating along the boards with the puck and an opposing player is approaching. v But the question on everyone’s mind isn’t if the player is going to lay a check on the opponent, but if the check will be clean. And often, when the ice chips settle, you are left wondering: was the player trying to separate the opponent from the puck, or separate a shoulder?

This scenario, and countless others like it, is played out more and more often at rinks across Minnesota all season long. Watching a hockey game, regardless of level, it doesn’t take long to realize that hockey’s line between aggressive and violent play is becoming seriously blurred.

“[Watching youth hockey games] I see kids just running around trying to run over people rather than just playing the game,” says Minnesota Gopher head coach Don Lucia, who has a son graduating from Bantams to the high school level this season. “I think there is far more emphasis on hitting than there should be at the youth level. The emphasis should be on skills – skating, passing, stickhandling and shooting – rather than just how many guys you can run through the boards.”

“The idea behind checking should be to gain possession of the puck, not to ring somebody’s bell,” says Minnesota Hockey’s executive admin-istrator, Mark Jorgensen. “If you can’t get back into the play immediately after a check you’ve gone too far, and right now I absolutely see too many players going too far.”

To address the issue at the collegiate level, the NCAA this season has made hits to the head one of their “points of emphasis” and has asked officials to report hits in this area not just as high sticks, elbows or roughing penalties, but specifically as elbow to the head, stick to the head, etc.

“I think the violence in the game today, at all levels, is something that needs to be addressed,” says WCHA referee Jon Campion. “Regardless of what level we’re talking about – youth, high school, college or even the pros – there are far too many hits that fall within a violent category.”

A Serious Issue
The Minnesota State High School League doesn’t keep statistics specific to all types of penalties, but last year 150 dis-qualification penalties were issued for various infractions. Minnesota Hockey tracks match and game misconduct penalties which, in 2002-2003, totaled 729.

“I think it would be fair to say that a good majority of the game misconducts were issued for penalties associated with violent hits,” says Eric Olson, president of the Minnesota Hockey Officials Association. “For the last few seasons USA Hockey has also made ‘contact above the shoulder’ one of their points of emphasis, and we preach to officials at seminars to call this infraction and to try and error on the side of safety at all times.”
“I think by the NCAA mandating that hits to the head be reported specifically as such, you can read between the lines and assume that there is an issue here, and it’s not just at the collegiate level,” says Campion. “But before any potential rule changes or tighter enforcement of specific rules take place, you need to have some data supporting the issue, so I think that the NCAA tracking hits to the head this year is a step in the right direction.”

It Wasn’t Always This Way
“I think the violence in our game is far different than it was even 15 years ago,” says Lucia. “When you look at videos from 20 years ago, such as the 1980 Olympics, there really wasn’t that much contact and there was more respect for the opponent than what you see today.”

Some speculate that the increase in contact has been fueled by changes in rules, equipment technology and the simple factor that players today are bigger, faster and stronger than they were 20 years ago.

“Part of the reason you see this type of play is that the equipment is so solid and protects so much of your body that whether you take or give a hit, there is equipment there to protect you,” says Lucia. “I don’t think it’s necessarily for the better that equipment is so much better. And since we’ve put facemasks on helmets the sticks have come up and the violence of our game really moved up.”

Who’s Off-sides?
So who is responsible for enforcing rules and “points of emphasis” that are handed down by rules committees? It’s a vicious circle of €nger-pointing, depending on who you talk to.

Coaching Issue
“I simply don’t think players were coached like some are today, to finish every check and to run through people,” says Lucia. “It’s almost as if some coaches are saying: if the team is behind, or playing a more skilled team, it’s okay to go out of your way to hit somebody, and that’s not right.”

“I think that coaches have learned through experience that less skilled teams can even the playing field through physical play,” says Jorgensen. “So rather than teach players skills, some coaches simply take the easy way out and play a rough, physical style, which may help win the game at hand, but doesn’t develop any long-term skills and certainly doesn’t help them get there at the end of the season.”

Officiating Issue
Officials can be instrumental in how a game is called, and having the right officials with the proper exper-ience and rules interpretation can be critical, no doubt. But officials are often put in “no-win” situations with regards to calling the “letter of the law” in the rule book.

“I think that there are many good officials out there who would agree that the style of play is getting too aggressive and bordering on violent and that they would like to call every hit to the head, slash and every necessary infraction throughout the game,” says Olson. “But we need recognition and acceptance of the rules from everybody involved in this including administrators, coaches and players. Calling the game ‘the way it should be called’ is something that we strive to do every game, but everyone seems to have an opinion on ‘the way it should be called,’ especially in the heat of the moment during a game.”

Player’ Issues
“Kids need to focus on the skills of angling and stick lifts as opposed to hitting, and they need to take responsibility for their actions on the ice,” says Jorgensen. “I see some hits on the ice that receive a two-minute penalty that anywhere
else in society would call for a suspension from school or a week’s grounding at home. I think that if players are taught from a young age how to properly give and take a check – and when it is appropriate to deliver a check to gain pos-itioning – we wouldn’t see so much of what we see now. Part of the solution is better education and that needs to happen, and is something that Minnesota Hockey is working at. In the end, without better education we will see smaller players become intim-idated to the point that they hang up the skates, which is the last thing we want.”

“It’s my belief, and I think I’m in the minority here, that there should be checking at every age,” says Lucia. “When you go from no checking at all (at Mite and Squirt levels) to Peewees where all of a sudden you can hit, it becomes a bigger deal than it should be, and kids are running around trying to run people through the boards. When my son became a Peewee I was stunned by the roughness in play and how kids were just running around trying to run over people rather than just playing
the game. I think that you can attribute this to the sudden intro-duction of checking rather than just growing up with it always being there.”
Resurfacing

While the games go on this season, administrators and gov-erning bodies are working to study the effects of “points of emphasis” on the rules and how a focus from officials on certain rules may bring the physical aspects of the game back into perspective. But it’s clear that in order to restore some of the “purity” to the game, any action will need buy-in from coaches, players, officials and administrators.

“I definitely don’t think officials call enough, whether it’s on one team or another – that’s not the point,” says Lucia. “Some youth games are more violent than college games because there isn’t that respect for your opponent. The slashing, stick penalties, blows and guys getting run is getting out of control. The rules are there: the game just has to be called a certain way. It’s like the NHL when they cracked down a few years ago…the players will adjust. But if it’s not being called, players will continue to take more and more liberties, more slashing and more running people into the boards. And that’s what we don’t want.”Do you have an opinion about the fine line between aggressive and violent play? Is there too much in our game? If so, who is responsible and what are some solutions?