Toggle sidebar

High sticking clarification

Sideshow

Registered User
May 24, 2002
636
2
Fernie, BC
Happened about a month ago, only remembered to look now.

Went wide on a guy, and their d-man lifted MY stick right into his OWN face (cut him on the bridge of the nose). Ref agreed that it was solely the d-man's fault that my stick went into the guy's face, then gave me 4 minutes for HS.

Your ruling? Proper call? Any rules or anything that say it wasn't the right call?
 
Personally, I think if you raise your own stick above your waist height when you lift someones stick it should be a penalty as it is a dangerous play. That would require a rule change though.
 
Technically it's the right call. The rule should be changed IMO though. The suggestion by the guy above me would be a great change to see.
 
I cant see how a ref would call that if he saw the stick lift.
If a guy grabs your arm and punches himself in the face with your hand, you are not getting roughing.

I dont know sounds fishy. Either there was no stick lift or the ref didnt see it and agree it was his fault.

"Section B-When a player carries or holds any part of his stick above the shoulders of the opponent so that injury results"

In this situation you where neither carrying or holding. It was forced by another player. So i cant see how it could be a DM

"Section A-Any contact made by a stick on an opponent above the shoulders is prohibited and a minor shall be imposed subject to section (b) of this Rule"

This makes it seem like it could be 2 minutes. But, i dont know, just cant see it.
 
Sideshow said:
Happened about a month ago, only remembered to look now.

Went wide on a guy, and their d-man lifted MY stick right into his OWN face (cut him on the bridge of the nose). Ref agreed that it was solely the d-man's fault that my stick went into the guy's face, then gave me 4 minutes for HS.

Your ruling? Proper call? Any rules or anything that say it wasn't the right call?
Click to expand...

This has happened to me before and it's very much within the rules to impose a minor anyway. However, almost everyone agrees there needs to be some sort of exception within the rule because as it is now, it's pure nonsense. Any time you control someone else's stick and it causes any sort of injury etc, you get a minor, makes more sense eh?
 
The proper call was made and the reasoning that you have to control your own stick is also correct. It's not for the ref to decide who was in control of the stick, only to decide who wasn't in control.
 
Gino 14 said:
The proper call was made and the reasoning that you have to control your own stick is also correct. It's not for the ref to decide who was in control of the stick, only to decide who wasn't in control.
Click to expand...


That doesnt seem right. If you get blasted in the trolleys and your stick comes up and hits, your not going to get a high sticking because you "weren't in control".

I dont know. A stick lift kinda makes you not have control, kinda the point.
 
CanadaBacon said:
"Section A-Any contact made by a stick on an opponent above the shoulders is prohibited and a minor shall be imposed subject to section (b) of this Rule"

This makes it seem like it could be 2 minutes. But, i dont know, just cant see it.
Click to expand...

and the OP said he cut the guy too - so that's double minor. It's one of those yes, technically its a penalty things but easy to look away... maybe you just happened to be a makeup call for something earlier.
 
CanadaBacon said:
That doesnt seem right. If you get blasted in the trolleys and your stick comes up and hits, your not going to get a high sticking because you "weren't in control".

I dont know. A stick lift kinda makes you not have control, kinda the point.
Click to expand...

Whether or not you think it's fair, that's the way the rules work.
 
Gino 14 said:
Whether or not you think it's fair, that's the way the rules work.
Click to expand...

Thats my point, i dont think thats how the rules work. Highsticking penalty does not explain what happens in circumstances like this. ie your FORCED into highsticking.

That my whole point, the op had no choice in this situation. He was FORCED to highstick.

The "make-up" call is the best explanation so far. The op wasnt "carry" or "holding" his stick to cause an injury. He was stick lifted. Thats why i dont think it shoul have ben a DM.
 
CanadaBacon said:
Thats my point, i dont think thats how the rules work. Highsticking penalty does not explain what happens in circumstances like this. ie your FORCED into highsticking.

That my whole point, the op had no choice in this situation. He was FORCED to highstick.

The "make-up" call is the best explanation so far. The op wasnt "carry" or "holding" his stick to cause an injury. He was stick lifted. Thats why i dont think it shoul have ben a DM.
Click to expand...

Like it or not, that is how the rules work. Anytime the stick comes up above the shoulders on somebody, it's a penalty. period. And there's a lot of emphasis on calling it, because it is dangerous.

But that's why several of us are advocating a rule change- because the point you're making is valid, the rule as it currently stands isn't perfect and needs work. Not every rule is perfect, that's why they tweak them fairly often.
 
cptjeff said:
Like it or not, that is how the rules work. Anytime the stick comes up above the shoulders on somebody, it's a penalty. period. And there's a lot of emphasis on calling it, because it is dangerous.

But that's why several of us are advocating a rule change- because the point you're making is valid, the rule as it currently stands isn't perfect and needs work. Not every rule is perfect, that's why they tweak them fairly often.
Click to expand...

I understand what your saying. But this is not true. Many many instances your stick will come up because you are forced into that position and penalty will not be called because the situation was out of your control. It all comes down to a judment call on the refs part i guess. I dont think a rule change is need, just to have the rule clarified so we understand how it applies in diffrent situations.

Once again i personally have never seen this type of thing happen, it just kinda baffles me.

You know the rule is pretty vague when people who have played and watched the sport for YEARS have a discussion like this. ;)
 
CanadaBacon said:
I understand what your saying. But this is not true. Many many instances your stick will come up because you are forced into that position and penalty will not be called because the situation was out of your control. It all comes down to a judment call on the refs part i guess. I dont think a rule change is need, just to have the rule clarified so we understand how it applies in diffrent situations.

Once again i personally have never seen this type of thing happen, it just kinda baffles me.

You know the rule is pretty vague when people who have played and watched the sport for YEARS have a discussion like this. ;)
Click to expand...


The carrying of sticks above the normal height of the
shoulder is prohibited. The Referee may assess a minor or a
major penalty on any player violating this rule.
Click to expand...

I can't see how the rule can be written any clearer. Your lack of rules knowledge is more to blame for confusion than rules clarity.
 
Gino 14 said:
I can't see how the rule can be written any clearer. Your lack of rules knowledge is more to blame for confusion than rules clarity.
Click to expand...

Ya that must be it :handclap:


He was stick lifted, he was not carrying his stick, he had no control of his stick, he was forced to raise his stick, hence stick lift.

The rule is not clear because many situations force you to have your stick over the shoulder. Watch any game and count the number of times a players stick is over the shoulder. He didnt raise his stick, in no way was he willingly bringing his stick that high (he had the puck ffs).

The way the rules are written if you perform the movements with your arms WILLINGLY to allow your stick to be that high it is called high sticking. It does not say anything about if you were FORCED, your arms were forced to raise th stick that high.
 
Last edited:
 
CanadaBacon said:
Ya that must be it :handclap:


He was stick lifted, he was not carrying his stick, he had no control of his stick, he was forced to raise his stick, hence stick lift.

The rule is not clear because many situations force you to have your stick over the shoulder. Watch any game and count the number of times a players stick is over the shoulder. He didnt raise his stick, in no way was he willingly bringing his stick that high (he had the puck ffs).

The way the rules are written if you perform the movements with your arms WILLINGLY to allow your stick to be that high it is called high sticking. It does not say anything about if you were FORCED, your arms were forced to raise th stick that high.
Click to expand...

You're assumed to have enough control of your stick to keep it from going above the shoulders. Valid or not, that's what refs are instructed to presume now, that's the standard of enforcement.

Try that excuse in a game. It doesn't work. I've had it called on me, and you just accept it. That's how they're supposed to call it, like it or not.
 
CanadaBacon said:
I cant see how a ref would call that if he saw the stick lift.
If a guy grabs your arm and punches himself in the face with your hand, you are not getting roughing.

I dont know sounds fishy. Either there was no stick lift or the ref didnt see it and agree it was his fault.

"Section B-When a player carries or holds any part of his stick above the shoulders of the opponent so that injury results"

In this situation you where neither carrying or holding. It was forced by another player. So i cant see how it could be a DM

"Section A-Any contact made by a stick on an opponent above the shoulders is prohibited and a minor shall be imposed subject to section (b) of this Rule"

This makes it seem like it could be 2 minutes. But, i dont know, just cant see it.
Click to expand...

Say you are skating along with the puck and you try and deke around the D-Man... but while you are trying to regain control of the puck again you hook the D-Mans stick causing it to hit your skate and causing you to trip. They'll most likely call a tripping penalty on the D-Man.

Kind of the same situation.
 
CanadaBacon said:
The way the rules are written if you perform the movements with your arms WILLINGLY to allow your stick to be that high it is called high sticking. It does not say anything about if you were FORCED, your arms were forced to raise th stick that high.
Click to expand...

The way the rules are written , if the stick is above your shoulders, a penalty can be called. It doesn't say anything about "forced" or "willingly" because it doesn't matter if you were forced or did it on purpose.

Also, remember, you don't play by NHL rules or play using NHL refs. You have USAH refs and they call the game by USAH rules. Like it or not, understand it or not, a stick above the shoulders for any reason can be called for a penalty.
 
CanadaBacon said:
By your "logic" these should all be called penalties.

http://images.google.ca/imgres?imgu...es?q=hockey+players+slap+shot+pics&hl=en&um=1

http://images.google.ca/imgres?imgu...players+pic&ndsp=20&hl=en&sa=N&start=180&um=1

http://blog.mlive.com/flintjournal/prepsnow/2007/11/large_CarsonCurranAction.jpg

http://media.photobucket.com/image/hockey players pic/Kylrk/hockey.jpg

http://images.google.ca/imgres?imgu...+players+pic&ndsp=20&hl=en&sa=N&start=20&um=1
Click to expand...

The carrying of sticks above the normal height of the
shoulder is prohibited. The Referee may assess a minor or a
major penalty on any player violating this rule.
Click to expand...

Actually, none of the players you show is in violation of the rule, none are carrying the stick above the shoulder level. And, just as a little tip, that is the rule verbatim from the rule book, not my logic. Try browsing through it sometime rather than assuming you know the rules just because you watch the game.
 
Talked to 4 refs today. 1 ref said that it is not high sticking, 1 ref said that he would only call it if there is blood or a "make up" call, 1 ref said he would only call it if there was blood and the last ref said she had no idea what she would do because this situation does not fall under the written rules. Two of these refs were in the E. The other two are registered with canada hockey and one of the last two ref (the none female) has ref'd major junior.

Why would i have USAH refs when im canadian? i figuered the canadian flag would have givin that away. I have played for 24 years. I played Junior (A and major) and two seasons in the E 7 years ago. Like my first post said, i have never seen this situation happen ever, refs i have talked to and other players have not seen this happen and EVERYONE believes it is unclear by the rule book, which action a ref should take.

Maybe you should leave the insults to GongShow and have ACTUAL discussions here, seeing as it is a discussion board.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom