You didn't read it wrong.  At this year's national meeting, USA hockey will be considering rule proposal #80 which amends rule #604 to prohibit body checking at the 14U age group and below.  If that rule amendment passes, youth hockey players wouldn't be able to start checking until their first year of high school or 16U, whichever comes first.   Editor's note: We've included the original rule 604 and proposal #80 at the end of this article for your convenience.

The rule is no doubt being considered in response to the significant advances made in understanding concussions and the long term effects of repeated brain injury.  After all, USA Hockey's very first priority is making sure the rules of the game allow for the safest playing environment without taking away from what makes hockey...well...hockey.  And that's the debate, it would seem.  Does rule proposal #80 make the game safer by delaying major contact or does it make hockey more dangerous by not allowing kids to learn the fundamentals of checking until later development stages?

Our own Paul Evans and Jeremy Kuntz tackled the debate head on with the following point-counterpoint discussion.  

Jeremy:  I believe the exact opposite of what this rule proposes.  In my opinion, the idea of waiting to teach kids how to properly check is even more dangerous than teaching them at the youngest ages.  I know what you're going to say, "you can still teach kids to check, they just can't do it in a game."  Hogwash.  You and I both know that if kids can't check, coaches won't bother teaching it.   You can't expect  a coach to spend ten minutes every practice on a skill and then finish with "but you can't do this in a game yet, soooo....."   But even if they did teach them to check, kids won't learn to check until they are doing it in games.  Waiting until they're a bunch of hormonal teenagers to present the idea of hitting someone is just asking for injuries.  It's bad enough waiting until they're bantams.         

Paul:  First off, you can't blame the rule for a coach's negligence or oversight.  Even if the checking rule remains unchanged, kids should still be taught all the necessary skills leading up to it early on.  Components such as angling, body position, body contact, puck protection, and so forth should be introduced long before checking.  Unfortunately, too many coaches don't pay much attention to these essential skills until the summer before 14U.  Age-appropriate body contact happens as early as 8U, and that's when the instruction should start.  The concepts of angling & mirroring can be understood at the 10U level, and 12U's should be taught puck protection and the right way to take the puck away.  “It’s about gaining the puck, handling the puck and possessing the puck efficiently," says USA Hockey ADM regional manager Guy Gosselin. "We want them well-prepared.  If coaches have done their job, by 12U, the angling skills and taking-away-ice skills should be there.”

This is the safe and responsible way to provide instruction in an inherently dangerous activity.  Coaches should be teaching checking skills long before they're needed in a game.  But you don't teach driving by intentionally crashing your car.  Using the Speed 2 and Stamina windows of trainability, players can develop a solid foundation for checking before they have to be concerned about that Mack truck barreling toward them.  Just as with driving, the best collision is the one you can avoid.

It makes sense.  I'm sure there are far less injuries in touch football than tackle football.  Obviously when you completely remove the core physicality from a game that is inherently physical, injuries will go down.  But after reading these statements, I'm left with two questions:  

1. Are we concerned with all checking or "big hits?"  There's a significant difference and I'd be willing to bet the number of catastrophic injuries typically occur with big hits.
2. How many injuries are caused by mismatched skill (and size) levels?

I'm concerned that proposal #80 removes checking from the game because it's the easiest path to get the desired results.  I'm not saying that there aren't injuries because of checking.  I'm saying I think we should look deeper and start by eliminating open ice hits or "big hits."  I'm saying we should consider how many kids are being forced to play at lower levels because of league "no play-up rules" or definitions of what constitutes house, select, or travel.  Once we understand those things, we can make smarter adjustments, not blanket moratoriums. 

Paul:  You raise some valid questions, and I agree that the answers aren't quite so simple.  Certainly checking isn't the only issue facing the game at both the local and national levels.  Simply banning checking isn't going to fix anything by itself.  The training and education component must be part of the solution.  Otherwise, we've simply pushed the problem up to the next age group.

Paul:  You left out the fact that kids aged 12-14 are more susceptible to concussions in general, and that this may also be due to greater disparities in size, strength and speed among younger athletes.

I happen to agree with the article on this point - "The sport might be safer, particularly among the youngest players, if hockey leagues focused on better enforcement of existing penalties for illegal hits – especially those from behind when players are less able to protect themselves, ” said Anthony Kontos, a concussion researcher at the University of Pittsburgh.  Referees are as much a part of the solution as coaches.

We seem to be on the same page with respect to this one key point:  we need to make the game safer.  The long-term health of our kids is of the utmost importance.  Not only do they need quality instruction in the finer points of checking and better enforcement of the rules, but there also needs to be more support for proper rehabilitation protocols and an increase in preventative training techniques.  If there was a way to ensure that all of those things were being done, we likely wouldn't need the rule change.

Personally, I believe that Body Checking is an important part of the game.  Unfortunately, it's also becoming a lost art.  Nowadays, too many players are simply looking for that 'SportsCenter Highlight' hit.  The purpose of the body check is to separate your opponent from the puck -- not his head from his body.  A well-executed check is a thing of beauty.  But if the foundational skills aren't being taught, the body check may disappear from the sport entirely.

Well, Hoosier Hockey Faithful, you can see why this will continue to be a hot topic of discussion as USA Hockey gears up for it's annual meeting.  Now, we'd like to hear from you.  Cast your vote in the poll on the left and tell us your thoughts on removing checking from 14U. You can share your thoughts in the Comments section below.