It’s been two weeks since the MSHSL stiffened the penalties for three infractions in the wake of the injury to Jack Jablonski. Coaches, officials and administrators weigh in on how the rule changes have affected the game of high school hockey in Minnesota.

The feedback I have received has been overwhelmingly positive. The change in the rules structure was the first step, creating an awareness of how to play the game safer. The phone calls and e-mails to the League have been very good, with parents and coaches noticing the change to the game.

My son is also a member of the Andover High School varsity team. At the games I have attended, I have seen a positive change in all areas:  the kids on the ice, the coaches, the officials and the fans in the stands.

Dr. Craig Perry
Associate Director • MSHSL

My best quote might be: “So far, so good.”

From the positive feedback that we have received and the lack of negative feedback, the change has gone very well, and I feel that there has been a significant change in the way that the game is played. I have been to several games myself and the games have been well-played.

There are still penalties in the three areas of emphasis, which will continue, but from what we can tell, they are being called, and I believe that the coaches and players understand the significance of the penalties.

At this point there has not been a increase in the number of ejections.  We believe that there has been an increase in the number of major penalties (which is what we expected), but we are still gathering those statistics.

We know that the biggest challenge will be to continue this emphasis so that this can be a permanent change in making the game safer.

Kevin Merkle
Associate Director • MSHSL

I think this is a step back for Minnesota high school hockey. These ‘new’ rules will encourage our players/talent to leave sooner for junior leagues. The rules have even more ‘gray’ area for officials to interpret, not to mention they are harsher penalties to interpret – five- minute majors, which do not go away even if scored on.

The rules we had were just fine, however they need to be enforced 100 percent of time, every time.

I really do feel for the Jablonski family. And, it is a terrible thing that happened to Jabby. Having said that, we are all aware of the risks we are taking every time we step onto the ice.

The state needs to really be careful on what they are doing to this game and really look at the big picture.

Eric Hofmann
Head Coach • Dodge County

I have been pleasantly surprised at how quickly teams and players are adapting to the new rule changes. There is an air of caution when contacting an opponent at or near the boards, while still maintaining the physical nature of the open-ice game.

The new penalties have brought a certain clarity between coaches and officials with regard to injury-potential hits. As with any rule change, there will always be grey areas and judgment calls. Experienced referees will modify their officiating to honor the spirit of the new rules, while maintaining the integrity of the game.

Dan Walt
Director • Suburban Hockey Referees

It appears the new rules have impacted the amount of contact in the games and impacted the influence of the officials. I believe the players are taking the safe approach trying to avoid any penalty resulting from contact that would possibly put the team shorthanded vs. the benefit of even a clean hit.

Because the penalty calls potentially have a stronger influence on the outcome of the games, the officials are torn and confused how to call the game. They were trained with the mindset that a good official controlled the game but wasn’t perceived to be the difference in the outcome. Now they are the center of attention.

I applaud the MSHSL for their concern about the seriousness of illegal contact in the game of high school hockey, but I’m not sure if stronger punishment is necessarily the answer. I understand because of the seriousness that it’s obviously worth a try and this is an experiment. But with three different areas of concern and knowing most changes need to occur gradually with time to teach the players, it’s not going to be perfect.

The game changed from a contact sport to a collision sport the day the full facemask was adapted. The fear factor and respect for the opponent’s safety diminished. In addition, weak coaches were screaming for hitting instead of teaching skills and the emphasis shifted from playing to get the puck to primarily playing the body as a definition of toughness and intimidation.

It’s really up to the coaches to understand how to teach the players the basic premise of the game and work with all levels of hockey to teach and be consistent with how hitting should be incorporated and executed.

Tom Vannelli
Co-Head Coach • St. Thomas Academy

In my opinion, the rule changes have had an immediate impact on the game and it is and will be a good thing for high school hockey. Thus far, the referees have done a commendable job of making the right calls. Although I still see missed calls here and there, the refs are doing a better of job of talking to each other to make sure that the right call is made.

With more major penalties, there is obviously more special teams play and that has caused us to shorten our bench. I believe this trend will run through the end of the year and into the playoffs until players and refs have gotten used to the new rules and new style of play.

I don’t think the new rule changes will cause many kids to leave high school and go to junior.

Jon Sturgis
Head Coach • Blake School

I think everyone is making the adjustment and the game seems to be cleaner.

Sheldon Weston
Head Coach • Monticello HS

I think the rule changes are good and the officials seem to be more confident in their calls. I see more and more players “letting up” on body contact near the boards.

It has increased the importance of specialty teams. There doesn’t seem to be very many minutes of 5-on-5 play during some games.

Chris Wilson
Head Coach • Chanhassen HS

As a teacher of the game, my initial response was to take offense to such mandates. My staff and I preach and teach body contact for a purpose, and the purpose is to obtain or deny puck possession.

The language of the directive implied that coaches were mostly to blame and that referees should not feel regret when they penalize coaches (with ejection) for protesting calls. That is a coaches nightmare:  Referees have been commanded to make a presence and have an affect on your game.

I saw contradiction throughout the emergency rule change. Coaches are responsible, referees have a mandate to make calls and it shall be done on earth as it is in heaven, amen.

I coach youth teams and the high school team in my community. I’ve never taught someone to check from behind, cause a concussion or hit to hurt. And I’ve never been a part of any program that does so from Mahtomedi to Irondale, Spooner and Bethel University.

I remember the tragedy of Travis Roy in the mid-1990s when he missed a check and fell head first into the boards 11 seconds into his first Division I college hockey game at Boston University. The national hockey community felt for him and cried for him. We had an acute awareness that the sport is intense, fast and physical.

I have watched things change over the past 10 years as a coach that may have more of an impact on this situation than the latest incidents. Your average and better youth players now feel it’s a need to train for hockey 9-12 months of the year. They are faster, have greater skill and are stronger than any hockey players before them. Their equipment is basically lightweight armor. They feel invincible and play as if it’s impossible to get hurt. Expensive helmets are advertised as the remedy for concussions without coming out and saying it (helmets protect against lacerations and superficial head trauma, not concussions inasmuch as they protect against the flu).

So you are a youth player competing in leagues and training year round and now you go to high school. Some play in junior leagues before and after their high school season. You think there are any conflicting messages there? You fight in one league, you stand to get suspended indefinitely. In the other league, they cheer your name from the rafters.

Big hits secure roster spots and fill the stands. Every team needs a strong, physical player so there is always someone willing to “step it up.”

The product of spending your life on the rink is a better, faster hockey player. Put body armor on that specimen and tell them they can play if they can hit. What will they do? Hit ... well and with efficiency.

The NHL went through a reformation when it died and was resurrected after the lockout. Rules were changed to open up the ice, create more scoring and benefit a skilled game over the clutch and grab boredom it had become. And it worked. Now that league is trying to police activity that was once accepted: retaliation hits, hits to the head, intimidation hits. I hope it sticks and is made public to the millions of fans, many of whom are still playing youth and high school hockey and look to the pros as models of the best hockey has to offer.

This vent began in one tone and will end on another. The rules that changed really didn’t change. They were always there and available. We now have an awareness that enforcement should be less discretionary.

I want to never read of a spinal injury suffered in a hockey game again. I want to never see a check from behind again. If these rule changes cause that to occur then it will have to be considered the best change hockey has ever implemented. The game should change from the aspect of violent hits on the unprotected. 

Brett Westbrook
Head Coach • Pine City/Rush City HS

The players today play the way they do, because that is how it has been taught. They do not know anything else. That is how the game has evolved, and they are playing like those in the colleges, juniors and pros. It has trickled down and this is where we are. My coaches and I have always taught proper bodychecking and pokechecking, but it is not so easy to change bad habits by the time they get to us in high school.

I’m hoping the new rule changes will get hockey playing back to the way it was when I played in Canada in the 1950s, and at the U of M in the 1960s. We were always taught to angle when hitting, and keep the stick on the ice when hitting or rubbing out. We respected the other players who never had helmets or mouthpieces, and I do not remember concussions and hits to the head the way they occur now.

I do know that the players are bigger faster, and better skaters, and the game is much faster. But I have never seen hockey players move so quickly and be in so many bodychecking situations. I do not blame the kids for their brutal checking, but the education of how to check properly will be a positive thing for hockey, especially if we start this when kids learn the game. No other sport is as fast, and I hope to see better passing, better team play, and smarter players.

The hockey community can make this very positive, and I applaud those who are striving to make hockey safer and better.

Lorne Grosso
Head Coach • Rochester Mayo HS

I know the reason behind the rule changes, but I think this was a kneejerk reaction. To try to put a rule change in the middle of the season is difficult for the players and officials.

The officials don’t know what to do, so they err on the side of making the call. If it’s even close, they’re calling the major. I told the refs I feel bad for them.

The kids are confused, too. We, as coaches, spent two hours on what they can and cannot do. I encourage our kids to play physical, but basically, the kids aren’t hitting now.

For my team, my players know that if they get a major, they go to the locker room and take their uniform off. But you could make the rule a 25-minute penalty and still kids would be doing it. I don’t know if you can legislate all injuries out of the game. As it stands, the five-minute major is almost like a death penalty for a team.

The officials can’t be the ones making the change. The players can’t make the change. The coaches need to do it.

Every kid has a dream of playing in the NHL. As high school coaches, we’re not preparing them for success because the same rules are not in effect. We’re going to lose our elite players if it continues the way it is. Those players will go where they will be taught to play the game at the next level.

From my perspective as a coach, I understand why it was done. I just don’t necessarily agree with it. We probably should have waited a year to give coaches and officials time to learn and teach. It should have been looked at longer and harder before making such a major rule change. I hope it gets looked at again and coaches and officials are allowed to give their input.

Tony Sarsland
Head Coach • Elk River HS

This is a tough situation to assess because of what happened to Jack Jablonski.

First, accidents will always be a possibility and there is no way to make anything 100 percent safe. There is an inherent risk in everything we do.

That being said, the game of hockey can made more safe. Simply raising the punishment of some of the penalties of the game isn’t the way to do it.  I realize that something had to be done by the league to show people that that the league is doing something. To ask high school players to change their game in the middle of the season is asking a lot of these players.  The game is different; players, coaches and referees are being asked to act totally different in mid-season.

Over the course of time, everyone will adapt, however, the game will be changed forever.  The changes I thought should happen would have been the checking from behind raised to what it is now: five-minute major, 10 minute misconduct and possible game ejection. The head contact and boarding calls should have been two-minute majors.

High school hockey has 17-minute periods and all these five-minute majors put the teams in precarious positions.

The other that should be put back into the game for next season is obstruction. Players should be able to shield or pick the opponent. If the player that is being picked is knocked down, that’s a penalty. This would help the defenseman on retrievals and slow the forecheck a bit, limiting the bad situations on the end boards.

The biggest problem with all of this is that there were rules already in place. These rules were not being enforced. This had been going on for many years and nobody said, “Hey this is getting out of hand. We better tighten the screws.”

Checking from behind was always called boarding. I have been coaching high school for seven years and I had never seen a checking from behind called until this season.

The high school league isn’t a police force; they are more of an advisory committee. Just like our kneejerk society, change comes with tragedy.

So far, the changes that have be implemented, the referees haven’t changed. The calls are very inconsistent and the coaches still react with outbursts.  The problem is that there are hundreds of high school referees and they don’t have the benefit of video. To educate these guys without video and on short notice puts the refs in a position to only make inconsistent calls.

It has been very difficult to see from the bench and the fact that we are not to ask for explanations makes it really frustrating. The referees take things personally and you can’t really blame them; they have been getting chewed out for years.

This aspect of the game will be very difficult to change because it’s a cultural change to the hockey society. A problem that I have is the fact that respecting the game hasn’t been mentioned. This respect means respecting the referees, coaches, fans, teammates, the game and most importantly, respecting the opponent.  The game can be policed by the players if they respect one another.

The changes to the game will impact the players who would like to move on to the next level and it will not be good for the Minnesota kids, unless the upper leagues make some changes also.

Ken Eddy
Assistant Coach • Holy Family HS

It certainly changes the dynamics of the game. Everyone in the hockey world feels terrible for the Jablonski family and many more that have suffered from bad hits in the game of hockey. This has been an issue since the birth of hockey and the game has remained the same.

My opinion is that the change just helps the refs with their control and ability to make the big calls. The reason for most of the problems is the lack of confidence in calling a check from behind for a two and 10. I agree that five-minute majors and 10 or a game are good for hits from behind because those are so very rare as it is. I feel like the boarding and head contact calls could be revisited as five-minute majors.

Not every team is blessed with the talent that some programs have and many have to work hard at establishing a physical presence. This is how hard working teams compete with powerhouse teams. These new rules have forced everyone to back off of finishing checks which is a big part of the game (was a big part of the game)

Reed Larson
Head Coach • Virginia/Mt. Iron/Buhl

Our players are more aware of the severity of the penalties and they have taken steps to be more careful on the hitting aspect of the game. We have had no significant problems so far.

Roy Nystrom
Head Coach • Albert Lea HS

It changed the game from day one. Teams are reverting to being more of a speed and skill team vs. a grinding team. I’m seeing that across the board. I see a better game with more finesse, skill and speed.

We’re still seeing checks from behind and shots to the head. I applaud the high school league for taking the jump, for changing the game, but it’s still happening.

The first week was kind of tough for our officials to figure out, but we have adjusted quickly because we had to. We have an ongoing communication network in our association, so we’re in daily communication with each other.

We need support from the coaches and players on the changes. The coaches need to buy into the rule changes to try to diminish those type of hits.

With boarding, there’s no two-minute minor. You can still check into the boards, but not violently. That’s the key. You can still check, but if you exceed the check and go to violence, you’re going to get called.

For checking from behind, it’s an automatic five and 10. But the operative word in the rule book is “flagrant.” If a player is checked from behind flagrantly into the boards or goal cage, it’s a game DQ. If you cross the line and go to flagrant, you’ll get the DQ.

The only difficulty we have with consistency with the new rules is when a player turns his back at the last second. What are you going to do? Send him out for 15 minutes or call charging? I’ve told my officials to raise your hand to call a penalty, but go talk with the other officials. Take the time to make the right call. The coaches and fans appreciate refs who get together and discuss.

From my perspective, the impact the new rules have had is black and white. If it’s there, call it. I send out an e-mail every night to my officials, talling them to keep calling the penalties. We need to stay consistent.

It’s early yet with the changes. It’s an experiment. But I think it’s been good for the game. It was a kneejerk reaction, but in reaction to a tragedy.

With the rule changes, it’s an even playing field. It happened to everyone at the same time, uniformly throughout the state.

Let’s play it out the rest of the year and go through the state tournament.

Dave Delmonico
Scheduler • Minneapolis Hockey Officials

I strongly believe the referees need to have the freedom of discretion on these penalties. What I would like to see is for the boarding and contact to the head penalties return to be a two-minute minor with the option of a major (ref’s discretion). The league had already implemented a emphasis on contact to the head penalties and the refs were doing a great job with this.

I have coached at the high school level for 19 years and boarding has always been called effectively as a minor or major without any problems. Why make it a problem now?

Checking from behind is the greatest safety concern in our game. We should keep the new rule in place for all CFB penalties when the player makes any contact with the boards, but the refs should have the option of a minor penalty when CFB occurs in open ice. The two CFB cannot even be compared to one another with regard to risk of injury.

Jeff Poeschl
Head Coach • Mahtomedi

I think the changes are a solid start. I do not think refs want to be difference makers in a game and that’s where I think we have to become more black and white.

A great example was the other night in our game. A player on our team was reaching for the puck and a player finished his check, hitting him in the head. I asked the ref about the hit and he explained that because our player was leaning forward that’s why he got hit in the head and if he was upright he wouldn’t have.

This referee did a great job and was very professional, but until the people that make the rules instruct black and white, no grey area, that a hit to the head is a hit to the head no matter what, the rules themselves will not have the impact they could.

It would take a bit for teams to adjust, but the long-term effects would be a faster, cleaner, better product.

Same with checking from behind. Until we have zero tolerence, we will continue to have discrepencies in our game.

Shjon Podein
Head Coach • St. Louis Park HS

The increased number of five-minute majors have made effective special teams play a priority.

I believe, overall, hits to the head are what really needs to be addressed. The sticks up, hands to the face type of actions are what leads to overly aggressive play (shoving a player near the boards). I am particularly concerned when officials allow this after the whistle.

Jerry Diebel
Head Coach • North St. Paul