I called a penalty on a guy last Monday night who was holding a guy against the boards. It was a USA Hockey non-checking league, and when I called the penalty, the guy said "You can hold somebody on the boards! That's legal."

I promptly replied "No it's not. You have to play the puck, not the player. You wouldn't be able to get away with a cheap hold like that in a checking game with good officials. You were taking away his ability to make a play and you weren't playing the puck."

However, I wasn't sure if the call should have been interference or holding. I think I had the scorekeeper put interference on the score sheet, but holding may have been more apt. Any thoughts or opinions?

As a side note, as soon as the puck was dropped his partner's penalty expired. He stepped on the ice and a goal was scored, effectively emptying the box and returning the game to 5 on 5. LOL!

Just a general note - interference only happens on someone who doesn't have posession of the puck. If a player has the puck, they can't be interfered with.

Other than that, it depends on the level of hockey. If you watch TV or any elite level of hockey, you often see a defenceman "pinning" an opposing player to the boards in an attempt to win a scrum. As long as the pinned player has the puck, its generally an accepted practice. Once the puck moves away, however, the d-man should be releasing the pin. Most officials will yell at the d-man to let him go, and if the d-man complies quickly, then its no-harm, no-foul.

Ahh, I think Interference was the right call then. The guy didn't have the puck. He was trying to make a play on the puck, but never got there. I could see the original action of holding him back for a second being alright, but the offender continued holding him after the puck was passed to center ice and didn't release him until I blew my whistle (the puck was then in the neutral zone).

Thanks for your feedback.