|
Sat Oct 04, 2003, 01:20am
|
|||
|
|||
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! 
|
|
Mon Oct 06, 2003, 01:44pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
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.
|
|
Tue Oct 07, 2003, 02:22am
|
|||
|
|||
|
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.
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Linear Mode
