Re: UAA @ Minnesota : 1/11/13 and 1/12/13
What I meant by splitting hairs is it doesn't matter whether it was his elbow or his arm that contacted the head. By rule, contact to the head is a 5 minute major. No offense Harley but your opinion is irrelevant once you agree the head was contacted. It doesn't matter that the pads were contacted first. I'm not sure I agree with you on that one but it doesn't matter anyway. Contact to the head was made. We both agree on that. The rule trumps your opinion on the severity.
Yes, it does matter. Indirect contact to the head is significant and not considered a major penalty according to the recently ratified NCAA ruling on contact to the head (NCAA, 2012). A minor penalty may be assessed in such cases of indirect contact to the head (see below), but it is entirely under the referees discretion to consider all the factors of such call.
The hit by Helgy appears to hit the pads of the UAA player first, and then indirect contact to the head occurs as the player lunges slightly forward due to the force of the initial impact. Noteworthy, is that the ruling uses words "unsuspecting" and "vulnerable" to describe the conditions of the opposing player under which a penalty for contact to head is typically called on the player delivering the hit. This was not the case here. The video shows the UAA player clearly moved forward into direct contact with Helgy and raises his arm attempting to shield himself from the impact of the hit.
Since it also appears that Helgy intentionally lowered his shoulder and did not lead with his elbow (also keep in mind there is a significant height differential as well, which the refs also consider at their discretion), IMO this was not even a two minute penalty. All things considered, a blistering hit by big Helgy, but IMO legal and not a 5 or a 2.
Contact to the Head (The National Collegiate Hockey Association. (2012).
NCAA Rules and Interpretations: Contact to the Head. Retrieved Jan. 12, 2012 from
www.nccapublications.com, p. 11).
This is an important safety issue and the committee is concerned about some
violent contact that has occurred in the game and caused injury. To make this
rule clearer, any time a player targets the head or neck area of an opponent, it
must be a major penalty and a game misconduct penalty at a minimum.
This
rule is not intended to cover incidental contact or contact with the head that
occurs that should be a minor penalty (e.g., unintentional high stick, body check
where the contact is initiated at the shoulder or torso, but the follow through
makes some contact with the head). Clear direction is being provided here to
assist officials, coaches and players with this rule.
The committee expects a heightened awareness to direct contact to head, but
it should be noted that many contact to the head fouls in previous seasons that
were minor penalties should remain minor penalties (e.g., an incidental high
sticking foul would remain a minor for high sticking).
The committee reminds coaches and players that the responsibility remains
with the player making the hit to avoid contact with the head and neck area of
an opposing player.
Any contact which directly targets the player’s head and
neck area must be penalized with a major penalty and a game misconduct or
disqualification. A player delivering a check to an
unsuspecting and
vulnerable
player puts themselves in jeopardy of being penalized under this rule.
Officials are to pay particular attention to these examples when applying
this rule.
These are intended as guidance and include, but are not limited to,
the following:
• Direct contact with the head or neck in any manner from any direction;
• A player that is reckless;
• A player that has just released a shot or pass;
• A player that is about to receive a pass;
• A player that delivers a late hit;
• A player that extends and directs the arm, elbow, forearm or shoulder to
contact the head and neck area of the opponent;
• A player that extends the body and targets the opponent’s head or neck
area;
• A player that leaves their skates or launches in order to deliver a blow
to the head or neck area of the opposing player; and
Points of Emphasis 9
• A player that uses the stick in any way to target the head or neck area
(e.g., cross checking, butt-ending, etc.).
As additional guidance, when the initial force of the contact is a shoulder
to the body of the opponent and slides up to the head or neck area, this is not
classified as contact to the head. This type of action may still be penalized,
at the referee’s discretion, as another penalty (e.g., charging, roughing,
elbowing, etc.).
Indirect Contact to the Head
When the initial force of the contact is thru the body of the opponent and then
slides up to the head or neck area, the committee believes this type of indirect
contact to the head action may still be penalized, at the referee’s discretion, as
another minor penalty (e.g., elbowing, roughing, high sticking, charging etc.)
When officials penalize this type of infraction, the committee is requiring that
officials assess this penalty placing the wording “indirect contact to the head –
elbowing, etc.” This will allow for a consistent seasonal tracking of these types
of indirect contact to the head minor penalties. This is in no way intended to
replace or encourage a lessening of contact to the head penalties.
