[Regina]

Anyone that would like to see what a high level NBC league would be like should pay close attention to the All Star game this week..............last shot win.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Brenda wrote:

PublicAnimalNo9 wrote:

Quote:

For the last damned time, I have NO problem with teaching kids how to deliver or receive a check. But that does not mean you should allow it during a game that young.

I have no problem teaching 16 yr olds to drive. But that does not mean they should be allowed to drive on public roads while so "young"?


Sounds fucking retarded don't it?

Are you teaching your 5 year old to drive, AND crash?

Well, when crashing becomes a normal part of driving outside of demo-derbies you can ask me that stupid question again.
Or maybe you think your nineteen year old should still not be allowed to drive on public roads?

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Regina wrote:

Anyone that would like to see what a high level NBC league would be like should pay close attention to the All Star game this week..............last shot win.

Wow, that was exactly what my next post was going to be
Once you remove body checking, there's little real reason for dedicated defencemen roles. Might as well just have a bunch'a forwards playing poke-check.

Bring back the pick!!!

[Lemmy]

I used to be a staunch traditionalist. "Suck it up and learn to take a check". But after having officiated many hundred Bantam and Midget house-league games, my opinion has changed. It's just too dangerous for kids of that skill level and that size.

Instead of taking bodychecking out at YOUNGER ages, it seems smarter to me to do it the other way around: let novice and atom aged kids body check, so they learn to do it safely when they're young and too small to really hurt one another doing it. Then, when they get to Pee Wee, take it out of the houseleagues. The vast majority of kids know, by Pee Wee age, whether they're going to be rep/junior/pro players or houseleague/beer leaguers. But if anybody thinks that there's a place for body checking in midget houseleague hockey, you've never been on the ice with it going on two feet away from you. It's insanely dangerous.

[OnTheIce]

Lemmy wrote:

I used to be a staunch traditionalist. "Suck it up and learn to take a check". But after having officiated many hundred Bantam and Midget house-league games, my opinion has changed. It's just too dangerous for kids of that skill level and that size.

Instead of taking bodychecking out at YOUNGER ages, it seems smarter to me to do it the other way around: let novice and atom aged kids body check, so they learn to do it safely when they're young and too small to really hurt one another doing it. Then, when they get to Pee Wee, take it out of the houseleagues. The vast majority of kids know, by Pee Wee age, whether they're going to be rep/junior/pro players or houseleague/beer leaguers. But if anybody thinks that there's a place for body checking in midget houseleague hockey, you've never been on the ice with it going on two feet away from you. It's insanely dangerous.

IMO, bringing it in earlier would be just as dangerous.

In the younger age groups, skating isn't the greatest, nor is the balance and often when kids are very different in size.

My son is in novice and he's got some kids in his league that looks like the drove themselves to the rink.

[PENATRATOR]

Brenda wrote:

Canadian_Mind wrote:

No, because it's a part of the fucking game.

Not in Vancouver anymore.

Quote:

As I said above, you've either got some severe ESL issues here, or you're being a deliberate pain in the ass because we disagree with you. I'm thinking it's the latter.

Go troll somewhere else. I'm out of here.

You guys are all over me about this, but I never implemented that ban. I only agree. And, so did On The Ice.

Disagreeing is trolling? Ok. Thanks for letting me know, TROLL!!!

No but calling someone Anti Immigrant AND an Asshole for disagreeing with you and calling you on your BS IS.

(You did that a few pages back)