After The Whistle: Impact Penalties

Impact Penalties: Setting The Tone

An impact penalty occurs when a player uses either his stick on another opponent, or uses his fists or arms on an opponent’s head or upper body.

Impact infractions are a large part of the game of hockey. When a player commits an impact infraction it is usually so obvious that everyone in the arena expects a call to be made. Referees are advised to have "zero tolerance" with respect to all impact penalties because they tend to involve the illegal use of a stick or fist on an opponent and are the type of infractions which can lead to retaliation, rough play and anger on the part of players from both sides. Games that "get out of hand", to use a hockey term which is often overused, usually get that way as a result of players trying to get even for previous impact infractions.

But anyone who attends a game of hockey, whether at the novice level or at the Junior ‘A’ level will easily see that all infractions which fit the definition of an impact penalty are not called. Why not?

It May Sound Simple But In Practice
It Is Quite A Complex Series of Actions

Don’t let the definition fool you. While it may sound simple, you and everyone else who follows hockey know and understand that you cannot possibly call a penalty every time a player touches another player with a stick or fist. After all, the glove forms a fist naturally, so each time a person touches another, it can be called a fist. Sticks are always coming into contact with players. So, the definition cannot be followed with zero tolerance or the game would turn into a farce.

With that in mind, the best way to help you understand how referees determine when to call impact penalties is to take a brief course in physics.

The Law of Hockey Physics
Force plus Location plus Intent Equals Penalty

In order for a referee to call an impact penalty, three things will be taken into consideration. And keep in mind that all three of these ingredients must be present and observable to the referee. If a referee is not convinced of any of the three, he is likely not going to call a penalty, irregardless of whether or not you and the rest of your friends in the stands think he should.

FORCE

First of all, the referee must make a quick judgement as to the force behind the use of the stick or the punch being thrown. Was it taken with a full swing, a half swing or merely a slow movement in the direction of the opponent? Was it a short swing, but with such force that it could have caused pain? Was the contact with the fist merely the follow through of the forward movement of the player in the first place?

LOCATION

Secondly, he must take into consideration the location of the actual contact. For example, if the stick is directed at an area where a player has very little padding, the call would be made without question. If it is on the front of the shin pads or on the front part of the pants, it may still be called depending on the other two ingredients.

INTENT

The third and perhaps most important consideration is intent. Did the player intend to strike his opponent and did he intend to strike his opponent with force, which was applied to the location where contact was made?

Intent is perhaps the most difficult of the three ingredients for a referee to determine, especially at the beginning of a game or if the referee is not familiar with the players.

For example, we all know that there are certain players on just about every team for whom intent is not an issue. Every time they step on the ice they intend on hitting and hurting everyone wearing an opposing jersey. When they hit someone with their stick, they intend to do so. And often, even if they happen to hit someone accidentally, their reputation may likely land them in the penalty box.

Mixing The Ingredients
Impact On The Game!!!!

Finally, as if all of the above is not enough for a referee to consider, in a split second, while fans, coaches and players are all yelling and screaming, he must also make a judgement call on how the infraction may impact on the game.

The referee may feel that the force of the blow was not hard enough to call. He may feel that the blow was not in a location which was vulnerable. He may also feel that the impact was accidental. But if the contact results in the loss of a scoring chance, or creates a scoring chance for the team of the player committing the infraction, then the referee may have no other choice but to call the penalty.

This is where things start to heat up if coaches, players and fans don’t understand the game – or if they don’t accept the principle of game management.

Inevitably, referees will often find themselves raising their arm and calling a penalty for exactly the same type of infraction which they let go a few moments earlier in another location on the ice. Perhaps it was contact in the neutral zone and there was no advantage gained to the team committing the infraction. Perhaps at that time the referee felt that the game was moving along well and there was no need to call a penalty because the three main ingredients didn’t add up. But then, when the same thing happens in one of the end zones, resulting in an advantage for one of the teams, he has no choice but to make the call and be prepared for criticism.

Impact Infractions
Can Lead To Injuries

For the most part, impact penalties are called by the officials because supervisors and Referee-In-Chiefs stress that these penalties are to be called if the game of hockey is going to be cleaned up and reduce the violence. The people who make the rules want these penalties called because impact penalties have the greatest chance to cause serious injury, so naturally, if they can cause serious injury then they are probably penalties that are so obvious that the referee has no choice but to call the penalty.

Getting Control At The
Beginning Of The Game

Old-time hockey fans will tell you that referees usually like to call penalties often near the beginning of the game to set the tone for the players and get the game under control. By calling impact penalties near the beginning of the game players are able to determine what the referee will be calling throughout the course of the game.

Once players have determined how closely a referee is going to call penalties, they proceed through the game and know what action or reaction will get them a trip to the penalty box or even to the dressing room.

What players and coaches, as well as fans must understand is that impact penalties are determined by taking into consideration all three elements of force, location of impact and intent, as well as location on the ice. Setting the tone at the beginning of the game is done to show players the "tolerance level" that they can expect from a referee. Players who are wise enough to recognize this tolerance level adjust their play to an acceptable degree which will keep them out of the penalty box.

For instance, if a referee is calling all slashing penalties early in the game then the players should be able to realize this and know that if they slash another player, regardless of the force used, then they will probably receive a penalty. The worst thing for a referee to do is call a slash on one play and then let the exact same type of slash go a few minutes later. The players are then left guessing what actions will get them a penalty and they then tend to become agitated and show this through verbal abuse to officials after receiving a penalty or after having a penalty committed against them but having no penalty called against the other team

Referees Do Not Put Their Whistle Away In The Third Period

Old-timers will also tell you that the same referees who call a lot of penalties at the beginning of the game to set the tone tend to put their whistles away in the third period. Anyone who still thinks this is the case hasn’t been to many hockey games lately.

Referees are being constantly reminded that a penalty is a penalty is a penalty – regardless of when it occurs. In practice, most referees who are aware of the importance of game management will tend to be a little more lenient in the dying minutes of a game when the game may be on the line. Nevertheless, there is a growing tendency to give out impact penalties near the end of the game. Related to this is the fact that people also were under the impression that if a team was killing a penalty, they could just about get away with anything. That is no longer the case and the number of times you see a team with two men in the penalty box at once is increasing as Referees clamp down on impact penalties.

Some Impact Infractions Can Change The Entire Atmosphere

One more Impact penalty that is common is the high hit with the elbow or with the fist to a player’s head while the player is standing against the boards. If the Head Checking rule has been adopted by the local district then this type of infraction falls under this rule.

Consider the case of a player such as Joe Sakic carrying the puck behind the net in one corner skating to the other corner along the boards. Now we have Darcy Tucker back checking hard, lining up Sakic as he is skating behind the net with a perfect opportunity to hit Sakic through the boards. The only problem is that Sakic at the last second sees Tucker coming at him and he stops behind the net in an attempt to avoid the body check.

Tucker is now about to crash into the boards and completely miss his target. Tucker, not wanting to look foolish decides to stick his arm out at Sakic and catches him in the head with his fist smashing Sakic’s head off the glass and sending him to the ice.

If this type of penalty goes uncalled then the referee will be dealing with hits and punches to the head area for the rest of the game and he may even have the potential for a fight on his hands.

This is considered a serious impact penalty because it can change the attitude of the players for the remainder of the game. If the players see that the referee is letting these high hits go then the players will react accordingly, throwing punches all over the ice. Furthermore, there would be a great potential for a player to suffer a serious head injury on this hit and therefore, it must be called if the referee sees this infraction.

The key thing to remember in this case is that the referee must see the infraction. This is not always possible, and even if everyone in the stands can see it, the referee may have been watching the puck or a couple of other players involved in a bit of an altercation. A referee cannot make a call if he "thinks" an infraction has occurred. He must see it. Consider the following.

Cross-checks occur every game because players are starting to realize that by using their sticks, they can cause more damage and pain when they throw a check at another player. Because of the advancement of equipment development today, there are few areas left unprotected on the body, however, the rib area just under the arm on the sides is still one of the areas that is the most vulnerable. This is popular target for players who are intent on causing pain.

This type of hit is most often seen when a player is taking a shot. As the player is following through with the shot his hands and arms are up high on his body. As the player coming to throw the check skates into the shooter, he may use his stick in a cross-checking manner (one hand at the top of the stick and the other near the bottom of the stick) and use a quick jabbing motion with the stick into the shooter’s lower back or ribs. This hurts because there is no padding in that area on players and the stick is a hard object that takes a lot of force to snap.

The hard part for the referee is actually seeing this type of infraction. As a shooter is following through, most referees will stop looking at the shooter in order to see where the puck has gone. The referee must keep his eye on the puck in order to determine if a goal is scored. It is extremely difficult for the referee to watch both the shooter and the puck that is usually 60 feet away from the shooter as the person throwing the cross-check makes contact with him.

This type of impact penalty is usually caught when the referee, is standing in a position where he can see both the shooter and the puck. Most of these calls will be made when a referee is standing near the goal line and a shot comes from the defenceman who is located near the blue line. A referee who is following the play will also catch this infraction more easily.

Most referees consider this type of cross-check to be a sneaky and cowardly act. It is also something that others in the building tend to see more often than the referee, thus giving the impression that the referee is incompetent. A good referee will follow the puck and then see or hear the reaction, knowing that something must have occurred, but he is left powerless to call anything that he didn’t see firsthand. However, rest assured that most referees have a good memory and will be "looking" more closely the next time.

Another type of cross-check penalty, that is somewhat a matter of self-defense, or self-preservation, is the following:

Consider the case of Brian Savage with the puck up against the boards just outside the blue line of his defending zone when he sees big Georges Laraque bearing down on him. Savage knows that he is going to be hit. Laraque is one of the larger and tougher players in the league and Savage knows that if Laraque hits him, it is going to hurt for a few days.

Savage takes the puck and passes it to a teammate just before he is going to be hit. Now Savage must try to protect himself from Laraque so he chooses to do this by putting his stick up in Laraque’s face. Laraque skates right into Savage’s cross check and this drops Laraque to the ice in some pain.

This happens in hockey on a regular basis at all levels. Players are often worried about being hurt when they get hit so they put their sticks up in the air as a form of defence. The only problem with this is that the player going to throw a ‘clean check’ becomes the victim. In the case above, if Savage would have chosen to go with the hit and use the boards that he was up against to help cushion the blow and help him stay on his feet then he could have saved himself a penalty.

Players who are not aware of how to properly take a hit or who panic when they see a big player about to hit them usually get their fists and sticks up in the checker’s face. Another reason for getting their fists and sticks up is because they think that the player that is about to hit them will also have their sticks and fists up high at the head area. This happens quite often and is a serious penalty because it can cause an injury to the head. Therefore, this type of penalty is usually called, especially if the head of the player about to throw the check snaps back from the blow to the head.

The more players learn about taking and giving checks, the less this occurs because the players about to receive the check know that they will get a shoulder to the chest area or to the shoulder area and then they will keep their gloves and sticks down and just spin off the check, instead of cross-checking or punching the player throwing the body check.

One final example we want to point out at this time is what is often referred to as a lazy penalty. This is the kind that you will see when a player is completely beaten and cannot catch up to his opponent.

Take the case of Saku Koivu , skating with the puck down the side boards in the neutral zone. Joe Thornton sees that Koivu has a clear lane to get around the defenceman and have a great scoring chance on the goalie. Realizing this, Thornton cuts off Koivu around Thornton’s blue line but he can’t quite catch Koivu because he is skating too fast. Thornton realizes that if he doesn’t do something, Koivu will have a clear shot on the net.

Thornton then decides to use his stick to slow Koivu down, but instead of hooking Koivu, Thornton swings his stick with a fair amount of force (brings his stick back behind his body and uses it like an axe that is trying to cut a tree down). The stick hits Koivu in the ankle but it does not send Koivu to the ice. It does however cause Koivu to stumble a bit and give a little yelp of pain. Koivu continues to skate in but is stopped by the goalie.

This is a type of penalty that would be considered an impact penalty. Even though the slash did not cause Koivu to lose the puck or not get a good scoring opportunity, the slash was directed at the ankle of Koivu and it was done with a force that was great enough to cause Koivu to stumble and give a little yell of pain. Thornton also brought his stick back behind his body and then swung it across his body at Koivu’s ankle. The farther the stick has to travel before it contacts Koivu, the greater the force that is applied and therefore the greater the chance that the infraction has at becoming an Impact Penalty.

Another type of cross-check penalty, that is somewhat a matter of self-defense, or self-preservation, is the following:

Let The Referee
Do His Job!

With impact penalties, as is the case with most other calls dealt with during a hockey contest, observers should always take a deep breath before reacting. Remember that what you see from your position in the arena is different from what the referee is seeing. You are also seeing things from the perspective of a fan, coach or player who has an interest in the outcome of the match. This may tend to cloud your judgement a bit.

Even if the referee sees the infraction, you must keep in mind that he must make a judgement as to whether the force, location and intent support a penalty in that situation. Also, he must look at how the action could "impact" on the outcome of the game.

Finally, remember that the referee must take all of this into consideration in a split second during the heat of battle, while still following the puck. He is not standing there in the stands with a cup of coffee among friends.

Yelling and screaming will do nothing to help the situation, nor will it result in improving your chance of getting any "breaks" from the referee.