NCAA Hockey: Expanded video replay criteria approved for men's, women's hockey

An ice hockey referee signals a penalty for high sticking. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Here are some of the changes to come down from the NCAA Ice Hockey Rules Committee.

The NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel approved several changes to the criteria for allowing video replay in men’s and women’s ice hockey, effective for the 2014-15 season.

The replay changes were recommended by the Men’s and Women’s Ice Hockey Rules Committee during its meeting in June as part of a number  of recommendations intended to improve the game and were circulated to coaches and conferences for comment prior to PROP’s approval.

The added scenarios are:

• Goals may be reviewed to determine if they are scored before a penalty occurred.

• If an offsides or too many men on the ice penalty is missed and a goal is scored, the play may be reviewed if the puck remains in the offensive zone after the missed infraction. If the puck leaves the attacking zone, the offsides or too many men on the ice penalty is no longer reviewable.This replaces the previous wording that only allowed a review if the missed play directly led to a goal.

• It was clarified that the video used for replays may come from any source that is available to the game officials. Previously, the video used was required to come from a television broadcast.

NCAA Hockey: New Rules

The NCAA Ice Hockey Rules committee has been meeting this week, and these are the rules changes that they came up with.

Hand Pass by Faceoff Player – The players taking a faceoff are not allowed to use their hand to play the puck. A violation of this rule will result in a minor penalty, similar to the NHL rule.

Faceoff Procedure – The defending team’s faceoff player shall be required to put the stick down first. Previously, the attacking team was required to do so. Center ice faceoffs will continue to require the visiting team to put the stick down first.

Goal pegs – Ten-inch goal pegs that are anchored into the ice or floor must be in place at all NCAA levels by the 2016-17 season.

Faceoff Location – Offensive Scoring Opportunity: If the offensive team is attempting to score and the puck goes out of play – the faceoff will remain in the attacking zone.

Faceoff Location – High stick/hand pass: In these cases, the ensuing faceoff will be one zone closer to offending team’s goal.

Video Replay – Several changes were made to the criteria and process:

• It is reviewable to determine if a goal was scored before a penalty occurred.

• If an offsides or too many men on the ice penalty is missed and a goal is scored, it is reviewable until the puck leaves the offensive zone. This replaces the previous wording that only allowed the review to occur if the missed play directly led to a goal.

• It was clarified that video review may be used without the restriction of games that are being broadcast on television.

Penalty Shot/Shootout – During a shootout or penalty shot, if the goal becomes dislodged by the goalkeeper, the referee shall either award a goal (if intentional or if the goal was obvious and imminent) or allow the team to shoot again.

Penalty Shot – If a player that is awarded a penalty shot is injured and unable to take the shot, one of the players on the ice at the time of the infraction shall be chosen to shoot.

Look-Up Line – The committee approved the use of a warning-track style line intended to positively impact safety near the boards. The use of this line will not be mandatory, but is permissible.

One of the new rule changes that I like is the new rule where if the net becomes dislodged during a penalty shot or shootout, the referee “shall” award a goal or another shot to the shooter. Last season, when Minnesota was playing Michigan State the game was tied and the two teams went to a shootout. With the game tied 2-2, Michigan State forward Joe Cox appeared to have scored a good goal during the shootout. However, after further review, the referee ruled that Gopher goalie Adam Wilcox knocked the net off its' moorings before Cox scored. (Video below).  

NCAA Cabinet Approves Change to NCAA Tournament Process

This week, this is one of the big news stories to come out for college hockey. In a nut shell, the small schools in Division I college hockey are lobbying the NCAA to tweak the NCAA selection criteria to reflect wins on the road. It appears that they have been successful with their efforts. The small schools’ quip is that the certain schools – more specifically the big division I schools – won’t travel to small schools arenas and play them.

That’s not a problem with my favorite team UND, they have a tradtion of making trips to nonconference games.

Some of these schools feel that they’re getting a raw deal when it comes time for the NCAA tournament for bids to the NCAA hockey tourney and they’re being left out in the cold, because they didn’t qualify for the NCAA tourney. Their reason, they claim, is that they are being punished for too many nonconference losses in other teams’ barns

Now, I do believe that there is “some” validity to those claims. Obviously, if your team has too many nonconference losses you’re not going to make the NCAA tourney. Recently, I can think of a couple of teams in the past that this bit in the rear end, because of their bad out of conference record. Also, I think a few teams “just” slipped into the NCAA tourney that would have probably made it with ease if they didn’t have as many bad losses. I also believe the math would probably support this assertion.

As we know in college hockey, not all things are equal. I also believe that there’s a downside to this, the big schools aren’t going to want to travel to a AHA team’s rink and play in front of much smaller crowds than they’re used to playing in front of. So, they will just find big schools to schedule out of conference series with. I do believe the teams that have less will still be left out in the cold.

Moving forward I am surprised there’s isn’t more pushback against this new possible rule change. First, by not having as many home games, these teams are also going to lose money because of them having less home games that they use the revenue from to fund the rest of their athletic department. Also, some of the ECAC schools only have “X” numbers of nonconference game that their schools allow them to play.

College Hockey News – Many coaches have been clamoring for changes in recent years, but, in light of the impending major conference re-alignment coming this season, the issue got particular attention at this year's coach's convention and Men's Ice Hockey Committee meetings.

The concern has been that a big difference in the amount of home and away games, puts teams from the smaller conferences — who, on average, play more road non-conference games — at a disadvantage in the selection criteria.

For example, among teams in the new Big Ten, Wisconsin has 14 non-league games, 10 home and four away; Ohio State has 14 non-league games, 11 home and three away; and Minnesota has 16 non-league games, 12 at home (including a tournament at the Xcel Center) and four away.

The details are still unknown, but there were a number of proposals on the table when the issue was being discussed over the summer. One proposal, for example, would re-balance the RPI (Ratings Percentage Index) evenly among home and road games — removing the advantage.

It's not yet known, however, which form the changes will take.

Moving forward, I think you’re going to see more Christmas tourneys and matchups between the bigger more attractive schools. I don’t know if in the end, the small schools will actually benefit from this rule. They will get punished less in the mathematical equation for losing on the road.

UND AD Brian Faison selected to NCAA Division I Men’s Ice Hockey Committee

GRAND FORKS, N.D. – The NCAA announced today that University of North Dakota Director of Athletics Brian Faison will represent the National Collegiate Hockey Conference (NCHC) as one of three new members selected to serve on the NCAA Division I Men’s Ice Hockey Committee.

Faison, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Athletics Director Jim Knowlton, and Minnesota associate athletics director Tom McGinnis each begin their 4-year appointments on Sept. 1, 2013. The appointment runs until Sept. 1, 2017.

“We couldn’t be happier with the selection of these three individuals,” said Kristin Fasbender, NCAA associate director of championships and alliances and operations manager for the Division I Men’s Ice Hockey Championship. “They all bring a wealth of knowledge and experience, and will be tremendous assets to Division I men’s ice hockey.”

The Division I Men’s Ice Hockey Committee is in charge of oversight of all aspects of the championship, which includes team selection, seeding and bracketing. Also, managing any administrative issues on site at all rounds of the championships, which includes any misconduct issues (reprimands, fines, suspensions). The committee serves as on-site representative at the regionals and make up the games committee at the Frozen Four. The committee also selects the regional and Frozen Four championship sites.

“Brian will be an excellent representative for the NCHC, and for all of college hockey, as he moves into his position as a committee member for NCAA hockey,” said UND Head Men’s Hockey Coach Dave Hakstol.

The Division I Men’s Ice Hockey Committee is made up of one person from each hockey-playing conference and currently consists of: Rick Goeb, director of athletics, Bemidji State University; Tom Nevala, senior associate athletics director, University of Notre Dame; Rand Pecknold, head coach, Quinnipiac University; Kevin Sneddon, head coach, University of Vermont and Col. William Walker, deputy director of athletics, United States Air Force Academy.

Faison is currently in his fifth year as athletics director at UND.

Ice Hockey Rules Committee to examine three-quarter face shields

Official Press Release
By Greg Johnson
NCAA.org

The NCAA Ice Hockey Rules Committee plans to establish a collaborative process with the NCAA Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports to collect data and fully explore the possibility of allowing men’s players to wear three-quarter visors.

Current rules require a full face shield to be worn.

The ice hockey committee did not make a formal proposal but focused more on continuing the process of a full review and data collection effort in the review of current technology. Committee representatives will meet with the competitive-safeguards committee next week to review a wider package of potential enhancements that can be made to enhance student-athlete safety. The committee hopes that a partnership with the competitive-safeguards committee and other hockey organizations (for example, National Hockey League, USA Hockey, United States Hockey League) will lead to the use of visors.

A recent survey of 1,000 student-athletes showed that 83 percent would prefer to utilize a three-quarter shield if given the opportunity. The overwhelming majority of men’s coaches favor three-quarter visor use.
Ice hockey rules committee members, who met Wednesday and Thursday in Indianapolis, believe that such support of the concept mandates a thorough review.

The development of newer, better facial shields that are more protective than traditional half-shields is one driving factor for the committee’s reconsideration of appropriate equipment. In its review, the committee believes that other aspects of equipment must be considered in conjunction with visor technology. For example, representatives of the NHL recently discussed working with manufacturers to develop softer padding, and the NCAA will engage in that discussion.

The NCAA has had an injury surveillance program in all sports for decades. Data will be compared to injury information that other entities, such as the United States Hockey League, collect after players completed their first seasons with the new visors. Over the past year, the USHL collected information on the number of facial injuries and concussions that occurred and has offered to partner with the NCAA on data collection.
Committee members understand the challenge of explaining how removing a piece of protective equipment may have a positive impact on student-athlete safety.

“Our coaches and student-athletes feel the game will be played with more respect, and players will play with less of a sense of invincibility,” said Ed McLaughlin, the chair of the Ice Hockey Rules Committee and director of athletics at Niagara. “We’ve talked about the visors, but also about softer padding in general as another important part of this.”

McLaughlin will meet with the competitive-safeguards committee next week to request engagement and partnership on those issues.

Since 1978, NCAA hockey players have worn full cages. The rule was implemented to protect the eyes of the players. At the time, there wasn’t talk of other injuries such as concussions or facial injuries.

Times have changed, especially in regard to head and brain injuries.

“That is why we want to take a measured approach to this,” McLaughlin said. “We look at how some of the technology has evolved, and the three-quarter visors may be able to address the same needs as when the full cages were put in.”

McLaughlin also noted that student-athletes are coming from playing with these visors before and after NCAA competition.

“All of this factors in as to why this is a passionate issue,” McLaughlin said. “We know our coaches and student-athletes are strongly in favor of this. We want to be sure the broader community has the opportunity to review this and fully understand the potential benefit as one part of a larger improvement to the sport.”
A more detailed communication will be distributed to hockey institutions regarding the committee’s plan in the near future.

The committee did propose several changes to current rules. All rules changes must be approved the Playing Rules Oversight Panel, which is scheduled to meet in July via conference call. The main proposals are listed below. All changes will be sent to the membership for comment next week and all feedback will be shared with the hockey committee and the oversight panel.

Overtime option

After a thorough discussion, the committee recommended giving conferences and institutions the option of playing four-on-four, five-minute overtime periods in the regular season beginning with the 2012-13 season. That is the system used in the NHL.

The goalies would still be required to switch ends of the ice, which causes teams to make long line changes, leading to additional scoring opportunities.

The proposed rule is not a mandate. If teams playing in a nonconference game can’t agree on which way overtime will be played, it will default to a five-on-five, five-minute extra period where the goalies will switch ends of the ice.

The format for NCAA tournament games has not changed (five-on-five until a winner is decided).

“There was some support in the membership for four-on-four overtime, and it is an exciting brand of hockey,” McLaughlin said. “We also wanted to respect the membership views that it might not be the best for all levels of hockey right now. Providing an option for everyone is the right step for us.”

The committee will monitor the overtime formats for the next two years to see if any other changes should be made.

“When we made the change two years ago for the goalies to change ends going into overtime, it lessened the number of ties in the sport,” McLaughlin said. “We think making another option available will allow for more data to be collected and to review the impact on our game.”

Hand passes made illegal

Committee members proposed that all hand passes be made illegal, including in the defensive zone.
The referee will stop play on any hand pass, and the faceoff will be in the offending team’s defensive zone. Additionally, if the team commits the violation in its defensive zone, that team will not be able to change its players before the ensuing faceoff.

 “This is a way to promote scoring and create more chances on offense,” McLaughlin said. “Not being able to make a line change can have a pretty big impact, and this takes away a rule that gave the defensive team an advantage.”

Net dislodgement change

The committee also adjusted its rules dealing with the goal cage becoming dislodged. The committee essentially moved to the NHL rule in this area, which allows some displacement of the goal as long as the posts remain in contact with the pegs or pins.

“Our rules currently don’t allow for much leeway, and we believe we have disallowed too many goals that really should count,” McLaughlin said. “The NHL rules have been used effectively, and we believe this is a positive change.”

To award a goal in these situations, the goal post must have been displaced by the actions of a defending player. To award a goal, the referee must determine that the puck would have entered the net between the normal position of the goal posts.

Distinct kicking motion

Another proposed change by the committee is intended to enhance scoring and also make its rules more consistent. The committee approved a change that will allow most goals off of attacking player’s skates, with the exception of a distinct kicking motion. In recent years, the committee has attempted a variety of interpretations in this area.

“We ultimately believe bringing some clarity to this rule is important and allowing goals that are directed into the goal with a skate will be a positive move,” McLaughlin said. “It seems like the hockey community is comfortable with the concept of a distinct kicking motion, so we hope this brings some clarity to this rule as well.”

Officiating system

Effective with the 2013-14 season, the committee voted to make the two-referee, two-linesman system mandatory for men’s ice hockey. Feedback from the women’s ice hockey community indicated that the two-referee, one-linesman system should remain as an option for the foreseeable future. All four NCAA championships used the two-referee, two-linesman system in 2012.

Additionally, goal judges are no longer required for NCAA games and will only be recommended.
“Our rules truly require two referees, and the committee strongly believes the four-person system is the best overall,” McLaughlin said. “We believe providing a grace period will allow institutions time to adjust and plan.”

The NCAA adjusted officiating fees in the 2012 Division III championships (men’s and women’s) to make the change immediately and reduced travel costs by not using a back-up official.

Postgame review of disqualifications

The committee voted to allow a postgame review of disqualification penalties by the on-ice officials. The group requested conference feedback on how best to implement a procedure and guidelines for the concept, but the belief is a disqualification penalty, with the help of video evidence, is an important determination and should be reviewed. The calling official will have the final decision on any review.

New chair

The committee approved the appointment of Tom Anastos, head men’s coach at Michigan State, as the chair of the committee, effective Sept. 1.