QUESTION: Are officials able to have a tinted visor or does it have to be clear?

ANSWER: Officials are required to wear a hockey visor, properly attached to the helmet. There are no restrictions about tinting or shading.

QUESTION: If a player unintentionally shoots the puck over the glass, is it a delay of game penalty?

ANSWER: There are no rules in the USA Hockey Playing Rules for Youth, Girls, High School or Adult level hockey that require a minor penalty for unintentionally shooting the puck over the glass (with the exception of a goalkeeper).

QUESTION: What actually constitutes a “kicking motion?” What if a player changes the angle of his foot to catch a pass and the puck deflects into the net? No “pendulum” motion and the shin didn’t hinge on the knee, and no force was applied to the puck.

ANSWER: The puck may not be either directly kicked, or “directed” into the goal by an attacking players skate. Keep in mind, “directed” and “deflected” are two different terms:

From the USAH Playing Rules Glossary:

Directing the Puck
The act of intentionally moving or positioning the body, skate or stick so as to change the course of the puck in a desired direction.

Deflecting the Puck
The action of the puck contacting any person or object, causing it to change direction.

Therefore, a puck that is shot with the stick and “deflects” (unintentional) off an attacking player’s skate and into the goal shall result in a goal. However, intentionally moving your skate to direct the puck into the net is illegal.

QUESTION: The basic official's manual indicates that the referee is responsible for shutting the penalty bench door after escorting a penalized player. Out of apparent spite towards officials, players exiting the penalty bench refuse to shut the door, both during the course of play and during stoppages. In this scenario there or are no penalty bench attendants. Can a player be penalized for intentionally leaving doors open?

ANSWER: There is no rule in the USA Hockey Playing Rules that allows for a penalty if players do not shut the penalty box door after exiting the box.

QUESTION: Is the parent serving in the penalty box an extension of the team providing the officials? Can a team be penalized for the actions of an off-ice official?

ANSWER: All off-ice officials, including penalty box attendants, are an extension of the game officiating crew. Which means they are expected to act professional, follow the on-ice officials’ guidance, and stay unbiased (or stay as unbiased as anyone would reasonably expect a Pee-Wee Hockey parent to behave). In short, they are expected to comply with the USA Hockey Code-of-Conduct for Officials as listed in the preface of the USAH Playing Rules.

If behavior or comportment is a problem, the on-ice officials may NOT penalize the team providing the off-ice officials. However, they can remove them from the game and request a suitable replacement. Furthermore, they can file an email report to their Local Supervisor of Officials who will follow up with the Local Hockey Association to ensure the volunteer is never assigned to off-ice duties again.

QUESTION: During a peewee game, Player A shoots the puck from his defending side of the red line in the neutral zone towards the goal line in his attacking zone. Player A's teammate is in the attacking zone prior to the puck crossing the blue line, but is close enough to the blue line that this would not normally be called intentional off sides. Should the ensuing face off be in Team A's Defending zone for icing, or the Neutral zone at the spot nearest where the shot was taken for off sides?

ANSWER: Assuming there is no Intentional Off-sides call, the face-off would be located at the nearest “last play” face-off location closest to Player A’s defending goal but still in the same zone the puck was originally passed from. Since play must be immediately stopped for the off-side violation, icing has no effect on this interpretation.

QUESTION: Can I apply rule 601(e)4 if I believe a player intentionally shoots a puck at a referee ? If not is there a rule for this ? Does it matter if the official was hit with the puck or not?

ANSWER: The spirit and intent of Rule 601.e.4 is to penalize a player who physically grabs and/or holds, or otherwise physically interferes with an official who is trying to perform their duties. This rule was not meant to address the situation where a player shoots the puck at an official.

With that clarified, your interpretation of the word “shoots” would determine what type of penalty a player would receive. Obviously, the degree of disrespect and injury-potential would have a large factor in deciding what to call. For example, a player who simply shoots the puck along the ice at a modest speed would likely only deserve an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty (since the puck is on the ice and there is very little chance of an injury occurring). However, any player who shoots the puck hard and elevated from the ice should be assessed a match penalty under Rule 601.f.1 or Rule 601.f.3. This assumes the puck was intentionally shot at the game official.

QUESTION: Time expires but the automatic horn malfunctions, 5 seconds later a team scores a goal. Is the referee permitted to ask the timekeeper if time expired before the goal thereby causing the goal to be disallowed?

ANSWER: Similar to all on-ice officials quickly discussing a game situation to determine if a penalty should be called or where a face-off should be located, it would be very wise for a referee to consult the Game Timekeeper if the game time is in question. The Game Timekeeper is responsible for managing the game clock and should be aware when a period has expired.

QUESTION: I was officiating an Adult Rec. league and both my partner and I glanced over at a collision away from the play. The puck was shot into the goal and hit the backbar when the collision happened, but I saw in the corner of my eye what looked like it hit the crossbar. So I waved it off. Even though most of the players saw it go in, am I in the wrong to wave it off? Because myself nor my partner did not see the puck physically enter the goal.

ANSWER: The game officials must be 100% certain the puck completely crossed the goal line to award a goal.

QUESTION: During an NHL game, the goalie took off his helmet for no apparent reason. Why was this not a delay of game penalty?”

ANSWER: Unfortunately, this forum is dedicated to the USA Hockey Playing Rules and cannot comment on National Hockey League rules or interpretations.

QUESTION: Can you please provide clarification regarding Rule 307 Situation 4? Rule 307 does NOT state that "the request for a measurement can only be made for a player who is on the ice at the time the request is made.", but Situation 4 states this. Is it permissible to check a measurement of players on the ice and the bench, but NOT in the penalty box? Or just of a player on the ice (which is not stated in the rule itself)

ANSWER: The USA Hockey Playing Rule Casebook provides additional guidance and interpretation to all playing rules. While the Playing Rules are written with the intent to convey “spirit and intent”, it would be impossible to cover every single nuance of the playing rules in the rule itself (otherwise, the rulebook would be about 2,000 pages long).

With that said, a player must be on the ice during a period of the game to have his/her stick measurements challenged.

QUESTION: During a game, a coach argued a situation and was assessed a minor penalty, a 10-minute misconduct, and a game misconduct. They made a player on the ice serve 12 minutes for the coach. Can a coach receive a 10 min and should a player serve the 10?

ANSWER: Team Officials cannot be assessed a Misconduct penalty under the USA Hockey Playing Rules. If they behave in a way that results in the assessment of a Bench Minor penalty, they must be assessed a Game Misconduct if they continue.

QUESTION: With a penalty being served (5 on 4), a delayed penalty for throwing the stick is being signaled on the short-handed team. A goal is then scored by the non-offending team. What is the proper procedure following the goal?

ANSWER: If the Referee signals an additional minor penalty(s) against a team that is already shorthanded (below the numerical strength of its opponent on the ice at the time of the goal) because of one or more minor or bench minor penalties, and a goal is scored by the non-offending team, the goal shall be allowed. The delayed penalty(s) shall be assessed and the first non-coincidental minor penalty already being served shall terminate automatically under Rule 402(c) (Minor Penalties).

QUESTION: A face off was in Team A's defensive end and the coach only places 4 skaters on the ice. The official asked for another player from Team A and the coach says it is OK, drop the puck. The face off was conducted and Team A immediately puts out a 5th player, which is behind Team B's defensive and a pass is made out to this 'cherry picker' who takes the puck in for a scoring opportunity. Are there any rules that would prevent this from happening in this 5 on 5 situation?

ANSWER: Rule 205(a) in the USA Hockey Playing Rules states,

“Both teams must place the full number of players on the ice to which they are entitled to prior to the face-off”

QUESTION: I was called for some penalty, not exactly sure what the actual name of the call was but the referee came over to explain the call while I was in the box and told me it was called because when I hit the opponent, my stick wasn't on the ice and therefore I wasn't playing the puck. I have not once been called for not having my stick on the ice and can not find it anywhere where this rule is mentioned. Is this an actual rule and if so how long has it been a rule?

ANSWER: Since we did not see the body-contact in your game situation, we cannot determine if the hit you executed was legal or not.

With that said, technically there is no rule in the USA Hockey Playing Rules that mandates a player must have his stick on the ice when they body-check someone. However, USA Hockey’s increased focus on player safety with respect to body-contact, has placed a higher demand on players to engage proper body-contact. The purpose of a body-check is to separate an opponent from the puck, and not to “punish” or “intimidate”. Therefore, one way to engage in proper body-contact is by “making a play for the puck first” (or low stick-on-stick contact) just before impact.

You can find more information about this at the Declaration of Player Safety, Fair-Play and Respect page at USAHockey.com. We’re certain your coaching staff and team manager has shared this information with you earlier this season (or if they haven’t, we strongly encourage you to ask “why not”), but it never hurts to review the information.

QUESTION: Regarding "board banging or kicking" during the course of a game. Is the initiative directed only at the situation regarding "big hits" or would it include saves and goals celebrated by a team. Is my judgement regarding such action to be a penalty is a taunt to the opponent or directed at the teammate? Or is it a penalty regardless?

ANSWER: The enforcement of “banging the boards” is related to body contact only. Goals, good saves and blocking shots are positive entities in our game and should always be celebrated when they occur. However, banging the boards after body checks (illegal or otherwise) should be viewed as “taunting” and can incite the opponent. Which may lead to escalation in illegal body contact as the opponents try to “get even”.

QUESTION: Teams are at full strength. Team A shoots the puck from their end zone it grazes (or contacts) a Team B player's shirt prior to the center red line and goes down and over the red teams goal line - is this icing or no icing?

ANSWER: If the puck is shot from the defending half of the ice and makes any contact (including the sweater) with an opponent before crossing the goal line, icing must be nullified. An official cannot be expected to know whether the puck contacted just the sweater or the actual body of the player.

QUESTION: If a defensive player were to fall on and cover the puck in the crease preventing an obvious and imminent goal while the goaltender was still on the ice but far enough away from play as to be unable to affect the outcome, could a goal be awarded (e.g. the goalie is half way to his bench for an extra attacker or has slipped and fallen in the corner of the rink 25 feet out of the crease).

ANSWER: If the goalkeeper is on the ice participating in play, then a penalty shot must be awarded any time a defending player covers the puck in the crease. While a goalkeeper who is removed from the crease (e.g. in the corner) might be situation where the goal is open and a goal would be “obvious and imminent”, the determination of “How far is far enough?” is too difficult to determine and has no playing rule guidance.

With that said, a goalkeeper who is leaving the ice for the purpose of substitution (which is a pretty obvious act vs. protecting the goal or playing the puck) would be a different interpretation. If this case, the goalkeeper is removed from play (though maybe not quite off the ice yet). In this case, a goal should be awarded if the defending team covers the puck in the crease.

QUESTION: During play, Team A has six players on the ice while Team B has possession of the puck. Team A has not gained possession of the puck either. Is this considered a delayed penalty or should the play be stopped immediately and assess a "too many men" penalty?

ANSWER: If a team participates in play with too many players, play must be allowed to continue until the offending team gains possession and control of the puck. Similar to any other minor penalty, if the referee is aware of the infraction, he/she should raise their arm to signal a delayed penalty. If the linesman observes the infraction, they simply wait until the offending team gains possession and control of the puck and then stops play and reports the infraction to the referee who assesses the penalty.

QUESTION: On an icing play, does the non-offending team have to make an attempt to play the puck? In a recent game, the puck was going slowly to the goal line and the player easily could've touched the puck but didn't. The icing was waved off, was this the right call?

ANSWER: Rule 624(b) in the USA Hockey Playing Rules states,

“Icing shall be nullified if any of the following conditions have been met:

If, in the opinion of the Linesman, an opposing player – except the goalkeeper – has an opportunity to play the puck, and has not done so, prior to the puck crossing the goal line.”

QUESTION: If a player clears the puck from behind the red line in the air regardless of height, am I as the opposing player expected to "attempt to play" the mid-air puck? The Ref said I had to try to play the puck out of the air because it passed close by me in the air and was "playable". I didn’t try to play it out the air and he waived off icing. He also said I could have blocked the attempted icing with my body. I said that I can’t be expected to play the puck in any situation out of the air.

ANSWER: Generally speaking, a player is not expected or obligated to play the puck in the air. And if they do, they are expected to either bat it to the ice or catch it and immediately drop it.

QUESTION: What is the penalty if a player drops only his stick in attempt to start an original altercation, but does not drop his gloves or throw a punch. Nothing comes of it and there is no other ongoing altercation.

ANSWER: Rule 601(a)2 in the USA Hockey Playing Rules states,

“A minor penalty for unsportsmanlike conduct shall be assessed to any player who commits the following actions:

2. Taunts or incites an opponent.”

Any attempt to instigate an altercation would be considered “taunting”.

QUESTION: If I am under 18 years of age, do I have to wear a cage when officiating?

ANSWER: While all USA Hockey Officials are required to properly wear a half-shield visor, they are not required to wear a full face-mask.

QUESTION: Our team was informed that all players on the bench should remain back or seated for if a puck comes in contact with a butt end of a stick, or glove, it will constitute a "too many players on the ice penalty". I have seen nothing pertaining to this except a dead whistle for an out of play puck.

ANSWER: Rule 625(a)9 in the USA Hockey Playing Rules states,

“A minor penalty shall be assessed for interference. This includes the following actions which shall be penalized under this rule:

9. Any player on the players’ or penalty bench who interferes, in any manner, with the movement of the puck or any opponent on the ice while play is in progress.”

While players are not required to be seated on the bench during the game, they should not hang over the boards in any way that might interfere with a player, official or the puck

QUESTION: Do game suspensions carry from state to state? If a player/coach received a game suspension at an out-of-state tournament do they still need to serve game suspension even though it happened out of state?

ANSWER: All players and team officials are accountable to all penalties and suspensions imposed under the USA Hockey Playing Rules, regardless of where they occurred. In fact, referees must submit all Major penalties, Game Misconduct penalties and Match penalties into the online National Game Reporting System that tracks all players and coaches. 

Plus, all game reports are automatically submitted to the local USA Hockey Affiliate (i.e. local governing body) of the offending team. So if a coach ignored a suspension, the Affiliate Disciplinary Body would know and take appropriate action.