skip navigation

South Shore Eagles have taken flight in 2012-13

By Mike Scandura, 03/15/13, 12:45PM MDT

Share

In 1985, the Massachusetts towns of Abington and Rockland merged their single youth teams into one team.
 
Then, as youth hockey became more popular on the South Shore in Massachusetts, it eventually led to the formation of the South Shore Eagles, which now includes players from towns like Bridgewater, Hanson, Middleboro, Taunton, Pembroke, Whitman and Norwell.
 
But as is the case in any sport, the Eagles have experienced their share of ups and downs.
 
“I took over the position last July,” President Danielle Larouco said. “Over the past two years or so the Eagles were in a decline in terms of players. We share a rink with the Bay State Breakers in Rockland, so we have a huge competition especially with elite players.
 
“A lot of our players moved to their organization about two years ago.”

However, in the 2012-13 season, the Eagles have taken flight.
 
“We were on the downward part of the curve and now we’re on the upward part of the curve,” Larouco said. “The Eagles program has seen an increase in players over the past year, players who’ve come back to the program.
 
“A big part of the reason people come back is there’s a good, positive vibe because we weren’t held in the highest regard in recent years. Now I think we have a good group of newcomers who realize the program has a lot to offer and cares about developing each and every player.”

What the Eagles program offers is two-fold in nature:
 

  • Its Bantam A and B, Midget half- and full-season, Peewee B and Squirt B2 teams play in the South Shore Conference.
  • Its Instructional Blue and Green, Bantam C, Squirt C, Mite C and Blue teams play in the Yankee Conference Instructional league. 

 
“The Yankee Conference is primarily a C level league,” Larouco said. “Because there were so many kids that wanted to skate at all age levels, it led to the formation of the Yankee Conference.”
 
The importance of the Yankee Conference Instructional League to the Eagles is underscored by the fact that 21 of 22 players at the Mite level returned for this season.
 
“We had a 95 percent return rate at the Mite instructional level,” Larouco said with a hint of pride in her voice. “Now, that’s snowballed. Ask any of those kids and they’ll say they love Eagles pride.”
 
To say the coaches “love” working in the Eagles program would be an understatement.
 
“We give our coaches warm-up suits,” Larouco said. “They’ll say ‘ “I’ve been coaching for 20 years and nobody ever has given me warm-up suits.’
 
“It’s the little things that have meant a lot.”
 
While USA Hockey’s American Development Model couldn’t be classified as a “little thing,” it has meant a lot to the Eagles program.
 
“We follow USA Hockey’s ADM,” Larouco noted. “It’s a four-on-four program run out of Hingham. It caters to a smaller ice surface with more touches and opportunities to become involved.
 
“We’ve had great success. Over the last couple of years, the kids who’ve come through the program on the ice have loved it. The end result of what the Eagles provide — and the ADM is part of it — is quality instruction at a great cost.”
 
Larouco herself brings an inordinate amount of quality experience to the South Shore Eagles.
 
A Brown University graduate (she played at Brown during a period when the Bears captured several ECAC and Ivy League titles), she also played for the U.S. National Team, served as an assistant coach at her alma mater, and attended several USA National development camps.
 
“My background definitely has helped me in terms of knowledge of hockey,” Larouco said. “I’m fortunate to be in an area where I can give back to the program. Last year, I was in the instructional league.
 
“No matter what my business is, we talk hockey all day long. I get along with the guys and we can talk hockey, and I can relate to the boys. At the end of the day, you want to mold the kids, plus I love hockey.”
 
Story from Red Line Editorial, Inc.

Related News

Most Popular Articles

Have you verified the score sheet?

By USA Hockey 02/13/2019, 8:15am MST

Remember when score sheets simply consisted of three or four carbon copies at the scorer’s table?

While we’re still likely to see that classic technique at some facilities, most have abandoned the handwritten score sheets in favor of electronic scoring systems and advanced score sheets – or minimally combined the process of both.

But whether it’s handwritten or electronic, the score sheet is not deemed “good to go” until an official signs off on it at the conclusion of the game. Rule 502(e) is clear in saying, “At the conclusion of the game, the referee shall check the official score sheet, including team rosters and players in uniform, for accuracy prior to signing.”

The game score sheet is considered an official record that documents the participants and the actions that take place during a game. Teams need them to document participation for eligibility in state or national tournaments, or to provide verification of a suspension served. They may also be keeping stats on players for their continued development and promotion to higher levels of play.  Plus, the score sheet provides a means to track progressive penalties or to identify trends within a local area or league. 

Regardless as to what system is used (hard copy or electronic scoring), the game score sheet is considered an official document and officials must adhere to their responsibility to treat it as such. Whereas the vast majority of officials have been good at reviewing and signing off on hard copy score sheets, there appears to be some confusion as to the need to verify the electronic version.

The electronic score sheet is an official document. Teams print these from the web-based system to verify their eligibility as mentioned above. Because it is an official record of the game, the officials have the responsibility to make sure all data is entered correctly, including the officials’ names, and must sign-off on the information prior to having the game sheet closed and finalized. This is no different than crossing off blank areas, making sure penalties are recorded properly and signing the actual hard copy score sheet. 

As a refresher, here are some tips on what to look for, and the officials’ responsibility to verify game sheets at the conclusion of every game.

1) Make sure that players who are not present to participate in the game are crossed off (hard copy) or removed from the game sheet (electronic). Only those players/coaches who are eligible and present to participate should be listed on the score sheet.

2) Confirm all penalties are recorded properly and to the proper player. Many times a game misconduct penalty will be recorded as a ten-minute misconduct or vice versa. If a player is assessed a minor plus misconduct, each of those must be recorded as a separate penalty. If you find there is a clerical error where a penalty was assessed properly, but not recorded correctly, fix the mistake prior to signing or closing off the game sheet.

However, an official is not allowed to simply change their call that was made during the game. For example, if an official assesses a major penalty for slashing during the game and the player serves the five minute major, but after the game, the officials talk and determine that the player deserved a major plus game misconduct penalty, or match penalty instead, the score sheet cannot be changed at this time. The officials may submit an incident report requesting the incident be reviewed under Rule 410 Supplementary Discipline.

3) Make sure all of the on-ice officials who worked the game are listed properly on the game sheet.

4) Once you have determined that all of the recorded information is accurate, the officials must sign (legibly) the hard copy of the score sheet or sign off and approve the electronic version so it can be finalized.

The one exception is when the scorekeeper manually keeps track of all of the game actions, but will then later enter the data into an electronic system. In this instance, it is important for the referee to make sure the document the scorekeeper used to record actions is accurate and they understand the penalties assessed so they can be entered properly.  It may be a good idea to go back at a later time and check the electronic version for accuracy, as well.

The bottom line is that the game sheet for each game you work is a reflection of your performance on the ice. If you do not pay attention to details and there are inaccuracies on the game sheet, the perception will be your performance on the ice was also lacking effort and attention to detail. Not to mention, it may also effect any potential imposed suspensions and/or eligibility of players/coaches. 

Please take score sheet (hard copy or electronic versions) management seriously as it is a major part of the official’s responsibility.  Doing so will make life easier for volunteers who are charged with tracking such things and will make the game better.  And if the game is better, your job as an official probably becomes more enjoyable, too.

Holding rule-breakers accountable

By USA Hockey 01/11/2019, 5:15pm MST

Q&A with Matt Leaf on the importance of game reporting

Everyone in hockey wants the game to be played within the rules. More importantly, they want those who fail to do so to be held accountable for their actions. 

As a result, USA Hockey has spent the past several seasons making appropriate consequences for the rule-breakers, including more severe penalties for dangerous actions and progressive suspensions for repeat offenders.

And while officials can’t prevent the dangerous action from occurring, they do play a significant role in holding accountable those responsible for these actions with proper rule enforcement. Not only that, but officials must fulfill their responsibility of submitting an accurate and timely game report through the USA Hockey Online Game Reporting System. 

STRIPES recently sat down with Matt Leaf, director of the officiating education program, to learn more about the game reporting process and to address some of the concerns he hears from affiliate disciplinary personnel on the reporting process and what officials can do better.

STRIPES: The Online Game Reporting System is in its fifth season, what are some of the areas where the system has helped the game?
Matt Leaf:
When properly used, the system has definitely helped affiliates and local leagues manage suspensions and the disciplinary process. It allows for a consistent game-reporting format where the required information immediately gets into the hands of the proper authorities once submitted by the official. The system also provides a more user-friendly mechanism for the officials to file the report on their mobile devices.

One other benefit is, with better compliance in filing reports each season, USA Hockey can track certain infractions and identify any trends both geographically and by types of infractions.

STRIPES: How is USA Hockey looking to continue to improve the system and make it even easier for the officials?
Leaf:
We are constantly receiving feedback from affiliate administrators and officials with suggestions, and all of that is taken seriously. In some cases, there are good ideas that we try to incorporate as soon as possible. In other situations, a bigger picture needs to be taken into consideration.

One main area that we are working on is the player search component and tying that into team rosters so officials can simply pull down the team roster to identify the player versus trying to narrow down an entire database. Doing so will greatly improve the accuracy of identifying the guilty player/coach and simplify the process for officials. 

The second area that is being worked on is the reporting side of things for administrators and making penalty data more readily available – basically simplifying their ability to manage hundreds of reports.

STRIPES: What is the official’s responsibility when it comes to submitting game reports?
Leaf:
First and foremost, with the new progressive suspension rules, the official has to be timely in submitting reports so the system can identify any players/coaches who have reached a suspension threshold. Timely should be well within 24 hours of the game, but certainly no longer than 48 hours (the sooner part of this option being preferred).

Next, it is imperative that the official pays attention to details and provides accurate information in regards to the player(s)/coaches involved (e.g., the type of penalty assessed and the proper rule reference). There really is no excuse for an official to submit a report for clicking on a minor plus misconduct for head contact when in fact they assessed a major plus game misconduct. The correct rule reference is also important as it does play a role in the system’s ability to track repeat offenders.

STRIPES: That seems to be pretty critical information.  What are some other things officials need to know when submitting a game report?
Leaf:
The most common mistake made is when an official submits a duplicate report (or maybe both officials submit a report) for the same incident. This creates problems because the system does not know it is a duplicate, so it counts it as two different strikes against the same player, even though it was only one infraction. Only one report (the officials can work on it together, if needed) needs to submitted for each incident.

Another common error is submitting multiple reports from the same game when, in fact, the system is designed to handle multiple incidents involving multiple players from the same game. Instead of starting over with a new report for each penalty assessed, the officials can simply do one report for the game and identify each incident separately in the one report.

Finally, officials have to know the rules and the consequences for the rules. Under Rule 411 (Progressive Suspensions), there is a full listing of infractions involving major penalties that require a report to be submitted. Each penalty also has to be listed separately. For example, a player gets a major penalty for slashing, and then later on, gets a major plus game misconduct for head contact. It’s not enough to simply submit a report assessing a game misconduct for the second major penalty in the same game. The report needs to have each penalty (slashing, head contact, game misconduct for second major) listed separately so the system can properly track the aggressive fouls and send out the automatic alert when a threshold is reached.

STRIPES: Any other final words of wisdom?
Leaf:
USA Hockey wants players and coaches held accountable for their actions, whether it is for unsportsmanlike behavior or dangerous play outside the boundaries established the rules. This can’t be accomplished without the help of the officials properly enforcing the rules and submitting the appropriate game report when needed. 

Officials have a responsibility (in fact it is part of their duties) to properly submit accurate game reports when required.

Detailed instructions on filing game reports are available on USAHockey.com, and if unsure on something, ask your local supervisor or assignor. Paying attention to details in submitting a timely and accurate report will not only minimize confusion and having to answer questions later, but also will eliminate having suspensions overturned on technical issues and will, ultimately, hold those who tarnish the game with their behavior accountable for their actions.