2003 AWHCA Meeting
Schools Present: Amherst, Augsburg, Bates, Bemidji,
Umass-Boston, Bowdoin, Brown, Colby, Colgate, Connecticut College, U Conn,
Cornell, Cortland, Dartmouth, Eau Claire, Elmira, Findlay, Hamilton, Harvard,
Lake Forest, Maine, Manhattanville, Mercyhurst, Middlebury, Duluth, Minnesota,
Mankato, New England, New Hampshire, Niagara, North Dakota, Northeastern, Ohio,
Princeton, Providence, Quinnipiac, RPI, Rhode Island, River Falls, St. Ben’s,
St. Cloud, St. Lawrence, St. Mary’s, St. Michael’s, St. Olaf, Union, Utica,
Vermont, Wayne State, Wisconsin-Madision, Steven’s Point,
(Please contact Jill Pohtilla at email@example.com if there are any errors or
omissions in meeting minutes)
Wednesday, April 23rd,
President Jeff Kampersal (Princeton University)
called the meeting to order at 2:10pm.
He introduced Ty Halpin (NCAA), Tony Mariano, (Rules committee chair),
Paul Duffey (Rules secretary) and Bob Quinn, newly appointed coordinator of
women’s officials (NCAA).
Ty talked about the following issues which are the
main areas for the Rules Committee to address:
- Dangerous play – There is a concern at the NCAA
in the rising numbers of concussions in men’s and women’s ice
- Hitting from behind
- Chin straps – goalies must also have them
- Contact with goaltenders – what is the intent
when there is contact? Rules
committee is looking to eliminate any contact with
- Line change procedure – Coaches shared the
following concerns: The new rule (5 second change) doesn’t affect the speed of
the women’s game since, among other things, the women don’t have the hitting
after the whistle the men do, especially in front of the net. Concerns were that the referees were
in such a hurry to follow the 5-5-5 rule that neither coaches nor their
captains had opportunities to ask for clarifications, especially during
penalty situations, i.e., are teams 5 x 5 or 4 x 4. Teams are rushed after goal is
scored. There were instances
where a celebrating team was not allowed to change their line. Home team does not gain an advantage,
especially in second period.
Rules committee question as to how much time should be allowed for a
team to celebrate a goal? Coaches
felt that celebrating needs to be allowed. Other issue is not being able to take
a timeout once the 5-5-5 process has begun. A coach only gets one time out…so let
the coach use it when they want, as long as it’s during a stoppage. Frank said the committee will be
looking at changing that. Other
concern is with the second period when teams have further to go to set up for
end zone face-offs. Basically,
the Rules Committee will address the fact that officials seem to be rushing
the process. Players should not
be in motion when the puck is dropped.
Coaches should be able to get their questions answered during a
stoppage. Maybe there is a way to
begin the process…with a whistle?
Talk of going to a 5-8-5 so the home team gets their
- Diving sweep check – Is it OK to trip if the
player went for the puck? Some
felt if the player touched the puck first, a trip should not be called. Others felt that a trip is a trip,
regardless of initial intent.
- Committee will clarify scrimmage vs
- Officiating system – 2:1 vs 1:2 vs 2:2? Feed back from coaches went both
ways, that some prefer the 2:1 to have two people making calls. Others prefer 1:2 so that the lines
are not missed. Basically, there is no perfect system. The 2:1 and the 1:2 each have their
strengths and weaknesses.
Important to consider making room for development of officials. Asked if NCAA has money for
development of officials.
No. basically, coaches are
asked to encourage their graduating players to get into
Should we keep dues structure as is? Some schools can’t afford it. In December, 2000, balance was
$4,940.26. Current balance is
$12,456.01. There will be bills to
pay after convention totaling around $4,000. Dues are to be used for bettering
the sport of women’s ice hockey. We
currently give $500 each fall to the MN Girls High School Coaches Association to
help defray the cost of their coaching clinics. Why do we need to keep the dues at
$100? We have money…how do we spend
it. Some suggestions were to
separate from the AHCA and run our own convention. That would be cost prohibitive. Plus, a lot of hard work went in to
allowing women’s coaches to be AHCA members. It would be hypocritical at this point
to go on our own. We don’t have a
foundation in place to be on our own.
Other suggestions included a “scholarship” for programs that can’t afford
it. The board will look at
that. Other suggestions for using
our money to further the growth of women’s ice hockey: Officials’ development, club nationals,
reduce dues for new programs. If
anyone has ideas on how to use our money for the betterment of women’s hockey,
please contact any AWHCA board member.
Using Academic All America is a copy-writed term
for CoSida. For this year, the term
Scholar All America will be used.
Certificates will be sent out (two per athlete – one for athlete and one
for school). There were 38 DIII and 36 DI recipients. There was discussion on criteria in that
there is no way to determine the player’s athletic ability with standardized
criteria based on percentage of games dressed. It is hoped coaches will submit names of
athletes who are high caliber players.
There was discussion on changing the name of the award to better reflect
it’s meaning. Membership wants,
“National Scholar Athlete” used for the following year. Criteria will stay as it
Joe Burke Award
Jane Ring is this year’s recipient. Membership asked to think of others who
are deserving for next year’s award.
Submit names to Jeff Kampersal.
Previously submitted names are kept on the suggestion
Large group adjourned at
Coaches asked it any are interested in having an
All America honorable mention team.
No. Don’t want to water it
down. It is an AHCA sponsored
award, and would need to go through the AHCA Awards Committee and the AHCA
Officiating systems were discussed. Conversation mirrored the large group
discussion (see above).
DIII NCAA Tournament Meeting
Kerri Fagen (NCAA) and Frank O’Brien (DIII Tourn.
Committee chair) introduced themselves.
Kerri talked about NCAA Tournament selection criteria and that it is set
for the next year. It can be
changed after that with committee recommendations. Selection criteria is set by the NCAA,
not the DIII committee. The
committee applies the criteria.
Kerri said the NCAA wants
hockey to use score reporting forms. Coaches will be notified if this is the
case. Beginning 2005-2006, the
ratio for number of teams in the championship will be 1:6.5. Coaches were asked for feedback
regarding site selection. Do we eliminate a team’s right to host if they hosted
the previous year and are the number one seed again? Do we want to rotate regions? How frequently? Does ice size matter? Do we restrict hosting capabilities
based on ice size and what are the limits? Coaches recommended that the
number one seed does not have to be the host, rotating is a good thing, and that
it is important to be careful when putting restrictions on a facility (lighting,
size, etc…) If the rink is good
enough to play regular season NCAA games, why should it be eliminated from
April 23, 2003
Jeff Kampersal started talking about “broken rules”
vs. “unwritten rules.” He mentioned
he received many emails about coaches’ actions and how we are representing
ourselves. Examples included poor
conduct toward officials, running up scores, and bad recruiting practices, and
not calling each other back in times of scheduling.
The direction of increased physicality and
body-checking were a concern to many members of the coaching body. Jeff mentioned a fact that average
penalty minutes a game increased from 8.94 in 2001-02 to 10.67 in 2002-03.
The group talked about the NCAA Championship at
Duluth. The consensus was that the
Tournament was a great success; it was organized and marketed very well. The group talked about Tournament
expansion, the fact that the NCAA Tournament conflicted with the World
Championships, and future starting dates of the season.
The group spent considerable time talking about the
RPI ratings index and how a higher ranked team can actually lose points by
beating a lower ranked team.
Mel Davidson mentioned the dates that Canada Hockey
would meet during the upcoming summer and season:
May 8-11 50
June 1-8 75
athletes competing at three different sites
Under-22 and Series against USA
Dec. 15-21 or Feb. 2-8
Nov. 2-10 Four
Nations Tournament in Sweden
March 20-27 Pre-World Championship
March 30-April 4 World
Championships in Kitchener, Ontario
Mel Davidson also mentioned that instead of a
system of debating over the system of officiating, we should be focusing on the
development of officials.
DI NCAA Tournament Meeting
Carolyn Campbell-McGovern and Troy Arthur met with
the coaching body to about the 2003 NCAA Tournament, future Championships, and
Bracket Expansion. Ms.
Campbell-McGovern gave an overview about the current committee members and when
their terms expire, team selections, and site selection. In terms of bracket expansion, 8 teams
in 2004-05 depending on NCAA funding and where they allocate the money is the
best-case scenario. Automatic
Qualifiers is a topic to be determined.
Future Championship Dates:
2004 March 26 & 28
2005 March 25 & 27
2006 March 24 & 26
Ms. Campbell-McGovern went over the Selection
Criteria in detail. Bob Deraney
mentioned the concern that the body had with the RPI index rating.
Bob Quinn, NCAA Coordinator of Officials mentioned
that the NCAA would work with all the conferences and try and develop
Troy Arthur mentioned that the NCAA Chain of
Command to get things approved is:
Championship Committee à
Management Council (administrators) à Board
Minutes respectfully submitted
by Jill Pohtilla (Augsburg
Created by: Zoe Harris -- Last updated:Sep 11, 2003