On-Ice Communication

Rule set: Written to NHL rules. Where IIHF, USA Hockey or typical rec-league rules differ in a way that changes how you play, it is flagged inline. This document is almost entirely about convention rather than rules — there is no rule anywhere in hockey that governs what you may shout, and the few rules that touch communication are noted where they apply. Playing in Britain? The IIHF flags are yours — every level of UK hockey runs the IIHF book, amended locally; see UK and England Rules.

Overview

The player with the puck is the least informed player on the ice, and everyone else can see what they cannot. An opponent closing from behind sits in the one place their eyes do not reach, so the information that would save them is already in somebody else's head, useless.

Two words carry most of the value, and both are usually available and usually unsaid. "Man on" means an opponent is closing and you cannot see them: stop trying to make a play, protect the puck with your body, and get rid of it. "Time" is its mirror — nobody is near you, so lift your head and make the good play instead of the safe one. A player who fears pressure that is not there throws the puck away just as reliably as one who never saw it coming.

"Man on" carries a safety rule that outranks everything else here. It is shouted at a player near the wall who cannot see the hit coming, and the two postures the call must never produce are the two that turn contact with the boards into a neck injury: a back turned to the wall, and a chin dropped to the chest to look for the puck. Never take that contact with your back to the wall, and never duck. Get your skates parallel to the wall instead and take the hit on your forearm and hip, head up, chin off your chest. Protecting the puck never justifies squaring your back to an oncoming checker.

Whoever can see it makes the call — not the captain, not the most experienced player. Early, short and loud: a call before the puck arrives lets the receiver plan, the same call as it arrives just startles them, and a perfect call at conversational volume did not happen. Use names, because "Sam, man on" gets acted on and "man on" turns four heads. Answer every call you hear.

There is no official hockey vocabulary, so agree yours as a team and drill it. Words vary by team, region, level and coach, and which ones you pick matters far less than everybody decoding them instantly — a call the receiver has to translate is worse than silence, because at least silence does not cost them a beat.

A note on variation — read this before you learn the list

Convention: There is no official hockey vocabulary — calls vary by team, region, level and coach
Action: Agree your list as a team at the start of the season and drill it in practice
Key: A call only works if the receiver decodes it in under half a second
Risk: A call the receiver has to translate is worse than silence — it costs them a beat
Read: The call list here is the North American vocabulary, and at the top level the shouted words appear to be English whatever the nationality
Never: Assume your calls travel when you move between hockey cultures. Ask instead
Convention: Some calls in this document are widely used but undocumented as spoken calls — no published coaching source records them as something you shout, and each one says so where it is taught

There is no official hockey vocabulary. Calls vary by team, by region, by level and by coach. Two things follow from that.

First, agree your list as a team. A call only works if the receiver decodes it in under half a second. If they have to translate, the call has failed — they would have been better off with silence, because at least silence doesn't cost them a beat. Coaches who set their calls at the start of the season and drill them in practice get calls that work in March; coaches who leave it to chance get five private languages.

Second, expect regional differences. The vocabulary here is the North American one, which dominates coaching material in English and is what you will meet in the NHL, in most of Canada and the United States, and in English-speaking rec hockey worldwide. European leagues run the same concepts in their own languages, and coaching terminology genuinely differs — Sweden forward Gustav Nyquist, describing switching back to a Swedish national-team staff, said "it's different words you use, kind of ... different terminology, I guess, for the same thing."

But be careful which way that cuts, because the evidence points the other way for on-ice calls. Asked at the 2025 4 Nations Face-Off whether his players would use Swedish on the ice to hide instructions from opponents, Sweden coach Sam Hallam said they would do the opposite: "They're going to scream and yell to each other in English. 'Over! Over!' 'Here! Here!' 'Open! Open!' 'Stretch!' Whatever. Just because that's what they're doing in games over here." So at the top level the shouted vocabulary appears to be English regardless of nationality. There is no published call-by-call comparison of North American and European club hockey vocabulary, so treat this as an open question rather than a rule: if you move between hockey cultures, do not assume your calls travel. Ask.

Some of the calls below are in common use but undocumented as spoken calls — no published coaching source documents them as something you shout. Each of those entries says so where the call is taught, and carries a dagger on the page. Some of them — outlet, net front, sag, collapse, odd man — are perfectly well documented as terms; it is only their use as something you shout that is unverified. Treat those calls as widely-used-but-unverified, and check them against your own team's vocabulary rather than assuming.

Why verbal communication wins games

Why the call exists at all: the player going to get the puck is the one who cannot see the danger, and in this picture the two who can see it are the two who cannot reach it. A defenceman is going back into his own corner for a loose puck; a forechecker is closing on him from behind, which is the one place his eyes do not reach; and his partner across the net and his goaltender can see both of them and can do nothing about it except say so. Both are labelled "calls it", because where two people can see it both should call it: the failure being guarded against is silence, not duplication. The words themselves are a team matter, not a law of hockey. Agree your own list: there is no official hockey vocabulary. Two honest limits. This notation has no facing, no head and no sightline, so the claim that the retriever cannot see him rests on which way he is travelling and is not something the drawing establishes. And which side the forechecker arrives from is one instance rather than a fixed arrangement. The mirror of this picture is the same corner with nobody arriving, where the call is "time" and the danger runs the other way, because a false "time" sends a teammate into contact he was not braced for. ⚠️ Which is the safety instruction this picture carries, since the warning is shouted at a player arriving at the wall who cannot see the check coming. Two separate postures injure a neck at the boards, and they are not the same warning. A back turned to the wall is one: it makes the contact a hit from behind, which USA Hockey warns could inflict a severe head or neck injury even when the hit is light. A chin dropped to the chest is the other: it straightens the cervical spine, and USA Hockey’s Heads Up Hockey guide, restating research by Charles Tator and colleagues, has it that almost all on-ice cervical spine injuries have come from the head being slightly flexed while making head-on contact with the boards or the goal post. So never take that contact with your back to the boards, and never duck. The posture that survives an arrival at the wall is skates parallel to it, the contact taken on your forearm and hip, head up and chin off your chest — never your back to the boards, and never a chin dropped to look for the puck. Protecting the puck never justifies squaring your back to an oncoming checker. The checker carries the legal obligation here, not you — but that is not something to lean on, because the penalty arrives after the injury does, and because in many leagues body checking is not allowed at all. Find out which book you are under, and whether you may body check in this game rather than merely in your division, before you plan on taking contact or making it.

Key: The puck carrier is the least informed player on the ice — the forechecker closing from behind is where they cannot look
Action: Say what you can see; the information costs you nothing and is useless sitting in your eyes
Goal: Turn a blind decision into an informed one — a guess in the defensive zone is how goals get scored
Priority: Call before the puck arrives — the same call as it arrives just startles the receiver
Mindset: The loudest team usually looks like the more skilled team, and most of that "chemistry" is information
Key: Talking is the cheapest improvement available to a team — no fitness, no skill development, no ice time

The mechanism is simple and it is worth understanding, because it tells you when to talk.

The puck carrier is the least informed player on the ice. Their eyes are down or forward, their body is between them and half the rink, and the most dangerous thing in their world — the forechecker closing from behind — is in the one place they cannot look. Everyone else can see it.

A call converts a blind decision into an informed one. A defenceman retrieving a puck in the corner has to choose between three plays. Without information they guess, and a guess in the defensive zone is how goals get scored. With one word from the goalie — "time" or "man on" — they are not guessing any more. The information cost you nothing. It was already sitting in someone else's eyes, useless.

And notice where the information usually sits. Anyone with a view of the puck carrier's blind side can make the call, and on a defenceman retrieving in his own corner the two who reliably have one are the goaltender, who faces the whole play, and the defence partner across the net. Neither of them is the player who has to decide what to do with the puck. A voice is the only thing that joins the seeing to the deciding.

Half a second is the whole game. A call given before the puck arrives lets the receiver plan; the same call given as the puck arrives just startles them. See Scanning and Anticipation for the habit that lets you make calls early.

The loudest team usually looks like the more skilled team. This is worth sitting with. A talking team makes fewer blind turnovers, arrives at pucks with a decision already made, and rotates in the defensive zone without anyone standing still to work out whose job it is. From the stands that reads as skill, speed and "chemistry". Most of it is information. It is the single cheapest improvement available to a team — it requires no fitness, no skill development and no ice time.

The core call list

Each entry gives the word, who says it, what it means, and what you do when you hear it.

Pressure warnings

Action: Call the pressure the moment you see it — the carrier almost never can
Action: On "man on", stop trying to make a play; protect the puck and get rid of it — rim, chip off the glass, or a short pass
Never: Take a check with your back to the boards, and never duck. Get your skates parallel to the wall instead and take it on your forearm and hip, head up, chin off your chest
Read: One forechecker can be beaten with a reverse or a quick turn; two means you are being sealed and the puck has to leave
Key: "Time" is the mirror of "man on" and just as valuable — fear of pressure that is not there throws pucks away
Action: On "feet" or "under", look down and kick it to your stick — the skate goes at the puck, never at the man — then reset. On "man on" the instruction is the opposite one: do not put your head down
Rule: Kicking or attempting to kick an opponent is a match penalty under NHL 49.3 whether or not an injury occurs, USA Hockey 627(b) and Hockey Canada 7.1(c)(iii); the IIHF writes no match penalty, so its 49.3 leaves it to a discretionary major, with an automatic game misconduct once assessed
Rule: Kicking the puck is legal — NHL and IIHF 49.2, "permitted in all zones" — but USA Hockey 627(a) needs no kicking motion at all: a skate used to "push off" an opponent is a major plus a game misconduct
Never: Use "heads" to mean anything tactical. It means a puck or stick is in the air, so turn away and cover up
Convention: "Wheel" is the documented call for skating it yourself; keep "turn" only if your team already agrees what it means

These are the highest-value calls in hockey and the ones most often missed. All of them are said by whoever can see the pressure, which is almost never the puck carrier.

"Man on" — Said by anyone with a view of the puck carrier's blind side. An opponent is closing and the carrier cannot see them. If you hear it: stop trying to make a play. Protect the puck with your body, put the net or your own body between you and the pressure, and get rid of it — a rim, a chip off the glass, or a short pass to the nearest teammate. Do not put your head down.

⚠️ One safety override, and it outranks everything else in this entry. "Man on" is shouted at a player near the wall who cannot see the check coming, and what you do with that warning is a posture. Two separate things injure a neck at the boards. A back turned to the wall makes the contact a hit from behind. And a chin tucked to the chest straightens the cervical spine, so that a head-first collision with the boards or a goal post compresses it — USA Hockey's Heads Up Hockey guide, restating research by Charles Tator and colleagues, has it that almost all on-ice cervical spine injuries have come from the head being slightly flexed while making head-on contact with the boards or goal post. Never take that contact with your back to the boards, and never duck. Get your skates parallel to the wall instead and take it on your forearm and hip, head up, chin off your chest. Protecting the puck never justifies squaring your back to an oncoming checker. If you cannot turn in time, get your stick and gloves up onto the glass and brace. Full treatment in Body Contact and Battles, which carries both mechanisms and the study underneath them — and note that the checker carries the legal obligation here, not you.
"One on" / "Two on" — Said by anyone, most often the goalie or a backchecker. The same warning with a count: one forechecker coming, or two. If you hear it: the number changes your play. One forechecker can be beaten with a reverse or a quick turn; two means you are being sealed and the puck needs to leave — rim it or glass it out.
"Heads up" — Said by anyone. Generic warning: something is coming that you have not seen. Less precise than "man on" but faster to shout when you have no time to be specific. If you hear it: get your head up and your body braced. Assume contact.

A related shout, "heads", is a pure safety call — a puck or stick is flying through the air toward someone. Get out of its path: turn away and cover up. Never use "heads" to mean anything tactical. Note the one place this does not apply, because it is the opposite of the rule that matters most: it is never an instruction to duck into contact near the boards. "Heads Up, Don't Duck" governs everything involving the wall. Head up, chin off your chest, skates parallel, forearm and hip. Ducking a flying puck in open ice is sensible; ducking a checker at the wall is how spinal injuries happen. See Body Contact and Battles and Skating.
"Behind you" — Said by anyone. Either an opponent or the puck is behind you. Ambiguous, which is its weakness — some teams reserve it for the puck and use "man on" for opponents. If you hear it: check over your shoulder immediately. If your team hasn't split the meaning, be prepared for either.
"Feet" / "Under" — Said by anyone. The puck is in your skates or directly under you and you have lost sight of it. If you hear it: look down and kick it to your stick — the skate goes at the puck, never at the man — and reset. This one is a genuine gift; a puck in your feet is invisible to you and obvious to everyone else. On "man on" the instruction is the opposite one: do not put your head down.

⚠️ Send the skate at the puck, never at the man. All four books permit kicking the puck — "Kicking the puck shall be permitted in all zones" at NHL Rule 49.2 and IIHF Rule 49.2, "Kicking the puck will be permitted in all zones" at Hockey Canada Rule 6.10(a), and USA Hockey Rule 627(c) subject to a goal-scoring proviso — and all four penalise kicking the man at or near the top of their scale. That matters on this call in particular, because a puck in your feet usually has an opponent’s feet beside it. Kicking or attempting to kick an opponent is a match penalty under NHL Rule 49.3 — "A match penalty shall be imposed on any player who kicks or attempts to kick another player", with the five-minute time penalty imposed "[w]hether or not an injury occurs" — and under USA Hockey Rule 627(b), "A match penalty shall be assessed to any player or goalkeeper who kicks, attempts to kick or recklessly endangers an opponent by kicking." Hockey Canada Rule 7.1(c)(iii) names "Attempting to kick or deliberately kicking an opponent" under a chapeau assessing "A Match penalty" for deliberately attempting to injure or deliberately injuring an opponent. 🇬🇧 The IIHF reaches the act by a different route, and that is a British reader’s book: it writes no match penalty anywhere, and its Rule 49.3 gives the Referee, "at their discretion," the power to "assess a major penalty and an automatic game misconduct penalty" — discretionary to assess, automatic once assessed. ⚠️ And USA Hockey does not require a kicking motion at all: its Rule 627(a) assesses "a major plus a game misconduct penalty" to a player who "uses their skate to ‘push off’ an opponent", which Note 2 to the same rule defines as "a non-kicking motion to make contact with the opponent." So under that book, shoving off a nearby skate to reach the puck is already a major and an ejection. Passing and Receiving carries the technique itself.
"Time" / "You've got time" / "No one on you" — Said by anyone with a view, most often the goalie. Nobody is close. This is the mirror image of "man on" and it is just as valuable, because a player who fears pressure that isn't there panics and throws the puck away. If you hear it: slow down. Lift your head, take an extra stride, make the good play instead of the safe one.
"Wheel" — Said by a defence partner, a forward, or the goalie. Skate the puck yourself, usually around behind your own net and up the far side. It is one of the standard breakout options — see Breakouts. If you hear it: take off. The call means the person who said it can see that the route is clear, so commit rather than hesitating. Turn to the open ice, not into the boards.

Some teams use "turn" † for the same instruction — in common use, but undocumented as a spoken call — or simply use "time" and let the retriever decide. "Wheel" is the documented one and the one to standardise on; keep "turn" only if your team already uses it and everybody agrees what it means.

Puck direction

A defence-to-defence pass in your own end goes behind your own net, below the goal line, and never across the slot — the shaded area, and the highest-danger ice there is. A D-to-D pass in front of the net that gets intercepted there is a point-blank chance against, and it is one of the most punished mistakes in the game — coaching emphasis, not a counted ranking. The same holds if you are carrying rather than passing: if no pass is on, skate behind the net to the other side instead of going through the middle. Moving the puck to your partner is often all you need, because it makes the forecheck reset and shift across. What varies between teams is the route rather than the prohibition: some exchange high in the zone instead, above the tops of the circles, on the reasoning that an interception up there is not a slot chance — two different routes and not a hard version and a soft one, so ask your coach which yours uses.

Diagram from defender

Action: Only call a direction you can genuinely see, and be prepared to be the target
Never: Send "over" or "D-to-D" through the front of your own net — an interception there is point-blank. Behind the goal line is the usual route, but ask your coach which one yours uses
Key: A rim goes onward around the boards with the flow, a reverse goes back against it — a rim beats a forechecker sealing you in, a reverse one who has over-run you
Technique: Keep a rim hard and high on the glass — a soft rim is a turnover with extra steps
Rule: Shooting the puck directly out of play from your own zone is a two-minute delay of game — NHL Rule 63.2(iii) reaches glass "behind" the bench, IIHF Rule 63.2(III) glass "surrounding" it, wider; IIHF Situation 63.24 exempts only a puck straight into the bench, not one clearing the glass
Rule: Deliberately shooting the puck out of play is a minor from anywhere on the ice, after the whistle too (NHL and IIHF 63.2(ii)); USA Hockey writes no strict-liability limb — 610(c) is deliberate-only, 631(d) makes an accidental one a faceoff — but 601(c)(10) makes an after-whistle one a misconduct
Rule: After your own icing your line cannot change and you cannot take a timeout under NHL and IIHF rules (81.4, 87.1) — the NHL's 81.4 excepts only an injured player, a pulled goalie returning and a strength-changing penalty; the IIHF's adds a broken skate its own 82.1 omits; USA Hockey blocks neither
Read: "Ice it" is normal on the kill and expensive at even strength — the short-handed icing exemption is conditional under NHL Rule 81.6, and restricted by classification under USA Hockey Rule 624(b)(1)
Rule: Under NHL and IIHF rules the goalie may play the puck behind the goal line only inside the trapezoid (sole exception: skate contact with the crease), so a puck dumped wide there has to be retrieved by a defenceman
Rule: In England and Wales the trapezoid's status is unsettled — England Ice Hockey's Rules & Regulations 22.3 say the restricted area is not currently enforced, so plan as though their goalie may come for it
Convention: "Eat it" carries two unverified meanings — say "eat the puck" for the board battle and something else for the clock

These tell the carrier where to put the puck. Because they arrive as instructions, they carry an obligation: only make them when you can genuinely see the option, and be prepared to be the target.

Two of these calls carry a restriction, and it is worth knowing before you shout either one. "Over" and "D-to-D" never go across the front of your own net, because an interception in the slot is a point-blank chance. That prohibition is the fixed half; the route around it is a convention. Most teams send the puck behind the net, below the goal line, and that is the route assumed throughout this document — some exchange high in the zone instead, above the tops of the circles, on the reasoning that an interception up there is not a slot chance. Ask your coach which yours uses. See Defender for both.

Moving it to a teammate

"Over" — Said by the weak-side defenceman, or the goalie. Move the puck to the other side, typically behind the net. On a breakout it is the call that switches the play away from the forecheck's pressure. If you hear it: send it across behind your own goal line, not through the slot. Never make a D-to-D pass through the front of your own net — an interception there is a point-blank chance.
"Up" — Said by the strong-side defenceman or the winger on the wall. Move the puck up the same side it is already on — usually to the winger on the boards. If you hear it: hit the wall option and go with it.
"Reverse" — Said by a teammate arriving behind the carrier, often the defence partner or the goalie. Send the puck back the way it came, against the flow of the forecheck. If you hear it: the forechecker has over-committed and skated past you; the puck goes into the space they just vacated.
"Rim" — Said by anyone. Fire the puck hard along the boards so it follows the curve of the rink around to a teammate further along. If you hear it: keep it hard and keep it high on the glass so it doesn't die in the corner. A soft rim is a turnover with extra steps.

Rim and reverse are not the same play and the distinction is worth being precise about: a rim goes onward around the boards in the direction of the flow; a reverse goes back against it. A rim beats a forechecker sealing you in; a reverse beats one who has over-run you.
"D-to-D" — Said by a defenceman or the goalie. Pass across to your defence partner. Functionally a more explicit "over". If you hear it: never through the front of your own net — same restriction as "over", and the same usual route, behind the net and below the goal line, unless your team exchanges high instead.
"Chip" — Said by a supporting forward. Put a short pass past the defender into space for them to skate onto — an area pass rather than a pass to a stick. If you hear it: don't try to hit their blade. Put it where they are going.

Getting rid of it

"Off the glass" / "Glass" — Said by anyone, usually in the defensive zone under pressure. Clear the puck high off the boards and out. If you hear it: aim high and wide, but keep it inside the rink. A glass-out rarely gets called for icing, because it usually dies in the neutral zone rather than crossing the far goal line. What it can cost you is two minutes: under NHL Rule 63.2(iii) a minor for delay of game is assessed "on any player who shoots or bats (using his hand or his stick) the puck directly (non-deflected) out of the playing surface from his defending zone, except where there is no glass." The test is where the puck was when you hit it, not where it left. There is no "I was under pressure" exception, but there are three carve-outs: the "except where there is no glass" clause above, and the NOTE to the rule, which says "when the puck is shot into the players' bench, the penalty will not apply" and "when the puck goes out of the playing area directly off a face-off, no penalty shall be assessed." Over the glass behind the bench is still a penalty, and a puck shot into the bench is not — but read on before you treat that as somewhere to aim.

🇬🇧 The IIHF writes the same delay-of-game provision for a puck put directly out of play from your own zone, so this one is a British reader's too — but not in the NHL's words, and the difference is at the bench. Its Rule 63.2(III) assesses the minor "on any Player who shoots or bats (using their hand or stick) the puck directly (non-deflected) out of the playing surface from their defending zone, except where there is no protective glass", with the same determining factor and the same two Note carve-outs, and it is unchanged between the 2025/26 and 2026/27 editions. Its bench clause is written a shade wider than the NHL's — "when the puck is shot over the protective glass surrounding the Players' bench, the penalty will be assessed", where the NHL says "behind" — so if anything a British reader has slightly less room, not more.

⚠️ And the players' bench is not somewhere to aim a clearance, because the IIHF Situation Handbook narrows the bench exemption to almost nothing. At Situation 63.24 — put in the same words in the 2025/26 (v1.1) and 2026/27 Handbooks — a defender clears the puck high off the glass, it goes over the glass and out of play, and its trajectory drops it into the Players' Bench. The answer is "Yes", still a minor: "the determining factor when deciding whether a delay of game penalty is to be assessed, is where the puck leaves the playing surface." Situation 63.24 then draws the line in the air: "If you use an imaginary plane that continues upwards to the roof from the top of the glass, should the puck break that plane as it goes out of play, then a minor penalty is to be assessed regardless as to the final resting place of the puck." The exemption Situation 63.24 leaves open is narrow: "When the puck is shot directly into the Players' Bench (where there is no glass), no penalty is to be assessed." So the exemption is for a puck that goes straight in through the gap, not one that clears the glass and drops in — and a player who aims at the bench under pressure is aiming at the penalty they were trying to avoid.

IIHF Situation 63.28 shuts a second door: a player whose stick has broken and who scoops the puck up with a glove, sending it over the glass behind the players' bench, takes the minor, "considered shooting or batting the puck with the hand resulting in the puck leaving the playing surface." Situation 63.3 puts the height point at the other bench — where the puck "clears the glass at a point in the Penalty Bench where the glass is lower than the normal height around the rink, no penalty shall be assessed." The Handbook's Foreword ranks it below the book — "in case of any contradictions, the valid IIHF Rulebook is always the basis" — so treat these as how it is officiated rather than as the rule itself.

⚠️ NHL Rule 63.2(iii) and IIHF Rule 63.2(III) are the strict-liability limb of the delay-of-game rule, and there is a second limb that is not tied to your own end: NHL Rule 63.2(ii) — and IIHF Rule 63.2(II), materially identical — assesses the same two-minute minor for delay of game on a player who "deliberately shoots or bats" the puck out of the playing area "(from anywhere on the ice surface) during the play or after a stoppage of play" — so a deliberate one is two minutes wherever you are on the ice, and after the whistle too. USA Hockey is the book that does not write the strict-liability half at all. Its Rule 610(c) reaches only a player who "delays the game by deliberately shooting or batting the puck outside the playing area, including after a stoppage of play", and Rule 631(d) sends an accidental one to a draw rather than the box: "if the puck is accidentally shot or deflected out of play, or onto the goal netting, a last play face-off will occur in the zone where the puck was shot or the deflection occurred." So the honest version of this call is: you concede possession, and under the NHL and IIHF books, if you miss the glass you concede a power play — under USA Hockey, only if you meant it.

⚠️ But "only if you meant it" is not "only two minutes", and USA Hockey is the book where the after-the-whistle version escalates. Above 610(c)'s minor, Rule 601(c)(10) assesses a misconduct on a player who "shoots or bats the puck outside of the playing area during a stoppage of play (when not done in protest of an official's decision or in the direction of a spectator)", and Rule 601(d)(7) makes it a game misconduct where the same act is "done in protest of an official's decision." 601(a)(4) adds an unsportsmanlike minor for "Shooting the puck after the whistle, if in the opinion of the Official such shot was avoidable" — no need for the puck to leave the rink. USA Hockey does not say which of 610(c) and 601(c)(10) governs a given puck, and its Casebook publishes no situation on the overlap. The NHL and the IIHF write no equivalent escalation, so under those books the deliberate one after the whistle is 63.2(ii)'s two minutes. Hockey Canada writes it outside its delay-of-game rule altogether — 10.1(d) provides that "No Misconduct penalty may be assessed for Delay of Game", and Rule 11.1, preamble item (v) instead lists "Shooting the puck out of the playing area, after the whistle" as Unsportsmanlike Conduct. Risk Management carries all of it.
"Ice it" — Said by anyone. The puck has to go all the way out even at the cost of a whistle. If you hear it: get it out. But know what you're buying: after your own icing, play stops, the faceoff is in your defensive zone and — under NHL and IIHF rules — your line cannot change and your team cannot take a timeout. The substitution bar has three exceptions in the rule's own words, and they are worth knowing because the injured limb is the one teams get wrong: NHL Rule 81.4 permits a substitution "to replace a goalkeeper who had been substituted for an extra attacker, to replace an injured player, or when a penalty has been assessed which affects the on-ice strength of either team". A tired winger is not on that list; a hurt one is. Both restrictions are in the IIHF book too, which is what matters if you play British league hockey — but only one of the two is in the NHL's own words. IIHF Rule 87.1 carries the time-out ban verbatim: "No 'time-out' shall be granted to the defensive team following an icing…" IIHF Rule 81.4 does not match. It bars substitution in the same terms, but lists a fourth exception the NHL rule has not got — "a Player with a broken skate" — so under the IIHF book a snapped blade gets that player off the ice after your own icing, and under the NHL book it does not. ⚠️ Ask your officials before you rely on that fourth one: the IIHF book writes the same ban out twice and the two copies do not carry the same list. Rule 81.4, the icing-specific rule, has the broken skate; Rule 82.1, which states the identical ban, does not — in the 2025/26 or the 2026/27 edition. Nothing in either book says which copy governs, and the NHL's two copies of the ban agree with each other. And do not put a replacement over the boards on it: under IIHF Rule 82.2(V) the referee sends them back and warns your coach, and that warning is one per team per game across all three of the acts 82.2(V) names — spend it and the next attempt is a bench minor for delay of game. USA Hockey blocks neither (Rule 624 restricts no substitution; Rule 204 permits a change at any stoppage; Rule 636(f) puts no icing condition on time-outs). The exception is when you are shorthanded — a penalty-killing team may ice the puck with no whistle at all, which is why "ice it" is a completely normal call on the kill and an expensive one at even strength. It is not unconditional: under Rule 81.6, a team shorthanded "by reason of a major penalty" that has "neglected to ensure there is a player on the penalty bench to exit upon the expiry of the penalty" keeps playing a man short but "are not permitted to ice the puck. Icing will be called." And it is not in every book. USA Hockey grants the shorthanded nullification only "(For all Youth 15-Only and above, Girls 16U and above, High School and Adult classifications only)" (Rule 624(b)(1)). So under USA Hockey, in the younger classifications Rule 624(b)(1) leaves out, shouting "ice it" on the kill buys your tired killers a defensive-zone draw rather than a rest. Find out which rule set you play under before "ice it" becomes a habit. Special Teams covers icing on the penalty kill.
"Deep" / "Dump" — Said by a supporting forward. The entry isn't there; put the puck into the offensive zone, usually to a corner below the goal line, and chase. If you hear it: dump and go. Under NHL and IIHF rules the opposing goalie may only play the puck behind their goal line inside the trapezoid (markings, NHL and IIHF Rule 1.8; the two-minute delay-of-game minor, NHL Rules 27.8 and 63.2(viii), IIHF Rules 27.7 and 63.2(VIII)), so a puck dumped wide has to be retrieved by a defenceman with your forecheck arriving on them. 🇬🇧 In England and Wales, do not assume their goalie is confined to the trapezoid when you dump — the restricted area's status is unsettled there, and live in Scotland and university hockey, whose In-House Rules do not amend Rule 27 (UK and England Rules).

When there is nowhere to put it

"Eat it" †— Said by a teammate who can see there is no good option; in common use, but undocumented as a spoken call. Hold the puck, absorb the hit, and keep possession rather than forcing a pass that gets picked off. Two cautions, and a flag on both. The action described here is commonly taught as "eating the puck" — holding it against the boards when there are no options under pressure — so that is the phrase to teach. And the short call "eat it" carries a different meaning in some rooms: there are only a few seconds left in the period or the game, so keep the puck where it is. ⚠️ Neither of those two glosses traces to a named source. Neither phrase appears in any of the call-vocabulary sources this document draws on. Treat both readings as unverified coaching usage — which is exactly why the advice that follows still stands. Same two words, two instructions. Agree which one your bench means, or use "eat the puck" for the board-battle version and something else for the clock version.

Support and availability

Goal: Tell the carrier you exist and where you are — without a voice you are not an option
Action: On "here", look to the voice even if you do not pass; you now know there is an outlet on that side
Read: Judge "middle" by zone — the highest-value place to move the puck going forward, but in your own end it crosses the slot and has to be certain
Risk: A cross-ice pass in your own zone crosses in front of your own net, and an interception there is a point-blank chance. Weigh "far side"; do not take it automatically
Rule: A receiver already across the blue line with both skates is offside; one skate on or behind the line keeps them onside (NHL Rule 83.1)
Rule: A skate in the air over the neutral zone counts as onside under NHL and IIHF rules, but not under USA Hockey 630(a) or Hockey Canada 6.11 — two books of the four require skate contact
Convention: "All alone" means no support and outnumbered on the published definition, but some teams use it for the support half only — agree which yours means
Never: Attack the defence alone when you hear "all alone". Slow down instead, protect the puck, or chip it in and wait for help

These tell the carrier that you exist and where you are. The carrier's head is often down; without a voice, you are not an option.

"Here" — Said by any open teammate. The simplest call in hockey. If you hear it: look to the voice. Even if you don't pass, you now know there is an outlet on that side.
"Middle" — Said by a support player in the middle of the ice. I am open through the centre. If you hear it: the middle is the highest-value place to move the puck in the offensive and neutral zones — and in your own end it is the pass that crosses the slot, where an interception is a point-blank chance. Judge by zone: in your defensive zone, a middle pass has to be certain.
"Back" — Said by a trailing support player. I am behind you and available for a drop pass or as the trailer. If you hear it: you can leave the puck rather than carrying it into trouble.
"With you" †— Said by a teammate skating alongside; in common use, but undocumented as a spoken call. I am on your hip, keep the puck alive. If you hear it: you have a two-man attack, not a one-man one. Slow down half a step and use them.
"I'm high" †— Said by a forward or a defenceman above the puck; in common use, but undocumented as a spoken call. I am the option closer to the blue line. If you hear it: this is usually your safe reset when the low options are covered.
"Far side" — Said by a support player on the opposite side of the rink. Your help is across the ice, not near you. If you hear it: the cross-ice option exists, but weigh it — a cross-ice pass in your own zone crosses in front of your own net, and an interception there is a point-blank chance.
"Outlet" †— Said by the first breakout option, usually a winger on the wall or a centre swinging low; in common use, but undocumented as a spoken call. I am your exit. If you hear it: move the puck and start the breakout.
"Stretch" — Said by a forward who has beaten the opposition up the ice. I am long, behind their forwards; put it up to me. (Documented as a spoken call: Sweden coach Sam Hallam lists "Stretch!" among the words his players shout on the ice, alongside "Over!", "Here!" and "Open!") If you hear it: the stretch pass is available. Check the blue line first — a stretch pass to a teammate who has already crossed with both skates is offside. One skate on or behind the line keeps them onside, and a skate in the air over the neutral zone counts as onside too under NHL and IIHF rules — not under USA Hockey or Hockey Canada, where Rule 630(a) and Rule 6.11 require skate contact.
"Point" — Said by anyone who can see the defenceman is open. The player at the blue line has space for a shot. If you hear it: get the puck up to the point, then get to the net front for the tip or rebound.
"All alone" — Said by a teammate behind the play. You are entering the offensive zone with no support. The published call list this document draws on defines it as letting the carrier "know that they do not have any support and are out-numbered" — so on that definition it carries both halves, the absent teammate and the numbers. Some teams use it for the support half only. Agree which yours means, because the two produce different decisions: no support says wait, outnumbered says do not enter at all. If you hear it: don't attack the defence alone. Slow it down, protect the puck, or chip it in and wait for help to arrive.

Danger and coverage

Your own end, your net at the right, with the puck in the corner and two players in a battle for it. The question this picture asks is not where the puck is — everybody can see that — but who scores if it comes out right now, and there are two usual answers, both drawn: a body at the net front, the immediate area in the goalmouth, and a player sneaking into the high slot, which is the shaded band, the ice between the two faceoff circles running from the level of the faceoff dots up to the top of them. The weak-side net front has its own name, the back door, and the tap-in conceded there is not bad luck: it is what happens when four players watch a puck battle in the corner for three seconds. The rule of thumb the picture exists for is that every time the puck goes into a corner in your own end, you check the net front. Your other four skaters are deliberately not drawn, so the picture asks the question rather than answering it — where they stand, and therefore whether either of these opponents is really unmarked, depends on the coverage your team plays. Under the low zone collapse this corpus assumes as its default, your eyes alternate between the puck and the most dangerous body near you and your man is whoever is currently in your area; under a strict man-to-man your assignment takes far more of your attention and the puck takes less; under a hybrid it depends on where you are standing. Find out which one your team plays, because it decides where your eyes belong. Neither the high slot nor the net front is painted on a rink: the circles and the crease that fix their edges are, and the regions themselves are names for pieces of ice.

Diagram from scanning and anticipation

Action: On "back door", the nearest player takes the unmarked opponent at the far post immediately
Key: The player who can see the back door is almost never the one who can cover it — that is why the call exists
Action: On "switch", take the nearer opponent, and answer it — a switch called and not acknowledged is worse than no switch at all
Convention: "Sag" and "collapse" are low zone collapse language — meaningless under man-on-man, above the dots only under a hybrid; find out which your team plays
Priority: On "clear", the nearest player gets the loose puck out of the high-danger area — do not stickhandle
Action: On "screen", move out of the sightline yourself, or box the screener out with hips and back and lift their stick below their bottom hand

These are defensive-zone calls. They are the ones teams stop making when they get tired, and the ones whose absence shows up directly on the scoresheet.

The first two calls name one piece of ice between them — the goalmouth, with "back door" naming its weak side, the far post where an unmarked opponent is hardest to see from the puck. The picture above draws that, and the second place a goal arrives from while four players watch a puck battle in the corner: an opponent sneaking into the high slot. See Scanning and Anticipation for the habit of checking both.

"Back door" — Said by anyone, most often the goalie or the weak-side player. There is an unmarked opponent at the far post. If you hear it: the nearest player takes them, immediately. How it ranks against every other unmarked position is not something anyone has counted; what makes the call necessary is that the person who can see it is almost never the person who can cover it.
"Net front" †— Said by anyone; in common use, but undocumented as a spoken call. Nobody is on the player standing in the goalmouth. If you hear it: cover them, box them out, get your stick on their stick. Under the house-default low zone collapse this belongs to the weak-side defenceman, but the call exists precisely for when it hasn't happened.
"Switch" — Said by either of two players who need to trade assignments. Most commonly used between defence partners and between a defenceman and a backchecking forward when two opponents cross. If you hear it: take the nearer opponent and let your teammate take the other. The call has to come from the player who initiates it and it has to be answered — a switch called and not acknowledged is worse than no switch at all.
"My man" / "I've got him" / "I've got two" †— Said by the player taking an assignment; in common use, but undocumented as a spoken call. I am covering this opponent, you take someone else. If you hear it: stop tracking that player and find the unmarked one. Using the opponent's jersey number ("I've got seventeen") removes all ambiguity and is worth the extra syllable.
"Sag" / "Collapse" †— Said by a defenceman, the centre or the goalie; in common use, but undocumented as a spoken call. Tighten in toward the net; give up the outside and protect the slot. If you hear it: the shape shrinks. Note that this is system language — it belongs to a low zone collapse (zone) coverage, the default assumed throughout. Under man-on-man the call makes no sense, because you go where your man goes; under a hybrid, it applies only above the dots. Find out which one your team plays. See Defensive Zone Coverage.
"Clear" — Said by anyone. The puck is loose in the high-danger area and the nearest player has to move it out now. If you hear it: don't stickhandle. Nearest player, get it out.
"Screen" — Almost always said by the goalie, because they are the one who knows — but the general principle applies here too, and a defenceman who can see their own goalie has no sightline should say so. I cannot see the puck. If you hear it: either move yourself out of the sightline, or get body position on the opponent who is in it — box them out with your hips and back the way you would box out for a rebound, and lift their stick below their bottom hand, because at or near the hands three of the four books reach the lift. Move fast, because nobody is coming to help you: screening is normally legal for the opposition — standing outside the crease in the goalie's line of sight without contact is not a penalty. See Defensive Zone Coverage for the box-out technique. What you may legally do to move them differs by book: see Moving a screener — what the books allow, immediately below.

Moving a screener — what the books allow

Technique: Walking a screener out needs a full-checking league, and interference reaches it even there. Anywhere else, women's hockey included, stop at the box-out and the stick lift, book permitting
Rule: At or near the hands, three of the four books reach a stick lift — on location alone under IIHF 55.1, whose next sentence then exempts stick-to-stick-only contact while checking, and only on effect under USA Hockey 623 and Hockey Canada 8.2(a). Lift below the bottom hand instead
Rule: The NHL is the one book of the four that does not reach a stick lift at the hands — its hooking rule writes no hands sentence, and its slashing rule (61.1) catches only a chop that is not an attempt to play the puck; lift below the bottom hand anyway, because the other three books do reach it
Rule: A chop at the hands is slashing under NHL 61.1, IIHF 61.1 in the same words bar the pronoun, and USA Hockey 634, reaching a major plus a game misconduct with nobody injured in all four books (NHL 61.3, IIHF 61.3, USA Hockey 634(b), Hockey Canada 9.3(b))
Rule: NHL and IIHF 56.1 grant "the ice he is standing on" (the IIHF in the plural), and 56.2(i) is a minor for impeding one "not in possession of the puck" — a screener has no puck. USA Hockey's Note to 604(c) grants less: only "under this rule". Hockey Canada writes no such sentence
Rule: Walking a screener off an established position is a push, and USA Hockey does not cap it at a minor where checking is barred — 604(c) a minor, 604(d) a major plus a game misconduct for reckless endangerment, 604(e) a match; in women's hockey an illegal hit, IIHF 101.1, at least a minor
Rule: Hockey Canada prices the push that moves a screener in divisions of U13 and below, in female hockey and in any other division a Member has approved — 7.3(a) is a minor, 7.3(b) a major plus a game misconduct on the degree of violence with nobody hurt and mandatory on injury, 7.3(c) a match
Rule: A two-handed shove on the shaft to move a screener is cross-checking — a minor under NHL 59.2, and a major at the referee's discretion under 59.3, which carries an automatic game misconduct (59.5); officials are told to watch the net front for it — an enforcement emphasis, not a frequency ranking
Rule: All four books ride a game misconduct with the cross-checking major — NHL 59.5 automatically, IIHF 59.3 and USA Hockey 609(b) gated on reckless endangerment, Hockey Canada 9.2(e) "any time a Major penalty is assessed"
Rule: Screening from outside the crease without contact is not a penalty: the NHL and IIHF sentence voiding a goal for where you stood requires entering it. A body in the crease differs — IIHF 69.1 and USA Hockey 625(b) both reach a stoppage, the IIHF's discretionary, USA Hockey's on three conditions
Rule: Rule 69's crease keying is the NHL's and the IIHF's — USA Hockey writes no vision provision and Hockey Canada's two reach only the crease, so an outside screen is legal there. A fifth book lets you stand your ground but not lean: CARHA 66(a) Note 2 against 49(a), CARHA-affiliated adult leagues only

At or near the hands, three of the four books reach the stick lift — on the location alone only the IIHF's 55.1, subject to a carve-out in its own next sentence, below; USA Hockey and Hockey Canada only where it stops the opponent playing the puck. The NHL is the one that does not: its hooking rule writes no hands sentence at all, and its slashing rule reaches only a "forceful or powerful chop… that, in the judgment of the Referee, is not an attempt to play the puck", which a clean lift below the bottom hand is neither. So the caution belongs to the other three books, and it is the one a British reader is under. ⚠️ One qualification on the IIHF, and the book does not resolve it. Rule 55.1's very next sentence reads "When a Player is checking another in such a way that there is only stick-to-stick contact, such action is not to be penalized as 'hooking'." A lift taken under the shaft is stick-to-stick contact and nothing else, so the two sentences pull against each other. Note the scope of the exemption even so — it covers a player checking an opponent, not stick-on-stick contact generally — and no IIHF interpretation reconciling the two is held here, so the caution above may be stricter than the rule. Low is still the answer. That slashing route is not the NHL's alone, and a chop is never the cheaper option: IIHF Rule 61.1 is the NHL's sentence bar the pronoun ("their stick" for "his stick") and a pair of quotation marks round "Non-aggressive", and USA Hockey Rule 634 a shortened form of it with no "attempt to play the puck" let-out at all, while a chop at the hands can reach a major plus a game misconduct with nobody injured in all four books (NHL 61.3 with 61.5, IIHF 61.3, USA Hockey 634(b), Hockey Canada 9.3(b)), where a hooking major needs an injury under the NHL (55.3) and Hockey Canada (8.2(b)) but not under the IIHF (55.3) or USA Hockey (623(b)), whose hooking rules reach that same tier for recklessly endangering an opponent. Lift low anyway, and never chop; the rule numbers and the wording are in Body Contact and Battles → Stick Checks.

Taking body position on a screener and holding it is not what any of the four books penalise — three of the four write it as legal, the NHL and the IIHF in the same clause at Rule 56.1: "a player is allowed the ice he is standing on (body position) and is not required to move in order to let an opponent proceed" (the IIHF's is that sentence in the plural, in its general book, not a women's-only rule), and USA Hockey in the Note to 604(c). ⚠️ USA Hockey's is much the narrowest of the three, and the two limits are easy to read past. What it protects is players who are "focused on gaining possession of the puck" and "simply maintaining established body position" — both conditions, not the second on its own — and what it grants them is that "[l]egal competitive contact shall not be penalized under this rule", Rule 604 being the rule. So it answers the body-checking rule and not the interference rule — which does not reach a player merely holding a position they established (USA Hockey 625's Note requires "no effort to play the puck, maintain normal foot speed or maintain an established skating lane"), but does reach the walk-out, checking league or not. Hockey Canada writes no such sentence; its one mention of body position, Rule 8.1, assumes it rather than granting it. ⚠️ A fifth book writes it in a different place, and draws the line further back. CARHA Hockey has no "ice you are standing on" sentence of its own — the phrase is not in the book — but it grants the same thing inside its interference rule, at Note 2 to Rule 66(a): "Often the action and movement of the attacking player causes the interference, since the defending players are entitled to 'stand their ground' or 'shadow' the attacking players." A screener is an attacking player and you are a defending one, so standing your ground against one is permitted there too. ⚠️ What is not, and this is where CARHA parts from the other four, is the active half of a box-out. Rule 49(a) assesses "[a] Minor or Major penalty, at the discretion of the Referee, based upon the intent and the violence of the impact" to a player who "intentionally bodies, pushes, shoves, stands in front of an opponent for the purpose of making contact, and/or does not avert body contact with an opponent" — and that rule carries no division or classification scope at all, where USA Hockey 604 and Hockey Canada 7.3 both do. So the line there runs between holding a position you established, which Note 2 protects, and leaning, bodying or shoving to keep it, which 49(a) reaches; 49(c) excuses only "accidental contact", and a box-out is not accidental. Walking the screener out is reached twice over — by 49(a) and by 66(a)(1), a minor or, at the referee's discretion, a major and a game misconduct for a player who "interferes with or impedes the progress of an opponent who is not in possession of the puck", which is CARHA's counterpart of NHL and IIHF 56.2(i). So the instruction that holds under all five is: hold your ground, do not lean on them, and take the stick lift — CARHA's hooking rule reaches only a stick that "impedes or seeks to impede the progress of an opponent" (64(a)) and its holding rule only a stick that holds one (63(a)), and the book writes no "at or near the hands" sentence of the kind three of the other four carry. ⚠️ That last point is a reading of two short rules, not an interpretation CARHA publishes. ⚠️ All of this is CARHA-affiliated adult leagues only — it is not a rec-hockey standard, it is not the answer in a USA Hockey or Hockey Canada league, and it is not a British reader's rule. If you play adult recreational hockey in Canada, ask whether your league is CARHA-affiliated. Rules Primer sets out what else that book does differently.

⚠️ Walking the screener out of the lane is a different act, and it needs a full-checking league — and a full-checking GAME. ⚠️ And a full-checking league does not make it free, because the screener has no puck. A body check is delivered on an opponent in control of the puck; the player standing in the sightline is not, so what reaches you there is interference. NHL and IIHF 56.1 permit blocking a path only "provided he is in front of his opponent and moving in the same direction" and penalise as interference "Moving laterally and without establishing body position, then making contact with the non-puck carrier"; 56.2(i) in both books is a minor for one who "interferes with or impedes the progress of an opponent who is not in possession of the puck" — the quoted wording throughout being the NHL's, the IIHF's differing in two ways rather than one: its pronouns, so that the block-path clause reads "provided they are in front of their opponent and moving in the same direction", and quotation marks round its defined terms ("establishing body position", "possession"); and USA Hockey Rule 625(a) is a minor for the same act, 625(a)(4) naming it in terms — "[a] defending player who changes their skating lane or foot speed in an effort to play the body of an opponent who is no longer in control of the puck." ⚠️ Rule 625 announces no Competitive Contact scope in its title the way Rule 604 does, so it reaches every reader, checking league or not. ⚠️ USA Hockey Rule 604(b) bars body checking outright any time a checking team plays a non-checking one, whatever your own classification. Where checking is barred it is a minor: USA Hockey Rule 604(c) on "deliberate physical contact with an opponent, with no effort to legally play the puck" in every Competitive Contact classification — 12 & under and below, all Girls'/Women's, all non-check Adult (Rule 604(a)) — and Hockey Canada Rule 7.3(a) on a player who "intentionally body-checks, bumps, shoves, or pushes any opposing player" in divisions of U13 and below, in female hockey, and in any other division a Member of Hockey Canada has approved. Neither of those minors is the ceiling. USA Hockey 604(d) assesses "a major plus a game misconduct penalty" to a player who recklessly endangers an opponent with a body check in a Competitive Contact category, and 604(e) reaches a match penalty; Hockey Canada 7.3(b) gives the Referee "a Major penalty and Game Misconduct penalty" at discretion "based on the degree of violence of the impact" — nobody has to be hurt for that one — and makes the same pair mandatory where the check injures; and Hockey Canada 7.3(c) reaches a match penalty, "to any player who deliberately attempts to or deliberately injures an opponent by body-checking." All of Rule 7.3 carries the scope its opening sentence sets — "This rule applies only in divisions of U13 and below, in female hockey, and any other divisions approved by a Member of Hockey Canada" — so those tiers are the ladder in exactly the divisions where checking is barred. And in women's hockey, where bodychecking is restricted rather than barred, it is an illegal hit under IIHF Rule 101.1 — the same rule that lets a player "hold their ground" goes on: "Any move by a Player to step or glide into an opposing Player will be assessed at least a minor penalty (2') for an 'illegal hit'", with a major (5') plus an automatic game misconduct above it. Unless your league permits full body checking, stop at the box-out and the stick lift — neither is scoped to checking leagues, and permission to check is not permission to walk a screener out, because they have no puck and interference reaches it wherever you play (NHL and IIHF 56.2(i), USA Hockey 625(a)(4)). Body Contact and Battles sets out which book is yours.

Do not cross-check the screener out of the lane either. A shove with both hands on the shaft is a cross-check and a minor under NHL Rule 59.2 — "at the discretion of the Referee based on the severity of the contact", which is word for word what 59.3 says when it reaches a major for the same act, with a match penalty above that at 59.4 — and it is the net-front infraction officials are told to look for, since USA Hockey's Standard of Play names the net-front cross-check as its leading example. That is an enforcement emphasis, not a frequency ranking — NHL play-by-play data has cross-checking neither among the most-called net-front penalties nor concentrated there, and the fouls that genuinely cluster at the net front are hooking and slashing; the figures are in Body Contact and Battles. The coaching point stands on the emphasis: officials are watching for it, so it is a bad way to win the space.

⚠️ And the major is not the ceiling — it is an ejection. NHL 59.5: "When a major penalty is assessed for cross-checking, an automatic game misconduct penalty shall be imposed on the offending player." Rule 59.3 points at it in its own text, "(see 59.5)", so there is no cross-checking major you stay in the game after. All four books ride the two together, by different routes. The IIHF bundles them into a single clause at 59.3, headed "MAJOR PENALTY AND GAME MISCONDUCT PENALTY" — "a major penalty and an automatic game misconduct penalty" — but gates them higher than the NHL does, on a Player who "recklessly endangers their opponent" and "would not be sufficiently sanctioned by imposing a minor penalty", where the NHL's major turns on severity of contact alone. USA Hockey 609(b) assesses "a major plus a game misconduct penalty" to a player who "recklessly endangers an opponent as a result of cross-checking", and Hockey Canada 9.2(e) is the flattest of the four: "A Game Misconduct penalty must be assessed any time a Major penalty is assessed for cross-checking, as detailed under Rule 9.2 (b)" — 9.2(b) being the only clause in that rule that assesses a major at all, whether at the referee's discretion on the degree of violence or mandatorily where the cross-check injures. The match penalty above it is not in every book, though — NHL 59.4 writes one, USA Hockey 609(c) writes one, and Hockey Canada 9.2(c) assesses one "to any player who attempts to injure or deliberately injures an opponent by cross-checking", while IIHF Rule 59 writes none.

The screen itself — set outside the crease, without contact — is legal, and no whistle is coming. Under the NHL and the IIHF every clause of Rule 69 that voids a goal for where you stood names the goal crease: 69.1's disallowing sentence reaches an attacker who "enters the goal crease", 69.3's no-contact screen ground asks for a significant position "within the goal crease", and 69.4, the rule for outside it, has no positioning limb at all. ⚠️ That is a reading of the rule's structure rather than something either book states in terms, and both add that Rule 69 is "enforced exclusively in accordance with the on-ice judgement of the Referee(s)." ⚠️ The reading stops at the crease line, so work just outside the paint and off the red around it — the IIHF (Rule 1.7), USA Hockey (the Note to 625(b)) and Hockey Canada (its Glossary) all count the line as part of the crease, while both the NHL's and the IIHF's own tables allow the screen planted "on the crease line" outright (Situation 5 E). Either way it is a judgement on the goal afterwards, not a whistle in the moment. ⚠️ A body standing in the crease is a different rule, and there a whistle can come. The IIHF's Rule 69.1 carries a sentence the NHL's does not: where an attacking Player "is in the goal crease and does not leave immediately, the Referee has the possibility to stop the game", with the face-off in the neutral zone. USA Hockey Rule 625(b) makes it a duty rather than a possibility — a neutral-zone face-off "any time an attacking player stands, holds their stick, or skates through the goal crease", provided the puck is in the attacking zone, the attacking team has possession and the goalkeeper is in contact with the crease. The NHL and Hockey Canada write no crease stoppage at all. Note what this does and does not give you: it is a whistle for a body in the paint that will not move, not something to appeal for against a screen set in front of it — and under the IIHF it is a possibility the referee may decline.

Rules Primer carries the four-book comparison, inside the crease and out, and the limit on that negative — it is a search of the two playing rule books, of USA Hockey's separate Rules and Casebook, which writes no goaltender-vision provision either, and of Hockey Canada's Interpretations, which is where one of its two references to the goaltender's view sits.

Rush and transition

Action: On "odd man", the defenders stop thinking about the puck and start thinking about numbers
Convention: Published call lists use the short numeric forms — "Two", "One" — and short wins at speed
Convention: Defending a two-on-one, take away the pass and give up the shot — stick flat in the passing lane; whether you hold the lane or time a slide across it is your team's system, so ask which, and Defending the Rush sets out both
Key: The defenceman commits to the pass and the goalie to the shooter — it only works if both say out loud which half is theirs
Action: On "backcheck", turn and sprint first and look second; puck-watching while drifting backwards opens the middle lane
Action: On "pick him up", get on the defensive side of the attacker — between them and your net, not behind their shoulder
Convention: Who owns which lane on a backcheck is a coaching choice — centre in the middle, first man back in the middle, or man-on-man from the puck outward; find out which your team plays
Key: Under every backcheck lane variant somebody owns the middle and nobody assumes it is somebody else

The rush is where communication most often fails, because everyone is skating flat out and nobody wants to be the one who spoke wrongly.

"Odd man" †— Said by a backchecker or the goalie; in common use, but undocumented as a spoken call. They have more attackers than we have defenders. If you hear it: the defenders stop thinking about the puck and start thinking about numbers. Full detail in Defending the Rush.
"Two-on-one" / "Three-on-two" — The "odd man" call with the count. Note that published call lists use the short numeric forms — just "Two" or "One" — rather than the full phrase, and short is better at speed: two syllables beat four when everyone is sprinting. If you hear it as a defenceman on a two-on-one: take away the pass and give up the shot. Position yourself in the passing lane, stick flat on the ice, and do not slide until the pass has been released. That is one of two legitimate systems — some teams instead coach a timed slide to force the shot — so find out which yours plays before you need it. Defending the Rush covers both.
"I've got the pass" / "Take the shooter" †— Said between a defenceman and the goalie; in common use, but undocumented as a spoken call. The defenceman is committing to the passing lane and the goalie is committing to the shooter. If you hear it as the goalie: square up to the puck carrier and play the shot as if it were a one-on-none. This split of responsibility is the standard way to defend a two-on-one and it only works if both players know which half is theirs — which is why it is said out loud rather than assumed. Why this one is flagged as undocumented: published goalie material documents this split being settled out loud on a two-on-one — but from the goalie's side, with the single word "shot" (see below). It is only these particular words, said by the defenceman, that are undocumented. If you want the verified call, use the goalie's.
"Backcheck" — Said by anyone, often the bench. We have lost the puck; get back. If you hear it: turn and sprint first, look second. Puck-watching while drifting backwards is how the middle lane opens up.
"Pick him up" / "Take the middle" †— Said by a defenceman to an arriving backchecker, or between backcheckers; in common use, but undocumented as a spoken call. There is an unmarked attacker and you are the closest. If you hear it: get on the defensive side of them — between them and your net — not behind their shoulder. Who owns which lane on a backcheck is a coaching choice, not a law. The most common assignment is that the centre owns the middle lane and the wingers own the two outside lanes; other teams use first man back takes the middle regardless of position, and others pick up man-on-man from the puck outward. Defending the Rush is the authority here and sets them out, along with the four named team backchecking systems that decide which assignment applies. Find out which your team plays — these calls exist precisely to resolve the cases where players arrive in the wrong order, and under every variant the two constants are that somebody owns the middle and nobody assumes it is somebody else.

Bench and line changes

Action: On "change", go as a group
Never: Change during a defensive-zone scramble, or when you are the player caught deepest
Never: Use "last change" or "last man" to mean a completed change — both already mean something else and will get you the wrong reaction
Rule: The home team's last change is lost after its own icing and kept after the visitors' — NHL and IIHF Rules 82.1 and 81.4
Rule: A change is legal while the retiring player is within five feet of the bench and out of the play — NHL and IIHF Rule 74.1, the IIHF's the same limit in metric at 1.50 m. The offence is joining the play too early, not sharing a seat (Rule 74.2)
Rule: That five feet is the NHL's and the IIHF's only. Hockey Canada 6.1(a) allows 3.05 m (10 ft.), and USA Hockey 204(b) writes no distance at all — but penalises a change that "causes their team to gain a competitive advantage" with no puck touched and nobody hit
Rule: After your own icing whoever is on the ice stays — no line change (82.1) and no timeout (87.1) under NHL and IIHF rules, three narrow substitution exceptions aside, none of them a tired player; USA Hockey blocks neither
Rule: After your own icing, NHL Rule 82.1 allows exactly three substitutions — a pulled goalkeeper, an injured player, or a penalty affecting on-ice strength; "he's gassed" is not on the list
Rule: IIHF Rule 81.4 adds a fourth exception after an icing, a player with a broken skate, but the same book's Rule 82.1 does not carry it. Check with your officials before planning a change around it
Rule: A replacement put over the boards on that broken-skate exception is sent back and your coach warned (IIHF Rule 82.2(V)) — one warning per team per game, covering all three of the acts 82.2(V) names, then a bench minor
Action: On "stay", finish the shift — a tired player in position beats a fresh player arriving late

Changing on the fly happens while the play is still running: a team briefly out of shape, and a bench minor waiting if the timing is wrong. It is coordinated almost entirely by voice.

"Change" — Said by a player on the ice, or from the bench. The line is going off now. If you hear it on the ice: go, as a group. Never change during a defensive-zone scramble or when you are the player caught deepest.
"I've got first player off" †— Said by a player on the bench; in common use, but undocumented as a spoken call. I am taking the seat of the first teammate who comes off, so nobody else jumps for it. If you hear it: the first opening is claimed; wait for the second.

Do not use "last change" or "last man" for this. Both already mean something else in hockey, and using them at the bench will get you the wrong reaction at the worst moment. "Last change" is the home team's right under Rule 82.1 to put its line-up on the ice after the visitors — the main mechanical component of home-ice advantage, and the sense used throughout Game Management. It does not apply at every stoppage. Rule 82.1 grants it "except in cases following an icing, which does not result in the delay of the game", and the rule's later paragraph identifies who that exception catches — the team in violation of Rule 81, i.e. the team that iced the puck (Rule 81.4 says the same). So the home team loses last change after its own icing, and keeps it after the visitors'. (The five-and-eight-second procedure for the change itself is Rule 82.2, a separate rule.) See Faceoffs, which is the authority on this. "Last man" (or "last man back") means the deepest defender, the one player who must not leave — which is the opposite instruction to "the change is complete, go." If your team wants a call for "the change is finished", pick a word neither of those two owns.
"I'm coming" / "I got next" — Said by a player leaving the ice, or a player on the bench claiming the next spot. If you hear it: the spot is taken; don't jump. This helps, but be clear about what the penalty actually turns on. NHL Rule 74.1 allows changes at any time during play "provided that the player or players leaving the ice shall be within five feet (5') of his players' bench and out of the play before the change is made." So the test is distance and involvement, not seats: a bench minor comes when the replacement steps on before the retiring player is inside that five-foot limit, or when either of them plays the puck or makes contact with an opponent while both are on the ice (Rule 74.2). IIHF Rule 74.1 writes the same limit as 1.50 m, which is the same measurement; Hockey Canada Rule 6.1(a) allows 3.05 m (10 ft.), twice as much; and USA Hockey Rule 204(b) writes no distance whatever — only that the retiring player "shall always be at the players' bench and out of the play" — while adding a trigger the NHL has not got, a bench minor where the change "causes their team to gain a competitive advantage" even though neither player played the puck or made contact. Team Play and Culture sets that divergence out in full. Two players wanting the same spot is a symptom; the offence is a player joining the play too early. And if your team scores before the whistle, Rule 74.2 disallows the goal and assesses the penalty anyway.
"Stay" †— Said by a teammate or the bench to a player thinking about changing; in common use, but undocumented as a spoken call. Don't change now; the situation is too dangerous. If you hear it: finish the shift. A tired player in position beats a fresh player arriving late.
"Next shift" †— Said on the bench; in common use, but undocumented as a spoken call. You are up after this one. If you hear it: get to the door, get your head into the game situation, and know who you are replacing.

A rules point that catches teams out: after your own team ices the puck, you cannot change lines (Rule 82.1) and cannot use a timeout (Rule 87.1). Whoever is on the ice stays on. That is precisely when bench communication matters most, because a tired line is about to take a defensive-zone draw.

Rule 82.1 allows exactly three exceptions to the no-change rule after your own icing, and they are narrow: you may substitute to replace a goalkeeper who had been pulled for an extra attacker, to replace an injured player, or when a penalty has been assessed that affects the on-ice strength of either team. Nothing else. "He's gassed" is not on the list. 🇬🇧 There is a fourth in the IIHF book, and it is not in that book's copy of this rule. IIHF Rule 81.4 adds "a Player with a broken skate"; IIHF Rule 82.1, which states the same ban, lists only the three above — the same three as the NHL's — in the 2025/26 and 2026/27 editions alike. Which of the IIHF's two copies governs is not settled by either rulebook edition, and the Situation Handbook is unhelpful rather than silent — no answer in it names a broken skate, but Situation 81.7 says a line change is permitted "only" on a strength-changing penalty, which is over-broad but adverse. So treat the broken skate as something to check with your officials rather than something to plan a change around. And never put a replacement over the boards on it. IIHF Rule 82.2(V) has the referee "send the Players who have attempted to change back to their Players' bench" and warn your coach that "any subsequent violations during the rest of the game (including overtime), shall result in a bench minor penalty for 'delaying the game'" — one warning per team per game, covering all three of the acts 82.2(V) names, so a bench that has already spent it gets the penalty at once. Under the NHL it can be the bench minor with no warning: Rule 82.3 assesses one to the visiting team for any change after the referee's signal, which its own 82.2(v) contradicts.

Faceoffs

Action: The centre tells the other four skaters the play before lining up — an actual sentence, while the linesman is still skating in
Priority: Keep the menu tiny — two or three plays everyone knows cold beat ten nobody remembers
Action: Name a fallback for a scramble, usually "everyone takes their man", so a lost draw does not become a lost coverage
Rule: A winger creeping inside the circle before the drop gets the centre thrown out of the dot, not the winger — NHL Rule 76.6, USA Hockey 613(d) and IIHF 76.6 from its 2026/27 edition; the IIHF 2025/26 edition warned the team and ejected nobody
Rule: After an icing the NHL and the IIHF 2026/27 book warn instead of ejecting — Rule 76.4, "the first face-off violation by either team will not result in the center being removed"; the IIHF 2025/26 book and USA Hockey write no such carve-out
Rule: In Britain IHUK settles that whichever IIHF edition your league runs — "the linesperson shall immediately replace the centre for all violations", face-offs following icings excepted (In-House Rules 2026-27, Section 10, Rule 76)
Rule: A second violation by the same team on the same draw is a bench minor under NHL and IIHF Rule 76.7, so the replacement has to be clean — USA Hockey 613(d) makes it an individual minor on the offender instead
Action: Agree in advance which winger steps in when the centre is tossed, and that they are looking for a safe tie-up rather than anything clever
Convention: Use hand signals here, but only ones agreed in the dressing room and never invented in the moment — you can be seen but not heard, and the opposition can hear you

Faceoff communication happens before the puck drops, when nobody is moving and everybody can hear. That makes it the easiest communication in hockey and the most commonly skipped.

The centre tells the four other skaters what the play is, before lining up. Not a code word shouted at the last second — an actual sentence said while the linesman is still skating in. Coaches who run set plays off the draw are unanimous that the plays only work when every player knows their assignment, and the pre-draw window is when that gets established.
Keep the menu tiny. Two or three offensive-zone plays that everyone knows cold beats ten that nobody remembers. Most teams run something like: win it back to the point for a shot with traffic already in place; win it back to the strong-side winger for a quick chance; or, on a defensive-zone draw, win it to the boards-side defenceman for an immediate rim out.
Name a fallback. Most draws are not won cleanly. Agree what happens on a scramble — usually "everyone takes their man and we sort it out" — so a lost draw doesn't become a lost coverage.
Two things the wingers must be told. First, if a winger creeps inside the faceoff circle before the drop, the centre gets thrown out of the dot, not the winger. ⚠️ That is the NHL's answer and it is not every edition's. NHL Rule 76.6 and USA Hockey Rule 613(d) both eject the centre — USA Hockey's words are that where a player other than the one facing off "fails to maintain their proper position, the center of their team shall be ejected from the face-off" — and the IIHF's 2026/27 Rule 76.6 now agrees, ejecting "the offending team's player taking the face-off". Its 2025/26 edition did not: there the offending team merely "receive[d] a warning for a 'face-off' violation", and nobody left the dot. ⚠️ The hash marks are a separate limb, and the books split on that one. Crossing your own hash marks is a face-off violation in all of them, but the NHL writes the consequence only for the circle. Its Rule 76.7(ii) says a skate crossing "into the area between the hash marks prior to the drop of the puck… shall be deemed as a face-off violation" and stops there, saying nothing about the centre; IIHF Rule 76.7(II) is that sentence again. USA Hockey does eject for it — 613(b) puts every other player "behind the hash marks on the outer edge of the face-off circle", 613(d)’s ejection is worded on "proper position" generally rather than on the circle, and its Casebook has the Linesperson, "[f]or the first offense… signal which center(s) shall be removed" for encroachment (Rule 613, Situations 9 and 10). ⚠️ And after an icing the NHL throws nobody out for the first one. That carve-out is in Rule 76.4, not 76.6: "When an icing infraction occurs, the first face-off violation by either team will not result in the center being removed." The centre is warned instead, and "any subsequent violation by that team will result in a bench minor penalty for delay of game." The IIHF’s 2026/27 book carries that paragraph word for word; its 2025/26 book has no icing carve-out at all, and neither has USA Hockey — so under those two the centre goes on the first one whatever stopped the play. 🇬🇧 In Britain you do not need to know which edition your league runs, because the IHUK In-House Rules 2026-27 answer it in that same shape: "With the exception of face-offs following icings, the linesperson shall immediately replace the centre for all violations" (Section 10, Rule 76). Second, agree in advance which winger steps in when the centre is tossed, and what they are trying to do — normally a safe tie-up rather than anything clever. A second violation by the same team on the same draw is a bench minor under NHL and IIHF Rule 76.7, so the replacement has to be clean — under USA Hockey Rule 613(d) it is an individual minor "assessed to the player committing the second violation" instead. See Faceoffs, which carries the full four-book comparison.
Hand signals are common here because you can be seen but not heard across a circle, and because the opposition can hear you. A tap on the boards, a glove pointed at a spot, or a stick blade angled toward the intended target all work — provided they were agreed in the dressing room and not invented in the moment.

Who owns which call

Key: The player who can see it makes the call — not the captain, not the defenceman, not the loudest
Action: Let the goaltender lead the defensive zone — they face the play, they are stationary, and nothing is behind them
Action: The defencemen call the breakout — "up", "over", "reverse" and "wheel" are called to the retriever, not chosen by them
Action: The centre announces the low-zone rotation, because the centre leaving is the one who knows it is happening
Action: Backcheckers call their own pickups, so the defencemen can commit to the puck instead of hedging
Action: The bench calls changes and warns about what the on-ice players cannot see
Convention: Where two people can see it, both call it — the failure mode you are guarding against is silence, not duplication

The organising principle is one line long: the player who can see it makes the call. Not the captain, not the defenceman, not the loudest — whoever has the information. That means an eighteen-year-old rookie shouting at a veteran is correct behaviour, and a team where that feels wrong will concede goals for it.

On top of that principle sit a few standing responsibilities, which exist because certain players reliably have certain information:

The goaltender is the loudest voice in the defensive zone. They face the play, they are stationary, and nothing in the zone is behind them. See the next section.
The defencemen call the breakout. The puck retriever cannot see the forecheck arriving; their partner and the weak-side defenceman can. "Up", "over", "reverse" and "wheel" are almost always called to the puck carrier by someone else, not chosen by the carrier. A common coaching drill has the weak-side defenceman read where the second forechecker is and make the call for the teammate under pressure — that is the whole shape of the responsibility in one sentence.
The centre organises the low defensive zone. The centre's job moves with the puck, which means they are the player whose assignment is most often ambiguous, which means they are the player who most needs to announce it. When the centre goes to help in the corner, someone has to cover the high slot — under the house-default collapse that is the weak-side winger. Anyone with a clear view can call that rotation, but the centre leaving is the one who knows it is happening. See Center.
Backcheckers call their own pickups. The players skating back are the only ones who know who they have got. Calling "I've got the middle" or "I've got seventeen" on the way back lets the defencemen commit to the puck instead of hedging.
The bench calls changes and warns about what the on-ice players can't see — a player coming off the opposition bench, a line matchup, a shift that has gone too long.

Where two people can see it, both should call it. Redundant information costs nothing. The failure mode you are guarding against is silence, not duplication.

The goaltender's calls

Key: The goalie's view is exactly the view your defencemen lack — the whole play, permanently, for free
Action: Give the retriever "time" or "man on" first, and add the count with "one on you" or "two on you"
Options: "Up" sends it up the strong side, "over" switches it behind the net, "leave it" parks it behind the net for a teammate wheeling through
Convention: Prefer "leave it" to "set" — two syllables are easier to tell from "up" and "over" at speed in a noisy rink
Key: A goalie shouting "shot" means they have the shooter and you take the pass — stay in the passing lane, it is not a warning that a shot is coming
Rule: Under NHL and IIHF rules the goalie may play the puck behind the goal line only inside the trapezoid — markings Rule 1.8 in both books, the two-minute delay of game under NHL 27.8 / 63.2(viii) and IIHF 27.7 / 63.2(VIII) — the only exception the rule writes is skate contact with the crease
Rule: USA Hockey and Hockey Canada have no trapezoid, so behind the net your goalie is a puck-handler — but all four books make any deliberate part in the play past the centre red line a minor, not just playing the puck; their skates test is USA Hockey Casebook 407 Situation 13, Hockey Canada 8.3(a)
Rule: "No trapezoid" is not "no restriction" — USA Hockey 614(c)(1) makes it a minor if your goalie freezes a puck behind the goal line, body entirely outside the crease; Hockey Canada's Interpretation 3 to Rule 10.1(a) bars freezing once they leave the crease, no warning, but permits a cover after a save
Rule: In England and Wales the status of the IIHF trapezoid rule is unsettled — England Ice Hockey's Rules & Regulations 22.3 (2024-25) say the restricted area is "not currently enforced" and neither the 2025-26 nor the 2026-27 In-House Rules mention it; assume it binds and ask your league
Read: Until your league says otherwise, call it as though it binds — your goalie may not play a puck behind the goal line outside the trapezoid, so "leave it" is only on where the puck is
Action: Answer your goalie — a call that gets no response gets made quieter next time, and then not at all

Your goalie faces the whole play, is stationary, and has nothing behind them — exactly the view your defencemen lack, and none of it reaches them unless it is said.

Why the position is special: they are the only player who faces the entire play at all times, the only one who is more or less stationary and therefore not making decisions under skating load, and the only one with nothing happening behind them. Every other player has a blind side. The goalie has the whole picture, permanently, for free.

Teams that ignore their goalie's voice concede more for a mechanical reason: the information the goalie has is exactly the information the defencemen lack. A defenceman retrieving a dumped puck is facing their own end boards with the forecheck coming from behind — the precise view the goalie has and they do not. If that transfer doesn't happen, the defenceman guesses, and defensive-zone guesses become turnovers in the highest-danger area on the ice.

The standard goalie vocabulary:

"Time" — nobody is on you. The retriever can turn, look up, and make a proper play.
"Man on" — someone is on you. Get rid of it. Some goalies use "one on you" or "two on you" to give the count.
"Up" — the puck goes up the strong side, to the winger on the boards. In practice this is usually the defenceman telling the goalie where they want it, and the goalie executing.
"Over" — the puck switches sides, usually behind the net. The weak-side defenceman is calling for it. The goalie can leave the net on either side to make this happen.
"Leave it" — the goalie should stop the puck and leave it behind the net for a teammate to pick up, typically a centre wheeling through. Some teams use "set" instead; there is a good argument for "leave it" because two syllables are easier to distinguish from "up" and "over" at speed, in a noisy rink, with someone wheeling at you.
"I've got it" — the goalie is playing the puck themselves. If you hear it: stay out of their way and get to your breakout position instead of the puck.
"Screen" — I cannot see. Move, or move the man who is blocking me. This is the goalie's most important call and the one most often ignored. How much you may legally do to move them depends on your rule set — see Moving a screener — what the books allow.
"Shot" — a goalie saying "shot" is not warning you that one is coming. They are telling you they have the shooter and you should take the pass — the same division of labour this document gives under "I've got the pass / Take the shooter". Published goalie material documents it as a spoken call in exactly that sense: "When the puck is at the point, or when the opposing team has a two-on-one, it can be difficult for your defense to know what you want them to do. If you'd prefer that they take away the pass or guard the open man, call for 'shot!'... If you want the shot, call for it!" That is the sense to adopt, because a warning that a shot is coming tells a skater nothing they can act on, while "I have the shooter" tells a defenceman exactly where to put their stick. If you hear it as a defenceman: stay in the passing lane and do not drift toward the puck. If your team has been using "shot" as a warning, pick a different word for the warning — the two meanings are incompatible and this is a call you have half a second to decode.

Where your goalie may play the puck

A constraint that shapes all of this: the trapezoid. Under NHL and IIHF rules the goalie may only play the puck behind the goal line inside the marked trapezoid — the lines are specified in Rule 1.8 in both books, and playing the puck outside them behind the goal line is a two-minute minor for delay of game under NHL Rules 27.8 and 63.2(viii) (the IIHF numbers the restricted-area rule 27.7 — its 27.8 is "Infractions – Unique to Goalkeepers" — and carries the same minor at its own 63.2(VIII)). The only exception, in the rule's own words, is a goalkeeper who plays the puck "while maintaining skate contact with" the crease. So "I've got it" and "leave it" are only available where the puck actually is. Those two books are read directly here; the rest of the sentence usually attached to the trapezoid is not. The KHL is commonly said to have one as well, but no KHL rulebook was available to check it against, so treat that one as unverified — the nearest thing to a source is the IIHF's own 2021 announcement of the unified rulebook, which calls the restricted area a "trapezoid familiar to NHL and KHL". That announcement is also what dates the IIHF's own adoption, to the 2021/22 season; the NHL's 2005-06 start date is in no rulebook — its Rules 1.8, 27.8 and 63.2(viii) carry no date at all — so it is the commonly given date rather than one checked here. Neither North American governing body's book has a trapezoid — the USA Hockey Playing Rules 2025-29 and the Hockey Canada Playing Rules 2026-2028 mark no goalkeeper's restricted area anywhere, and neither limits where behind the net a goalkeeper may play the puck (USA Hockey Rule 610; Hockey Canada Rule 10.1) — and under those books your goalie becomes a genuine third puck-handler behind the net, which changes their calls and yours completely. ⚠️ Behind the net, and no further: those two books stop them at the centre red line, as all four do. USA Hockey Rule 407(c) makes it a minor if “a goalkeeper deliberately participates in the play in any manner when they are beyond the center red line”; Hockey Canada Rule 4.13(c) penalises the same conduct “under Rule 8.3 (a) – Interference”, a minor by its own Interpretation 2. That bar is not a North American extra — all four books carry it in the same operative words. NHL Rule 27.7 and IIHF Rule 27.6 are the same sentence, “participates in the play in any manner”, with “(intentionally plays the puck or checks an opponent)” set inside it as a parenthetical gloss rather than as a limit on it. ⚠️ What does differ is the measurement: these two measure it on the goaltender's skates, where the NHL and IIHF measure it on the puck — “The determining factor is the position of the goaltender’s skates and not the position of the puck” (Hockey Canada Interpretation 2 to Rule 4.13(c); USA Hockey Casebook Rule 407 Situation 13 rules the same way), against “The position of the puck is the determining factor” at NHL Rule 27.7 and IIHF Rule 27.6. And Hockey Canada does not leave its skates test to an interpretation: Rule 8.3(a) assesses a minor in its own words to any goaltender who “plays the puck with their skates over the centre red line” — worded narrower than 4.13(c)'s “in any manner”, though both routes end at the same minor. So never call a goalie up past the red line for a loose puck, however clearly it is still on your side of it — that call is legal in the NHL and a minor under both North American amateur books. Neither leaves them unrestricted, though, and "I've got it" is not "I can sit on it": USA Hockey Rule 614(c) bars a goalkeeper freezing the puck outside the "goalkeeper's privileged" area, and Hockey Canada's Interpretation 3 to Rule 10.1(a) provides that once a goaltender leaves the crease "they will not be allowed to freeze the puck. If they do, they will be assessed a Minor penalty. No warning will be issued." ⚠️ That clause is half the Interpretation, and the missing half is the one that matters to a teammate with a voice. Clause ii expressly permits a goaltender to come out "to cut down the angle and catch the shot or, after stopping the shot, cover the puck", and Hockey Canada nowhere says which of the two governs a cover made after a save outside the crease — reading ii as the exception is a reading of the Interpretation rather than a Hockey Canada ruling, though it is how the NHL and IIHF print the same pair, their 63.2(vi) Note making that cover legal in terms. So never call "move it" at a goalie who has smothered a puck after a save. The call that clause v is actually about is the goalie who has come out and has time: give them "time" early, not "move it" late. How much rec, beer-league and youth hockey runs on those two books is a question about leagues rather than about books, and this document has no count for it. Find out which rules you are under. Full detail in Goaltender. 🇬🇧 In England and Wales, treat this as unsettled. The IIHF book carries the rule (Rule 27.7, not the NHL's 27.8), but England Ice Hockey's Rules & Regulations 22.3 say the restricted area is "not currently enforced" — that is the 2024-25 edition — and neither the 2025-26 nor the 2026-27 In-House Rules mention it at all, both editions having been searched for it. Assume it binds — your goalie may not play a puck behind the goal line outside the trapezoid. Ask your league, and look behind the net to see whether the lines are painted at all — a hint, not a ruling, since IIHF 27.7 turns on the position of the puck rather than the markings.

Answering your goalie

Two things for the skaters. Answer your goalie — a call that gets no response gets made quieter next time, and then not at all. And tell them what you want before you need it: "leave it" works because the centre said it while still in the neutral zone, not while arriving behind the net.

How to call well

Priority: Early beats accurate — a slightly wrong call before the puck arrives beats a perfect one as it does
Priority: Short beats specific — one or two syllables; if your call needs a comma, it is too long
Priority: Loud beats clever — a perfect call at conversational volume did not happen, and that is the commonest reason a call fails
Action: Use names for teammates and numbers for opponents — "Sam, man on" gets acted on, "man on" gets four heads turning
Action: Call while the puck is travelling; once it is on their blade they are already committed
Never: Say "time" unless you are sure — a false "time" puts a teammate into contact unbraced, and they will stop trusting you
Convention: One word, one meaning, all season, across the whole team
Action: Answer calls — "yep", "got it", a raised glove; an unacknowledged switch is two players hoping

The technique of calling matters as much as the vocabulary.

Early beats accurate. A slightly wrong call made before the puck arrives is more useful than a perfect one made as it does. The receiver's decision is already forming; you are trying to inform it, not correct it afterwards.
Short beats specific. One or two syllables. "Man on" survives a noisy rink; "there's a guy coming from behind your left shoulder" does not. If your call needs a comma, it is too long.
Loud beats clever. Rinks are loud, helmets and cages muffle everything, and you are both moving. A perfect call at conversational volume did not happen. This is the single most common reason a call fails.
Use names. "Sam, man on" gets acted on; "man on" gets four players looking around. Numbers work equally well for opponents: "I've got seventeen" is unambiguous in a way that "I've got him" never is.
Call before the puck arrives, not as it does. The window that matters is while the puck is travelling. Once it is on their blade they are already committed.
Keep the vocabulary consistent across the team. One word, one meaning, all season. If half the team says "over" for a cross-ice pass and half says it for "go around the boards", the word is worse than useless.
Say the thing that is true, not the thing that is helpful. If you are not sure whether they have time, do not say "time". A false "time" call puts a teammate into contact they were not braced for, and after one of those they will stop trusting you.
Answer calls. "Yep", "got it", a raised glove — anything. An unacknowledged switch is two players hoping.

Non-verbal communication

Technique: Put your blade flat on the ice in front of your body as a target — a stick held in the air says you are not ready
Risk: All stick taps sound alike, so an opponent can tap and induce a blind pass — use the tap to reinforce a call, never to replace one
Action: Make eye contact before the pass — a tenth of a second confirms they have seen you and are ready
Technique: Look a defender off by staring deliberately at one option and passing to another; defenders read heads and eyes as a shortcut
Action: Point your glove or stick at the space you want a teammate to take, then put the puck there
Convention: Signal faceoff plays and power-play entries rather than speaking them, but only with signals agreed off the ice — never invent one mid-game
Key: Your feet and hips tell a teammate what you are about to do — hips open to the middle says inside, square to the boards says wide

Rinks are loud and sometimes a voice will not carry. Non-verbal cues are the backup, and for some things they are better than words because the opposition can hear you shout.

Stick blade on the ice as a target. The most basic and most reliable one. A blade flat on the ice, out in front of your body, says "pass it here" and gives the passer something to aim at. A stick held in the air says the opposite — that you are not ready. See Passing and Receiving.
Tapping the stick on the ice. The traditional "I'm open" signal, and worth a caution: all stick taps sound alike. An opponent can tap their stick and induce a blind pass straight to them, and at least one coaching resource argues against relying on the tap for exactly that reason. Use it to reinforce a call, not to replace one, and never make a blind pass on a tap alone.
Eye contact before the pass. A tenth of a second of eye contact confirms two things at once — that they have seen you and that they are ready. It is the cheapest turnover-prevention available.
Looking a defender off. The inverse. If you stare at your intended target, so does the defender covering them. Look deliberately at one option, then pass to another. This works because defenders read heads and eyes as a shortcut, the same way a defenceman defending a rush is taught not to — to read the attacker's chest and hips instead, precisely because the head, hands and puck are the tools of deception.
Pointing before you pass. Point your glove or your stick at the space where you want a teammate to go, then put the puck there. Common on breakouts and on the power play, where the passer has a fraction of a second of calm and the receiver is looking up.
Hand signals for set plays. Faceoff plays and power-play entries are often signalled rather than spoken, because the opposition is three feet away. Any signal works as long as it was agreed off the ice. Do not invent one mid-game.
Body position as a signal. Where your feet and hips point tells a teammate what you are about to do before you do it. Opening your hips toward the middle says you are cutting inside; squaring to the boards says you are staying wide. Skilled linemates read this constantly, and it is why players who have played together a long time appear to be telepathic. They are not — they are reading hips.

Building the habit

Mindset: The obstacle is social, not tactical — the fear of being wrong, of being loud, of being the only one making noise; it fades with deliberate practice
Action: Talk in every drill, including the ones where it feels stupid; treat a missing call the way you would treat a missed backcheck
Priority: Start with "man on" and "time" and get those automatic before adding anything
Action: Make one player responsible for volume each drill, rotating the job so the quiet players cannot hide behind the loud ones
Action: Name the calls that worked, out loud, afterwards — "that 'over' saved us a turnover"
Action: Agree the vocabulary in the dressing room at the start of the season, not on the ice in game three
Key: Write down one word per meaning — one call carrying two meanings is the classic failure, as with "behind you"
Action: Keep the list to ten or fifteen calls, include the goalie in the conversation, and revisit it about a month in

Almost nobody talks naturally on the ice at first. The obstacle is not tactical, it is social: being loud in front of people is uncomfortable. Newer players in particular are worried about being wrong, about being loud, about being the one person making noise. That is normal, and it fades with deliberate practice. How widespread it is, and how long it takes to fade, have not been counted here — none of the coaching sources this document draws on measures either — so treat both as coaching observation and judge them against your own room.

How to practise it:

Talk in every drill, including the ones where it feels stupid. A three-player passing drill with nobody in the way is exactly where the habit gets built, because you can talk without also thinking. Coaches who accept silence in drills get silence in games. Treat a missing call the same way you would treat a missed backcheck.
Start with the two calls that matter most. Just "man on" and "time". Get those automatic before adding anything.
Make one player responsible for volume each drill. Rotating the job means the quiet players get forced through the awkward stage rather than hiding behind the loud ones.
Talk on the bench too. Players who are engaged verbally on the bench are engaged verbally on the ice. It is the same muscle.
Note the calls that worked, out loud, afterwards. "That 'over' saved us a turnover" does more for a team's willingness to talk than any amount of general encouragement.

How a team agrees a vocabulary:

Agree the vocabulary in the dressing room at the start of the season, not on the ice in game three. Twenty minutes with a whiteboard is enough.
Write down one word per meaning. The commonest source of confusion is two calls for one thing, or worse, one call carrying two meanings — "behind you" meaning both an opponent and a loose puck is the classic.
Keep the list short enough to remember. Ten to fifteen calls covers almost everything. Anything longer will not survive a real game.
Include the goalie in the conversation. Their calls are the ones the defencemen have to act on instantly, and they are the ones most often left out of the discussion.
Revisit it once, about a month in. You will find two calls nobody uses and one situation nobody has a word for.

See Team Play and Culture for the wider point, and Practice and Development for building habits generally.

Common Mistakes

Total silence in the defensive zone. The failure this document exists to fix. The defensive zone is where the information gap between the puck carrier and everyone else is widest, and it is where a lost puck becomes a goal. (Nobody publishes a ranking of amateur communication mistakes, or a count of what actually gets said on amateur ice. So wherever this document calls a mistake the commonest, a call the highest-value, an improvement the cheapest, or a thing usual — anywhere in it, in this list, in the overview and in the takeaways at the end — that is coaching observation, not measurement.)
Two players calling for the same puck, both arriving, and neither taking it. The fix is a standing rule about who has priority — usually the player facing up-ice, or the player who called first.
Calling too late to be useful. "Man on" shouted as the hit lands is not communication, it is commentary.
Nobody calling the switch. Two opponents cross, two defenders both track the same one, and the other walks in alone.
Assuming a teammate saw what you saw. They did not. You are looking at different halves of the rink; that is the entire reason the call has value.
The "I thought you had him" goal. Both defenders drawn to the puck, the goalmouth empty, a tap-in. It is a communication failure rather than an effort failure — both players were working hard, at the same job — and it is the reason the back-door call exists.
A false "time" call. Sending a teammate into contact they were not braced for. One of these and they will stop listening to you for the rest of the season.
Answering "screen" by walking the screener out of the lane. ⚠️ The instruction in that call is to clear the sightline, and how much you may legally do to clear it is not the same in every book. Walking a body out of the lane needs a full-checking league — and even there the screener has no puck, so what reaches you is interference (NHL and IIHF 56.2(i); USA Hockey 625(a)(4)), which announces no checking-classification scope at all. Where checking is barred it is a minor rising to a major plus a game misconduct and then a match penalty (USA Hockey 604(c), 604(d), 604(e); Hockey Canada 7.3(a), 7.3(b), 7.3(c)), and in women's hockey an illegal hit under IIHF 101.1. ⚠️ And a fifth book splits the box-out in half. CARHA Note 2 to Rule 66(a) entitles defending players to "stand their ground" or "shadow" the attacking ones, so holding a position you established is fine there — but Rule 49(a) makes a minor or a major of a player who "intentionally bodies, pushes, shoves" an opponent, with no division or classification scope on it, so leaning on the screener to keep that position is the offence and 49(c) excuses only accidental contact — CARHA-affiliated adult leagues only. Hold your ground, do not lean, and lift the stick below the bottom hand.
Calling your goalie up past the centre red line for a loose puck. USA Hockey Rule 407(c) and Hockey Canada Rule 4.13(c) make it a minor to take any deliberate part in the play beyond that line, not just to play the puck, and both books judge it on the moment the goaltender's skates cross. ⚠️ Neither of those two rules says "skates", and each book prints that test somewhere else: USA Hockey's is in the separate Casebook volume at Rule 407, Situation 13 — "the determining factor is the position of the goalkeeper's skates and not the puck" — while Hockey Canada writes it into playing-rule text at Rule 8.3(a), a minor to a goaltender who "plays the puck with their skates over the centre red line", and restates it at Interpretation 2 to Rule 4.13(c). NHL Rule 27.7 and IIHF Rule 27.6 bar that same participation in the same words — this is not a North American extra — but judge it on the puck, in the playing rule itself: "The position of the puck is the determining factor for the application of this rule." So a goalie reaching back over the line for a puck still on your own side is legal on television and two minutes under both North American amateur books. Find out which book you are under before you make that call.
Assuming a goaltender's minor is the goaltender's to serve. Whatever you talk your goalie into, a goaltender is not sent to the penalty bench: USA Hockey Rule 407(a) has the minor served by "another member of the team who was on the ice when the offense was committed", and Hockey Canada Rule 4.13(a) is to the same effect. ⚠️ Both books then put the choice with the coach, and that is the half that catches the caller. USA Hockey: "The player shall be designated by the Coach of the offending team through the captain and such substitute may not be changed." Hockey Canada says it in almost the same words, without the no-swapping sentence. If you made the call you were on the ice, so you are inside the pool your coach chooses from — it is a designation rather than anyone's offer, and under USA Hockey you cannot then be swapped out. USA Hockey's Rule 407 Note has the penalty "charged in the records against the goalkeeper" whoever serves it.
Making a call and not being available to back it up. If you shout "here", be there.
Using a private vocabulary. Words your team has not agreed are noise.
Talking to the referee instead of to your teammates. Whatever you say to the official does not change the call and does take your attention off the play.

Check yourself

Answer each question before you go on — a real attempt, not a guess. Then go and check, because the checking is the part that does the work. Producing an answer and getting it wrong is worth more than recognising a right one, but only when the right answer follows: the section named with each question, and the Key Takeaways after them, are where you get it. Where the answer lives in another document, that is named too.

You shout "man on" to a teammate retrieving the puck near your own wall. One thing in that entry outranks everything else in it — what is it, and what exactly should their body be doing? (§Pressure warnings)
Your goalie shouts "shot" as the opposition come at you two-on-one. What are they telling you to do — and what are they not telling you? (§The goaltender's calls)
"Rim" and "reverse" are opposite plays chosen off the same read. What is the read, and which kind of forechecker does each one beat? (§Puck direction)
Someone shouts "ice it" while you are killing a penalty. What are you buying, what might you be giving up, and what would you need to know about your rule set before that call becomes a habit? (§Puck direction)
A defenceman shouts "sag". Under which defensive-zone coverage does that call mean nothing at all, under which does it apply only above the dots, and what should you therefore have found out before the season started? (§Danger and coverage)
This document gives three priorities for how to make a call, each in the form "X beats Y". Name all three, and say which one it calls the single most common reason a call fails. (§How to call well)
Four calls in this document are flagged as carrying two meanings at once — and not one of them is a single word. Name three of the four and say what the document suggests doing about each. Then name the two bench phrases it tells you not to press into service for a new meaning, because both are already taken. (§Pressure warnings, §Puck direction, §Support and availability, §The goaltender's calls, §Bench and line changes)
Who makes a call, and who does not? State the organising principle in one line, then name two of the standing responsibilities that sit on top of it. (§Who owns which call)

Key Takeaways

Nobody publishes a ranking of amateur communication mistakes, or a count of what gets said on amateur ice. So wherever the takeaways below call a mistake the commonest, a call the highest-value, an improvement the cheapest, or a thing usual, that is coaching observation rather than measurement.

The puck carrier is the least informed player on the ice. Everyone else can see their blind side, and passing that on costs nothing.
"Man on" and "time" are the two highest-value words in hockey. One prevents a turnover, the other a panic, and both are usually unsaid. "Man on" carries a safety rule that outranks everything else it means: never take that contact with your back to the wall, and never duck. Get your skates parallel to the wall instead and take it on your forearm and hip, head up, chin off your chest.
The player who can see it makes the call — not the captain, not the most senior player. Whoever has the information.
Your goalie faces the whole play, is stationary, and has nothing behind them — exactly the view your defencemen lack, and none of it reaches them unless it is said.
Early beats accurate, short beats specific, loud beats clever. A perfect call at conversational volume did not happen.
Use names and numbers. "Sam, man on" gets acted on. "Man on" gets four heads turning.
Agree the vocabulary as a team: one word, one meaning, all season. The specific words barely matter; a receiver who has to translate has already lost the half-second.
Answer every call. An unacknowledged switch is two players hoping, and hoping is how the back door scores.
Non-verbal cues back up words, they don't replace them. A stick blade on the ice is a target; a stick tap is anyone's, including your opponent's.
The loudest team usually looks like the more skilled team — the cheapest improvement available, needing no fitness, no skill work and no extra ice.

A note on which calls are documented. Fourteen of the calls taught here are in common spoken use, but none of the sources this document draws on documents them as verbal calls. They are: turn, eat it, with you, outlet, net front, sag / collapse, odd man, I'm high, my man / I've got him, pick him up / take the middle, I've got the pass / take the shooter, I've got first player off, stay, and next shift.

Two qualifications on those undocumented calls. First, outlet, net front, sag, collapse and odd man are all well documented as standard hockey terms — they appear throughout the coaching literature and elsewhere in this guide as names for positions, shapes and situations. What is unverified is only their use as something a player shouts. Second, these calls are corroborated in the sources and are not flagged as undocumented: stretch, over and here (Sweden coach Sam Hallam's list of what his players shout, quoted by NHL.com — he also lists "Open!", which this document does not carry as a separate call); two-on-one / three-on-two (ReasonY gives the short numeric forms "Two" and "One", noted inline); wheel, reverse, time, man on and middle (the BVHS goalie manual's "phrases and what they mean" list, which also documents "bank" — "half wall" is not on that list; it appears in a separate list of "key communication phrases goaltenders can use" in the same manual's Playing The Puck section, alongside "leaving it", "reverse", "wheel" and "bank"); man on, time, screen, ice it, dump, leave it (Sportmentary); up, over and leave it (Kelvin Cech's goalie breakout calls, which is also the source for the two-syllable argument); rim, clear, back, back door, chip, deep / dump, far side, feet / under, one on / two on, all alone and screen (the Chicks with Sticks call list); and the goalie's shot, which Sportmentary documents word for word, in the same sense this document gives it.

For the rest, the concepts are standard and sourced elsewhere in this guide; it is only the specific wording that is unverified — which is the main point of this document anyway: the words are conventions, and yours may differ.

Sources — retrieved 27 July 2026

Call vocabulary: Chicks with Sticks Hockey – Hockey Vocabulary (On-Ice Communications) — the most complete published call list available, organised by who says each call · Coach Chic – Voice of the Bench: Communicating Under Pressure on the Ice — a general essay on communicating under pressure; it names no individual calls (read 1 September 2026) · Athlenow – How to Improve Team Communication on the Ice · Fusion Hockey – On-Ice Communication — source for the caution against relying on stick taps

Goaltender calls: The Coaches Site – Goalie Breakout Calls (Kelvin Cech) — source for "up", "over" and "leave it", and the two-syllable argument · ReasonY – Goalie/Defense Communication (Michal Ondrasek) — note this is a ball-hockey coaching post, not ice hockey; the calls quoted from it transfer · Ice Hockey Systems – Breakout Communication Drill — weak-side defenceman reads the second forechecker and makes the call · Sportmentary – Ice Hockey Goalie: Communication Tips — source for the goalie's "shot" call on a two-on-one, and for "man on", "time" / "space", "watch left", "screen" / "screen slot", "backdoor" / "high slot", "dump" / "ice it", "you've got time" / "leave it", "play it" and "send it" as spoken calls · BVHS Goalie Coaches Tactics and Skill Development Resource Guide, updated May 2026 (PDF) — its "phrases and what they mean" list documents "wheel", "reverse", "time", "man on", "middle" and "bank" as spoken calls

Building the habit: USA Hockey ADM – Teaching Effective Communication at 12U · Hockey's Arsenal – Developing an Ice Hockey Team's Communication · Swift Hockey – The Art of Effective Communication on the Ice · Minnesota Hockey – 4 Tips for In-Game Communication

Faceoff and line-change communication: Ice Hockey Systems – 10 Offensive Zone Faceoff Plays · Hockey's Arsenal – A Deep Dive Into Hockey Line Changes

The safety override on "man on": USA Hockey — Heads Up Hockey Program Guide (PDF) — "How spinal injuries happen in hockey", for cervical flexion straightening the spine's natural curve and for the finding that almost all on-ice cervical spine injuries have come from the head being slightly flexed while making head-on contact with the boards or goal post; and, under its "Checking from behind" subheading, for the hazard of the turned back — "Even a light hit from behind could inflict a severe head or neck injury", carried in the same words by USA Hockey's Introduction To Body Contact at its §5 "Checking From Behind", both strings located in the extracted text on 3 September 2026. ⚠️ Note the division of labour between those two quotations, which is why this document states them as two separate limbs rather than one: the cervical-flexion finding is about a head-down, head-first collision, and USA Hockey does not say it about turning your back; the hazard of the turned back is that it makes the contact a hit from behind, which is the sentence quoted for that. That finding is a restatement, not USA Hockey's own research: the page credits "research done among a wide range of hockey players" and prints the citation under it — Charles H. Tator et al., Spinal Injuries Due To Hockey, Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences 11:34–41 — which has not been read in the original here, only the USA Hockey page reproducing it and the paper's own published abstract. That abstract does not carry the quantifier: the paper is indexed as a case report and describes six patients treated at a single Toronto unit between 1974 and 1981, so "almost all" is USA Hockey's characterisation of the research rather than that paper's finding. Body Contact and Battles carries the larger studies that do bear on it. And it ranks nothing. It was searched on 31 August 2026, flattened and de-hyphenated, alongside USA Hockey's Introduction To Body Contact, its Playing Rules and Casebook, the CARHA rule book and the UK grassroots concussion guidelines, for any ranking of hockey's injuries or its situations by seriousness or danger — there is none in any of them. The one frequency statement the guide does make is about frequency and not seriousness, and it does not stop where a half-quotation leaves it: "in hockey, concussions are not the most common form of injury, but the[y] require your attention for two important reasons" — the missing letter is the guide's own. So the claim supported here is about a posture and a collision, not a ranking. Body Contact and Battles carries the fuller treatment.

Rules: NHL Official Rules 2025-2026 (PDF) (Rule 56.1 Interference — Body Position, for the ice a player is allowed to stand on, Rule 59.2 Cross-checking (with 59.3, the major for the same act at the Referee's discretion, 59.4 the match penalty, and 59.5, under which "an automatic game misconduct penalty shall be imposed on the offending player" whenever a cross-checking major is assessed), Rule 63.2(iii) Delaying the Game — puck out of play from the defending zone, Rule 69.1 Interference on the Goalkeeper, Rules 74.1 / 74.2 Too Many Men on the Ice, read 31 August 2026 — 74.1's "within five feet (5') of his players' bench and out of the play before the change is made", matched at 1.50m by IIHF Rule 74.1, against Hockey Canada Rule 6.1(a)'s "at the Players' Bench (within 3.05m (10 ft.)) and out of play" and USA Hockey Rule 204(b), which writes no distance at all and adds the trigger "or causes their team to gain a competitive advantage" — applied at USA Hockey Casebook Rule 204, Situation 8 to a change that turns a 2-on-1 against into a 2-on-2, Rule 76 Face-offs, Rule 81 Icing, Rule 82.1 Line Change, Rule 83 Off-side, Rule 87.1 Time-outs, Rule 1.8 Goalkeeper's Restricted Area markings, Rules 27.8 / 63.2(viii) restricted-area penalty, and Rule 61.1 Slashing, the route to a penalty for a stick at the hands that Rule 55.1 does not reach, read with 55.3, 61.3 and 61.5 — the hooking major requiring that the player "injures an opponent" where the slashing major turns on "the severity of the contact", and 61.5 imposing the ejection: "Whenever a major penalty is assessed for slashing, a game misconduct penalty must also be imposed") · USA Hockey Official Playing Rules 2025-29 (PDF) — Rule 624(b)(1), the classification restriction on the shorthanded icing exemption, Rule 636(f), which attaches no icing condition to its 60-second time-out, Rule 601, the tiers above the delay-of-game minor once the whistle has gone — 601(a)(4), an unsportsmanlike minor for "Shooting the puck after the whistle, if in the opinion of the Official such shot was avoidable"; 601(c)(10), a misconduct for a player who "shoots or bats the puck outside of the playing area during a stoppage of play (when not done in protest of an official's decision or in the direction of a spectator)"; and 601(d)(7), a game misconduct where the same act is "done in protest of an official's decision" — read with Rule 601's opening Note, which says only that "A minor penalty or misconduct penalty should be assessed for actions that occur on the playing surface or in the penalty bench area" and so leaves the overlap with 610(c) unresolved, and Rule 610(c), which reaches only a "deliberately shooting or batting the puck outside the playing area" and writes no defending-zone strict-liability limb of any kind, read with Rule 631(d), which sends an accidental puck out of play to "a last play face-off" rather than to a penalty, and Rule 625(b), whose first sentence is a mandatory neutral-zone face-off "any time an attacking player stands, holds their stick, or skates through the goal crease" on three conditions, and whose second is the flat bar on a goal with an attacking player in the goal crease, whoever scored, subject to two carve-outs — the puck preceding the player in, or the goalkeeper being out of the crease area, the second of which the separate USA Hockey Casebook narrows at Rule 625, Situation 9, disallowing the goal and assessing an interference penalty where the goalkeeper is returning to the crease and is prevented from making a play — with a third paragraph relieving an attacker whom a defending player's physical interference put in the crease; read in full for a goaltender-screening or goaltender-vision provision, of which it has none — its one "protective screen", at 625(a)(1), is a screen set on a checker, not on a goaltender — and Rules 604(a) and 604(c), the Competitive Contact classifications and the minor for body checking in them, with 604(d) and 604(e) above it — a major plus game misconduct for recklessly endangering an opponent, and a match penalty — Rule 609, whose (b) assesses "a major plus a game misconduct penalty" for cross-checking that recklessly endangers an opponent and whose (c) reaches a match penalty, Rule 623 Hooking, whose Note counts among the hooking actions "a stick placed on the hand/arm that takes away the ability for the opponent to pass or shoot the puck with a normal amount of force", and Rule 634 Slashing, whose Note — "Any forceful chop with the stick on an opponent's body or opponent's stick, on or near the opponent's hands, shall be considered slashing" — carries no "attempt to play the puck" let-out, read with the tiers above the minor: 623(b) — "A major plus game misconduct penalty shall be assessed to any player who recklessly endangers an opponent as a result of hooking" — and 634(b), that sentence again for slashing, neither of which requires an injury · USA Hockey Official Rules and Casebook 2025-29 (PDF) — all seventeen situations under Rule 625, read for a screening or goaltender-vision provision, of which they have none, and among them Situation 9, which limits 625(b)'s goalkeeper-out carve-out: "if the goalkeeper is attempting to return to the goal crease and there is any interference by the attacking player who prevents the goalkeeper from making a play, then the goal must be disallowed and an interference penalty shall be assessed" · Hockey Canada Playing Rules 2026-2028 (PDF) — Rule 11.1 Unsportsmanlike Conduct, item (v) of whose non-exhaustive list is "Shooting the puck out of the playing area, after the whistle", made "a Minor or Bench Minor penalty" by 11.1(a) and a Misconduct by 11.1(d)(i) where the player persists — whose own Note 1 adds that "[a] Referee is not required to assess a Minor penalty under this rule before assessing a Misconduct penalty, but may assess either penalty initially", so the Minor is not a step the referee must take first — read with Rule 10.1(d) — "No Misconduct penalty may be assessed for Delay of Game" — which is why Hockey Canada writes the after-the-whistle case outside its delay-of-game rule, Rule 8.5 Interference with the Goaltender, whose crease bar is not flat — its Goal Crease Area paragraph allows a teammate's goal where the player in the crease "does not attempt to play the puck, interfere with the play or obstruct the Goaltender's view or movements" — and Interpretation 3 to 8.5(a), the goaltender-vision test USA Hockey has no counterpart to; its only two references to a goaltender's view both reach a player in the crease, and Rule 7.3(a), the minor for bumping, shoving or pushing, read with the scope Rule 7.3's own opening sets — "divisions of U13 and below, in female hockey, and any other divisions approved by a Member of Hockey Canada" — and with 7.3(b) above it — a major and game misconduct at the Referee's discretion on the degree of violence, and mandatory where the check injures — and 7.3(c) above that, a match penalty for a player who "deliberately attempts to or deliberately injures an opponent by body-checking", and Rule 8.1 Holding, which permits an arm used in a strength move by a player who has body position, Rule 9.2(e), under which a Game Misconduct "must be assessed any time a Major penalty is assessed for cross-checking", and Rule 8.2(a) Interpretation 1, the stick lift allowed for the puck but penalised where it contacts the hands, and Rule 10.1 Delay of Game, whose clauses (a)–(e) place no limit on where a goaltender may play the puck — Hockey Canada marks no trapezoid — read with Interpretation 3 to Rule 10.1(a), clause v, which does restrict them: once a goaltender leaves the crease "they will not be allowed to freeze the puck. If they do, they will be assessed a Minor penalty. No warning will be issued." read in turn with clause ii, which permits a goaltender to come out "to cut down the angle and catch the shot or, after stopping the shot, cover the puck", the book not saying which of the two governs a cover made after a save outside the crease · IIHF Official Rule Book 2025/26 (PDF) — Rule 87.1, which imposes the post-icing time-out ban in the NHL's own words, and Rule 81.4, which imposes the substitution ban but not in the NHL's words: it lists a fourth exception the NHL rule lacks, "a Player with a broken skate", unchanged in the 2026/27 edition — read against IIHF Rule 82.1, which states the same post-icing ban and lists only the NHL's three, in both editions, so the fourth exception is not consistent within the IIHF book itself and neither book resolves it, Rule 1.8, whose "Goalkeeper Designated Area" is "6.80m" along the goal line and "8.60m" at the boards, with Rule 27.7 — not the NHL's 27.8, which in the IIHF book is "Infractions – Unique to Goalkeepers" — and Rule 63.2(VIII), the same two-minute delay of game "On a goalkeeper who plays the puck outside of the designated area behind the net", all three unchanged in the 2026/27 edition, Rule 63.2(III), which carries the NHL's defending-zone puck-out-of-play minor in the same terms — its "except where there is no protective glass" and its bench clause reading "surrounding" where the NHL's reads "behind" — with 63.2(II), the deliberate limb from anywhere on the ice, both unchanged in the 2026/27 edition, and Rule 101.1, which sits in the book's Women's Hockey section and is a women's-hockey rule, not a general one, Rule 56.1, which carries the NHL's body-position clause in the general book rather than in the women's section, and Rule 55.1, the only one of the four to state the hands limb inside its hooking definition — and whose very next sentence exempts contact that is stick-to-stick only "when a Player is checking another", a tension the book does not resolve and no interpretation held here settles — with Rule 61.1, which reproduces the NHL's slashing hands sentence word for word, and Rule 59.3, which bundles the major and an automatic game misconduct into one clause and gates both on reckless endangerment, IIHF Rule 59 writing no match penalty, and Rule 69.1, which carries the NHL's premise and both grounds but adds a sentence the NHL's Rule 69 has not got anywhere in 69.1 to 69.8 — the referee's "possibility to stop the game" where an attacking Player "is in the goal crease and does not leave immediately", with the face-off at the nearest neutral zone spot · IIHF Official Rule Book 2026/27 (Version 1.0, June 2026) (PDF) — the edition behind every "unchanged in the 2026/27 edition" note above, read on 29 August 2026 for Rules 1.8, 27.7, 63.2(II), 63.2(III), 63.2(VIII), 81.4, 82.1, 87.1 and 69.1's crease-stoppage sentence only, each of which is word-for-word as the 2025/26 book has it. No other IIHF citation in this document has been checked against that edition · IIHF Situation Handbook 2025/26 — Version 1.1, August 2025 (PDF) and IIHF Situation Handbook 2026/27 — Version 1.0, June 2026 (PDF) — both read for Situations 63.24, 63.28 and 63.3, which are put in the same words in the two editions. 63.24 still assesses the minor where a clear goes over the glass and lands in the Players' Bench — "the determining factor… is where the puck leaves the playing surface", judged on "an imaginary plane that continues upwards to the roof from the top of the glass" — exempting only a puck "shot directly into the Players' Bench (where there is no glass)"; 63.28 makes the glove scoop over the glass behind the players' bench a minor, "considered shooting or batting the puck with the hand resulting in the puck leaving the playing surface"; 63.3 assesses none where the puck "clears the glass at a point in the Penalty Bench where the glass is lower than the normal height around the rink". The Handbook's Foreword ranks it below the Rulebook — "in case of any contradictions, the valid IIHF Rulebook is always the basis" · IIHF – New Rule Book for global game — the IIHF's own announcement, 5 June 2021, that it would "introduce a new Rule Book for the 2021/22 season", listing among the rules to be integrated "A restricted area for goalkeepers behind the net to create more offensive play (i.e. trapezoid familiar to NHL and KHL)". It is the source for the IIHF's 2021/22 adoption date, and the only support held here for the KHL — a governing body's aside rather than a KHL rule, and no KHL rulebook was available to check against. Nothing held here dates the NHL's own adoption; the NHL book gives no date in Rules 1.8, 27.8 or 63.2(viii).

The fifth book on moving a screener — CARHA Hockey Official Rule Book, printed 2020 (PDF), read 7 September 2026: Rule 49 (Boarding and Body Contact) — 49(a), the minor or major "based upon the intent and the violence of the impact" on a player who "intentionally bodies, pushes, shoves, stands in front of an opponent for the purpose of making contact, and/or does not avert body contact with an opponent", with the major mandatory "[w]hen injury results from intentional body contact"; and 49(c), "[w]here, in the opinion of the Referee, accidental contact has taken place, no penalty shall be assessed." Rule 66 (Interference/Protection of the Goalkeeper) — 66(a)(1), the minor or, at the referee's discretion, major and game misconduct on a player who "interferes with or impedes the progress of an opponent who is not in possession of the puck", and its Note 2, which is CARHA's counterpart to the body-position permission the other books write: "Often the action and movement of the attacking player causes the interference, since the defending players are entitled to 'stand their ground' or 'shadow' the attacking players." ⚠️ It sits in the interference rule rather than in a body-position clause, and CARHA carries no equivalent of the NHL's and the IIHF's "allowed the ice he is standing on" sentence or of USA Hockey's Note to 604(c) — the phrases "body position", "standing on", "not required to move", "established position", "hold their ground", "legal body contact" and "competitive contact" all return zero from the book, flattened for hyphenated line breaks, and Note 2 was found by searching "entitled to" instead. What is claimed is that none was found under those terms, not that none exists. Rule 63 (Holding) and Rule 64 (Hooking) were read for the stick lift: 63(a) reaches a player who "holds an opponent with the hands, stick or in any other manner" and 64(a) one who "impedes or seeks to impede the progress of an opponent by hooking with their stick", and the book writes no "at or near the hands" sentence of the kind IIHF 55.1, USA Hockey 623 and Hockey Canada 8.2(a) carry — ⚠️ so the conclusion that a clean lift below the bottom hand is not reached there is a reading of those two short rules, not an interpretation CARHA publishes. ⚠️ The book governs CARHA-affiliated leagues only and is not a rec-hockey standard; how much adult recreational hockey runs on it is a question about leagues rather than about books, and this document has no count for it.

Face-off violations (the §Faceoffs section): read in the primary texts on 2 September 2026 and quoted from them. NHL Rule 76.6 — where a player other than the draw-taker "moves into the face-off circle prior to the dropping of the puck, then the offending team’s player taking the face-off shall be ejected from the face-off circle. This shall be considered a face-off violation" — with Rule 76.7, whose second paragraph is printed "When a least two face-off violations have been committed by the same team during the same face-off, this team shall be penalized with a bench minor penalty to the offending team" ("a least"* is the book’s own typo, quoted as printed), and whose summary list makes hash-mark encroachment a face-off violation at (ii) without saying the centre goes. ⚠️ The warning shape belongs to Rule 76.4, and it is a carve-out rather than the NHL’s general position. 76.4 produces a warning in two places: for a centre who arrives late on a draw "as a result of an icing infraction", who "shall not be removed" but is warned, and more broadly at "When an icing infraction occurs, the first face-off violation by either team will not result in the center being removed… any subsequent violation by that team will result in a bench minor penalty for delay of game - face-off violation being assessed." (Rule 76.7 adds a third warning, once per game, for players "late to the face-off location and therefore in an offside position".) So off an icing the NHL warns; off anything else 76.6 ejects the centre with no warning at all. The IIHF 2026/27 book reproduces both 76.4 paragraphs; its 2025/26 v1.1 book has neither, and USA Hockey writes no icing carve-out — searched flattened and de-hyphenated across its Playing Rules and its Casebook on 2 September 2026, and there is none in either. IIHF Rule 76.6 in both editions: the 2025/26 v1.1 book has the offending team "receive a warning for a 'face-off' violation" where a player other than the draw-taker "moves into the face-off circle prior to the dropping of the puck", while the 2026/27 book replaces that sentence with "the offending team's player taking the face-off shall be ejected from the face-off circle". IIHF 76.7's bench minor for a second violation is in both. USA Hockey Rule 613(d) — "If a player, other than the player facing off, fails to maintain their proper position, the center of their team shall be ejected from the face-off. A second violation of any of the provisions of this subsection by the same team during the same face-off shall result in a minor penalty for delay of game being assessed to the player committing the second violation" — so USA Hockey ejects the centre as the NHL does but prices the second violation on the individual rather than the bench, and reaches the hash marks the NHL’s 76.7(ii) leaves alone — Rule 613(b) requiring every other player to be "behind the hash marks on the outer edge of the face-off circle", and the USA Hockey Casebook, Rule 613, Situations 9 and 10, which split the watching between the two Linespersons and give both the same remedy — Situation 10, on the players in front: "For the first offense, the Linesperson will blow their whistle and signal which center(s) shall be removed", and Situation 9 the same sentence for the back Linesperson and the players behind. Casebook Situation 8 is stricter still than the NHL on the same line: a stick between the hash marks is a violation, because "[b]oth players must be completely behind their respective hash marks. This includes all sticks and all skates", where NHL 76.7(ii) permits the stick there absent contact. The IIHF Situation Handbook confirms the edition split from the officiating side: its Situation 76.21 has the centre "warned" in the 2025/26 v1.1 Handbook and "removed" in the 2026/27 one, for the same encroachment into the face-off circle. IHUK In-House Rules 2026-27, Section 10, Rule 76 — "With the exception of face-offs following icings, the linesperson shall immediately replace the centre for all violations." ⚠️ Hockey Canada was not read for this document, and no claim is made here about its answer; Faceoffs carries the four-book comparison.*

The British layer on the trapezoid: IHUK In-House Rules 2026-27, Revision 1 (published 25 July 2026) (PDF) — the current British document, adopted by IHUK and the British Universities Ice Hockey Association for "England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland (the Home Countries)" · IHUK In-House Rules 2025-26, Revision 1 (published 27/10/25) (PDF) — superseded, and scoped only to England and Scotland. Both editions were searched for the goalkeeper's restricted area on 30 August 2026 and neither mentions it — neither amends Rule 27 at all, and both close their Introduction "Unless otherwise stated, all rules will be enforced in line with the IIHF Rule Book." · England Ice Hockey Rules & Regulations 2024-2025 (PDF) — Rule 22.3, which says of the goalkeepers' restricted area that it is "not currently enforced to allow ice rinks the necessary time to make the changes to implement this rule", read with Rule 1.1, which makes England Ice Hockey the National Governing Body "in England and Wales" and so sets how far 22.3 reaches. Whether that suspension still stands is not resolved by anything published, and no IHUK Rule Bulletin has been obtained here.

Regional variation: NHL.com – 4 Nations Face-Off gives European players chance to speak native languages — source for Gustav Nyquist on differing coaching terminology, and for Sweden coach Sam Hallam's list of the words his players actually shout on the ice ("Over! Over!" "Here! Here!" "Open! Open!" "Stretch!"), which is also the citation for "stretch" as a documented spoken call. No source gives a call-by-call North American/European comparison, so that section is deliberately kept general — and note that the one piece of direct evidence available points to English being the shouted language at that level regardless of nationality.