After reading the articles over the past few days, and seeing both BC
games this past weekend, I agree with mike that the excessive penalty
calling is a regional problem.  At the SLU-BC, there weren't many
penalties called at all.  There was some holding that I thought would
have been called in light of the new emphasis, but no such calls.  Even
the icing calls with respect to the red line weren't always made.  At
the Clarkson-BC game, there were more penalties called, especially in
the first period.  With my line of sight, from the other end, I didn't
not think that there were any weak calls.  I really couldn't see the
slashing call against Clarkson's goalie Chris Rogles.  I believe that
some of the Clarkson's players frustration came from wanting to play a
more physical game than Earle wanted to allow.  At least Earle was
consistent in his penalty calling, that counts for a lot.  He did let
some mutual holding go that was boarder line.  In contrast to the previous
night, the lines men (Caruso was one) were making every icing call
according to the new rule.  The two major penalties and game DQs were
correct calls and everyone knew it.  About the Colgate-Northeastern
game, I talked to my roommate's dad (who played defense for RPI in
1950-1953).  He said that the ref swallowed his whistle and allowed
the two teams, especially NE, to bang it out.  He said that it was
one of the hardest hitting games he's seen in a long while.  So, I believe
that there is a regional discrepency in the calling of penalties.
Hopefully, the problem will be quickly solved out west before too much
harm is done.
 
Mike Zak
Clarkson '87, '91,...
"Maui no ka oi!"