> "When a player's uniform has blood on it (whether it is the player's own blood
> or someone else's blood), the official must stop the game at the earliest
> possible time and make the player leave the game to have the uniform evaluated
> by medical personnel. If the team's medical personnel determine that blood has
> saturated the uniform, the player must change the bloodied part of the
> uniform. If saturation has not occurred, the player may continue to wear the
> uniform.
>
 
  I suppose this is somewhat reasonable, and inevitable following the basketball
rules...  It's gonna mean some more stoppages, though... (Is it saturated? I
think it's saturated.  No, I think it's only 90% saturated.  Should we run
tests?)
 
> * Added a new rule (Rule 6-30-f) so that if a player intentionally is pushed
> offside, the offside violation shall be nullified and play will continue.
>
 
  I really like this rule, though I agree it probably won't be called all that
often.  I hope the NHL follows suit with this.
 
> * Voted to allow the Hockey East Conference and the Western Collegiate Hockey
> Association to experiment with shoot-outs to decide games that are tied after
> overtime.
>
 
 
  Ohhhhhhh nononononononononononono
 
   After a bunch of logical and/or good rule changes, why this one?  Shootouts
are not the solution to tie games.  The only hopeful thing I see here is
'experiment.'  Maybe this is only for exhibition games, or maybe they'll still
just call it a tie but have the shootout anyway and see at the end of the season
how it would have changed things.   I certainly hope the NHL does *not* follow
suit on this one.
 
---
+---------------------------------------------------+
|Carl Lindberg           Colgate University  '94    |
[log in to unmask]                          |
[log in to unmask]                       |
[log in to unmask]    (NeXTMail welcome)  |
+---------------------------------------------------+