> ...  For example, in 1988 and 1989 then-commish
> Stu Haskell handed down suspensions to players involved in brawls.
 
   Stu Haskell has lots of qualities I like to see in a commissioner.
 
   I'll just mention two.  First, Stu liked to be fair and consistent;
   to this end, he instituted a policy to the effect "if you get a game
   suspension (via NCAA playing rules), you may expect a second game
   from the league office".  Not every situation can be foreseen and
   planned for, but a few simple rules, consistently applied make for
   good relations.  (Too bad the Hockey East Acting Commish dropped the
   additional "league suspension" game.  Was it dropped before or after
   Jack Parker declared his suspended player would be back in their
   second game?  Hockey East led college hockey with that rule ...  to
   bad it now seems lost.  :-( ).
 
   Second, Stu liked "punishment" and "control" to come from the school,
   not the league.  When someone or something went awry, Stu would get
   on the telephone to that school's AD.  They'd make sure each knew the
   circumstances.  Stu expected the school to take action to address or
   remedy the problem, and the school knew if they didn't, then Stu
   would.  As Stu tells it, the schools' actions were often stronger
   than he would or could have taken.  And I'm sure the schools felt
   more comfortable dealing with the problems in-house.
 
cheers,
 
Wayne Smith
The College Hockey Discussion List administrator
Systems Group - CAPS              BITNET/CREN:  wts@maine
University of Maine System        internet:     [log in to unmask]