Finally I have been able to strike a nerve.  I have received two letters in a
short time in response to my criticism of the All-Star selections.
 Unfortunately they do not address my comments but instead point out why
their friend was deserving of the honor they received.  Look any argument
could be made for any one of the selections, as I said before they are
totally subjective.
 
But my point is that they are totally subjective in some instances.  I like
Laurie Belliveau, I think she is one of the nicest kindest people I have ever
met.  I also think that she is an excellent goalie, but the thing that people
have not address is where is the pressure.  I was really surprised (and
pleasantly I might add) at the over all high quality of  the goalies on the
women's hockey teams.  All of the goalies were extremely talented.  However,
the true test is how do they perform under pressure, I don't mean just the
pressure of volume but when the game is on the line. Unfortunately, Laurie
Belliveau because of the nature of her team was never afforded the
opportunity to show what if anything she could do.  What Laurie did at St.
Mark's is irrelevant in making the years ECAC selections.  The award is for
the year not for a lifetime.   I agree that as was pointed out to me that if
Laurie was one of the leaders in save percentage, then based upon the number
of shots she was the logical choice, but that is not the case.
 
Before I end are there any Barbara Gordon fans out there, I think she is the
true tragedy of this whole senario.  Will somebody explain to me how the
leading scorer is the player of the year and 1st line player and her line
mate who has equally great statistics in fewer games is totally ignored.
 Taint fair McGee.
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.