When the CCHA tried the 2 ref system, it was HORRIBLE.  Calls were very
inconsistent and it always seemed as though the 2 refs were trying to
keep up with the other one.  When Bowling Green played in the tournament
at Minnesota over Christmas break, one of the games ( BG-New Hampshire I
believe) one ref called all of his penalties against BG and the other
called his against New Hampshire.  Ok, it wasn't like that on EVERY call,
but it was on the majority.  I would have no problem whatsoever with the
2 ref system if they made their calls on a consistent basis ( besides
being consistently BAD).  With what the CCHA has seen of the system, why
should they change?
 
Alex
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
On Tue, 23 Jan 1996, Cheryl A. Morris wrote:
 
> When I watch a CCHA game, of course taped on slow play with all those co
> commercials for RV outlets on the Upper Peninsula, I also seem to be asking why
> didn't the refs call that? or he got away with only two minutes for that? (John
> Hauessler has probably by now branded me as a fan of wimp hockey.)  But I do
> have this impression that the CCHA calls fewer penalties than the ECAC and HE.
> Can't generalize for the WCHA--I just don't see them enough.  Coudl be a more
> physical style of play for the CCHA, but it could also be related to the one
> ref system.
>
> What's the consensus?  Pros and con?  And why does the CCHA stick with a system
> that probably disadvantages them come tournament time?  Any takers?
> *********************************************************************************
> Brian Morris                     RPI Engineers--it's a new year
> [log in to unmask]
>
> HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
> [log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.
>
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.