The discussion of the third penalty in the SLU-Princeton game
reminds me of the situation at the end of the Cornell-Brown
game this weekend.  In the final minute, Cornell was up 6-4
and had two men in the box, while Brown had one.  Brown had also
pulled their goalie, giving them a 5-3 skaters advantage.
 
At that point, Cornell took *another* penalty, and the man simply
went to the box and was replaced on the ice (his penalty time would not
queue up until one of the others expired).
 
And I realized that Cornell could basically do *anything* short of a
game DQ (which would have consequences in the next game) with impunity.
They had only about 45 seconds to kill, but were in a potentially
dangerous (two men down) situation.
 
Does anybody see any reason why the Cornell players could not just
tackle, hook, and hold their way through the last minute, perhaps
picking up a ludicrous number of penalties but never affecting
their on-ice strength?
 
Heck, it would have given Jason Kendall a reason to get back in the
game... :-)   (C'mon now, only kidding and you know it.)
 
 
- Greg
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.