There is an article in the Minnesota Daily today on the appeal. (Tried to up-
load it but some server is down :-( )
 
Anyway, it states in the article that the reason Woog thinks the suspension
wasn't valid was because McAlpine's hands didn't leave his stick. This is a
new one to me....what difference would it make?
 
I will quote from the article:
Referee Robin Anderson said McAlpine's hand left his stick when he returned a
hit from Hill.<MTU's Jeff Hill> Had McAlpine kept both hands on the stick, as
Woog maintains he did after seeing the video, the hit should have drawn only
a minor penalty. Hill was not penalized at all on the play. end quote
 
I'm really confused now. Wouldn't a hit holding the stick be just as bad?
I might have to find time this weekend and get to the library to see if they
have a copy of the NC$$ rule book and read up on MAJOR penalties and DQ's.
Unless someone (Mike? Keith? Kenny Z?) can clue us in here what the problem is.
 
The person they are appealing to was at the game. Head of officials for the
WCHA Ron Foyt was officiating (if you could call it that...) at the game.
 
The article also says that this is the FIRST time in his nine-year career at
Minnesota that Woog has ever filed an appeal. I don't hold out any hope that
they will grant the appeal however.
 
-Carol
 
Carol S. White                            BITNET: c-whit@uminn1
University of Minnesota        internet:[log in to unmask]
Office of the Registrar
(612) 625-8517                                    GO Gophers!!!