Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Wed, 15 Mar 1995 05:29:12 -0700 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On Wed, 15 Mar 1995, David Blackburn wrote:
> Brown's
> penalties are almost always roughing, hitting from behind, hitting after
> the whistle, charging, etc. *not* "clutch and grab" penalties like
> interference and holding (except when they retalitory aginst Princeton's
> holding).
If this is true I'm glad Princeton won, you've basically said that Brown
are a bunch of cheap shots. I am not saying this, I haven't seen them
play at all this year.
> That's it. I'm out. I hope I convinced *somebody* of what our argument
> is and that we are not whining because we didn't win.
I'm sorry, but that is what it sounds like. I've kept out of this
because I have only seen one ECAC game this year, not involving either
team, but it seems to me that if Brown was so skilled they would have won
in a three game series. A good team always has some team that may not
look good on paper but matches up well with them. This is the case for
Merrimack with BU. (Mike, I am not saying here that Merrimack is not a
good team :-)) It seems Princeton knew what to do to beat Brown, and
Brown was unwilling or unable to adjust.
Arthur Berman [log in to unmask]
GO BU!!!
|
|
|