In a message dated 97-12-02 12:29:45 EST, you write:
 
<< Seems like there should be a more severe penalty when a
 >  serious injury results from the hit. >>
 
How can this be justified?
 
Does this mean that when Dan Ronan hits someone in open ice with one of his
patented hip checks, perfectly legal (as of now!!), and he twists an ankle
because his head was glued to the puck, and not straight ahead like it should
be, that Ronan should be given 5 + game misconduct, because the opponent got
injured!!??
 
I think not.  Theres been alot of BU bashing here, and I dont agree with it.
 I was at both the Clarkson, and St. L. game this past weekend and what I saw
was a much more chippy game with Clarkson, I feel, simply because thats the
way the competition chose to play BU.  Ive been to all but one of the home
games and do not feel that they are a cheap team (Notoriously
classless!!!!!!?????  I think thats a bit out of line!!!).  The play was
dictated by the visting team in this instance.. as it often is.. whether it
be a flat game or an up and down game.
 
Anyway, my $0.02.  Couldnt let BU get slammed anymore
 
Lance Harry
Union '92
BU '94
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.