(replying to my own post ... always a danger when someone argues with
himself!) ...
 
I agree with Tom Rowe ... the rules are unclear and have been interpreted
literally rather than looking at the *intent*.  In my mind, high sticks are
to be avoided.  The rules seem to support this.  The delayed whistle rule
*seems*, to me, to be there to keep the game going.  The assumption is that
if you high stick the puck "to an opponent", there is no harm and play is
to continue.
 
In this case, though, the defender apparently did not have *control* of the
puck.  Thus, maybe the rule should be changed from "to an opponent" to "to
the control of an opponent".
 
The High Sticks rules were changed from the 1999 to 2000 rulebook,
emphasizing violent stick work penalties (IMHO). Perhaps they should be
changed again or a new entry is needed in the "Interpretations" section of
the rulebook.
 
cheers,
 
Wayne T. Smith                             mailto:[log in to unmask]
Systems Group - UNET                 University of Maine System
Co-owner of the College Hockey mailing lists
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.