After reading this, I have to conclude that whoever writes these rules probably came over from Congress (or maybe the IRS).  I would suggest two things (as if anyone who could do anything would ever read this):

1.  Attempt to injure is grossly misleading as defined.  Any reasonable person would read that phrase as implying there was an INTENT to injure.  Surely a better phrase could be found.

2.  Why on earth does the commissioner have the power to increase penalty minutes but no power to reduce them?  If the on-ice official makes a call that results in a DQ but tapes later prove that the call was in error, this means the situation cannot be fixed.  If a commissioner can fix an insufficient on-ice call, why not be able to fix an overly-aggressive on-ice call?

TR

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alexis Wollstadt [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 8:20 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: HE Findings in relation to Exter/Eaves collision...
>
>
> ...not meant to stir the pot or rehash old news, but just to
> provide information on Hockey East's reaction to and findings
> of the accident.
>
> http://www.hockeyeastonline.com/presarch/0303/mar11sr.html
>
> ~Lexy~
>
> Check out UMaine hockey photos here!
> http://www.photoreflect.com/scripts/prsm.dll?photographerpage?
client=03SS