The problem with treating on-ice incidents as punishable under the
law is that determining intent to harm is necessarily subjective and
not clear cut. Now certainly there are incidents where there is no
room for doubt - hitting someone well after the final buzzer would
probably qualify. But does a hit from behind always indicate intent
to harm or can it be more of an impulsive action?  Was Salei trying
to injure Modano? Maybe, but maybe not. (I didn't actually see the play -
just using the example.)
 
Putting on a hockey jersey doesn't mean an exemption from the law but
I think players should be given the benefit of the doubt when it comes
to on-ice actions that can be considered game related. A subjective
decision from a referee that sends a player to the box or the showers
isn't really a big deal. There should be clear evidence before sending
a guy to court.
 
Keith Kannenberg
Email: [log in to unmask]
Web: http://mae.cornell.edu/kannenb/
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.