+ Ryan Robbins <[log in to unmask]> writes:
+
[text deleted]
+
+ After reading more about the situation, I now agree with the NCAA's
+ decision to suspend Ingraham for 14 games. A rule is a rule is a
+ rule. However, I disagree with Maine's having to forfeit the 14 games
+ Ingraham played in that semester. Of course, the forfeits mean noth-
+ ing because it was two seasons ago. It doesn't make sense to do that.
 
Huh?  If anything, I would find the forfeiture of games involving
ineligible players to be one of most sensible rules that the NC$$
employs.
 
I doubt very much that the NC$$ (or opposing schools for that matter)
would be for encouraging the use of ineligible players by letting
teams keep wins involving such players.
 
The loses may be "mean nothing" time-wise, but I doubt that Maine will
have a repeat of this situation for a long time to come, and the
forfeiture of those games (and with them, perhaps the Hockey East
championship for that season) is one of the reasons that I doubt it
will happen again.
 
adam
BU '89