From the subject, I thought the Elves had gotten tossed and
would miss the Clarkson game tonight.  Don't tease me like that, Greg.
 
Greg Berge writes:
 
>Chris Craig wrote:
 
>> Mowers and his RiverHawk counterpart got something like triple-minors
>> and 10-minute misconducts, which shouldn't result in any suspensions
>> either.
 
>Which brings up the question of when you call a DQ.  Is it strictly a case
>of removing the player(s) from the game to avoid probable future mahem?  In
>that case, there's no point in imposing this penalty with less than 10 min
>remaining.  (Theoretically, you could call 2+ misconducts for that matter
>-- though has anybody ever seen that done?)
 
        Don't forget that there's the option of a game misconduct,
which gets someone off the ice for the duration, but doesn't carry the
suspension.  I think if a ref felt a double-misconduct (i.e., 20 min)
were justified, he'd just imopse the game misconduct.
 
        My impression is that DQs are used sparingly, since they're so
harsh.  Generally just for fighting.  (And arguably in the WCHA
they're not even used then, thanks to the "punching" major.)
 
                                        John Whelan, Cornell '91
                                        <[log in to unmask]>
        <http://www.cc.utah.edu/~jtw16960/jshock.html>
 
1997 Frozen Four: Sec 438, Row U, Seat 11
LET'S GO RED!
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.