Mark Lewin writes:
 
>A question arose during the 3rd period that no-one around us could answer.
>
>Mid-way through the 3rd period, an RPI player broke in on Shtrom. Shtrom
>flopped down and, although he never touched the puck, forced the shot wide
>missing the post by inches. The puck rolled slowly to the corner and
>Shtrom was flat on the ice with the RPI skater quickly chasing down
>the rolling puck. Just then, a retreating Union defenseman fell
>to the ice in the slot, slid past Shtrom and into the net, dislodging it
>causing a stoppage in play. There were no other RPI players around so he
>couldn't have been taken down nor could he have been checked into the net.
>But, from where I sit, (and I had a very clear view), it seemed as if the
>Union skater just lost an edge and went down. Either that or he was a REAL
>good actor. The fans started yelling for a delay of game call. They didn't
>get one. What's the rule on that? Did that constitute delay of game or does
>delay of game require the referee to conclude that delay was the intent of
>the player causing the delay? Inquiring minds want to know!!!
 
I think you've answered your own question. It has to be the judgement
of the referee that the player *intentionally* dove into the net and knocked
it off its moorings. I remember the situation and I don't see why Union
would need to get a whistle at the time since the scoring opportunity had
already gone by and there was no immediate threat of an RPI goal (which
could be another reason why no delay of game was called). Maybe they
were winded or just needed to kill some momentum RPI had, but it was
hard for me to see why they intentionally would have dislodged the net -
of course, I was at the opposite end of the ice, so it was hard to see much
of anything, anyway.
 
-Andy
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.