>Scott Biggar said:
>I am kind of confused over a situation that came up this weekend during the
>championship game of the RIT tourney between RIT and Fredonia.  As seen on
>Hockey-L and other places, one of the rules changes this season dealt with
>coincidental minors.  It was my understanding that the compromise rule was that
>the first set of coincidental minors of a game would result on each team losing
>a skater, ie 4 on 4.  But that every set of coincidental minors after that
>would not result in the loss of a skater, ie each team would remain at 5 on 5,
>etc.
 
This is simple. Your understanding of the rule is incorrect.
 
Substitution is allowed in all cases of coincidental minor penalties, with
ONE exception: when ONE minor penalty is called against ONE player of each
team in a situation where neither team is shorthanded due to penalties.
 
 
 
----------
Arthur C. Mintz          [log in to unmask]          (607) 255-1487
Senior Project Leader
Cornell Information Technologies / Information Resources
 
"Luck is the residue of design." - Branch Rickey