Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Tue, 26 Jan 1999 01:02:05 +0100 |
Content-Type: | TEXT/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Greg Berge writes
> Why wouldn't it? Let's say you're the UNC rep on the committee. The only
> ice you've ever seen is in your drinks, and you couldn't care less if the
> hockey tourny is 16, 12, or 0. Skirting the issue of why you're voting at
> all, what would be the rationale for not simply accepting the hockey
> schools' consensus, whatever it was? There's obstinacy I suppose, but I
> would think the political log-rolling instinct would be far stronger.
I assume the reason they'd vote against it would be that 16/52 is still above the
NC$$'s official maxmum for percentage of teams in the tournament. You know,
"the rule of law" and all that.
John Whelan, Cornell '91
[log in to unmask]
http://www.amurgsval.org/joe/
"We've got a whole mess of penalties" -- Cornell PA Announcer
Arthur Mintz, after the Cornell-Union brawl 1998 December 4
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey; send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.
|
|
|