Error during command authentication.

Error - unable to initiate communication with LISTSERV (errno=111). The server is probably not started.

On Fri, 1 Mar 91 09:20:44 CST Bill Beaulac said:
>
>	The major advantage that BC gets out of the layout of the benches
>	seems to me to have more to do with the placement of the penaltybox.
>	After a shorthanded situation the BC player swings out of the box,
>	onto the bench, while his replacement steps onto the ice in the
>	defending zone from the other end of the bench.  The visiting team's
>	player would have to skate the width of the ice.  If, per chance,
>	BC has possession of the puck at the time the penalty expires they
>	have a man wide open behind the visitors defensemen.  Clear advantage
>	for the home team throughout the ENTIRE game as opposed to maybe the
>	final minute or so.
>
>>  disadvantage goes to BC.  Why they spent over $30 million on such a
>beautiful
>>  facility and screwed up the placement of the team benches I'll never know.
>
>	I'm surprised this is not against the rules of rink specifications.
 
The NCAA rule book contains two suggested layouts for team benches,
penalty boxes, timekeepers stations, etc. Strangely enough, one of
them (benches on opposite side of the rinks) places the home penalty
box right next to the home bench. However, in both of them, whether
the players benches are on the same side of the rink or on opposite
sides, the benches are supposed to run from the blue line to the red
line. Neither team is supposed to have the kind of advantage that
BC enjoys.