Not having seen the game, it would be inappropriate to offer my
reactions, but before we all settle into our summer routines,
I'd like the friends of hockey to consider whether a few
relatively minor changes in rules might not (a) reduce the
number of instances where a referee calls (or might call)
a penalty, and (b) coincidentally reduce the complaints about
inconsistency of officiating.
     First, why not define "elbowing" as striking an opponent
above the armpits with any part of the hand or arm.  Any other
use of the arm to strike the torso would be ignored.  The call
would become more objective than with the currrent rules (where
an elbow of first to the face mask is ignored one minute and
called the next...).  One might even forsee the time when all
uniforms feature a band of contrasting color from the armpit
to the neckline, to help the myopic ref see where the elbow
or fist was applied.
   While I'm using bandwidth, let me ask that you consider
the advantages of placing a white dot (approx. 0.5 inch
diameter) in the center of the puck.  The visual system
evolved to pick up such moving targets and anything that
helps the uninitiated follow the puck (including on
TV) will help the game.
     I hope no one will object to changing the nature
of the puck!  When I was a youngster, there was an extra
skater on the ice (the rover position).  Eliminating
that player really helped the game.  We also used to
have the rule that the puck must be carried across
every line, and changing that rule eliminated half
of the stoppages of play.  So a change in the visual
detection qualities of the puck would be a minor
modification!
     I've enjoyed greatly the expert comments and
colorful observations on the LIST.  As we all know,
hockey is great, from pro to SQUIRT.