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.