The discussion of the third penalty in the SLU-Princeton game reminds me of the situation at the end of the Cornell-Brown game this weekend. In the final minute, Cornell was up 6-4 and had two men in the box, while Brown had one. Brown had also pulled their goalie, giving them a 5-3 skaters advantage. At that point, Cornell took *another* penalty, and the man simply went to the box and was replaced on the ice (his penalty time would not queue up until one of the others expired). And I realized that Cornell could basically do *anything* short of a game DQ (which would have consequences in the next game) with impunity. They had only about 45 seconds to kill, but were in a potentially dangerous (two men down) situation. Does anybody see any reason why the Cornell players could not just tackle, hook, and hold their way through the last minute, perhaps picking up a ludicrous number of penalties but never affecting their on-ice strength? Heck, it would have given Jason Kendall a reason to get back in the game... :-) (C'mon now, only kidding and you know it.) - Greg HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey; send information to [log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.