(replying to my own post ... always a danger when someone argues with himself!) ... I agree with Tom Rowe ... the rules are unclear and have been interpreted literally rather than looking at the *intent*. In my mind, high sticks are to be avoided. The rules seem to support this. The delayed whistle rule *seems*, to me, to be there to keep the game going. The assumption is that if you high stick the puck "to an opponent", there is no harm and play is to continue. In this case, though, the defender apparently did not have *control* of the puck. Thus, maybe the rule should be changed from "to an opponent" to "to the control of an opponent". The High Sticks rules were changed from the 1999 to 2000 rulebook, emphasizing violent stick work penalties (IMHO). Perhaps they should be changed again or a new entry is needed in the "Interpretations" section of the rulebook. cheers, Wayne T. Smith mailto:[log in to unmask] Systems Group - UNET University of Maine System Co-owner of the College Hockey mailing lists HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey; send information to [log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.