CONGRATS to the Bloomington Blades for the win . It was AWESOME!!!

Congrats to Toledo Storm Pee Wee "A". Tried real hard and went 4-1 for the weekend. Played Butler County hard and tried to knock them out but didnt prevail. But Toledo did manage to win out the rest and take the "Consolation cup" against the 3rd seeded Columbus Flames. I was a bit disapointed for the kids that the BTHL had nothing for them. I dont think a trophey was in order but maybe a medal of somesort. Just a run down rink and a long drive home The boys were also real happy to knock out the Columbus Blue Jackets. They never found a way to beat them until this weekend.

Who was the Toledo jerk shining the laser pointer in the eyes of the Columbus goalie? This is the lowest thing I've ever heard of in travel sports. You're absolutely sick if you have any pride whatsoever about the outcome of that game.

P.S. I have no connection whatsoever to either Columbus or the PeeWee division.

quote:

---

Originally posted by walodnoc:
Who was the Toledo jerk shining the laser pointer in the eyes of the Columbus goalie?

---

WOW!! I have never heard of someone going this far. It is one thing to be loud and obnoixous, even yelling at other kids, but to do something to physically interfere with the game? Can this be true? If yes, shouldn't have tournament officials been notified and the person removed from the rink or even more drastic have any goals prior to that time disallowed. Is this against the Columbus Flames team or the CBJ. This is so over the top, it feels like an urban legend. If it was the CBJ, I can try to confirm its accuracy.

Commish, any insight?

It involved the consolation final with the Flames and the source is a formal complaint filed with the league by the goalie's parents. The complaint alleged that the game was stopped in the second period after an official noticed the red laser dot on the goalie's jersey. Other than putting a stop to it, there was apparently no other action taken.

quote:

---

Originally posted by walodnoc:
It involved the consolation final with the Flames and the source is a formal complaint filed with the league by the goalie's parents. The complaint alleged that the game was stopped in the second period after an official noticed the red laser dot on the goalie's jersey. Other than putting a stop to it, there was apparently no other action taken.

---

That is correct. Except I heard that the dot was on the back of one of the Toledos players. But I have no other facts then this also. I am sure someone will look into the situation and get the facts.

[This message was edited by Y.H.F. Commissioner on March 02, 2004 at 11:38 AM.]

Am I seeing things or was the Commish's first response to the effect that he was at the game and did not see anything, and then a few minutes later he reposted and changed his response to "That is correct. . ." ?

I'm not certainly not accusing or implying that anyone is guilty of the charge, but my question is whether the Commish apparently having been at the game with the Toledo parents knows more about this than disclosed so far.

No need to answer. If there is a shred of truth to this, the next round of questions to Toledo will be coming from the League Board, the Mid-Am District, and hopefully the Montgomery County prosecutor.

WOW (to quote myself ) Can someone enlighten me on the complaint process with the BTHL? I am assuming that there is some form of disciplinary committee. Now that the season is over, what kind of actions could it actually take? As a goalie parent, I have a couple ideas--think Turkish prison--if this turns out to be true and not some kid messing around. Do the minutes or findings of this committee get published on the BTHL website? If it was found to be true, does the Storm have it's own process to deal with this?

My son is in his first year of travel hockey and my experience outside of that with the sport is 20 years old at this point so I apologize if I am shocked by someone physically interfering with a player on the ice--yelling is bad enough but this is another level. (Again, assuming it is true.) Innocent until proven guilty, but I am just reacting to the possiblity that such a thing could occur even if it did not occur in this instance. (Insert any other legal disclaimer!!)