Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lowell @ Vermont, 2/28 and 3/1: Let the games commence!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Lowell @ Vermont, 2/28 and 3/1: Let the games commence!

    Originally posted by HawkUnderground View Post
    Disagreeing with someone about a hockey call is one thing but this is just one of numerous times you've taken a shot at not only the school I graduated from, but the city I grew up in. Class is not always something found in sports debate, rarely ever in actuality but how about you take it easy. Lowell's always played a tough style and with it comes plays like Holmstrom's and Arnold's. I may not think it was as bad as you did, and I certainly think that penalties were warranted, but no team in HE or the any of the others haven't had moments like that where temps got too hot.
    If I make it down to Tsonga for the QF's I'll bring you a big box of tissues and an apology note for hurting your feelings. I'm sorry.

    All teams get hot under the collars, I've never said differently. This particular game it happened to be Arnold and Holstrom and just Lomberg from ME they should get an appropriate penalty. If it were a UVM player I'd say the same thing. You can play good and hard without playing dirty. No reason for that kind of BS.

    So I suppose if Hamilton and Paliotta took a run at Hellebuyck and just flat out plowed into him after the whistle it would be alright then with you guys because everyone gets a little hot under the collar and hey that's hockey...
    Originally posted by Hokydad
    Maine will be better this year relative to rankings than BC will be this year

    Comment


    • Re: Lowell @ Vermont, 2/28 and 3/1: Let the games commence!

      Originally posted by jcarter7669 View Post
      Sorry my bad... no one is crying over the officiating as it relates to the incident that is the topic of discussion. But yes, if you go back through all the pages you could find a few instances of it, especially regarding the linesman. I figured most people would understand and other then you and Patronick everyone else did... it's like you guys share a brain, which may explain why you both act like you only have half of one...
      Well, you (and a few others) were whining that there should have been supplemental discipline for the "incident". That sounds like complaining that the refs didn't get it right. Then again, that would be the logical conclusion and I wouldn't expect you to apply logic to any discussion.
      Charter Member of darin's "UML Seven"

      "I just hate Boston College to be perfectly honest'' -Ken Dorsey
      "It's time for my favorite NCAA tradition ... that's right, rooting against BC!" -Bill Simmons

      Comment


      • Re: Lowell @ Vermont, 2/28 and 3/1: Let the games commence!

        Originally posted by jcarter7669 View Post

        So I suppose if Hamilton and Paliotta took a run at Hellebuyck and just flat out plowed into him after the whistle it would be alright then with you guys because everyone gets a little hot under the collar and hey that's hockey...
        Sure, because 2 guys running a goalie after the whistle is the same as a collision in the corner at the buzzer.
        Charter Member of darin's "UML Seven"

        "I just hate Boston College to be perfectly honest'' -Ken Dorsey
        "It's time for my favorite NCAA tradition ... that's right, rooting against BC!" -Bill Simmons

        Comment


        • Re: Lowell @ Vermont, 2/28 and 3/1: Let the games commence!

          Originally posted by ScottK View Post
          Well, you (and a few others) were whining that there should have been supplemental discipline for the "incident". That sounds like complaining that the refs didn't get it right. Then again, that would be the logical conclusion and I wouldn't expect you to apply logic to any discussion.
          I think supplemental discipline is the league's territory, not the refs.

          Comment


          • Re: Lowell @ Vermont, 2/28 and 3/1: Let the games commence!

            Originally posted by ScottK View Post
            Well, you (and a few others) were whining that there should have been supplemental discipline for the "incident". That sounds like complaining that the refs didn't get it right. Then again, that would be the logical conclusion and I wouldn't expect you to apply logic to any discussion.
            That would be an assumption, not a logical conclusion. A logical conclusion would first rule out other possibilities... like maybe the refs were turned the other way and not observing the ruckus, or maybe in their opinion it wasn't required or they just figured who cares the game is over. Bertanga has a mechanism in place to address such circumstances... to assert that it should be used does not require ref bashing. For example, UMO's lomberg was penalized, the refs never saw it... that's not their fault but the league took corrective action to ensure it did not go unpunished.
            Originally posted by Hokydad
            Maine will be better this year relative to rankings than BC will be this year

            Comment


            • Re: Lowell @ Vermont, 2/28 and 3/1: Let the games commence!

              Originally posted by ScottK View Post
              Sure, because 2 guys running a goalie after the whistle is the same as a collision in the corner at the buzzer.

              As far as rules are concerned two guys running a player is the same as two guys running a player, position is irrelvant. So Yes, I am glad to see were are making progress here.
              Originally posted by Hokydad
              Maine will be better this year relative to rankings than BC will be this year

              Comment


              • Re: Lowell @ Vermont, 2/28 and 3/1: Let the games commence!

                I find it funny that no one has thought to post this side of the story.

                How dumb is it to give the team you are most likely going to face in your next games another reason
                to really want to beat you. I think UML's coach should be more mad at the players for that then anything
                else.

                Hope those two guys have eyes in the back of thier heads if VT plays them.
                New Arena New Arena where for art thou New Arena

                Comment


                • Re: Lowell @ Vermont, 2/28 and 3/1: Let the games commence!

                  Originally posted by Cat lover View Post
                  I find it funny that no one has thought to post this side of the story.

                  How dumb is it to give the team you are most likely going to face in your next games another reason
                  to really want to beat you. I think UML's coach should be more mad at the players for that then anything
                  else.

                  Hope those two guys have eyes in the back of thier heads if VT plays them.
                  Well if Rob "Mad Dog" Hamilton has anything to do with it...

                  Comment


                  • Re: Lowell @ Vermont, 2/28 and 3/1: Let the games commence!

                    Originally posted by jcarter7669 View Post
                    As far as rules are concerned two guys running a player is the same as two guys running a player, position is irrelvant. So Yes, I am glad to see were are making progress here.
                    Except that there are different rules for goalies. So, position is not irrelevant.

                    Rule 43 - Charging

                    A player shall not charge or otherwise foul a goalkeeper while the
                    goalkeeper is within the crease or privileged area (see 71.2).

                    PENALTY—Minor or major at the discretion of the referee. A game
                    misconduct or disqualification may be assessed at the discretion of the
                    referee.
                    Charter Member of darin's "UML Seven"

                    "I just hate Boston College to be perfectly honest'' -Ken Dorsey
                    "It's time for my favorite NCAA tradition ... that's right, rooting against BC!" -Bill Simmons

                    Comment


                    • Re: Lowell @ Vermont, 2/28 and 3/1: Let the games commence!

                      Originally posted by ScottK View Post
                      Except that there are different rules for goalies. So, position is not irrelevant.
                      I've no idea what you are even debating anymore. You've moved the goalposts as far as they can go. They won't go any further.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Lowell @ Vermont, 2/28 and 3/1: Let the games commence!

                        Originally posted by BTV802 View Post
                        I've no idea what you are even debating anymore. You've moved the goalposts as far as they can go. They won't go any further.
                        I'm not the one that moved them. Your pal jcarter is the one who compared the end of the game with 2 UVM players "plowing into Hellebuyck after the whistle."
                        Charter Member of darin's "UML Seven"

                        "I just hate Boston College to be perfectly honest'' -Ken Dorsey
                        "It's time for my favorite NCAA tradition ... that's right, rooting against BC!" -Bill Simmons

                        Comment


                        • Re: Lowell @ Vermont, 2/28 and 3/1: Let the games commence!

                          Originally posted by ScottK View Post
                          I'm not the one that moved them. Your pal jcarter is the one who compared the end of the game with 2 UVM players "plowing into Hellebuyck after the whistle."
                          Could care less if he chose to use Hellebuyck as an example. He could have used any player on the ice as an example, still wouldn't make what happened ok.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by BTV802 View Post
                            Could care less if he chose to use Hellebuyck as an example. He could have used any player on the ice as an example, still wouldn't make what happened ok.
                            That kind of stuff happens at the end of almost every game I have ever attended. . I'm not sure why we are still talking about it.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Lowell @ Vermont, 2/28 and 3/1: Let the games commence!

                              As I saw the play unfolding I thought “oh crap this is going to get ugly.” I won't make an excuse for Holmstrom’s or Arnold’s actions because every time I see an opponent pull one of those stunts I get PO’d. I cannot agree with your hyperbole JCarter; the Riverhawks aren’t a bunch of unsportsmanlike goons. Holmstrom plays with some edge; McGrath toes the Little Ball of Hate Lite line but Arnold’s one of the last guys I would have expected to be involved. Their reaction to Paliotta’s move back towards the boards was so quick and intentional it made me wonder if something had occurred between him and one of them (or a Lowell player) during either game that I'd missed (again…not condoning).

                              Regardless, I think the penalty fit the crime and that should be the end of it. I don’t know if it was egregious enough to give the Cats more incentive to beat Lowell than they would have otherwise but it certainly appears to have stoked the flames of the fan base.

                              PS – Thank you UVM for the game feed; I enjoyed watching both games from the friendly confines of home.
                              Last edited by ULowell'81; 03-03-2014, 05:03 PM.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by BTV802 View Post
                                Well if Rob "Mad Dog" Hamilton has anything to do with it...
                                Hmmm, I've always known him as "Raging" Rob Hamilton....

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X