Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

WCHA 2019-20 season: We Can Do Better Than Two Bids and a First Round Exit

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

  • Shirtless Guy
    replied
    Re: WCHA 2019-20 season: We Can Do Better Than Two Bids and a First Round Exit

    Well I guess I thought I should make it official, with confirmation from UAH:

    Leave a comment:


  • FadeToBlack&Gold
    replied
    Re: WCHA 2019-20 season: We Can Do Better Than Two Bids and a First Round Exit

    Originally posted by purpleinnebraska View Post
    Look at some YouTube Scott Stevens videos. Those hits were overwhelmingly legal at the time, and now almost all of them would result in penalties. Is the game worse because of that shift? Some would say yes, but attendance and TV ratings would contradict that.
    A lot of Stevens' hits back then would get him suspended and fined today. Goes for a lot of other players, too.

    Leave a comment:


  • purpleinnebraska
    replied
    Re: WCHA 2019-20 season: We Can Do Better Than Two Bids and a First Round Exit

    Originally posted by MTUHuskies View Post
    I also have a hard time accepting that either of the two puck carriers was unsuspecting. What the hell do they think will happen when they skate the puck up the ice?

    Making a play on the puck is a valid argument when two opposing players are going for a loose puck. When one is in possession and control, delivering a clean check to the puck carrier should be an acceptable form of defence.

    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

    He may not be unsuspecting, but he's certainly defenseless. And I think the ref's perspective would be that if you as the hitter have left yourself where you can't even play the puck, it's not a clean check.
    Again, I don't view either of these 2 hits as "dirty." But I think there's a genuine concern about the long-term health of the college players, and the NCAA doesn't view it as enough to just say, "We don't tolerate fighting." They're trying to promote a game of skill. That will lead to a less physical game, but I think they view the tradeoff as acceptable.
    Look at some YouTube Scott Stevens videos. Those hits were overwhelmingly legal at the time, and now almost all of them would result in penalties. Is the game worse because of that shift? Some would say yes, but attendance and TV ratings would contradict that.

    Leave a comment:


  • MTUHuskies
    replied
    Re: WCHA 2019-20 season: We Can Do Better Than Two Bids and a First Round Exit

    Originally posted by purpleinnebraska View Post
    There's always the all-purpose charging call. And I think you're going to see more of that, particularly when the defender isn't making a play on the puck. Remember the point of emphasis: "Continued diligence is needed with regard to player safety rules, particularly contact to the head, contact against defenseless or unsuspecting players and hitting from behind."

    Of course it's a judgment call, but the refs are being pushed to make that judgment call in favor of player safety. Hockey is changing. Ten years ago, those are both good, clean hits. But today, with neither of those defenders making a play on a puck that is right in front of them, a call is more likely than not.
    I also have a hard time accepting that either of the two puck carriers was unsuspecting. What the hell do they think will happen when they skate the puck up the ice?

    Making a play on the puck is a valid argument when two opposing players are going for a loose puck. When one is in possession and control, delivering a clean check to the puck carrier should be an acceptable form of defence.

    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

    Leave a comment:


  • purpleinnebraska
    replied
    Re: WCHA 2019-20 season: We Can Do Better Than Two Bids and a First Round Exit

    Originally posted by MTUHuskies View Post
    What fan wouldn't WANT their team to get a 5 minute PP? A major penalty should only be assessed when there is attempt to injure, or direct contact to the head. I saw neither in the Buckley video.

    Some people on these forums have also suggested Buckley should have been given a minor for interference. I don't agree with that either because the other guy was in possession of the puck.

    The only plausible infraction I saw was possibly a minor for elbowing. I would argue against that because although his arm came up a bit, initial contact was to the body and Buckley's elbow stayed under his opponent's arm and did not make contact with the head.

    My opinions are based solely on the video shared here. I do not know if the officials had different views to consider.

    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
    There's always the all-purpose charging call. And I think you're going to see more of that, particularly when the defender isn't making a play on the puck. Remember the point of emphasis: "Continued diligence is needed with regard to player safety rules, particularly contact to the head, contact against defenseless or unsuspecting players and hitting from behind."

    Of course it's a judgment call, but the refs are being pushed to make that judgment call in favor of player safety. Hockey is changing. Ten years ago, those are both good, clean hits. But today, with neither of those defenders making a play on a puck that is right in front of them, a call is more likely than not.

    Leave a comment:


  • MTUHuskies
    replied
    Re: WCHA 2019-20 season: We Can Do Better Than Two Bids and a First Round Exit

    Originally posted by pdt1081 View Post
    What I see is the Tech player's arm/elbow going up before contact is made. The LSSU player kept his arm down throughout his check. The elbow going up simply looks worse and could be argued that he was trying to make contact with the head.

    That being said, if I were a fan of the player receiving either check, I'd WANT a 5 called.
    What fan wouldn't WANT their team to get a 5 minute PP? A major penalty should only be assessed when there is attempt to injure, or direct contact to the head. I saw neither in the Buckley video.

    Some people on these forums have also suggested Buckley should have been given a minor for interference. I don't agree with that either because the other guy was in possession of the puck.

    The only plausible infraction I saw was possibly a minor for elbowing. I would argue against that because although his arm came up a bit, initial contact was to the body and Buckley's elbow stayed under his opponent's arm and did not make contact with the head.

    My opinions are based solely on the video shared here. I do not know if the officials had different views to consider.

    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

    Leave a comment:


  • pdt1081
    replied
    Originally posted by John J. MacInnes View Post
    That's the biggest problem - the inconsistency. The actual outcome is the opposite of purpleinnebraska's neutral analysis. I thought Buckley was just out of control when he made his hit, and Henriksen was much more deliberate. How both Likens and Klosowski looked at that one and didn't up it to a 5 is baffling and more than a little angering for me.
    What I see is the Tech player's arm/elbow going up before contact is made. The LSSU player kept his arm down throughout his check. The elbow going up simply looks worse and could be argued that he was trying to make contact with the head.

    That being said, if I were a fan of the player receiving either check, I'd WANT a 5 called.

    Leave a comment:


  • John J. MacInnes
    replied
    Re: WCHA 2019-20 season: We Can Do Better Than Two Bids and a First Round Exit

    Originally posted by purpleinnebraska View Post
    I see much more head contact on the Lake State hit. That said, I think in general there's a push to penalize those who are making no real play on the puck. I'd go 5 for the Lake State hit, 2 on the Tech hit for interference.
    That's the biggest problem - the inconsistency. The actual outcome is the opposite of purpleinnebraska's neutral analysis. I thought Buckley was just out of control when he made his hit, and Henriksen was much more deliberate. How both Likens and Klosowski looked at that one and didn't up it to a 5 is baffling and more than a little angering for me.

    Leave a comment:


  • manurespreader
    replied
    Re: WCHA 2019-20 season: We Can Do Better Than Two Bids and a First Round Exit

    Originally posted by MTUHuskies View Post
    How do you come up with interference when the guy getting hit is in possession of the puck?

    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
    The same way you call hooking on the person who is in front!

    Leave a comment:


  • manurespreader
    replied
    Re: WCHA 2019-20 season: We Can Do Better Than Two Bids and a First Round Exit

    Dear UND.... you could have done College Hockey a favor by playing Hunstville in Nashville. It would have meant a lot to them and would have given them visibility and helped their program that could use it. But NO, what do you do? You play Penn State? what a bunch of Schmucks. I hope you lose.

    Leave a comment:


  • giwan
    replied
    Re: WCHA 2019-20 season: We Can Do Better Than Two Bids and a First Round Exit

    Easily both 2's

    Leave a comment:


  • MTUHuskies
    replied
    Re: WCHA 2019-20 season: We Can Do Better Than Two Bids and a First Round Exit

    Originally posted by purpleinnebraska View Post
    I see much more head contact on the Lake State hit. That said, I think in general there's a push to penalize those who are making no real play on the puck. I'd go 5 for the Lake State hit, 2 on the Tech hit for interference.

    That said, this isn't easy, and I tend to cut the refs some slack when it looks like they're being too severe. There are too many horror stories of permanently disabled former players.
    How do you come up with interference when the guy getting hit is in possession of the puck?

    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

    Leave a comment:


  • purpleinnebraska
    replied
    Re: WCHA 2019-20 season: We Can Do Better Than Two Bids and a First Round Exit

    Originally posted by Shirtless Guy View Post


    What do you think?
    I see much more head contact on the Lake State hit. That said, I think in general there's a push to penalize those who are making no real play on the puck. I'd go 5 for the Lake State hit, 2 on the Tech hit for interference.

    That said, this isn't easy, and I tend to cut the refs some slack when it looks like they're being too severe. There are too many horror stories of permanently disabled former players.

    Leave a comment:


  • Shirtless Guy
    replied
    Re: WCHA 2019-20 season: We Can Do Better Than Two Bids and a First Round Exit



    What do you think?

    Leave a comment:


  • gfmorris
    replied
    Re: WCHA 2019-20 season: We Can Do Better Than Two Bids and a First Round Exit

    It's time for a change in Huntsville.

    GFM

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X