BU: '22-'23 Season: Sail The Boats

[chickod]

Thanks!! I guess I missed them saying that. I'm really surprised by that call though. We should have blown the whistle so we're taking away the goal. That doesn't happen often, does it?

You're right. Hence my comments about replay. Ten years ago that would have been a goal because play was not stopped on the ice and there would have been no review. So, hence the argument that "See, that's why they have replay. To get the call right."

Which doesn't mean I still have to like it...but it is what it is. We are circumcising ants and eventually the games are going to grind to a halt becuase EVERYTHING is being questioned. I have noticed a tremendous increase this year, especially in the NCAA Women's Basketball. EVERY call is getting questioned and it's just getting ridiculous. The games are starting to become unwatchable. A half hour to play the last two minutes. Humans make mistakes...it's part of the game. If you put yourself in a position where one call costs you the game after an hour of playing time, that's on you. In my opinion. I get the "get it right" thing, but if you can see where this is going; there is no limit.

[chickod]

To add to that, I also think the puck was "freed up" after Larkin pushed the goalies pad back toward the net. So it took contact with the goalie to even free up the puck to score it. My wife saw it different, but that's what I saw. So your whole banging on the goalie's pad point.

Yeah....that's why I said the "second bang" because it WAS frozen until he dislodged it. But the whistle (as far as I know from watching hockey for 58 years) is supposed to be blown when the referee "loses sight of the puck." I agree that it was "loose" but by the time he banged his pad the second time, it was under the pad and there's was no way the referee could have seen it.

[chickod]

Why was WM goal called back? Goalie interference? Announcers are lousy. Nice goal by LH!!

They didn't specifically use the term "goalie interference" and I don't believe that's what it was. IMO it was basically that the play was over. There is no doubt that the whistle did not blow (and obviously there was no intent for the ref to blow it, because he emphatically waved "goal" and pointed at the net). But...upon review it was obvious (to me, anyway) that it was simply the wrong call. No different than plays that get overruled in any other sport.

We can discuss how difficult it is for officials to be under constant scrutiny and second-guessing. I personally don't like replay, but it's apparently here to stay. It's not easy to make calls when every other call is questioned, but that's the way it is now.

[MichVandal]

The puck was frozen under Commesso's pad. For at least two seconds...clearly. It was out of sight but for some reason the ref didn't blow the whistle. Maybe he was sleepy because there were only 100 people in the stands at the time. I believe it was the right call (even though I'm biased). The announcers DID say that the "information" they got "from above" was that it WAS because the puck was frozen and the whistle should have blown.

I guess one can make the case that you "play until the whistle," but, on the other hand, banging at the goalie's pad until the puck dislodges and goes in isn't what is supposed to happen either.

Razor seems to think the puck was "loose." Yeah, it was loose at first, but when the guy banged at Commesso's pad it was NO LONGER loose. It was clearly not visible under the pad. It was the second "bang" at the puck that caused it to go in, and by that time, IMO it was already frozen.

And for those who don't know, Andrew Raycroft ("Razor") is a local Bruins analyst, so there may be some attempt to not appear biased towards Boston teams.

To add to that, I also think the puck was "freed up" after Larkin pushed the goalies pad back toward the net. So it took contact with the goalie to even free up the puck to score it. My wife saw it different, but that's what I saw. So your whole banging on the goalie's pad point.

[Tmtroiano]

The puck was frozen under Commesso's pad. For at least two seconds...clearly. It was out of sight but for some reason the ref didn't blow the whistle. Maybe he was sleepy because there were only 100 people in the stands at the time. I believe it was the right call (even though I'm biased). The announcers DID say that the "information" they got "from above" was that it WAS because the puck was frozen and the whistle should have blown.

Thanks!! I guess I missed them saying that. I'm really surprised by that call though. We should have blown the whistle so we're taking away the goal. That doesn't happen often, does it?

[Sean Pickett]

What's the deal with the ice? Don't the Monarchs play there?

It's quite warm in the arena seating bowl.

Sean

[Tmtroiano]

Maybe its the weather. 60 degrees in Boston.

[chickod]

Why was WM goal called back? Goalie interference? Announcers are lousy. Nice goal by LH!!

The puck was frozen under Commesso's pad. For at least two seconds...clearly. It was out of sight but for some reason the ref didn't blow the whistle. Maybe he was sleepy because there were only 100 people in the stands at the time. I believe it was the right call (even though I'm biased). The announcers DID say that the "information" they got "from above" was that it WAS because the puck was frozen and the whistle should have blown.

I guess one can make the case that you "play until the whistle," but, on the other hand, banging at the goalie's pad until the puck dislodges and goes in isn't what is supposed to happen either.

Razor seems to think the puck was "loose." Yeah, it was loose at first, but when the guy banged at Commesso's pad it was NO LONGER loose. It was clearly not visible under the pad. It was the second "bang" at the puck that caused it to go in, and by that time, IMO it was already frozen.

And for those who don't know, Andrew Raycroft ("Razor") is a local Bruins analyst, so there may be some attempt to not appear biased towards Boston teams.

[chickod]

What's the deal with the ice? Don't the Monarchs play there?

[Tmtroiano]

Why was WM goal called back? Goalie interference? Announcers are lousy. Nice goal by LH!!

[chickod]

Western keeping us to the ouside. We need to start driving the net and getting the puck in front.

[boblav1]

Go BU, go Hockey East.

[Rogie21]

Was searching for a This Date in BU history. Our last win on 3/23...was in 1996 when Pandolfo was captain. 3-2 win over Clarkson in the Albany Regional. Only 12 teams back then. Sounds like an omen to me.

[Bomber]

This game is guaranteed to go to multiple OT's.

I have to be in Reading, MA by 7:30 for the show I'm directing.

You've been warned.

: )

Go BU!

[chickod]

Who thinks we will take this thing? Lost a top shot blocker in McCarthy and great speed in Zabaneh. However, we get Skoog back and Fensore seems like a go, but maybe not 100%. Commesso is playing at his peak. This is where the depth has to shine through and you have to have the will to win. Get through the first 5 minutes and then play with poise. Seniors will need to lead by example.

I prefer the "one game at a time" approach, and let's hope the team is doing the EXACT same thing. (I won't quote Hackman in "Hoosiers" about "There's a condition in tournament play...") :smiley (since we can't REALLY use emojis)

You never know where the upsets will be so it's pointless to think about anything beyond this afternoon at 2:00. I just worry about the injuries...to me, Zabaneh is a HUGE loss because he's the fastest guy on the ice. And McCarthy is equally important because, even though BU is a "high scoring" team and all that stuff, we all know in the playoffs you have to PREVENT goals. Just look at the games this past weekend.

(and, parenthetically, I draw a parallel to the Bruins, who have had this exact same problem for years, that the offense dries up when the checking gets really tight and the game gets more physical. The regular season "high flyers" tend to get shut down if they can't create their own offense)