Re: CHA Thoughts and Prognostications: Year 11, The Finale... Part Deux
On the whole high stick thing, and I will admit, I have not went back and watched the replay as much as some. BUT, the ruling on the ice was no-goal. In order to be overturned, the evidence has to be conclusive. From what I remember, I didn't see an angle that makes it conclusive. Sorry Purp fans.
Here is one for you, it happened in the WCHA Final Five last night. UMD and UND are tied at 0, UMD scores, but the goal is waved off by being directed with a UMD high stick. BUT, the puck hit the goalie and the skate of an UND defender before going into the net. The only reasoning I heard was that UND never gained possession to negate the high stick, so the goal did not count.
UND went on to win 2-0.
On the whole high stick thing, and I will admit, I have not went back and watched the replay as much as some. BUT, the ruling on the ice was no-goal. In order to be overturned, the evidence has to be conclusive. From what I remember, I didn't see an angle that makes it conclusive. Sorry Purp fans.
Here is one for you, it happened in the WCHA Final Five last night. UMD and UND are tied at 0, UMD scores, but the goal is waved off by being directed with a UMD high stick. BUT, the puck hit the goalie and the skate of an UND defender before going into the net. The only reasoning I heard was that UND never gained possession to negate the high stick, so the goal did not count.
UND went on to win 2-0.
Comment