What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

2013 NCAA Quarterfinal: North Dakota @ Minnesota

Re: 2013 NCAA Quarterfinal: North Dakota @ Minnesota

sfo19 said:
Um, no. It was in the neutral zone. No where near a scoring chance.
Click to expand...

Regardless of the previous non call then, it shouldn't have been called. When someone tries to defend the reffing after a win, it brings about curiosity. Why do these idiots (stripes) have to be so inconsistent. :confused:
 
Re: 2013 NCAA Quarterfinal: North Dakota @ Minnesota

Eeyore said:
Not sure, but it was a ridiculously blatant trip. And the one that wasn't called just before it did prevent a scoring chance.
Click to expand...

Exactly what I said to my brother, sitting next to me. The refs let the first blatant one go, right before. But they were not about to give them another break on the second one, which came right after. Nothing cheap about the call at all, even in OT.
 
Re: 2013 NCAA Quarterfinal: North Dakota @ Minnesota

D2D said:
Exactly what I said to my brother, sitting next to me. The refs let the first blatant one go, right before. But they were not about to give them another break on the second one, which came right after. Nothing cheap about the call at all, even in OT.
Click to expand...

The first one should have been called. In such a crucial game, especially in OT, you shouldn't call anything unless it's a clear scoring chance. It's the only way to make it fair, regardless of the blown call. You don't make up for a mistake on a non scoring chance. It's just the way it is, and should be. Human error cannot be corrected on a call that wouldn't be made otherwise.
 
Re: 2013 NCAA Quarterfinal: North Dakota @ Minnesota

CanHockGuy said:
The first one should have been called. In such a crucial game, especially in OT, you shouldn't call anything unless it's a clear scoring chance. It's the only way to make it fair, regardless of the blown call. You don't make up for a mistake on a non scoring chance. It's just the way it is, and should be. Human error cannot be corrected on a call that wouldn't be made otherwise.
Click to expand...

Anyway, you have a great team. Good luck the rest of the way, it might get tougher. :)
 
Re: 2013 NCAA Quarterfinal: North Dakota @ Minnesota

CanHockGuy said:
In such a crucial game, especially in OT, you shouldn't call anything unless it's a clear scoring chance. It's the only way to make it fair, regardless of the blown call. You don't make up for a mistake on a non scoring chance. It's just the way it is, and should be. Human error cannot be corrected on a call that wouldn't be made otherwise.
Click to expand...

I understand what you're saying, but don't totally agree. While infractions that thwart good scoring opportunities deserve priority in these situations, that doesn't mean you swallow your whistle altogether. You still call the obvious intentional ones, like this one clearly was. And like it or not, refs do have a tendancy to call an obvious penalty right after they either intentionally or unintentionally did not call another obvious one right before.
 
Re: 2013 NCAA Quarterfinal: North Dakota @ Minnesota

CanHockGuy said:
Regardless of the previous non call then, it shouldn't have been called. When someone tries to defend the reffing after a win, it brings about curiosity. Why do these idiots (stripes) have to be so inconsistent. :confused:
Click to expand...

So, you're fine with just making pulling the skates out from under a player legal in overtime? Because that's what you're saying. And the problem is that, while we don;t know that that was a scoring chance, it could have been; Megan Bozek has been known to create those off of a rush at center ice.
 
Re: 2013 NCAA Quarterfinal: North Dakota @ Minnesota

D2D already scooped me on the Strib article (no offense taken), but here's the link to the one from the Pioneer Press.

Minnesota advances in triple overtime

http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_22808339/gophers-womens-hockey-minnesota-advances-triple-overtime

And surprisingly, despite the school being on Spring Break, the Minnesota Daily posted an article too.

Triple-OT thriller sends Gophers to Frozen Four

http://www.mndaily.com/sports/womens-hockey/2013/03/17/triple-ot-thriller-sends-gophers-frozen-four
 
Re: 2013 NCAA Quarterfinal: North Dakota @ Minnesota

Eeyore said:
I stand by my previously expressed opinion that I would rather have played anyone but North Dakota today. It's not just that I think that they're better than what the Pairwise says, but I am also convinced that they don't play as well against any other team. I've seen several games that they've played against other teams and it's like night and day.
Click to expand...

Fierce rivalries always bring out the best in teams when they play each other. There is also the familiarity factor, that makes these games closer as the season goes along.
 
Re: 2013 NCAA Quarterfinal: North Dakota @ Minnesota

And can we nominate Sam LaShomb for some sort of Sore Loser award for cross-checking Kelly Terry to the ice well after the winning goal went in?
 
Re: 2013 NCAA Quarterfinal: North Dakota @ Minnesota

Eeyore said:
And can we nominate Sam LaShomb for some sort of Sore Loser award for cross-checking Kelly Terry to the ice well after the winning goal went in?
Click to expand...

As soon as we find the winner for Sore Winner.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ARM
Re: 2013 NCAA Quarterfinal: North Dakota @ Minnesota

Eeyore said:
And can we nominate Sam LaShomb for some sort of Sore Loser award for cross-checking Kelly Terry to the ice well after the winning goal went in?
Click to expand...

:( :o :( When you lose you say little. When you win you say even less. :mad: :( :mad:
 
Re: 2013 NCAA Quarterfinal: North Dakota @ Minnesota

Eeyore said:
And can we nominate Sam LaShomb for some sort of Sore Loser award for cross-checking Kelly Terry to the ice well after the winning goal went in?
Click to expand...

At least she didn't punch her in the handshake line. :rolleyes:
 
Re: 2013 NCAA Quarterfinal: North Dakota @ Minnesota

OnMAA said:
:( :o :( When you lose you say little. When you win you say even less. :mad: :( :mad:
Click to expand...
It isn't about winning/losing. That was a dangerous play after a game was over and doesn't belong in the sport. You'd post differently if it was your kid laying on the ice.
 
Re: 2013 NCAA Quarterfinal: North Dakota @ Minnesota

ARM said:
It isn't about winning/losing. That was a dangerous play after a game was over and doesn't belong in the sport. You'd post differently if it was your kid laying on the ice.
Click to expand...

After reading this why does the name Lauren Smith keep running through my head?
 
Re: 2013 NCAA Quarterfinal: North Dakota @ Minnesota

ARM said:
It isn't about winning/losing. That was a dangerous play after a game was over and doesn't belong in the sport. You'd post differently if it was your kid laying on the ice.
Click to expand...

I'll admit that I did not see it, so cannot judge if it was late or not, or how severe it was. Often during scrums in front of the net that result in a goal a player may not realize the puck has gone in, or that the play is over, so I'd give them the benefit of the doubt

Do not recall seeing anyone laying on the ice after the goal was scored. All I saw was a celebration. If there was indeed a player laying on the ice hurt after the game, then yes, by all means it should be discussed/dealt with by the refs/discipline committee if a foul was committed.

I recall in a tournament final many years ago, a player scoring an empty netter and then getting cross checked into the cross bar by the trailing player as time expired. In that case the offending player got 8 games and the player cross checked into the cross bar was finished for the season with a concussion, so it was dealt with properly. I would hope that if an infraction is severe enough, the refs would deal with it.

My point in the previous post was more about. You won, celebrate that fact, rather than rubbing it in to a team that gave it their all in a great game and lost.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top