Re: 2016/2017 Lowell Thread: Hoping for Chicago pt 2
That pretty much sums it up.
Congratulations to Notre Dame on the win today.
That pretty much sums it up.
Congratulations to Notre Dame on the win today.
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.
2016/2017 Lowell Thread: Hoping for Chicago pt 2
- Thread starter Go-UML
- Start date
Re: 2016/2017 Lowell Thread: Hoping for Chicago pt 2
Norm's post game press conference.
Game highlights.
Norm's post game press conference.
Game highlights.
Last edited:
Nick Papagiorgio
Holding court
Re: 2016/2017 Lowell Thread: Hoping for Chicago pt 2
Congrats on a great season. Tough ending for Zink, interfered with ND player for 3 seconds, lost his stick, then went flopping trying to defend.
Will be interested to see how the programs move along with Gambardella. Tremendous player that seemed like the straw that stirs the drink. Felt like he played at UML for 7 years.
Congrats on a great season. Tough ending for Zink, interfered with ND player for 3 seconds, lost his stick, then went flopping trying to defend.
Will be interested to see how the programs move along with Gambardella. Tremendous player that seemed like the straw that stirs the drink. Felt like he played at UML for 7 years.
Middle Street
Well-known member
Re: 2016/2017 Lowell Thread: Hoping for Chicago pt 2
For me, the most disappointing part about yesterday was knowing Joe isn't going to put that uniform on again. I agree with you, he was the straw that stirred the drink. I'm encouraged by what I see from Lohin, I'm thinking he could be the next guy.
For me, the most disappointing part about yesterday was knowing Joe isn't going to put that uniform on again. I agree with you, he was the straw that stirred the drink. I'm encouraged by what I see from Lohin, I'm thinking he could be the next guy.
leswp1
New member
Re: 2016/2017 Lowell Thread: Hoping for Chicago pt 2
I must have homer eyes. How do you 'lose' your stick when the other guy ends up holding a stick in each hand and then throwing Zink's stick away? I just don't get it. The result is what it is but I watched a bunch of times and I just can't understand why this is 'losing' your stick.
umlhockey22490
Member
Re: 2016/2017 Lowell Thread: Hoping for Chicago pt 2
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
Zink had a really rough game fro. What i saw. Hopefully we see him get signed
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
Nick Papagiorgio
Holding court
Re: 2016/2017 Lowell Thread: Hoping for Chicago pt 2
IDK... I watched it many times last night. Seems like the ND player is a righty, has his bottom hand off the stick in the air (trying to buy a call?) after he gets spun around by Zink (hooking/holding?), is holding his own stick with his left hand on the butt end so I'm not sure what he was using if he held onto Zink's stick. Either way... there was some serious interference anyway so that was kind of a deserved situation. Just seems like he somehow lost his stick. I mean we're talking about 3 straight seconds of interference on a guy who chipped the puck in at the blue line. Look at where they are 3 seconds later.
IDK... I watched it many times last night. Seems like the ND player is a righty, has his bottom hand off the stick in the air (trying to buy a call?) after he gets spun around by Zink (hooking/holding?), is holding his own stick with his left hand on the butt end so I'm not sure what he was using if he held onto Zink's stick. Either way... there was some serious interference anyway so that was kind of a deserved situation. Just seems like he somehow lost his stick. I mean we're talking about 3 straight seconds of interference on a guy who chipped the puck in at the blue line. Look at where they are 3 seconds later.
Re: 2016/2017 Lowell Thread: Hoping for Chicago pt 2
Well, as an objective observer I would say the truth (as usual) lies somewhere in between. I didn't see him "holding" it in each hand, but I agree that he DID have it "pinned" under his arm so he wasn't letting Zink get it back. But I've never seen holding called on an offensive player so I'm not sure how they could have handled it. Delay of game? I think if there's no goal scored there (and I know that led directly to the goal) then that's nothing. It's one of those things that you let go and then say "Oh oh" when the goal immediately follows.
That won't make anyone feel any better, but I'll just say this. You NEVER want to put yourself in a position where one call or non-call can cost you the game. I said a few times yesterday that I thought it was very "unfortunate" to have to play them again after you just crushed them last Friday night. Nothing good can come of it, and I don't care how many times the coach "warns" the team not to get overconfident, it's hard to get pumped up against someone you completely destroyed. That game at the Garden was a joke. No doubt in my mind you would have played much better against Minnesota. It's one of the reasons (as you're starting to find out) why it is so difficult to win a National Championship. They don't play the games on paper. You've got to go out there and take care of business and Lowell didn't really seem to play with that fire that they have had during the recent streak.
Well, as an objective observer I would say the truth (as usual) lies somewhere in between. I didn't see him "holding" it in each hand, but I agree that he DID have it "pinned" under his arm so he wasn't letting Zink get it back. But I've never seen holding called on an offensive player so I'm not sure how they could have handled it. Delay of game? I think if there's no goal scored there (and I know that led directly to the goal) then that's nothing. It's one of those things that you let go and then say "Oh oh" when the goal immediately follows.
That won't make anyone feel any better, but I'll just say this. You NEVER want to put yourself in a position where one call or non-call can cost you the game. I said a few times yesterday that I thought it was very "unfortunate" to have to play them again after you just crushed them last Friday night. Nothing good can come of it, and I don't care how many times the coach "warns" the team not to get overconfident, it's hard to get pumped up against someone you completely destroyed. That game at the Garden was a joke. No doubt in my mind you would have played much better against Minnesota. It's one of the reasons (as you're starting to find out) why it is so difficult to win a National Championship. They don't play the games on paper. You've got to go out there and take care of business and Lowell didn't really seem to play with that fire that they have had during the recent streak.
leswp1
New member
Re: 2016/2017 Lowell Thread: Hoping for Chicago pt 2
Not arguing the interference at all. Both teams spent the night interfering with each other with non-calls. As I said, the game result is the game result.
If you go slo-mo or freeze frame he is holding 2 sticks in the air. I am pretty sure our guy didn't hand the stick to the other guy and say, 'here, hold this for me.' I know it is semantics
and honestly I am not always a fan of the guy who owned said stick. It just stuck in my craw. Honestly I would have felt better if they said- look at that but no call.
Not arguing the interference at all. Both teams spent the night interfering with each other with non-calls. As I said, the game result is the game result.
If you go slo-mo or freeze frame he is holding 2 sticks in the air. I am pretty sure our guy didn't hand the stick to the other guy and say, 'here, hold this for me.' I know it is semantics
and honestly I am not always a fan of the guy who owned said stick. It just stuck in my craw. Honestly I would have felt better if they said- look at that but no call.Nick Papagiorgio
Holding court
Re: 2016/2017 Lowell Thread: Hoping for Chicago pt 2
I keep watching it. ND player is definitely not holding two sticks with his left glove. He'd have a hard time fitting two sticks in one glove in the first place. To do it while twirling around, opening his glove wide enough to grab Zink's stick while not losing his own is really just not possible.
I keep watching it. ND player is definitely not holding two sticks with his left glove. He'd have a hard time fitting two sticks in one glove in the first place. To do it while twirling around, opening his glove wide enough to grab Zink's stick while not losing his own is really just not possible.
leswp1
New member
Re: 2016/2017 Lowell Thread: Hoping for Chicago pt 2
NO he has a stick in each hand
This is why they don't believe in eye witnesses. The latest one I find looks diff than the one I think I saw last night.
NO he has a stick in each hand
This is why they don't believe in eye witnesses. The latest one I find looks diff than the one I think I saw last night.
Last edited:
Nick Papagiorgio
Holding court
brassbonanza
Super Serial
Re: 2016/2017 Lowell Thread: Hoping for Chicago pt 2
There's an argument to be made that there could be a penalty on both players there, Zink for interference and the ND guy for holding the stick. But both would be very marginal calls and also difficult to see, look how hard it is for us to make a determination watching the replay that many times. I think the ref there doesn't want to blow his whistle on a strict interpretation of the rule that he can't be sure of. No call either way I think was the right move. Chick's right though, if you're putting yourself in a situation, like BU did on Saturday, where you're one call/no call away from losing a game, you've already missed opportunities elsewhere.
There's an argument to be made that there could be a penalty on both players there, Zink for interference and the ND guy for holding the stick. But both would be very marginal calls and also difficult to see, look how hard it is for us to make a determination watching the replay that many times. I think the ref there doesn't want to blow his whistle on a strict interpretation of the rule that he can't be sure of. No call either way I think was the right move. Chick's right though, if you're putting yourself in a situation, like BU did on Saturday, where you're one call/no call away from losing a game, you've already missed opportunities elsewhere.
leswp1
New member
Re: 2016/2017 Lowell Thread: Hoping for Chicago pt 2
I watched that play 10 times. I don't see anything warranting just a penalty on ND. either matching or nothing. ND player had stick slashed out of his hands in 3rd leading to good chance for lowell. Didn't have a problem with nothing being called on that cluster in OT. they looked like they were dancing together.
I watched that play 10 times. I don't see anything warranting just a penalty on ND. either matching or nothing. ND player had stick slashed out of his hands in 3rd leading to good chance for lowell. Didn't have a problem with nothing being called on that cluster in OT. they looked like they were dancing together.
Re: 2016/2017 Lowell Thread: Hoping for Chicago pt 2
The same with Nick Master. Although he didn't show up in the scoring sheet he was huge on faceoffs this weekend winning 30 of 42 in the two game.
Re: 2016/2017 Lowell Thread: Hoping for Chicago pt 2
Agree. I thought Lowell had several chances early in the game to score but couldn't convert. Peterson was giving up some big rebounds early that were just out of reach. They also had three power plays that they didn't take advantage of. A tough way for the game to end but I like the fact that the refs let the teams play.
Agree. I thought Lowell had several chances early in the game to score but couldn't convert. Peterson was giving up some big rebounds early that were just out of reach. They also had three power plays that they didn't take advantage of. A tough way for the game to end but I like the fact that the refs let the teams play.
Last edited:
walrus
Wind up workin' in a gas station
Re: 2016/2017 Lowell Thread: Hoping for Chicago pt 2
I thought it could have been 4-2 Lowell after 1. They flat out missed good opportunities in the 1st. Good game to watch from a fan of neither team
I thought it could have been 4-2 Lowell after 1. They flat out missed good opportunities in the 1st. Good game to watch from a fan of neither team
Patman
Rodent of Unusual Size
Re: 2016/2017 Lowell Thread: Hoping for Chicago pt 2
just looked at that zink replay and still can't understand how that happened exactly other than they got wrapped up into each other... ugh... unless I can "zapruder" it I'll just have to chalk it up to terrible luck
just looked at that zink replay and still can't understand how that happened exactly other than they got wrapped up into each other... ugh... unless I can "zapruder" it I'll just have to chalk it up to terrible luck