2021-2022 D1 Women's Hockey Scores

[Timothy A]

I thought that the second goal for UW was more questionable; they reviewed to see if it crossed the line (it did), but the key to the play was Wheeler running into the goalie and knocking her into her net. Too much to ask the WCHA refs to follow so many moving parts.

As for the 1st goal, maybe the deflection was high, but I didn't see a replay that showed the height at which the puck contacted the stick. If there was video evidence that it was high, I didn't see it, and it was called good on the ice. The announcer was upset that her stick started high, but that isn't what determines legality.

On the deflection goal, one of the replay they showed in the rink an ice level view, it was right there at the cusp of being illegal. They needed to freeze the video at the contact point for a definitive call. I'm sure that's Watts Ludwig did, LOL.

I did not notice the goalie getting contacted on the Wheeler goal, I was juts looking for the puck going over the line, which it did.

Overall a cleanly called game other than the interference they seem to like to allow.

 

[robertearle]

On the deflection goal, one of the replay they showed in the rink an ice level view, it was right there at the cusp of being illegal. They needed to freeze the video at the contact point for a definitive call. I'm sure that's Watts Ludwig did, LOL.

The Q skater is 5' 5", and was wearing skates. She contacted the puck when it was about even with her forehead, and maybe a bit higher. That is, maybe 5' 9" above the ice level. This is quite clear on the BTNPlus video stream. If I understand things correctly, anything above 4' is too high. This was not close. I have no idea what Ludwig thinks he saw, maybe he didn't see any 'ice level' camera angle.

 

[KTDC]

Wow, Blair made some nice saves on that first Quinni PP.





​​​​​​…..love to see Robert Ludwig and the Badger players huddle up before the face off…lol

 

[robertearle]

Wow, Blair made some nice saves on that first Quinni PP.





​​​​​​…..love to see Robert Ludwig and the Badger players huddle up before the face off…lol

The "huddle" was Badger players asking Ludwig "why the hell did you allow play to continue for ten, fifteen seconds while our goalie had neither her stick nor her glove?!?" Seriously, Blair is out there with a bare hand while Quinnipiac was threatening the net with the puck. (Ludwig never did blow his whistle; the Badgers had to ice the puck to get a stoppage.)

 

[KTDC]

Great summary of the team. I don't think Posick saw the ice the rest of the game. They can't put her in high leverage games with her lack of experience at D, no fault of her own. She was listed ahead of Toft on the line charts, which is interesting, maybe Toft is banged up??. The loss of D grad transfer Nealy for the year is significant.

Gopher players used to lose playing time, also. Coaching staff eliminated that at the same time they reduced the priority of winning games.

 

[Timothy A]

Heck of a period by UW. Passes were firm and stick to stick. They were all over the Q players who had the puck. Played with a ton of speed. Q had like 9 sog on the consecutive pps otherwise they didn't do much.

 

[Timothy A]

The Q skater is 5' 5", and was wearing skates. She contacted the puck when it was about even with her forehead, and maybe a bit higher. That is, maybe 5' 9" above the ice level. This is quite clear on the BTNPlus video stream. If I understand things correctly, anything above 4' is too high. This was not close. I have no idea what Ludwig thinks he saw, maybe he didn't see any 'ice level' camera angle.

The video quality at the rink is not the greatest, so I couldn't pick the puck up. Or I'm just old and a little nearsighted lol.

 

[robertearle]

The video quality at the rink is not the greatest, so I couldn't pick the puck up. Or I'm just old and a little nearsighted lol.

BTNPlus stream/replay was quite clear.

 

[Timothy A]

Q got 1, but this is the kind of game where the stats don't indicate who is playing better, UW is. They have to keep the hammer down in the 3rd.

 

[robertearle]

A thought watching the OT of the Wisconsin-Quinnipiac game: is two minutes too big a penalty for e three-on-three five minute OT? Maybe it should be shorter; 90 seconds or even 60 seconds instead?

 

[shelfit]

A thought watching the OT of the Wisconsin-Quinnipiac game: is two minutes too big a penalty for e three-on-three five minute OT? Maybe it should be shorter; 90 seconds or even 60 seconds instead?

Or maybe an automatic penalty shot for all minor penalties in OT? Sound silly? This isn't 10U hockey so shortening the length of minor penalties sounds just as silly. Besides how many teams are really good at executing a 4 vs 3 PP? The design of the 3 vs 3 OT is to increase the chances of having a goal scored in OT because that's more exciting etc. Maybe the automatic penalty shot idea isn't so silly after all!

 

[robertearle]

Or maybe an automatic penalty shot for all minor penalties in OT? Sound silly? This isn't 10U hockey so shortening the length of minor penalties sounds just as silly. Besides how many teams are really good at executing a 4 vs 3 PP? The design of the 3 vs 3 OT is to increase the percentage of having a goal scored in OT because that's more exciting etc. Maybe the automatic penalty shot idea isn't so silly after all!

So, that's a "no" from you? LOL

 

[ARM]

Did you close your eyes during the BTN stream while they repeatedly showed the 'from the corner' camera? Because that clearly shows her contacting the puck at about her forehead level, if not a bit higher.

No, I didn't close my eyes. The problem with the high stick calls is that they almost never change the call made on the ice, because the replay in two D has to overturn a call originally made by an official in three D. Coach Frost said that was one of the reasons why there was talk a few years ago to make a deflection at any height a legal play, because otherwise, it leads to all of these judgement calls. You could well be right that the tip is high; I just didn't expect them to change it based on every similar call I've seen made and left in place over the years. I thought the other call was far more obvious (goalie removed from the crease by contact with an attacker, and the puck subsequently trickles in), given that one involved overturning an official's call made on the ice. I wonder what the call would have been had the Q coach requested a replay to check for goalie interference at that point.

The "huddle" was Badger players asking Ludwig "why the hell did you allow play to continue for ten, fifteen seconds while our goalie had neither her stick nor her glove?!?" Seriously, Blair is out there with a bare hand while Quinnipiac was threatening the net with the puck. (Ludwig never did blow his whistle; the Badgers had to ice the puck to get a stoppage.)

I remember Amanda Leveille losing her stick and blocker after a Badger ran into her, the officials didn't blow a whistle, so she removed her helmet to get one. She was assessed two minutes for delay of game, and the explanation was that the whistle only blows when the goalie loses her mask and helmet. Apparently, if she loses either glove, the thought must be that she'll still have one healthy hand to get her through life. I agree with you that the whistle should go for player safety, but maybe they feel that there would be too many intentional delays, like the sneaky goalies who always seem to be able to knock the net off a peg during a scoring chance.

 

[robertearle]

No, I didn't close my eyes. The problem with the high stick calls is that they almost never change the call made on the ice, because the replay in two D has to overturn a call originally made by an official in three D. Coach Frost said that was one of the reasons why there was talk a few years ago to make a deflection at any height a legal play, because otherwise, it leads to all of these judgement calls. You could well be right that the tip is high; I just didn't expect them to change it based on every similar call I've seen made and left in place over the years. I thought the other call was far more obvious (goalie removed from the crease by contact with an attacker, and the puck subsequently trickles in), given that one involved overturning an official's call made on the ice. I wonder what the call would have been had the Q coach requested a replay to check for goalie interference at that point.

I remember Amanda Leveille losing her stick and blocker after a Badger ran into her, the officials didn't blow a whistle, so she removed her helmet to get one. She was assessed two minutes for delay of game, and the explanation was that the whistle only blows when the goalie loses her mask and helmet. Apparently, if she loses either glove, the thought must be that she'll still have one healthy hand to get her through life. I agree with you that the whistle should go for player safety, but maybe they feel that there would be too many intentional delays, like the sneaky goalies who always seem to be able to knock the net off a peg during a scoring chance.

What replay doesn't require a 2-D review of a 3-D call? If 2-D isn't "good enough", then there's no point in having a replay system for anything, including "goalie interference".

The BTN video stream *quite* clearly shows the puck being deflected well above four feet. You simply have to actually look at it.

 

[KTDC]

What replay doesn't require a 2-D review of a 3-D call? If 2-D isn't "good enough", then there's no point in having a replay system for anything, including "goalie interference".

The BTN video stream *quite* clearly shows the puck being deflected well above four feet. You simply have to actually look at it.

I saw it pretty much as you did. For me this was one of those "why bother stopping the game to review this if you're not gonna make the call?"

 

[TitleIXHockey]

BTNPlus stream/replay was quite clear.

I couldn't see the puck on the BTN- stream but it looked like the only possible deflection points were high. That said, the Wisconsin goal that got reviewed should have been goaltender interference so I think it evened out.

 

[EMPTYNETTER]

UNH over Providence back to back. 1-0 and 3-1 should remove Providence from RV
UCONN splits with Vermont. 5-1W and 6-2L. should knock UCONN out of Top 10
Clarkson narrow win over Quinnipiac 3-2 does Clarkson move up and Quinnipiac move down?

 

[TitleIXHockey]

UNH over Providence back to back. 1-0 and 3-1 should remove Providence from RV
UCONN splits with Vermont. 5-1W and 6-2L. should knock UCONN out of Top 10
Clarkson narrow win over Quinnipiac 3-2 does Clarkson move up and Quinnipiac move down?

The score was close but Clarkson really took it to Quinnipiac. Shots were 39-23.

 

[D2D]

After two the Gophers are up 1-0 on the Buckeyes. Nice shot by Taylor Heise.

 

[thirdtime's . . .]

Harvard 6 Clarkson 2 F

(I haven't edited the score, just my typing)