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.

Boston College Hockey 2009-2010

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010

...& I just want to point out that I like Lyles, and I'm rooting for him. I don't think it's fair to blame all of BC's defensive woes on one or two guys. It's a team effort, and everyone's feeling the strain of having two key contributors out.

That doesn't make that play on Friday any less of a penalty though. lol
 
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010

BCWH Superfan joe said:
That's what I figured. It was pretty obvious to me all the way on the other side of the arena that the net was off way before the puck went in.

Yes, the defense is struggling right now. I feel for the Dmen because our four regulars obviously have increased pressure with Cross and Wey out, especially the ones paired with D w/ little experience. Hopefully they can hold it together until Wey comes back, but it's looking rough right now.

As for hokydad, wow, I don't even know what your point is there. Yes, I have, in fact, seen worse penalties in my life.

For example:
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/DnP18StCoHA&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/DnP18StCoHA&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

That was a worse penalty, yes.

This one was more clear as well:
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/zAjWi663kXc&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/zAjWi663kXc&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

However, just because there were worse infractions in the history of sport doesn't make that any less of an obvious penalty. Sorry.

He took his hand off of his stick, wrapped up the BU player and threw him into the boards from about two feet off.

Not dirty or anything, just clearly letter-of-the-law boarding.
Click to expand...

I was not the one who said, "it was the worst penalty I ever saw"
 
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010

Samuelson for a shut down guy(zero O ability) sure looked like a turnstile on that one play. He is over rated
 
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010

Hokydad said:
I was not the one who said, "it was the worst penalty I ever saw"
Click to expand...

Nor did anyone else on this thread. You did, however, try to say it obviously wasn't so bad because Petrecki's headbutt was worse. (???)
 
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010

TonyTheTiger20 said:
Are you kidding? The Petrecki headbutt was awesome.

That would be me and Joe. Warso gave us a nod and little stick tap on the glass to thank us after warm-ups too. Pretty cool of him.

18537_264034308206_570008206_3520078_2658600_n.jpg
Click to expand...
That was Wade's photo, right?

I suggest giving her props. It's a nice gesture.
 
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010

BC's defense is overworked and a few errors here and there will happen. Let's not get on them for a few mistakes. Several or making them early in the game is a different story.

Here is the rulebook regarding deliberately dislodged nets. It is a goal not a penalty shot.

g. If the goalkeeper for the defending team deliberately displaces the goal
to prevent an obvious and imminent goal, the puck would have entered
the goal had it not been displaced, a goal shall be awarded.
 
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010

Question hokydad, do you still think Providence is going to have a good season?
 
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010

BC/HE said:
g. If the goalkeeper for the defending team deliberately displaces the goal
to prevent an obvious and imminent goal, the puck would have entered
the goal had it not been displaced, a goal shall be awarded.
Click to expand...

What if the defender knocks it off and not the goalkeeper? I remember BU did that at the Ledyard Bank tournament a few years ago, and Dartmouth converted on the ensuing penalty shot.
 
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010

BCWH Superfan joe said:
What if the defender knocks it off and not the goalkeeper? I remember BU did that at the Ledyard Bank tournament a few years ago, and Dartmouth converted on the ensuing penalty shot.
Click to expand...

The only thing with a defender doing it is a face off in the near end with no change of defensive players allowed. I assume a defender deliberately doing it if a goal is imminent would be a penalty shot but that is not in the rulebook and it may be just a penalty. The rulebook was changed for a defender doing it in 2008.
 
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010

BC/HE said:
The only thing with a defender doing it is a face off in the near end with no change of defensive players allowed. I assume a defender deliberately doing it if a goal is imminent would be a penalty shot but that is not in the rulebook and it may be just a penalty. The rulebook was changed for a defender doing it in 2008.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure its a penalty shot in overtime and/or late in regulation, unless that has changed...
 
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010

BCWH Superfan joe said:
Nor did anyone else on this thread. You did, however, try to say it obviously wasn't so bad because Petrecki's headbutt was worse. (???)
Click to expand...

"The Lyles penalty was absolutely a penalty and was probably one of the dumbest penalties I've ever seen"

Oh excuse me Superfan, he said it was one of the dumbest penalties he ever saw. Pretty much the same thing.
 
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010

Hokydad said:
"The Lyles penalty was absolutely a penalty and was probably one of the dumbest penalties I've ever seen"

Oh excuse me Superfan, he said it was one of the dumbest penalties he ever saw. Pretty much the same thing.
Click to expand...

Uh, no, they mean entirely different things. Sorry. There's a difference between a dumb penalty and a penalty that's cheap/offensive that comes on a bad hit.

Given the situation - trailing in a rivalry game, partly due to the fact that your team had already taken a number of dumb penalties - and how clearly it matched the rulebook definition of boarding, it was just not a good thing to see. He knew it, too - as soon as he made the hit, he sort of slumped over, knowing a penalty was coming.

Nobody's perfect and the point here isn't to harp on the guy for taking the penalty. The point is that people who are saying it wasn't a penalty, or wasn't an obvious penalty, are looking through serious homer glasses (or in hokydad's case, mancrush glasses).
 
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010

BC/HE said:
Here is the rulebook regarding deliberately dislodged nets. It is a goal not a penalty shot.

g. If the goalkeeper for the defending team deliberately displaces the goal
to prevent an obvious and imminent goal, the puck would have entered
the goal had it not been displaced, a goal shall be awarded.
Click to expand...

There is no way Hutton knocked the net off deliberately. He had just made a huge save on a BC breakaway and the net came off in the process. That was the second BC breakaway of the night that they failed to convert on.
 
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010

UMLGoon said:
schaus cleared it out of the neutral zone from behind the red line but a bc forward was right in his face and got a piece of it as he released, which is why it kind of waffled off the straight-line course for the net that it started with and ended up in the corner. his contact on a flat puck was too good and strong for it to move like that otherwise.
Click to expand...
Gotcha. Our seats were bad and we couldn't really see. :shrug: I'll defer to your call there.
BCWH Superfan joe said:
He took his hand off of his stick, wrapped up the BU player and threw him into the boards from about two feet off.
Click to expand...
Even worse - it was when Lyles had broken his stick and didn't have a stick in his hands at all.
 
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010

Hokydad said:
"The Lyles penalty was absolutely a penalty and was probably one of the dumbest penalties I've ever seen"

Oh excuse me Superfan, he said it was one of the dumbest penalties he ever saw. Pretty much the same thing.
Click to expand...
Joe already touched on this, but no, they aren't the same thing. I stand by what I said - it was one of the dumbest penalties I've ever seen.
 
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010

boblav1 said:
There is no way Hutton knocked the net off deliberately. He had just made a huge save on a BC breakaway and the net came off in the process. That was the second BC breakaway of the night that they failed to convert on.
Click to expand...

That is likely true but it does not explain the reluctance of the referee to even review it.
 
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010

BC/HE said:
That is likely true but it does not explain the reluctance of the referee to even review it.
Click to expand...

The net was clearly off before the puck went in. The ref was right there and in position. He didn't need to review it. The first one was a lot more iffy, which is why, despite waving it off immediately, he went to review it.
 
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010

ScottK said:
The net was clearly off before the puck went in. The ref was right there and in position. He didn't need to review it. The first one was a lot more iffy, which is why, despite waving it off immediately, he went to review it.
Click to expand...

The purpose of a review would be solely for determining whether the net was dislodged intentionally or not because if it was then a goal would be awarded. It was obviously off before the puck went in. The reluctance to even review puzzles because if it was not obvious then the referree was in a good position to not be overruled. A simple review would be required under the rules because it involves a goal call. That must be reviewed in the championships but apparently it does not apply in regular season.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top