Gophers vs Badgers Nov. 9-10: Yeah, we still hate each other...

[5mn_Major]

Re: Gophers vs Badgers Nov. 9-10: Yeah, we still hate each other...

Expected a split and that's what we got. Gophers were lucky to win Friday and thought they easily could have won Saturday had a couple pipe shots found their way in.

Quite honestly, that felt like two non-NCAA teams going at it but there are still a lot of games to play. See you again in January.

UW was the better team. Lucky to get a split.

 

[SteveO]

Re: Gophers vs Badgers Nov. 9-10: Yeah, we still hate each other...

You can make immediate contact but there is no 2 seconds or 2 strides to make contact on zone entry. That's literally what it says. And if you do make contact the standard for release is immediately, not seconds or strides, so I'm not sure why you're pointing out how many strides Achan did or didn't take as it's irrelevant. When the puck goes, so must the defender.

They do spell out lateral movement. You are allowed to be a traffic cone, but if you move into the F's path you are impeding. If you don't move, or move in another direction, you are not impeding. Not impeding is the direction laterally, and otherwise, you are to move.

After reading the ruling again it's seems I misinterpreted it. Another way to read that is the former ruling on two seconds or two strides no longer applies. After researching a bit further, that interpretation seems to be what Tom Anastos, the chair of the NCAA ice hockey rules committee at the time, sought to clarify to the NCAA in Jan. 2016. The memo reads as follows:

The committee’s consensus is that defenders should be allowed to engage/bump/contact an attacking player “immediately” after the puck is released on a dump in, but players are expected to release the attacker and pursue the puck or retreat following this initial contact. The same standard would be applied regardless of whether or not the attacking player was knocked down. However, it ultimately was decided that the ‘immediacy” of the contact continues to be a determination made by the officials on a case-by-case basis.

The emphasis of the ruling is what constitutes "immediate contact" and penalizing delayed contact with an attacking player after he dumps the puck. It seems to me this was a discretionary call by the ref who ruled that Zuhlsdorf did not release "immediately". If so, then Koho's post is correct that it was a bad call. Achan "jumped" on Zuhlsdorf's shoulder and head after legal contact was made making it virtually impossible for him to "release immediately".

In interpreting this rule, a referee should make sure which of the players is the one creating the interference — often it is the action and movement of the attacking player that causes the interference since the defending players are entitled to stand their ground or shadow the attacking players.

My point on movement was there is no specific reference in the ruling on limiting any type movement by a defender, lateral or otherwise, to impede an attackers progress. Note 2 indicates defenders are allowed to "stand their ground or shadow attacking players".