Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

[Watson Rink]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

Pucci's playing, has scored, and has been buzzing all over the ice today, Whew....makes an enormous difference....

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

Well it was a struggle to be sure and it didn't have to be that way. After going up 2-0, Harvard took its foot off the pedal and let Princeton dictate play letting them back in the game with a gift goal off a scramble in front. Taking some questionable penalties didn't help either and thank goodness for Lyndsey Fry. Is she on fire or what?? She has been a one woman wrecking crew and Princeton has no answer for her. Her third goal and game winner came off a beautiful feed from Elizabeth Parker. Princeton paid close attention to Pucci and Dempsey but they can't get physical with Fry because she has no problems with that type of game. It will be interesting to see what happens the rest of the series.

Harvard needs to step up its game if they expect to win this in two straight. Neither goalie played particularly well although Bellamy made a great save off a breakaway with the score tied late in the third period. She didn't have one of her better games; neither did Weber. Princeton played their usual clog the middle of the ice style trying to slow the Crimson down. It worked but Harvard gave them plenty of help by not moving their feet and aggressively forechecking. Our passing was way off as well. Both need to improve for tomorrow and beyond.

One more thing. The shots on goal were not accurate. Princeton did not outshoot us by a two to one margin. Yes they carried the play in the third period but no way was the shot differential that large. Not even close.

I didn't think that it would be repeat of the first weekend in February but I didn't think it would come down to the last three minutes. Harvard can play much better than they did today. I'm sure that the message will be drilled into them if they haven't already got it by what happened today.

 

[alslammerz]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

One more thing. The shots on goal were not accurate. Princeton did not outshoot us by a two to one margin. Yes they carried the play in the third period but no way was the shot differential that large. Not even close.

Just a problem with how the press box is set-up behind one goal. Unlike some other rinks with set ups like the Bright, they usually give the benefit of the doubt on shots through traffic or wide on the side away from the press box (I can confirm, it's a pain trying to see what shots actually got through). Since Princeton attacked that end twice...
It's fun looking at the shot counts at some of the men's road games I've been at where the visiting team does not get that doubt, but the home team does.

 

[Veritas]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

One odd thing was the officiating. For at least the last 30 seconds of the second period Friday, Princeton had 7 players on the ice with no whistle by either linemen or referees. I first thought I was seeing things and recounted 3 times in the 30 seconds. Yep, 7 Princeton players on the ice. No harm done but I hope they are a but more alert Saturday.

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

One odd thing was the officiating. For at least the last 30 seconds of the second period Friday, Princeton had 7 players on the ice with no whistle by either linemen or referees. I first thought I was seeing things and recounted 3 times in the 30 seconds. Yep, 7 Princeton players on the ice. No harm done but I hope they are a but more alert Saturday.

There you go. Another example of officials not doing their job. How you can miss 7 players for thirty seconds is beyond me. That plus strange icing or non icing calls, arbitrary 'body checking' calls that seem to make no sense and blatant turning the other way on trips, holding and interference add up to games that should not be close but wind up that way because of this nonsense. Not that Harvard doesn't deserve the penalties it receives; I'd just like the calls to go both ways.

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

Just a problem with how the press box is set-up behind one goal. Unlike some other rinks with set ups like the Bright, they usually give the benefit of the doubt on shots through traffic or wide on the side away from the press box (I can confirm, it's a pain trying to see what shots actually got through). Since Princeton attacked that end twice...
It's fun looking at the shot counts at some of the men's road games I've been at where the visiting team does not get that doubt, but the home team does.

I hear you. I had to do games at Walter Brown Arena and Bright and being at one end does make it difficult to see exactly how many shots are launched on goal. Not impossible mind you but difficult.

Believe it or not, Meehan Auditorium at Brown even with their poor lighting has a good press box area near center ice where you can see both ends of the ice clearly without obstruction.

 

[alslammerz]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

I hear you. I had to do games at Walter Brown Arena and Bright and being at one end does make it difficult to see exactly how many shots are launched on goal. Not impossible mind you but difficult.

Believe it or not, Meehan Auditorium at Brown even with their poor lighting has a good press box area near center ice where you can see both ends of the ice clearly without obstruction.

Meehan does have a nice press box (aka one at center ice). Hobey Baker and Starr make me feel like I need a helmet to avoid all the pucks that come into the press box. Messa might be the oddest as they have the press box and statistician behind the opposition goal (1st and 3rd ) while the broadcast area is at center ice - so the shot count really sometimes feels off compared to the game. HFH's radio broadcasting area is a catwalk that had terrible sightlines on the near side and then they hung up a giant championship banner so that you can't see the far side either. Lynah's fine, Ingalls is a little low compared to the fans for my taste, Thompson and Cheel are both nice, Appleton is great except it can be a little hard to see the near corners and Quinnipiac's is another top notch press box for sight lines.

That said, I love the Bright's charms, even if I have to duck down to see underneath a light fixture just to see some of the scoreboard.

 

[Hux]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

There you go. Another example of officials not doing their job. How you can miss 7 players for thirty seconds is beyond me. That plus strange icing or non icing calls, arbitrary 'body checking' calls that seem to make no sense and blatant turning the other way on trips, holding and interference add up to games that should not be close but wind up that way because of this nonsense. Not that Harvard doesn't deserve the penalties it receives; I'd just like the calls to go both ways.

Unfortunately, an all too often occurrence, regardless of the level. Personally, I think officiating should be done goal judge style, with someone looking down ice from either end so that things aren't missed. Not practical, I suppose, but it seems you see more sitting up in the stands 10 rows back in the corner than you do 10 feet away on the ice.

 

[Veritas]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

There you go. Another example of officials not doing their job. How you can miss 7 players for thirty seconds is beyond me. That plus strange icing or non icing calls, arbitrary 'body checking' calls that seem to make no sense and blatant turning the other way on trips, holding and interference add up to games that should not be close but wind up that way because of this nonsense. Not that Harvard doesn't deserve the penalties it receives; I'd just like the calls to go both ways.

I fully concur! I have been watching some very strange calls lately. I have been watching hockey for many years. I am not an expert on the fine print of all the hockey rules but I have a basic understanding and know what icing is. It may sound odd but after this week's games I looked at the NCAA rules to see if there had been recent changes in the definition of what icing is. (There haven't been)

 

[OnMAA]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

It may sound odd but after this week's games I looked at the NCAA rules to see if there had been recent changes in the definition of what icing is. (There haven't been)

IIRC, there was a change to the icing rules at the start of last season (10-11).

 

[Hux]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

IIRC, there was a change to the icing rules at the start of last season (10-11).

Good rule too. While not like the NHL's rule where the player has to touch the puck first to wave off the icing, if the "icing" team has a player that is in position to beat the opposition to the puck the icing is waved off.

 

[D2D]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

Video highlights from the weekend:

Game 1 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=n6EMui5Gbzg

Game 2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=sLirNSchy14#!

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

After a game last season, I had a chance to talk to Katey Stone and her assistants about officiating. During that game (I can't remember the opponent), there were at least three or four calls that should have been made on both teams but were not. I asked Coach Stone how she deals with the inconsistency and her answer surprised me. She said that she was just as confused as the fans regarding calls such as bodychecking and why some officials call it and some don't. She felt that from game to game, it was hard to know what the officials were going to call or let go.

Ultimately, it's about playing your game and not worrying about the officials or the other team. But it is a fact that the officials are throwing themselves more and more into these games and making themselves a factor and in the process disrupting the flow and continuity of the game. It affected Harvard big time this weekend and for the life of me, I don't understand what these officials see in Harvard's style of play that necessitates some of their calls while they let the opposition get away with holding, tripping and interference. Just doesn't add up.

 

[DC78-82]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

After a game last season, I had a chance to talk to Katey Stone and her assistants about officiating. During that game (I can't remember the opponent), there were at least three or four calls that should have been made on both teams but were not. I asked Coach Stone how she deals with the inconsistency and her answer surprised me. She said that she was just as confused as the fans regarding calls such as bodychecking and why some officials call it and some don't. She felt that from game to game, it was hard to know what the officials were going to call or let go.

Ultimately, it's about playing your game and not worrying about the officials or the other team. But it is a fact that the officials are throwing themselves more and more into these games and making themselves a factor and in the process disrupting the flow and continuity of the game. It affected Harvard big time this weekend and for the life of me, I don't understand what these officials see in Harvard's style of play that necessitates some of their calls while they let the opposition get away with holding, tripping and interference. Just doesn't add up.

As a player and a spectator, I think the biggest problem is that some of the officials are inconsistent within one game. Ideally, you feel the officiating out in the opening minutes of play, and what you get is what you will have for the remainder of the game. What I see so often, particularly as regards contact in the women's game, is that the officials set the tone early, and then change it by either putting the whistles away or, as you said, injecting themselves into the game at center stage.

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

As a player and a spectator, I think the biggest problem is that some of the officials are inconsistent within one game. Ideally, you feel the officiating out in the opening minutes of play, and what you get is what you will have for the remainder of the game. What I see so often, particularly as regards contact in the women's game, is that the officials set the tone early, and then change it by either putting the whistles away or, as you said, injecting themselves into the game at center stage.

Agreed. I get that officials are human and prone to make a mistake or two here and there. But having played the game and talked to officials at the international level at a World Junior tournament, I have a hard time accepting the arbitrary nature of some of these calls. I don't want to come across as simply a Harvard zealot who thinks the world is out to get us. Because I've seen it in other games not involving Harvard and it has to be somewhat infuriating to both coaches and players.

 

[alslammerz]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

On a separate topic, nice of the league to announce the whole "semifinals and finals will be played at the top seed" thing.

(I admit to not reading the women's releases as much as I used to but when I saw others had made that mistake on USCHO up through this weekend I felt a little bit better and now feel like the league must have just done a poor job of letting people know that switch was happening.)

 

[dave1381]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

Not sure when they made the switch: the ECAC did have the format switch up on their web site during this past weekend. I could have sworn I checked it earlier in the season and it was still business as usual.

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

Not sure when they made the switch: the ECAC did have the format switch up on their web site during this past weekend. I could have sworn I checked it earlier in the season and it was still business as usual.

I checked it as late as January and it was business as usual. It listed "campus sites" for the semifinal round. So I'm not sure when the reversal took place but it sure feels like a shaft job for the #2 seed which just happens to be Harvard in this case. Imagine if Clarkson had fought their way into second place on the last day of the season only to find out they were headed to Ithaca with no home ice for the semis. I sure they would have been thrilled with that news.

 

[OnMAA]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

I checked it as late as January and it was business as usual. It listed "campus sites" for the semifinal round. So I'm not sure when the reversal took place but it sure feels like a shaft job for the #2 seed which just happens to be Harvard in this case. Imagine if Clarkson had fought their way into second place on the last day of the season only to find out they were headed to Ithaca with no home ice for the semis. I sure they would have been thrilled with that news.

Should the format not be something all teams are advised on BEFORE the start of the season. If that is/was the case, it sure was the best kept secret.

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

Should the format not be something all teams are advised on BEFORE the start of the season. If that is/was the case, it sure was the best kept secret.

It's possible that the coaches and players were informed prior to the season that the format would revert back to the highest seed hosting the semis and finals and that it was never posted until recently. But again for the second seed's fans expecting another home game, it is a bitter pill to swallow and I can tell you in the case of Harvard, you won't get our fans to travel to Ithaca. There will be a revenue loss there for sure as opposed to our hosting a game at Bright.