Hockey East Quarterfinals: #6 UNH @ #3 BU

[25 N Countin']

Re: Hockey East Quarterfinals: #6 UNH @ #3 BU

I hate so much that this wasn't on TV. Sounded like a pretty unreal effort from both teams, but especially Millan.

 

[goblue]

Re: Hockey East Quarterfinals: #6 UNH @ #3 BU

All I can say is "wow". What a thrilling game. Congrats to both teams, but especially to BU for persevering an incredible UNH onslaught and ultimately winning the game.

 

[billb]

Re: Hockey East Quarterfinals: #6 UNH @ #3 BU

It was a good game, and I was impressed by UNH's discipline, hustle, and positional play.
Yes, the officials were tired.
Nice job, BU. Good luck.

 

[GoUNH]

Re: Hockey East Quarterfinals: #6 UNH @ #3 BU

What a series. Congrats BU and good luck the rest of the way.

 

[pirate]

Re: Hockey East Quarterfinals: #6 UNH @ #3 BU

I hate so much that this wasn't on TV. Sounded like a pretty unreal effort from both teams, but especially Millan.

Well, there are a few scenarios in double OT, this was the one where the team with the most chances gives up one rush and loses. I had just told my son that UNH was going to score because BU couldn't get it out of their zone. TG for Megan, he creates opportunities that didn't exist a second earlier.

BU looked so bad earlier that i got up and walked away...as Bernie and Tom said, they looked disinterested. They had one good PP and then got the 3 quick goals.

Tough one for UNH because they fought for the lead and then once they relinquished it, they didn't give up. Nobody would have been surprised if BU had won 7-4 once the got that early goal in the 3rd.

 

[Carmine Scarpaglia]

Re: Hockey East Quarterfinals: #6 UNH @ #3 BU

Congrats to the Terriers. See you Friday (and Saturday too).

 

[Happy Husky]

Re: Hockey East Quarterfinals: #6 UNH @ #3 BU

Whoop whoop!-go Terriers!

 

[steakbomb]

Re: Hockey East Quarterfinals: #6 UNH @ #3 BU

Great series. Neither team quit. Truly a weekend of hockey I won't soon forget.

 

[Nifty16]

Re: Hockey East Quarterfinals: #6 UNH @ #3 BU

Well my first trip down to Agganis will be a memorable one. Thought I was to happy with the outcome, have to say that was one great game and both teams put everything out there. The Cats have nothing to be ashamed of, they went down with a huge fight tonight, dam you Milan I will not be upset to see you leave

 

[JB]

Re: Hockey East Quarterfinals: #6 UNH @ #3 BU

This game was like a classic boxing match. UNH seemed to punch themselves out by 10 min. in to the 2nd. BU was done 5 min into the 3rd. You could see the legs go away. They both left it all on the ice this weekend.

 

[Gibber]

Re: Hockey East Quarterfinals: #6 UNH @ #3 BU

Congrats to BU, and great job UNH for playing tough until the end.
I'll echo what Nifty said. Millan has owned UNH since his freshman year, or at least it seems that way...
(not making excuses since you can't expect to win blowing a 4-1 lead that late in the 2nd period, but can anyone tell me why that was waved off after being called a goal on the ice?)

 

[Darius]

Re: Hockey East Quarterfinals: #6 UNH @ #3 BU

During the first intermission I heard it was because Downing's stick hit Milan in the head before the goal. Is that illegal? Why was a penalty not called?

 

[CLS]

Re: Hockey East Quarterfinals: #6 UNH @ #3 BU

Congrats to BU, and great job UNH for playing tough until the end.
I'll echo what Nifty said. Millan has owned UNH since his freshman year, or at least it seems that way...
(not making excuses since you can't expect to win blowing a 4-1 lead that late in the 2nd period, but can anyone tell me why that was waved off after being called a goal on the ice?)

Don't know, I was there, and they didn't announce why. The scorer chopped at the puck twice. The second chop knocked the puck in, but I think the first chop may have nicked Millan's mask. That would be a violation, and I think that would be consistent with the fact that the ensuing faceoff was in the UNH end.

 

[brassbonanza]

Re: Hockey East Quarterfinals: #6 UNH @ #3 BU

Congrats to BU, and great job UNH for playing tough until the end.
I'll echo what Nifty said. Millan has owned UNH since his freshman year, or at least it seems that way...
(not making excuses since you can't expect to win blowing a 4-1 lead that late in the 2nd period, but can anyone tell me why that was waved off after being called a goal on the ice?)

The puck was played by a high stick. The UNH guy batted it down out of the air to himself fairly clearly with a high stick, then put it in without it touching Millan or any BU stick.

Edit: I wrote that before watching that highlight video. The angle they showed on the jumbotron last night was different from that one, and it did seem much clearer that the UNH guy made contact with the puck above the crossbar then knocked it in.

 

[JB]

Re: Hockey East Quarterfinals: #6 UNH @ #3 BU

They didn't announce but the ruling must have been played with a high stick: 1) no goal, 2) face-off in UNH's end, 3) no penalty. I don't believe they can rule on the penalty in review. I was at BU and the review they played once on the screen was no clearer than this one, may have been the same, and it was played once. From that one view i have no idea how you rule that a high stick when the call on the ice was goal. There is nothing indisputable that the play was above the cross bar. Downing's stick hits the puck below Downing's shoulders, and at Milan's shoulders, but Milan is a little over half way down to the butterfly.

The ruling didn't happen until BUnyon went into view the replay also. Please note the BU captain went from talking to Jack to BUnyon then BUnyon went into also review the play. Prior to that BUnyon was standing at center ice after talking to Umile. So I chalk it up to Jeff being affraid of Jack...

Would love it if a rule expert would chime in on this one for the rest of us. It is to much to ask Hockey East to explain themselves.

 

[KnightsOfTheRound]

Re: Hockey East Quarterfinals: #6 UNH @ #3 BU

Are we sure the high stick didn't nick Millan in the mask? I don't know if you could prove it based on just the video above but it looks like it is a possibility and maybe the referees had another view

 

[BUTerrierfan]

They didn't announce but the ruling must have been played with a high stick: 1) no goal, 2) face-off in UNH's end, 3) no penalty. I don't believe they can rule on the penalty in review. I was at BU and the review they played once on the screen was no clearer than this one, may have been the same, and it was played once. From that one view i have no idea how you rule that a high stick when the call on the ice was goal. There is nothing indisputable that the play was above the cross bar. Downing's stick hits the puck below Downing's shoulders, and at Milan's shoulders, but Milan is a little over half way down to the butterfly.

The ruling didn't happen until BUnyon went into view the replay also. Please note the BU captain went from talking to Jack to BUnyon then BUnyon went into also review the play. Prior to that BUnyon was standing at center ice after talking to Umile. So I chalk it up to Jeff being affraid of Jack...

Would love it if a rule expert would chime in on this one for the rest of us. It is to much to ask Hockey East to explain themselves.

Here's the deal:
The ruling for a high stick is based upon the crossbar, not the players shoulder height (shoulders were a decade ago). If a player contacts the puck with his stick it is ruled where the puck and stick make contact with each other. If that contact point is above the crossbar, it is ruled as a high stick. If that player or any player of the same team is the first one to touch the puck after the high stick occurs, no matter how the next contact is made (stick, glove, etc), it is ruled a high sticking infraction and play is blown dead. Further, if the puck is high sticked and hits the goalie or opposing player and then enters the net, it is still no goal.

Penalties cannot be reviewed during replay. Replay's only purpose is to determine if the puck legally entered the net or not (there are a host of criteria for that). That being said, the League may use game tapes and even the video review feed to determine if a penalty (or non called penalty) is subject to additional supplementary discipline against a player in the game by the League which would occur well after the game has ended. The on ice officials may not use replay for that purpose at all.

 

[C-H-C]

Re: Hockey East Quarterfinals: #6 UNH @ #3 BU

The video appears to show Downing making an upward motion with his stick in an apparent attempt to bat the puck away from Millan. During the follow through, the blade of his stick is above his shoulder. Subsequently, the puck descends to just below Downing's knees and he bats it into the goal. I assume the upward swat with his stick lead to the eventual, high-stick ruling.

 

[Agganis]

Re: Hockey East Quarterfinals: #6 UNH @ #3 BU

The video appears to show Downing making an upward motion with his stick in an apparent attempt to bat the puck away from Millan. During the follow through, the blade of his stick is above his shoulder. Subsequently, the puck descends to just below Downing's knees and he bats it into the goal. I assume the upward swat with his stick lead to the eventual, high-stick ruling.

I can't see any claim that the stick was above the crossbar. This leaves two options: they ruled the stick made contact with Millan in the crease (it looks like it may have hit his mask) and could not assess a penalty for contact to the head, goaltender interference, or high sticking because it was a replay, so instead they sent the face off all the way to the other end; or Jack paid them more than he normally does (is he using the money saved on Coyle's scholarship for that?). Granted this replay only has one angle and I'm sure the ref's had more at their disposal during the game, I had no idea what happened live as I was about as far from that goal as is possible while still being in the seating bowl.

 

[C-H-C]

Re: Hockey East Quarterfinals: #6 UNH @ #3 BU

I can't see any claim that the stick was above the crossbar. This leaves two options: they ruled the stick made contact with Millan in the crease (it looks like it may have hit his mask) and could not assess a penalty for contact to the head, goaltender interference, or high sticking because it was a replay, so instead they sent the face off all the way to the other end; or Jack paid them more than he normally does (is he using the money saved on Coyle's scholarship for that?). Granted this replay only has one angle and I'm sure the ref's had more at their disposal during the game, I had no idea what happened live as I was about as far from that goal as is possible while still being in the seating bowl.

With all the possible interpretations, no wonder it took the refs so long to review the video and make the decision.