Still Eeyore
New member
That was the single worst disallowed goal I've ever seen in 40 years of watching hockey.
Do you mean the second one/Hemp, that they didn't review, rather than the Ostertag "goal"? Dan was perplexed by that one. If the referees are going to screw up (what are the odds of that), I'd prefer that they do it in a case like yesterday where the scoreboard has become less relevant.That was the single worst disallowed goal I've ever seen in 40 years of watching hockey.
Do you mean the second one/Hemp, that they didn't review, rather than the Ostertag "goal"? Dan was perplexed by that one. If the referees are going to screw up (what are the odds of that), I'd prefer that they do it in a case like yesterday where the scoreboard has become less relevant.
On the second one, what appeared to happen was that with the Beavers’ Larson laying in the net Ryhorchuk couldn’t see the puck bounce off Hogenson’s skate and go in the net after it hit the post. He doesn’t see the puck in the net until well after he blew the whistle. With that being the case, the question is whether Frost wasn’t allowed to challenge or chose not to with the score already 6-0. It was clear from the replays that the puck went in well before Ryhorchuk lifted the whistle to his mouth to blow the play dead.
The play is 'dead' when the ref decides to blow the whistle, not when he/she actually blows it. That is, it doesn't depend on how quickly he/she manages it, or whether he/she fumbles it on the way to their mouth etc. That means there's nothing to 'challenge'; the video won't show when he decided he couldn't see the puck anymore.
The problem is that the puck was never covered. If the ref lost sight of it, that means that he wasn't doing his job.
I believe the issue here is that the puck was in long before the ref thought it was. If the problem is that the ref is thinking, "The goalie has the puck covered so I can't see it and I'll blow the whistle," the coach should be able to challenge if the contention is that you can't see it because it was already in the net. In the college game, a timeout gets used on the first unsuccessful challenge. You can still challenge if you don't have a TO, but it is a penalty if you're wrong, like it is in the NHL. Regardless, I think that UM had its TO.But the comment was in response to the idea of Frost challenging or not challenging. It's pretty clear that the justification for the 'no goal' was the ref saying he lost sight of the puck, and that isn't challengeable.
I believe the issue here is that the puck was in long before the ref thought it was. If the problem is that the ref is thinking, "The goalie has the puck covered so I can't see it and I'll blow the whistle," the coach should be able to challenge if the contention is that you can't see it because it was already in the net. In the college game, a timeout gets used on the first unsuccessful challenge. You can still challenge if you don't have a TO, but it is a penalty if you're wrong, like it is in the NHL. Regardless, I think that UM had its TO.
Part of the struggles/improvement can be attributed to her, but the D playing in front of her gets some of the blame/credit. Vetter is similar to Leveille, in that she isn't the biggest goalie but she moves and competes well. That's great on odd-player rushes, but such goalies benefit greatly when their D can keep the net front reasonably clean. Leveille played behind such a D. Whatever their flaws, the current Gopher blue line features four fifth-year players plus another senior among the seven playing of late. By now, they should be familiar with the NCAA battles around the net (although Oden is new to D, she has been at center for awhile, and in the UM system, a center is like a third D at times when defending the net.) If you're forcing your goaltender to make tough saves, she isn't always going to control where the puck goes, so you'd better help clear rebounds or tie up those looking for them.Earlier in the season, she struggled in scrums around the crease, but has dramatically improved on that.
Last night, I finally got around to watching the telecast of Saturday's game. Up until then, I'd only seen this goal on a Twitter highlight on my phone, where it looked similar to how you described it. Seeing the entire play develop, it wasn't all on the Bemidji defender. The Gophers dump the puck into the zone and make the Bemidji defense turn and chase it. For some reason, the Bemidji right wing decides to remain at center ice with the other two BSU forwards, rather than coming back to support a breakout, leaving her behind Bouveng. All three Minnesota forwards join the forecheck. The Bemidji D wants to transition quickly, so after gaining control of the puck while skating towards her own goal line, she tries to make a 180-degree turn and simultaneously hit her right wing on the breakout. Only, that wing isn't there; Bouveng is. It looked like that as she turned and realized this, she tried to call off the launch of the pass (I remember trying to do something similar when making a throw in rec-league softball, with similarly disastrous result). She who hesitates is lost. Had she committed to trying to elevate the puck over Bouveng's stick in the instant, the odds are good that the puck at least goes for an icing. As it was, she took something off it and Bouveng made a good shot, which is within her skillset.The Gophers first goal came on possibly the worst defensive zone turnover I've ever seen.
Murphy also made a great backhand for the second goal, hustled to win a race to the puck and get it to Grace for the final goal, and drew three penalties. The glass isn't as empty as you describe it. Heise wasn't shut down for lack of opportunities. Not sure what happened on her chance at the end of the second period; it looked like she had a shot at the net with the goalie out, but perhaps it hit the Beaver laying in the crease. The camera in Bemidji was doing something flakey where it would totally lose focus at inopportune times. Heise's single point was certainly highlight-worthy.Murphy was still agitating and could have been called for infractions, but wasn't. Taylor Heise was held to a single point, which doesn't happen often.
UMD will take points this weekend. The Bulldogs are the best defensive team that I've watched this season. I'd make the Gophers a very slight favorite at best.The WCHA regular season title could be decided in two weeks when the Buckeyes visit Ridder, but Minnesota needs to take care of business against UMD first.
Murphy also made a great backhand for the second goal, hustled to win a race to the puck and get it to Grace for the final goal, and drew three penalties. The glass isn't as empty as you describe it.
At least two of them in this particular game were more of a case of her being dangerous with the puck and forcing the defense to try to stop her. However, it would be fair to say that she can fall rather easily at times. I agree with you in that she would be better served to skate away rather than instigate or respond. Talented players need to learn that they can't help their team from the penalty box.Drawing three penalties because you've been taking cheap shots and taunting to the point that players on the other team respond is not a positive attribute.
When I first showed up here ARM was already here, as was brookyone and some others. But I still see Arlan so I know that there is at least this one other observer who remembers that a split in Duluth is a good result.UMD will take points this weekend. The Bulldogs are the best defensive team that I've watched this season. I'd make the Gophers a very slight favorite at best.
In the pregame before Friday's contest it was described as an injury in practice that wasn't expected to keep her out long term. There was hope that she could return this week. She's been playing well, and it definitely helps the line depth if Huber can go.I may have missed some information about it but does anyone know the status of #26? Sick, Injured, or...