Re: Minnesota Women's Hockey 2015-2016: Confection Free
I've got 'please wait'.
Anybody got video?
I've got 'please wait'.
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.
Minnesota Women's Hockey 2015-2016: Confection Free
- Thread starter brookyone
- Start date
- Status
Re: Minnesota Women's Hockey 2015-2016: Confection Free
Assuming the Live Stats' stats are right, the Beavers did a fantastic job in throttling the Gophers' first line, holding Brandt, Cameranesi an Potomak to no goals and what must be a season low of just 4 shots on goal. That will obviously have to change if the Gophers are to win the rematch tomorrow afternoon.
Assuming the Live Stats' stats are right, the Beavers did a fantastic job in throttling the Gophers' first line, holding Brandt, Cameranesi an Potomak to no goals and what must be a season low of just 4 shots on goal. That will obviously have to change if the Gophers are to win the rematch tomorrow afternoon.
FiveHoleFrenzy
Well-known member
Re: Minnesota Women's Hockey 2015-2016: Confection Free
A win is a win...One down, seven to go to win the league title.
A win is a win...One down, seven to go to win the league title.
2Bladedskates
New member
Re: Minnesota Women's Hockey 2015-2016: Confection Free
Weird officiating is an understatement. Felt the penalty on the Beavers late in the second was questionable at best. The official who called it was in the corner below the goal line and called the "rough" at center ice. The official at center ice did not call it as it appeared that both players were racing for the puck and collided, with the Gopher falling down. The winning goal was also questionable as many thought it was knocked in with a high stick. The officials said the video was "too grainey" to over turn. Tough way to lose for the Beavers who played one of their better games of the year.
Weird officiating is an understatement. Felt the penalty on the Beavers late in the second was questionable at best. The official who called it was in the corner below the goal line and called the "rough" at center ice. The official at center ice did not call it as it appeared that both players were racing for the puck and collided, with the Gopher falling down. The winning goal was also questionable as many thought it was knocked in with a high stick. The officials said the video was "too grainey" to over turn. Tough way to lose for the Beavers who played one of their better games of the year.
Re: Minnesota Women's Hockey 2015-2016: Confection Free
I thought both calls made were very questionable while some obvious stuff was allowed. It didn't seem to favor either side particularly (although I thought there were several hooking/interference penalties committed by the Beavers but I am willing to admit that may be my Gopher eyes) but allowed what I consider dangerous stuff by both teams. it was just unreliable and a real credit to both sides that neither escalated in the absence of control. One of the 2 linesmen had no idea how to hold a face off, someone needs to explain to him his goal is not to trick the players, get in there & drop the puck & get out. Instead he held on to the puck & I saw him feign dropping it then yelling at the centers for jumping. He also had a problem with offsides getting it wrong both ways for both teams a couple of time times.
The goal happened at the far end from us so my view was not great but it didn't look like the stick was above her shoulders though it was close enough to deserve a second look. They took long enough reviewing it.
I thought both calls made were very questionable while some obvious stuff was allowed. It didn't seem to favor either side particularly (although I thought there were several hooking/interference penalties committed by the Beavers but I am willing to admit that may be my Gopher eyes) but allowed what I consider dangerous stuff by both teams. it was just unreliable and a real credit to both sides that neither escalated in the absence of control. One of the 2 linesmen had no idea how to hold a face off, someone needs to explain to him his goal is not to trick the players, get in there & drop the puck & get out. Instead he held on to the puck & I saw him feign dropping it then yelling at the centers for jumping. He also had a problem with offsides getting it wrong both ways for both teams a couple of time times.
The goal happened at the far end from us so my view was not great but it didn't look like the stick was above her shoulders though it was close enough to deserve a second look. They took long enough reviewing it.
Re: Minnesota Women's Hockey 2015-2016: Confection Free
The UW series had some very 'weird' officiating too. Lots of stuff let go...and then with 2 minutes left in overtime they call a penalty. Next game, the refs call 3 straight penalties in the same team in the first handful of minutes...and then other stuff is let go.
The UW series had some very 'weird' officiating too. Lots of stuff let go...and then with 2 minutes left in overtime they call a penalty. Next game, the refs call 3 straight penalties in the same team in the first handful of minutes...and then other stuff is let go.
brookyone
Deport Right Wing Nuts
Re: Minnesota Women's Hockey 2015-2016: Confection Free
If they were looking at a replay courtesy Stretch Internet video stream I'm sure it was. Poor quality you absolutely could not watch in full screen mode.
Re: Minnesota Women's Hockey 2015-2016: Confection Free
hahaha.......I watched it in full screen but I couldn't read the players numbers! You are right.
Still better than nothing for me
hahaha.......I watched it in full screen but I couldn't read the players numbers! You are right.
Still better than nothing for me
2Bladedskates
New member
Re: Minnesota Women's Hockey 2015-2016: Confection Free
I agree that they let a lot of stuff go which I thought added to the game. Nothing real blatant that they missed IMO and they allowed both teams to play. It was just unfortunate that the weak penalty call lead to the winning goal. Everyone knows that if you are going to beat the Gophers you cannot play shorthanded. For what it is worth I thought the winning goal was a good call. From my vantage point her stick was shoulder high. Much to the dismay of the Beaver fans who had a much better view then me they said, "no question it was a high stick". Oh well, I think the Beavers proved to themselves and others that they can play with the Gophers. Let's see if they can two days in the road. Fear the Beaver!
I agree that they let a lot of stuff go which I thought added to the game. Nothing real blatant that they missed IMO and they allowed both teams to play. It was just unfortunate that the weak penalty call lead to the winning goal. Everyone knows that if you are going to beat the Gophers you cannot play shorthanded. For what it is worth I thought the winning goal was a good call. From my vantage point her stick was shoulder high. Much to the dismay of the Beaver fans who had a much better view then me they said, "no question it was a high stick". Oh well, I think the Beavers proved to themselves and others that they can play with the Gophers. Let's see if they can two days in the road. Fear the Beaver!
brookyone
Deport Right Wing Nuts
Re: Minnesota Women's Hockey 2015-2016: Confection Free
Likely a turn of events that just lights a fire under the Beavers today. As if we need that...
robertearle
Well-known member
Re: Minnesota Women's Hockey 2015-2016: Confection Free
The woman who does the Bemidji radio (and does a very good job of it) thought it was pretty clearly a high stick, both live and after replays available to her.
FWIW.
The woman who does the Bemidji radio (and does a very good job of it) thought it was pretty clearly a high stick, both live and after replays available to her.
FWIW.
2Bladedskates
New member
Re: Minnesota Women's Hockey 2015-2016: Confection Free
Kelly does a fantastic job on the Beaver radio network and if she said it was a high stick IT WAS! Too bad the Beavers couldn't pull the upset, but with a goal on a bad bounce that was kicked in by the Beaver's own player, a phantom rough call and a PP goal that was a high stick, can we say "The Beaver's got homered"? Oh wait a minute..... they were at home. Anyone know where the referees live ?
Kelly does a fantastic job on the Beaver radio network and if she said it was a high stick IT WAS! Too bad the Beavers couldn't pull the upset, but with a goal on a bad bounce that was kicked in by the Beaver's own player, a phantom rough call and a PP goal that was a high stick, can we say "The Beaver's got homered"? Oh wait a minute..... they were at home. Anyone know where the referees live
?I saw the replay on the Bemidji news and, while the stick may have been high, it appeared that the puck went in off of Piazza's body, not the stick. Hence, good goal.Kelly does a fantastic job on the Beaver radio network and if she said it was a high stick IT WAS! Too bad the Beavers couldn't pull the upset, but with a goal on a bad bounce that was kicked in by the Beaver's own player, a phantom rough call and a PP goal that was a high stick, can we say "The Beaver's got homered"? Oh wait a minute..... they were at home. Anyone know where the referees live
FiveHoleFrenzy
Well-known member
Re: Minnesota Women's Hockey 2015-2016: Confection Free
Minnesota is just deadly on the power play...
Minnesota is just deadly on the power play...
- Status