What's new
By:
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.

MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

Bakunin said:
He probably thought you guys still played at the old facility (which I think held around 1900 max?). :p
Click to expand...

2500.
Bakunin said:
Tougher to fill every seat when the arena holds over 10,000 and charges nearly $40 per ticket. :p Cripes, I imagine our parking rates down here rival the cost to attend ****ing games in some locales. :mad:
Click to expand...

Tickets for last night and tonight are $30-$40 depending on location. Add in ticketmaster fees, and you're at $37.68-$47.68. Can't argue parking though...

Oh, and Millsy once made a chart about size of rink compared to population, and BSU had something like the second largest per 10,000 people. (4373 in a town of about 30,000 compared to 10,000 in a metro area of 3.5 million)
 
Last edited:
Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

GoBeavers said:
Bush-league?, headhunted?, i was at the game and i also watched the game this morning. and the only thing that stood out besides the gophers getting outplayed was that Matson better learn to keep his head up,twice he had to pick him self up off the ice, once the the beavers had to push him back on the ice from there bench, and the last time the gophers had to pick him up off the ice.
Click to expand...

So, when the BSU guy swung his stick and hit the Gopher guy in the head (and got called for it, and played innocent), that's not headhunting? I love me some gritty play, but BSU was playing a little too chippy for my tastes last night.

I really hope that their play is an anamoly. I don't want to hate BSU.
 
Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

have you watched the replay? if you have you will notice that Lowe was trying to hit the puck out of the air and did'nt notice the gopher coming up from behind him. keep looking.
Brenthoven said:
So, when the BSU guy swung his stick and hit the Gopher guy in the head (and got called for it, and played innocent), that's not headhunting? I love me some gritty play, but BSU was playing a little too chippy for my tastes last night.

I really hope that their play is an anamoly. I don't want to hate BSU.
Click to expand...
 
Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

GoBeavers said:
Bush-league?, headhunted?, i was at the game and i also watched the game this morning. and the only thing that stood out besides the gophers getting outplayed was that Matson better learn to keep his head up,twice he had to pick him self up off the ice, once the the beavers had to push him back on the ice from there bench, and the last time the gophers had to pick him up off the ice.
Click to expand...
The first hit on Matson was a good hit. Matson sacrificed his body to make the play. That's toughness; not shying away from taking a lick in order to make a play on the puck.
The second hit on Matson was downright dirty, and knocked him out of the game. Extending your leg and checking with the knee is reckless and unnecessary in the game of hockey. It's especially frustrating after watching Ness get shoved in his back going head first into the boards and knocking him out of the game. I don't think the BSU player was trying to do it, that's just one of those plays that occasionally occurs in a fast-paced game. But it was from behind, Ness went head first into the boards, and he never returned to the ice. So that just adds fuel to the (yes, bush-league) hit on Matson that sent him to the locker room.

I have to say I was also surprised by how much BSU complained about obvious infractions. Brent already noting the guy who clubbed a Goipher over the head (I agree, I don't think it was intentional) and then had the gall to turn around and question the call.
Serratore complaining about a clear icing in overtime, and riding the ref for several minutes after play resumed about the crystal clear no-goal decision. That one really surprised me, becuase the guy had both feet n the crease, and his left foot had blue both in front of and behind it. I never pegged Serratore to play those kind of games with the refs.
thebrain said:
Gophers don't like to be touched, they think hockey is basketball and they didn't get the refs to make calls go their way. They're not used to all of this...
Click to expand...
Ask DU, Duluth, Wisconsin if MN doesn't like playing a physical game.
Try having a little bit of knowledge about a team before spouting off.
***** ridiculous.
 
Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

Typical Gopher fan summary of events.
Stauber1 said:
The first hit on Matson was a good hit. Matson sacrificed his body to make the play. That's toughness; not shying away from taking a lick in order to make a play on the puck.
The second hit on Matson was downright dirty, and knocked him out of the game. Extending your leg and checking with the knee is reckless and unnecessary in the game of hockey. It's especially frustrating after watching Ness get shoved in his back going head first into the boards and knocking him out of the game. I don't think the BSU player was trying to do it, that's just one of those plays that occasionally occurs in a fast-paced game. But it was from behind, Ness went head first into the boards, and he never returned to the ice. So that just adds fuel to the (yes, bush-league) hit on Matson that sent him to the locker room.

I have to say I was also surprised by how much BSU complained about obvious infractions. Brent already noting the guy who clubbed a Goipher over the head (I agree, I don't think it was intentional) and then had the gall to turn around and question the call.
Serratore complaining about a clear icing in overtime, and riding the ref for several minutes after play resumed about the crystal clear no-goal decision. That one really surprised me, becuase the guy had both feet n the crease, and his left foot had blue both in front of and behind it. I never pegged Serratore to play those kind of games with the refs.

Ask DU, Duluth, Wisconsin if MN doesn't like playing a physical game.
Try having a little bit of knowledge about a team before spouting off.
***** ridiculous.
Click to expand...
 
Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

Larch said:
The Gophers did not look good last night at all and the Beavers played pretty decent. I'm hoping for a better game out of the Gophers tonight. With that said, while I still think it wasn't a great call in the course of the game, I think the last call on Bjugstad was officially a high-stick call and not hooking. Some arguement could be made for that call, but it would still be pretty weak.
Click to expand...

It was officially a hooking call on Bjug at 19:20. Probably one of the top "worst calls" of this season. With less than a minute left, I would think a ref would prefer to be absolutely sure the call is the right one before the hand goes up. That puts BSU in a 6 on 4 adv., they flood the middle with bodies and Patterson didn't even see the shot from the point.

Does anyone know who put the two hits on Matson? Was it the same player? The first hit could have easily been a boarding call. It looked like the BSU player gave an extra effort and checked Matson into the boards, and he literally flipped head over heels over the boards and then moments later he got hit from the blindside and it looked like it hyperextended his leg near the knee area. I really hope for Taylor's sake, it's not serious...or he will not be a happy camper after already sitting out most of two seasons with knee and ankle injuries.
 
Last edited:
Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

should have been interference
NCAA Ice Hockey Rulebook said:
Interference
SECTION 29. a. A player shall not interfere with or impede the progress of
an opponent who is not in possession of the puck, deliberately knock a
stick out of an opponent’s hand, prevent a player who has dropped the
stick, or any other piece of equipment, from regaining possession of it
or knock or shoot any abandoned or broken stick or illegal puck or other
debris toward an opposing puck carrier in a manner that could cause the
player to be distracted.
 
Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

flyund said:
should have been interference
NCAA Ice Hockey Rulebook said:
Interference
SECTION 29. a. A player shall not interfere with or impede the progress of
an opponent who is not in possession of the puck, deliberately knock a
stick out of an opponent’s hand, prevent a player who has dropped the
stick, or any other piece of equipment, from regaining possession of it
or knock or shoot any abandoned or broken stick or illegal puck or other
debris toward an opposing puck carrier in a manner that could cause the
player to be distracted.
Click to expand...

If it had to be called something, yes. But it really should have been nothing. Hold on to your stick.
 
Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

flyund said:
should have been interference
NCAA Ice Hockey Rulebook said:
Interference
SECTION 29. a. A player shall not interfere with or impede the progress of
an opponent who is not in possession of the puck, deliberately knock a
stick out of an opponent's hand, prevent a player who has dropped the
stick, or any other piece of equipment, from regaining possession of it
or knock or shoot any abandoned or broken stick or illegal puck or other
debris toward an opposing puck carrier in a manner that could cause the
player to be distracted.
Click to expand...

The problem there is that the player WAS in possession of the puck.

It was a terrible call, but it's the WCHA, and you cannot expect anything better than the absolute worst when it comes to the officiating.
 
Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

Fighting Sioux 23 said:
The problem there is that the player WAS in possession of the puck.

It was a terrible call, but it's the WCHA, and you cannot expect anything better than the absolute worst when it comes to the officiating.
Click to expand...

I kind of like BSU, the goofs not so much... that being said the call was quite bad, especially given the time when it was called. It is a shame that WCHA teams have just had to come to expect this type of officiating from our refs...:mad:
 
Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

Fighting Sioux 23 said:
The problem there is that the player WAS in possession of the puck.
Click to expand...

Read the second part of the sentance (my emphasis)
flyund said:
should have been interference
NCAA Ice Hockey Rulebook said:
Interference
SECTION 29. a. A player shall not interfere with or impede the progress of
an opponent who is not in possession of the puck, deliberately knock a
stick out of an opponents hand, prevent a player who has dropped the
stick, or any other piece of equipment, from regaining possession of it
or knock or shoot any abandoned or broken stick or illegal puck or other
debris toward an opposing puck carrier in a manner that could cause the
player to be distracted.
Click to expand...

Each segment of the rule is intended to be applied on its own. It should have been listed as an interference penalty, but no matter what the box score says, it's a 2 minute minor and a BSU PP.
 
Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

Jeebus. I missed the call, but when two Sioux fans are saying the Gophers got screwed on the call, it must have been bad.
 
Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

moose97 said:
Read the second part of the sentance (my emphasis)


Each segment of the rule is intended to be applied on its own. It should have been listed as an interference penalty, but no matter what the box score says, it's a 2 minute minor and a BSU PP.
Click to expand...

I would disagree, but if you are going to apply the rulebook that strictly for that one call, there were about a dozen calls that should have been called (by the letter of the law) in last night's game against Bemidji that weren't. Given what the officials let slide, calling that call at that point in the game was a disgrace.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top