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.

NCAA Tournament Games

ARM said:
Was there a time when Syracuse was looking good? If so, I confess that I missed it.
Click to expand...

I thought they looked plenty good in the first and first half of the second. They were getting outshot, but if the game continued like that without Q getting it in gear about a half hour in, the Bobcats were going to lose.
 
TitleIXHockey said:
I thought they looked plenty good in the first and first half of the second. They were getting outshot, but if the game continued like that without Q getting it in gear about a half hour in, the Bobcats were going to lose.
Click to expand...
Ragged as it was early, Q had a shift midway through the first where they did everything but score. I didn't see Syracuse have anything that threatening. It seemed like a matter of time.
 
ARM said:
Ragged as it was early, Q had a shift midway through the first where they did everything but score. I didn't see Syracuse have anything that threatening. It seemed like a matter of time.
Click to expand...

Not the shot on the powerplay that hopped on Moloughny when she had a wide open net to shoot at?

FNiN8MRVQAQ-Kfi
 
Last edited:
TitleIXHockey said:
Not the shot on the powerplay that hopped on Moloughny when she had a wide open net to shoot at?
Click to expand...
Syracuse had zone time on that PP, and some moments where it looked like a goal was developing that never did. On that play, I thought she got handcuffed by the puck as much as anything. Agree to disagree on the level of goodness from the Orange.
 
Did my eyes deceive me on that last pair of matching minors in the Wisconsin-Clarkson game?

Clarkson player pushes Badger to the ice, and as she is falling, the Badger player's stick catches the Clarkson player in the face/neck. And the badger player gets a penalty for, I guess, failing to control her stick as she's falling to the ice because she was cross-checked?!? WT Fudge is that? (Take that censors!)

Wisconsin wasn't great, but they were good enough for today. Their slow 'Friday' game to start the weekend.
 
robertearle said:
Clarkson player pushes Badger to the ice, and as she is falling, the Badger player's stick catches the Clarkson player in the face/neck. And the badger player gets a penalty for, I guess, failing to control her stick as she's falling to the ice because she was cross-checked?!? *** is that?
Click to expand...
I saw it differently when they showed the other replay. It looked like a deliberate swing on the retaliation. She was lucky it wasn't five, because the stick caught her up high. I doubt it would have mattered as far as the game, because it would still have been 4-on-4 for two minutes, and the major penalty piece would mostly have been in the OT that never came.
 
ARM said:
I saw it differently when they showed the other replay. It looked like a deliberate swing on the retaliation. She was lucky it wasn't five, because the stick caught her up high. I doubt it would have mattered as far as the game, because it would still have been 4-on-4 for two minutes, and the major penalty piece would mostly have been in the OT that never came.
Click to expand...

Maybe you were looking at the first time the Clarkson player pushed her down. Badger skater goes down, gets back up, Clarkson player pushes her a second time, and as she is falling to the ice, her stick catches the Clarkson player.
 
ARM said:
I saw it differently when they showed the other replay. It looked like a deliberate swing on the retaliation. She was lucky it wasn't five, because the stick caught her up high. I doubt it would have mattered as far as the game, because it would still have been 4-on-4 for two minutes, and the major penalty piece would mostly have been in the OT that never came.
Click to expand...

"crosschecked"
 
robertearle said:
Maybe you were looking at the first time the Clarkson player pushed her down. Badger skater goes down, gets back up, Clarkson player pushes her a second time, and as she is falling to the ice, her stick catches the Clarkson player.
Click to expand...

Also pretty sure that was a textbook call since you have to control your stick at all times. This happened in the NHL several years ago as a player got a "high" stick for whacking a player in the face that was on the ice.

Edit: Here's the NCAA high sticking rule

Rule 64 - High-Sticking 64.1 High-Sticking - Carrying sticks above the height of 4 feet (the height of the goal cage) is prohibited. PENALTY—Minor. A player shall not violently use the stick for contact to the head or neck region of the opponent. PENALTY—Major, game misconduct or disqualification at the discretion of the referee.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top