NMU @ Anchorage: We're Going Up North Again, Eh?

[Suze]

Re: NMU @ Anchorage: We're Going Up North Again, Eh?

It was a terrific visit to Anchorage. The UAA staff went above & beyond and the people of Anchorage were incredibly friendly. The nice weather was a great bonus consider temperatures around or below zero back Marquette! Looking forward to next year

Very glad to hear you had a good time here, that's what UAA strives for! Stay warm back home.

 

[Alaska Hockey]

Re: NMU @ Anchorage: We're Going Up North Again, Eh?

It was a terrific visit to Anchorage. The UAA staff went above & beyond and the people of Anchorage were incredibly friendly. The nice weather was a great bonus consider temperatures around or below zero back Marquette! Looking forward to next year

Chuck had a good time I am sure.

 

[Suze]

Re: NMU @ Anchorage: We're Going Up North Again, Eh?

I think I figured out why UAA is listed in the top 5 for shots against. It's because the shot counter at the Sully falls asleep amid the period. NMU had 6 minutes of PP in the first period, and their shot count never changed from 1.

Not only is the SOG count inaccurate for NMU, but Kamal's save % suffers because of it.

Figure this sh*t out UAA!!!!!!!

I just watched the replay of the first period, and I counted 5 shots for the Wildcats, which is what the official shot count was. As improbable as it seems, Northern Michigan did NOT get a single shot on net during their two 5 on 3's and the other power play. UAA did an excellent job of getting sticks in lanes and deflecting the puck away, as well as blocking shots. Northern suffered from what ailed UAA on Friday night, they shot high and wide. So while I agree the shot counts are not always accurate, in this case they were spot on.

 

[UAA08]

I just watched the replay of the first period, and I counted 5 shots for the Wildcats, which is what the official shot count was. As improbable as it seems, Northern Michigan did NOT get a single shot on net during their two 5 on 3's and the other power play. UAA did an excellent job of getting sticks in lanes and deflecting the puck away, as well as blocking shots. Northern suffered from what ailed UAA on Friday night, they shot high and wide. So while I agree the shot counts are not always accurate, in this case they were spot on.

Thanks for checking. It makes me feel better, at least.

 

[Alaska Hockey]

Re: NMU @ Anchorage: We're Going Up North Again, Eh?

Thanks for checking. It makes me feel better, at least.

Maybe you should go to a craft shop and get supplies to make a save-o-meter to the shades of the old ref-o-meter. and keep track of saves at the game.

 

[Suze]

Re: NMU @ Anchorage: We're Going Up North Again, Eh?

Maybe you should go to a craft shop and get supplies to make a save-o-meter to the shades of the old ref-o-meter. and keep track of saves at the game.

That's actually a pretty good idea. But would fans boo if they disagreed like they disagreed with the refs calls? Those were the days!! I think ninelives still has that ref-o-meter somewhere.

 

[UAA08]

Maybe you should go to a craft shop and get supplies to make a save-o-meter to the shades of the old ref-o-meter. and keep track of saves at the game.

Or I could just continue to assume that the scorekeeper is *******in up, and Suze will continue to call my bluff. Sounds less expensive to go with the latter.

 

[davyd83]

I just watched the replay of the first period, and I counted 5 shots for the Wildcats, which is what the official shot count was. As improbable as it seems, Northern Michigan did NOT get a single shot on net during their two 5 on 3's and the other power play. UAA did an excellent job of getting sticks in lanes and deflecting the puck away, as well as blocking shots. Northern suffered from what ailed UAA on Friday night, they shot high and wide. So while I agree the shot counts are not always accurate, in this case they were spot on.

I would agree there. But after the shot count seemed low in the first period Friday, I kept shots for the second and third and found it to be off by a few each way. A shot that would have scored had the goalie not stopped it is a shot on goal. I saw a couple from both sides that were sent down the ice from beyond center that the keepers stopped that weren't counted. I also saw multiple attemps that weren't counted. I've also seen many places that aren't well versed on the definition and count it when the goalie catches one or sticks one that was headed wide

 

[revfnb]

Re: NMU @ Anchorage: We're Going Up North Again, Eh?

The biggest problem I have with the UAA hockey game is the person that rules what is and is not a shot on the goal. I am afraid that I have got way to worked up over it. Too many times it completed ruin the evening for me. If the goalie stops or fails to stop the puck from going into the net it is shot on the goal. However, who ever does it for UAA must be a major supporter because I have not silent about it. If the shot on goal is beyond the blue line it becomes a none shot unless it goes in. It just doesn't matter what the NCAA rule book def. says for the person ruling on the shots on goal at the Sullivan.

 

[Jimjamesak]

Re: NMU @ Anchorage: We're Going Up North Again, Eh?

Are we arguing about shot counts again?
<img src="http://denver.mylittlefacewhen.com/media/f/img/mlfw5199-aj-noonecares.png"></img>

Do we seriously need to do this for the umpteenth billion time?

 

[Suze]

Re: NMU @ Anchorage: We're Going Up North Again, Eh?

I would agree there. But after the shot count seemed low in the first period Friday, I kept shots for the second and third and found it to be off by a few each way. A shot that would have scored had the goalie not stopped it is a shot on goal. I saw a couple from both sides that were sent down the ice from beyond center that the keepers stopped that weren't counted. I also saw multiple attemps that weren't counted. I've also seen many places that aren't well versed on the definition and count it when the goalie catches one or sticks one that was headed wide

I watched the Alabama Huntsville / Wisconsin game, and the Chargers didn't get a shot on goal until the first period was almost over. It was a clearing attempt that wasn't icing because the Badger goalie stopped it. The fans all cheered because it was, in their opinion, (and the opinion of the shot keeper), a shot on goal. However, I have always heard that the shot should not be counted unless it was taken with the intent to score.

Also, depending on where you are sitting in the arena, it can be hard to tell if a shot is actually on net or if it's going wide. I think there should be two people counting shots, it's not as easy as it looks. During the Mankato series the puck flew up into the air, over Kamal's head, and he grabbed it out of the air. This was counted as a SOG and that was totally wrong.

 

[Suze]

Re: NMU @ Anchorage: We're Going Up North Again, Eh?

Are we arguing about shot counts again?
<img src="http://denver.mylittlefacewhen.com/media/f/img/mlfw5199-aj-noonecares.png"></img>

Do we seriously need to do this for the umpteenth billion time?

As long as the problem persists people will discuss it.