What's new
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.

The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration

Defkit, in all honesty.. the BU player who was hit from behind from Alex Tuckerman (NU), did a bit of selling himself.. That could (should) have been a 2 min call. I understand ref discretion.. but in my opinion, if you gave that a 5...

well, anyhow, the selling was obvious on both ends :)
 
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration

I forgot to post this last night, but the NU band's total butchering of Brass Bonanza last night was despicable.
 
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration

Oh and another thing - can it be contact to the head high sticking if your stick doesn't actually make contact with the head? Just curious.

No, but it can be cross-checking, which is what shows up in the box score:

http://www.hockeyeastonline.com/men/boxes10.php?mbu_noe1.f01

It reminded me of JVR's cross check on Costa at the end of the second UNH/NU game last year (that so endeared him to the DogHouse) and he got 5.
 
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration

I forgot to post this last night, but the NU band's total butchering of Brass Bonanza last night was despicable.

the fanboy's total lack of enthusiasm for most of the game was predictable.
 
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration

the fanboy's total lack of enthusiasm for most of the game was predictable.

so we have one fanboy? sure, every group had a bad apple or two.

but to what you were trying to say, I whole heartedly agree, there was no enthusiasm from anywhere in the BU sections. if only your own fans agreed with you..

Well, congrats to BU (again). You guys earned the win. One thing I do like about the BU fanbase is that they celebrate each Beanpot win as though they don't win it every year. As an NU fan I can appreciate a fanbase not taking success for granted.
 
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration

I watched parts of the game again today, and took a close look at those penalties at the end. I really do think Tuckerman's hit from behind was unintentional. He obviously felt terrible about it afterwards, hanging around there to make sure he was ok. If you look at it it's kind of just an unfortunate change of direction for both guys on the ice. It's a pentalty, no question about that... But the fact that it wasn't a bonehead move makes me wonder if the 5 minutes was really the best decision there.

And then obviously I'm partial on this one, but I couldn't believe a punch to the throat right in front of the ref didn't warrant a 5-minute as well.

But it is what it is, and in the grand scheme of things it was a well officiated game, and a great game to watch on both ends. Much more fun that the BC/Harvard game... we had fans to chant at, and we had a real game to watch.
 
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration

Defkit, in all honesty.. the BU player who was hit from behind from Alex Tuckerman (NU), did a bit of selling himself.. That could (should) have been a 2 min call. I understand ref discretion.. but in my opinion, if you gave that a 5...

well, anyhow, the selling was obvious on both ends :)

I don't think the Tuckerman hit was sold, but I don't think it should have been called a major. There didn't look to be intent, and it was more from the side. I could understand that being a 2 and Warsofsky getting a double minor, but the live calls aren't always what we see on the replay in this league. :rolleyes:

No, but it can be cross-checking, which is what shows up in the box score:

http://www.hockeyeastonline.com/men/boxes10.php?mbu_noe1.f01

It reminded me of JVR's cross check on Costa at the end of the second UNH/NU game last year (that so endeared him to the DogHouse) and he got 5.

Generally a hit like that would get hitting after the whistle or roughing because it was after the whistle.
 
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration

I watched parts of the game again today, and took a close look at those penalties at the end. I really do think Tuckerman's hit from behind was unintentional. He obviously felt terrible about it afterwards, hanging around there to make sure he was ok. If you look at it it's kind of just an unfortunate change of direction for both guys on the ice. It's a pentalty, no question about that... But the fact that it wasn't a bonehead move makes me wonder if the 5 minutes was really the best decision there.

And then obviously I'm partial on this one, but I couldn't believe a punch to the throat right in front of the ref didn't warrant a 5-minute as well.

But it is what it is, and in the grand scheme of things it was a well officiated game, and a great game to watch on both ends. Much more fun that the BC/Harvard game... we had fans to chant at, and we had a real game to watch.

You're going to have a really hard time arguing that Tuckerman's hit should not have been a major. From about the bottom of the face-off circle, the BU player (Esco, Castro?) had his back facing Tuckerman. He had all the time in the world to pull up, but he didn't. I don't doubt that he was concerned that he may have hurt the BU player, but he saw numbers and didn't pull up.
 
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration

I think the Tuckerman call was a valid one. It looked from the replays that he gave a push to the BU guy (it could have been something else). But there certainly was more than just a bump.

That being said, I think there's an argument that Warso gets the day off from Parker. I don't think it's going to happen, but it was dirty, and there was no reason to do it (it's not like he's protecting his player or goalie in a scrum).
 
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration

And then obviously I'm partial on this one, but I couldn't believe a punch to the throat right in front of the ref didn't warrant a 5-minute as well.

Because it wasn't a punch. There's a huge difference between taking your hands off your stick and blatantly punching someone, and shoving/checking at them with your stick after a whistle.
 
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration

Because it wasn't a punch. There's a huge difference between taking your hands off your stick and blatantly punching someone, and shoving/checking at them with your stick after a whistle.
Still is a dirty play though, and a cheap shot.
 
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration

Still is a dirty play though, and a cheap shot.

Absolutely it was ridiculously dumb and stupid and unprovoked, but it's not on the level of punching a guy unprovoked. In reality plays similar to that happen after the whistle during the game and sometimes they're whistled for matching minors. In those cases it's usually provoked by someone hitting the goalie or general scuffling. In this case it came seemingly from nowhere besides a huge mental lapse for #5 that can't be happening, but that's a weak 5 minuter. Anyone have a replay of the Tuckerman major?
 
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration

There's a huge difference between taking your hands off your stick and blatantly punching someone, and shoving/checking at them with your stick after a whistle.
it's not on the level of punching a guy unprovoked.
Aiming a stick - with both hands! - at a guy's throat is a bit worse than getting punched in the face by a guy wearing hockey gloves. I'd personally choose the latter.
 
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration

Aiming a stick - with both hands! - at a guy's throat is a bit worse than getting punched in the face by a guy wearing hockey gloves. I'd personally choose the latter.

He hits him first in the left shoulder, then follows through and hits him in the chin with his glove.
 
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration

Rewatch the video. MacLeod leans in, ever so slightly so the theory that he lost his balance and flailed his arms is crap, there was some embellishment there to make it look worse. Macleod's right leg is clearly angled as he leans toward Warsofsky and he moves his left arm up in clear anticipation of making contact with him. In fact, you can see that MacLeod sees Warsofsky take the shot at the goal after the offsides is called and breaks his skating path to his left, toward Warsofsky, so he maded the first move to initiate the contact. Warsofsky's stick first makes contact at his upper chest, and in the process of falling backwards, the stick moves up his chest and toward his chin. At no point does Warsofsky take his hand off his stick to punch or hit MacLeod, it only falls off after making contact. That's not a major and misconduct, I could see a double minor.

The penalty that could have been called here is shooting after the whistle, which I believe is a 10 minute misconduct, however that wouldn't be additional pp time.
 
Last edited:
Re: The 2010 Beanpot: Featuring One Team Under Consideration

He hits him first in the left shoulder, then follows through and hits him in the chin with his glove.
*DISCLAIMER* The following is intended primarily for bringing some blatantly biased, potentially humorous insight into the conversation. If you lack the human capacity for understanding, accepting, and/or appreciating lightheartedness, and are going to take the following analysis completely seriously, please skip ahead to the asterisk that succeeds the wall of text.

***

after watching the videos many many times, i keep coming up with the following: (this is going to be a little dense, but i feel the situation calls for it. bear with me)

1. play is blown dead after warsofsky corrals the puck behind the blue line and drags it back in offsides.
1a. I don't know what compels andy brickley to call it obviously offsides, the puck barely creeps out of the zone. from my vantage point in the garden, i saw the puck leave the zone, but it was awful close, waddnit?
2. warsofsky decides to unload a shot (whether it is to try and disguise the offsides or because he was under the impression it was onsides... depends on your interpretation of item 1a.)
3. macleod skates up to warsofsky, evidently uttering some pleasantries (again, i'll leave speculation as to what was said to personal judgements of how rivaling college hockey players might treat each other on the ice) let it be noted that if you watch macleod's skates, he at no point even intends on stopping himself from gliding into warsofsky. this is inviting a response from warsofsky, or as one may stretch a definition of an item out of a hockey rulebook (again, personal interpretation, mind you) known as instigating
4. now, visibly incensed at macleod's language (body, and potentially verbal), warsofsky's animal instincts take over and he raises his arms, stick firmly grasped with the wide grip common to penalized cross checking, and directs his blow towards macleod's chest. aiming upwards, warsofsky's left glove makes some (considerable) contact with the bottom of macleod's helmet cage. macleod responds by whipping his head back and flailing his arms up above his head as he falls to the ground as if he were just shot in a gay western. (not that there's anything wrong with that)
5. doghouse embarasses itself as it (vulgarly) ((is that even a word?)) compares an act of self defense to the malicious and vicious and nutritious hit from behind the audience witnessed 4 minutes and 34 seconds earlier.


* If you were one of the SUPERSERIOUS readers from before. I am all done. You didn't miss much. Carry on.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top