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 Michigan OT Goal
- Thread starter Neil Diamond
- Start date
UMDBulldogHockeyIsKing
Customized for Her Pleasure
Re: The Michigan OT Goal
Watched the replay with audio last night. No, it was not in before the whistle blew. It was right around the line, but not clearly over it. And furthermore, it was under Reiter's pads about 2-3 seconds before that. It was a slow whistle to start with. Don't blame Michigan's forwards for hacking away at it; it's what you're taught in squirts. But that puck was as dead as Charlie Sheen's career.
Watched the replay with audio last night. No, it was not in before the whistle blew. It was right around the line, but not clearly over it. And furthermore, it was under Reiter's pads about 2-3 seconds before that. It was a slow whistle to start with. Don't blame Michigan's forwards for hacking away at it; it's what you're taught in squirts. But that puck was as dead as Charlie Sheen's career.
wolverine318
Dark Lord of the Sith-Yost Regiment
Re: The Michigan OT Goal
Funny considering Michigan is higher than Northwestern in the world rankings.
Funny considering Michigan is higher than Northwestern in the world rankings.
wolverine318
Dark Lord of the Sith-Yost Regiment
Re: The Michigan OT Goal
check your ears. It was in a good 2 seconds before the whistle. You are like the UNO fans who still maintain the puck never crossed the line.
check your ears. It was in a good 2 seconds before the whistle. You are like the UNO fans who still maintain the puck never crossed the line.
Re: The Michigan OT Goal
I sat six rows from the ice, slightly to the side of the no-goal. I don't know what the announced reason the no-goal was, but my buddy (Sioux fan) and I agreed that it could have been 3 reasons:
1. Frozen puck (and just a slow whistle)
2. The "intent to blow the whistle"
3. Man in crease (we thought this was the least likely, and basically threw that in there as a "coulda/mighta/sorta" option)
We both agreed no goal, though.
I sat six rows from the ice, slightly to the side of the no-goal. I don't know what the announced reason the no-goal was, but my buddy (Sioux fan) and I agreed that it could have been 3 reasons:
1. Frozen puck (and just a slow whistle)
2. The "intent to blow the whistle"
3. Man in crease (we thought this was the least likely, and basically threw that in there as a "coulda/mighta/sorta" option)
We both agreed no goal, though.
MinnesotaNorthStar
Minding the gap
That's probably for the same reason Notre Dame football keeps getting ranked in the Top 25...name recognition.
wolverine318
Dark Lord of the Sith-Yost Regiment
Re: The Michigan OT Goal
or perhaps Michigan has the highest level of NIH funding in the country. More than Harvard, Princeton, Stanford, and Northwestern. Michigan is also in the top 3 for NSF funding. Michigan just produces great research in the basic, applied, and medical sciences.
That's probably for the same reason Notre Dame football keeps getting ranked in the Top 25...name recognition.
or perhaps Michigan has the highest level of NIH funding in the country. More than Harvard, Princeton, Stanford, and Northwestern. Michigan is also in the top 3 for NSF funding. Michigan just produces great research in the basic, applied, and medical sciences.
wolverine318
Dark Lord of the Sith-Yost Regiment
Re: The Michigan OT Goal
Hold on now wolverine....earlier you stated: "I don't like the call we received during the finals because I think the intent to blow the whistle is perhaps the worst rule in sports. However, it is what it is. No point in crying over spilled milk like some UNO fans."
Just above you said: "check your ears. It was in a good 2 seconds before the whistle. You are like the UNO fans who still maintain the puck never crossed the line."
I, along with many U!N!O! fans, moved on awhile ago. In fact, between your two posts above, there has been no mention whatsoever of the goal from the first round. The post above suggests a remaining bitterness on your behalf...just stating the facts...
And by the way, I agree with you, the intent to blow the whistle is a dumb rule.
Hold on now wolverine....earlier you stated: "I don't like the call we received during the finals because I think the intent to blow the whistle is perhaps the worst rule in sports. However, it is what it is. No point in crying over spilled milk like some UNO fans."
Just above you said: "check your ears. It was in a good 2 seconds before the whistle. You are like the UNO fans who still maintain the puck never crossed the line."
I, along with many U!N!O! fans, moved on awhile ago. In fact, between your two posts above, there has been no mention whatsoever of the goal from the first round. The post above suggests a remaining bitterness on your behalf...just stating the facts...
And by the way, I agree with you, the intent to blow the whistle is a dumb rule.
wolverine318
Dark Lord of the Sith-Yost Regiment
Re: The Michigan OT Goal
I never said if I agree with the goal or not. I am just stating facts. It was in the goal a good two seconds before the whistle. The ref made the correct call according to a really crappy rule that has zero accountability.
you are not stating facts about any bitterness.
I never said if I agree with the goal or not. I am just stating facts. It was in the goal a good two seconds before the whistle. The ref made the correct call according to a really crappy rule that has zero accountability.
you are not stating facts about any bitterness.
Re: The Michigan OT Goal
Gotcha there - misinterpreted what you said. You are stating that it was in the goal long before the whistle blew, but you agree that the refs intent to blow the whistle nullified the goal. It's just a stupid rule....although I'm still looking for evidence that U!N!O! fans are still showing bitterness....
Gotcha there - misinterpreted what you said. You are stating that it was in the goal long before the whistle blew, but you agree that the refs intent to blow the whistle nullified the goal. It's just a stupid rule....although I'm still looking for evidence that U!N!O! fans are still showing bitterness....
nudgy_olsen
New member
Re: The Michigan OT Goal
its a great rule. pace at the college level is in fractions of seconds, and in the time it takes for a whistle to be blown a lot can happen. the moment the ref intends to stop play, that is final. there are so many whistle malfunctions that can happen that this rule has to exist. slide off his fingers, get caught on a jersey thread, the pea could become frozen, he could be shielding himself from a shot or a body collision next to him, the list goes on. to think he's not allowed to stop play just cuz he couldn't blow a whistle literally the mili-second he wanted to is beyond retarded, and it shows a lot about people who really don't understand the philosophy behind the rule.
its a great rule. pace at the college level is in fractions of seconds, and in the time it takes for a whistle to be blown a lot can happen. the moment the ref intends to stop play, that is final. there are so many whistle malfunctions that can happen that this rule has to exist. slide off his fingers, get caught on a jersey thread, the pea could become frozen, he could be shielding himself from a shot or a body collision next to him, the list goes on. to think he's not allowed to stop play just cuz he couldn't blow a whistle literally the mili-second he wanted to is beyond retarded, and it shows a lot about people who really don't understand the philosophy behind the rule.
wolverine318
Dark Lord of the Sith-Yost Regiment
Re: The Michigan OT Goal
In this day and age of 1080p high definition video replay, it is a freaking moronic rule with zero accountability. If the ref did no blow the whistle too bad. Go to replay and see if the puck went it. Hockey should have the same replay and whistle rules as basketball.
The rule was meant to prevent dangerous play in front of the net. However, hockey players are taught from day one to play till the whistle blows. So players are still going to hack until they hear the whistle.
It is the most moronic rule. God helps us if the NBA joins the NHL and adopts the rule. The NBA is already fixed by big time bookies and vegas. Now lets give refs a rule where there can blow the whistle at will just because they can.
In this day and age of 1080p high definition video replay, it is a freaking moronic rule with zero accountability. If the ref did no blow the whistle too bad. Go to replay and see if the puck went it. Hockey should have the same replay and whistle rules as basketball.
The rule was meant to prevent dangerous play in front of the net. However, hockey players are taught from day one to play till the whistle blows. So players are still going to hack until they hear the whistle.
It is the most moronic rule. God helps us if the NBA joins the NHL and adopts the rule. The NBA is already fixed by big time bookies and vegas. Now lets give refs a rule where there can blow the whistle at will just because they can.
nudgy_olsen
New member
Re: The Michigan OT Goal
nope its a great rule, and it has to exist. you just don't get the philosophy. not sure what resolutions of tvs have to do with it. the rule existed way before televisions. replay slows down games. shouldn't have to do that for every decision. this rule prevents uses of replays for everything. the official has intent to stop play, anything occuring after doesn't count, and sometimes a coach has to swallow that.
no hockey and bball should absolutely not have the same rules, they are polar opposite games. the velocity of a puck entering a goal is mili seconds compared to the easily seen lofty float of a jump shot. hockey has rules tailored for hockey. for some reason you are talking more about basketball than about hockey.
you're just sounding silly now at the end. if you wanna go vegas conspiracy route this fast then you're just goofing around. hockey happens in milli seconds, and sometimes things happen with whistle blowing. the pace on the ice for officials is light speed compared to what you see in the seats or on your 1080 tv. the rule exists for great reasons, its important, and as of now there has been no abuse of it. the philosophy behind it is very sound.
wow that was pretty easy to dismantle, lol
nope its a great rule, and it has to exist. you just don't get the philosophy. not sure what resolutions of tvs have to do with it. the rule existed way before televisions. replay slows down games. shouldn't have to do that for every decision. this rule prevents uses of replays for everything. the official has intent to stop play, anything occuring after doesn't count, and sometimes a coach has to swallow that.
no hockey and bball should absolutely not have the same rules, they are polar opposite games. the velocity of a puck entering a goal is mili seconds compared to the easily seen lofty float of a jump shot. hockey has rules tailored for hockey. for some reason you are talking more about basketball than about hockey.
you're just sounding silly now at the end. if you wanna go vegas conspiracy route this fast then you're just goofing around. hockey happens in milli seconds, and sometimes things happen with whistle blowing. the pace on the ice for officials is light speed compared to what you see in the seats or on your 1080 tv. the rule exists for great reasons, its important, and as of now there has been no abuse of it. the philosophy behind it is very sound.
wow that was pretty easy to dismantle, lol
Re: The Michigan OT Goal
The rule also helps if a ref tries to blow the whistle, but due to crowd noise/malfunctioning whistle/etc the players don't hear it. I don't blame the Wolverines for poking at the goalie for the puck. Like you said, you play until you hear the whistle. That's fine, and it shows that they are disciplined in that aspect.
The rule also helps if a ref tries to blow the whistle, but due to crowd noise/malfunctioning whistle/etc the players don't hear it. I don't blame the Wolverines for poking at the goalie for the puck. Like you said, you play until you hear the whistle. That's fine, and it shows that they are disciplined in that aspect.
MinnesotaNorthStar
Minding the gap
So why does the clock stop when the whistle blows and not when the ref intends to blow it?
That's why the rule doesn't make sense.
wolverine318
Dark Lord of the Sith-Yost Regiment
Re: The Michigan OT Goal
You sound like the cranky old traditionalists that were against replay in major league baseball. Replays show what actually happened and not what the ref thinks what happened. They give credibility and accountability to refs to allow them to make the correct call. I am willing to spend a couple minutes to get the correct call. I cannot stand fans who feel differently.
There is no reason for this rule. How are we supposed to know what is going in the refs head? Secondly, this rule is and can be easily abused and allow for corruption in the officiating ranks. As I said I before, how are we supposed to know what is going on in the refs head, if all the ref needs to do is say I meant to blow the whistle earlier.
Basketball happens in milliseconds too. With High def cameras running at a 60 Hz we now get a almost a perfect image of what actually happened and not what the refs thinks what happened in his mind because he was out of position.
Wow that was easy to dismantle.
You sound like the cranky old traditionalists that were against replay in major league baseball. Replays show what actually happened and not what the ref thinks what happened. They give credibility and accountability to refs to allow them to make the correct call. I am willing to spend a couple minutes to get the correct call. I cannot stand fans who feel differently.
There is no reason for this rule. How are we supposed to know what is going in the refs head? Secondly, this rule is and can be easily abused and allow for corruption in the officiating ranks. As I said I before, how are we supposed to know what is going on in the refs head, if all the ref needs to do is say I meant to blow the whistle earlier.
Basketball happens in milliseconds too. With High def cameras running at a 60 Hz we now get a almost a perfect image of what actually happened and not what the refs thinks what happened in his mind because he was out of position.
Wow that was easy to dismantle.
Last edited: