University of North Dakota, version 2.0

[Goon]

Re: University of North Dakota, version 2.0

42.27°N, -83.73°W and 41.32°N, -72.94°W repectively.

Cool! A GPS reading.

 

[ecbrevik]

Re: University of North Dakota, version 2.0

Now, I just hope the Sioux saved some goals for tomorrow night!

Just barely. Interesting game, no scoring until there were only 4 minutes left and then we had a veritable offensive outburst. Not an impressive night by the Sioux. Lots of missed passes, poor decisions, etc. UND dominated play during some portions of the game, but were also dominated by RMU over others. All in all, we were a bit lucky to walk away with a win tonight. I did feel bad for Dell loosing his shutout with less than 20 seconds left in the game, there were times tonight that he really kept us in it.

 

[Dirty]

Re: University of North Dakota, version 2.0

MMFF just hangs on for a 2-1 weekend victory over Bob. It was looking good for a third straight shutout for him, but then blah. Very disappointing, but a win is a win I guess.

 

[Goon]

Re: University of North Dakota, version 2.0

The goal that ended up not counting.

 

[brianvf]

Re: University of North Dakota, version 2.0

Frattin's goal was a beauty. He's killing it this season, great to see.
He has now tied Gregoire's UND-leading goal total from all of last season, and we're only half done with the year!

No clue why Trupp's goal was disallowed.

 

[PCM]

Re: University of North Dakota, version 2.0

No clue why Trupp's goal was disallowed.

Hakstol said he was told that the whistle had blown before the puck went in and the video review was inconclusive on that point. I didn't hear a whistle, but I did see the ref waive off the goal almost immediately.

Ironically, Derek Schooley, RMU's coach, thought Trupp's goal should have counted. But he also thought his team's disallowed goal should have counted. I don't know what took so long to review that goal. RMU's Cody Crichton clearly had both skates in the crease and was screening Dell before the shot from the point was made. It should have been an automatic no goal.

 

[Dirty]

Re: University of North Dakota, version 2.0

The whistle in Don Adams' mind I guess. Still better than the disallowed goal against Tech last year where the ref called it a goal on the ice, reviewed it and said he meant to blow the whistle so no goal.

 

[brianvf]

Re: University of North Dakota, version 2.0

The whistle in Don Adams' mind I guess. Still better than the disallowed goal against Tech last year where the ref called it a goal on the ice, reviewed it and said he meant to blow the whistle so no goal.

That's the exact goal I was thinking of when they disallowed Trupp's goal tonight. Weird.
Glad it didn't cost them the game.

 

[PCM]

Re: University of North Dakota, version 2.0

The whistle in Don Adams' mind I guess. Still better than the disallowed goal against Tech last year where the ref called it a goal on the ice, reviewed it and said he meant to blow the whistle so no goal.

You're confused, as usual.

It was this game against SCSU to which you're referring.

As with Friday’s game, the officiating was again at issue. With SCSU up 2–0 in the first period, UND’s Brett Hextall appeared to notch a power-play goal, jamming the puck under Dunn’s pad during a scrum in the crease. Although the goal light came on, the referee immediately waived off the goal and it was disallowed after a review. The explanation given was that the whistle had blown, even though the replay didn’t appear to confirm that.

Hakstol, red faced and clearly unhappy with the call, said he was told that the referee hadn’t actually blown his whistle, but intended to.

“I don’t know; I don’t care,” he said. “I disagree with it.”

He then added, “I like consistency from night to night,” referring to a goal the Huskies scored Friday under similar circumstances that had been counted.

 

[Dirty]

Re: University of North Dakota, version 2.0

Actually, I'm pretty sure I'm not confused. Against Tech, UND scored and the ref signaled a goal. It was reviewed and was ruled no goal because the ref intended to blow the whistle. Which is what makes it more dumbfounding then the no goal tonight. If you meant to blow your whistle, why did you signal a goal!?!?!? I know this because MEg argued with me and somehow tried to justify the ref being a dork.

 

[SiouxFanatic]

Re: University of North Dakota, version 2.0

You're confused, as usual.

It was this game against SCSU to which you're referring.

Dirty is referring to this no-goal call:

 

[Dirty]

Re: University of North Dakota, version 2.0

That goal still just dumbfounds me. Just wave it off you moron! You don't signal a goal and then say "Whoops! I meant to blow my whistle, no goal." But much more importantly....
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/DhrfhjLd9e4?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/DhrfhjLd9e4?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

 

[PCM]

Re: University of North Dakota, version 2.0

Actually, I'm pretty sure I'm not confused.

Okay, you're not confused. However, the disallowed goal last season against SCSU is similar to what happened Saturday night on the disallowed goal against Robert Morris. So while I agree that the call on Zajac's goal against MTU was a total pooch screw by the officials, it was different because the ref actually signaled a goal and then disallowed it without even reviewing the play. The SCSU and RMU goals were immediately waved off by the refs and the calls stood after reviews.

 

[Dirty]

Re: University of North Dakota, version 2.0

I never said the two goals were the same situation though, I just said this disallowed goal wasn't as bad as the one against Tech.
<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/tACjxpxhW2Q?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/tACjxpxhW2Q?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

 

[Fighting Sioux 23]

Re: University of North Dakota, version 2.0

Well, not the prettiest game by the Sioux on Saturday, but pleased with the sweep. We have a nice 7 game winning streak, and 9 game unbeaten streak going. We're also 11-1-1 in our last 13. Dell has been playing great. He was 20 seconds away from posting his 3 straight shutout. Frattin, as has been mentioned, already has 20 goals. With probably another 20 games left or so, he should be able to hit 30 goals. He's scored a goal in 8 straight games, and 16 of our 23 games. Since Ross Romaniuk scored 40 in '90-'91, the highest goal total for the Sioux in a season has been 35 (Bochenski in '03). At his current pace, Frattin can certainly challenge that number.

The upcoming series with Minnesota and then with UNO will be very important. We need to win 3 of those 4, but if we can sweep both we should have a strong hold on the conference lead. With the Gophers it will obviously be an emotional series. If we can keep our emotions in check and stay out of the box, we should sweep. We are a better team, and really have advantages in nearly every aspect of the game. I see a big win Friday, and then a closer game Saturday. Dell will be key.

 

[SoCalSiouxFan]

Re: University of North Dakota, version 2.0

http://www.adn.com/2011/01/08/1639403/whos-up-whos-down.html

DOWN -- Alaska oil patch rank: Well, not yet, but North Dakota may soon outproduce us. North Dakota! Bad enough we have to deal with its hockey team.

 

[SoCalSiouxFan]

Re: University of North Dakota, version 2.0

Pipeline Still Open?

Interesting comments from the Boston Globe regarding recruits from non-traditional hockey states and its effect on scholorships to Canadian players.

PIPELINE IS OPEN
US colleges still importing
Ex-Whaler goalie and longtime broadcaster Greg Millen, now 53, believes that US college scholarship opportunities will be drying up for Canadian players.

In Millen’s view, because the US is developing top talent from nontraditional hockey areas (e.g. California, Texas), more of those kids will snag American scholarships. Ergo, more Yanks, fewer Canadians.

The good news, said Millen: better homegrown talent available for Canadian universities, in turn providing a boost to that system.

Millen could prove prescient, but according to Paul Kelly, head of Newton-based College Hockey Inc., there is no indication at the moment that Division 1 US colleges have sated their desire to stock rosters with the best Canadian boys.

“If you talk to coaches around the country, you’ll find that, if anything, they’ve increased their efforts to secure elite players from Canada, as well as Sweden and Finland,’’ said Kelly.

According to Kelly, current CHI books show there are 1,568 Division 1 NCAA hockey players (the vast majority on scholarship), and nearly one-third (481) are Canadian-born.

“That has been pretty consistent over the past 5-10 years,’’ said Kelly. “I think the truth is that the percentage of the Canadian kids would go higher if the Canadian Major Junior system weren’t so proficient at recruiting for its leagues.

“Right now, we have no indication that our schools are turning away from Canadian players, especially if you look at those schools along the US-Canada border, such as Clarkson, Cornell, St. Lawrence, North Dakota, Western Michigan, Canisius, and Niagara. The majority of those players are from Canada.’’

Currently the UND roster is stocked with Canadians however there does seem to be a new trend at UND where UND is recruiting more American born players. I think there is some merit to Greg Millen's observations.

 

[lord k]

Re: University of North Dakota, version 2.0

It seemed that all the goal reviews really took a long time this weekend. I am all for getting the call right but it does interupt the flow of the game. You dont seem to notice it as much when you are watching the game on tv but when you are at the game it seems to go on forever.

I wonder if any of the stat wizards know how often the original call is changed after a replay? It just seems that the original call is rarely changed.

When you score it can really help build momentum especially at home when the crowd is going crazy etc. A long review can really kill it.

 

[Roben]

Re: University of North Dakota, version 2.0

It seemed that all the goal reviews really took a long time this weekend. I am all for getting the call right but it does interupt the flow of the game. You dont seem to notice it as much when you are watching the game on tv but when you are at the game it seems to go on forever.

I wonder if any of the stat wizards know how often the original call is changed after a replay? It just seems that the original call is rarely changed.

When you score it can really help build momentum especially at home when the crowd is going crazy etc. A long review can really kill it.

Even the announcers were talking about how long it took. I felt it was taking forever when I was home watching the game. It's good to get it right, but there's a time when it takes too long. Nice sweep at home. They're carrying in some good momentum into the series of the season (at least so far).

 

[Goon]

Re: University of North Dakota, version 2.0

Even the announcers were talking about how long it took. I felt it was taking forever when I was home watching the game. It's good to get it right, but there's a time when it takes too long. Nice sweep at home. They're carrying in some good momentum into the series of the season (at least so far).

I think that is because Don Adam makes $#!i up as he goes... The man is a clown and shouldn't be reffing hockey games in any league.