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.

Your Chance To Play Video Replay Judge! Enter Your Verdict

Re: Your Chance To Play Video Replay Judge! Enter Your Verdict

That goalie had all the time in the world to get up and reset himself. He got up like a 2 year old infant and then made no attempt to save the puck. He also didn't even have to fall in the first place had he not embellished the goaltender interference call that he thought should have been called. Goal.
 
Re: Your Chance To Play Video Replay Judge! Enter Your Verdict

There was a 10-second difference between the Gaulrapp supposed man in the crease and Derek Hanson's goal.

With that reversal, the refs did not put that 10 seconds back on the clock.

I believe we should make a case to get a point awarded, but CSS doesn't lose their point. We just get an extra one.

I think Webb had mentioned their being a regulation some where not allowing a change post-game, an argument can be made the ref's did it once already, with all three obviously not seeing that tangle in the first place.
 
Last edited:
Re: Your Chance To Play Video Replay Judge! Enter Your Verdict

BlueDevilRadio said:
There was a 10-second difference between the Gaulrapp supposed man in the crease and Derek Hanson's goal.
Click to expand...

Actually, if you watch the video, the span between when they first make contact and when Kleiman hits the ice is from 51.0-49.9, and the goal is scored at 46.0. Span of 3.9-5.0 seconds depending on when you want to start counting.

As you know, I was there and don't think Stout got much of a break on that call, but it wasn't a ten second span. :)
 
Re: Your Chance To Play Video Replay Judge! Enter Your Verdict

what a joke. IN THE CREASE? That is embarrassing. What a homer call. I hope Stout atleast sent in the tapes to the league. I don't see how the NCHA wouldn't allow the Blue devils an exta point. Clear video evidence. By the way...who's video is that? Whoever's that is should send it in.
 
Re: Your Chance To Play Video Replay Judge! Enter Your Verdict

mnhock27 said:
what a joke. IN THE CREASE? That is embarrassing. What a homer call. I hope Stout atleast sent in the tapes to the league. I don't see how the NCHA wouldn't allow the Blue devils an exta point. Clear video evidence. By the way...who's video is that? Whoever's that is should send it in.
Click to expand...

Don't worry they have sent it in.
 
Re: Your Chance To Play Video Replay Judge! Enter Your Verdict

I agree that the play should have been stopped when the goalie went down. That way there prob would have been a pelenty on the play and then there would have been a powerplay opportunity and a faceoff that would take place.

So by that being said... the refs made the right call and saying no goal.
 
Re: Your Chance To Play Video Replay Judge! Enter Your Verdict

Stout got jobbed, but I would bet against any action being taken to retroactively reward Stout with the extra point.
 
Re: Your Chance To Play Video Replay Judge! Enter Your Verdict

joeyc3402 said:
Stout got jobbed, but I would bet against any action being taken to retroactively reward Stout with the extra point.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The league won't reverse an on-ice decision. Plus, even if you gave Stout the goal, then you would have to give CSS 44 seconds to try to score one of their own. Essentially, you would have to restart the game from the point of the "in the crease" call or from the point of the goal. Not gonna happen. Hopefully, this won't end up making a difference in the final standings.
 
Re: Your Chance To Play Video Replay Judge! Enter Your Verdict

LonelyStoutFan said:
even if you gave Stout the goal, then you would have to give CSS 44 seconds to try to score one of their own.
Click to expand...
OT is sudden death, the goal by Hanson <STRIKE>would</STRIKE> should have ended the game.

It is my understanding Coach Watkins will be having a conference call with the 'big wigs' from both the NCHA and NCAA in the coming days. Each entity will have the same DVD with the raw footage as well as digitally enhanced to go over as they have the conference call.

The worst part of this 'call' is none of the ref's actually witnessed Gaulrapp and Kleiman getting tangled. They were later pressured by home fans and CSS to revert ths goal. The reaction from the home fans caused the refs to believe they missed some incredibly drastic infraction, when in reality nothing that could be attributed to Stout actually happened.
 
Last edited:
Re: Your Chance To Play Video Replay Judge! Enter Your Verdict

stevepetty said:
I agree that the play should have been stopped when the goalie went down. That way there prob would have been a pelenty on the play and then there would have been a powerplay opportunity and a faceoff that would take place.

So by that being said... the refs made the right call and saying no goal.
Click to expand...

First off it depends on who you were giving the penalty to... If you give it to Kleiman the goalie for CSS the penalty then Stout would have had a delayed penalty and play shouldn't have stopped and the goal should have been counted. However if you gave Gaulrapp the Stout forward the penalty then you are right play SHOULD have been stopped right then and there. No call was made though and the goal should not have been called back. I cannot see how your logic works, because they did not call a penalty it was ok to have a make up call later on? I know that happens in every sport but it shouldn't.
 
Last edited:
Re: Your Chance To Play Video Replay Judge! Enter Your Verdict

BlueDevilRadio said:
It is my understanding Coach Watkins will be having a conference call with the 'big wigs' from both the NCHA and NCAA in the coming days. Each entity will have the same DVD with the raw footage as well as digitally enhanced to go over as they have the conference call.
Click to expand...

Great to hear. That was a bad call, there is no doubt in my mind.

However, I don't think you'll see Stout credited with the point or anything like that. Rather, I think they'll take the same route as the CCHA with the Bowling Green shootout win a couple weeks ago. That is, I think they will publicly announce that "an error was made by the officiating crew," state that no call may be appealed after the completion of the game (that is NCAA regulation), and suspend that particular officiating crew for a set amount of time as amends for the "error"
 
Re: Your Chance To Play Video Replay Judge! Enter Your Verdict

I agree. It looks like he goalie comes outside the crease and trips the Stout player and falls down doing so. I say GOAL.
 
Re: Your Chance To Play Video Replay Judge! Enter Your Verdict

I wouldn't have had any problem with a goalie interference call because the Stout player wasn't looking were he was going and (in my view) initiated the contact. However, goalie interference was not called and the rest of the play was completely legal. Goal.
 
Re: Your Chance To Play Video Replay Judge! Enter Your Verdict

I have played and watched hockey for 45 plus years. This is not the 1st time a goal has or will be disputed.
Hockey is a game of mistakes. Mistakes by players and coaches are normal events. Fans seem to accept the mistakes players make but are not so understanding or tolerant of refereeing errors.
I believe the goal tender was interfered with. Just my opinion, I could be wrong. Only the players involved know.
The referee should have made his call when the interference happened. He hesitated, the puck went in the net and now the real fun starts.
The call was made without benefit of replay and the question of the call being correct or not really does not matter. Tie game. This one is over and Stout and CSS are preparing for next week. Over the long run these calls tend to even out.
There will be no reversal of the outcome of this game. Endless discussion will not change anything.
Stout will put this one behind them and likely the one point will make no difference at year end. Only the players can control how they react to adversity and a good team will just forget about it. Hopefully the referee will learn as well. If not maybe he will lose his privledge of being part of the game.
Just enjoy watching the game.
 
Re: Your Chance To Play Video Replay Judge! Enter Your Verdict

We are all sitting here with the luxury of watching a slow motion video replay for days after the game, unlike the refs that get don't get paid much to travel on their weekends to do the game they love. Yeah it sucks, but it will happen again.
 
Re: Your Chance To Play Video Replay Judge! Enter Your Verdict

Since the goalie had vacated the crease and the Stout player never entered the crease, there is not man in the crease violation. The CSS goalie tried to draw a penalty with that Dive. The correct call should be a delayed penalty on the goalie for diving and Stout wins on the goal scored prior to CSS gaining possession and control of the puck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top