PCM

I can now answer my own question. I looked at the new box score here and see that neither Spirko nor Rankin were given fighting DQs.

Here's an article on Ryan Bayda's recovery from knee surgery.

What exactly did Finley do that warranted a fighting DQ? I'm asking because I honestly didn't see it. Based on what I did see, I wouldn't have questioned Zelkin if he had DQed Oshie and Radke, as well as the Mankato players they were paired off against. I don't understand how Rankin ends up with a fighting DQ and Spirko doesn't. I heard Jutting and Hakstol discussing the penalties after the game and I got the impression that neither coach seemed to believe that Spirko and Rankin deserved fighting DQs.

I don't know whether it did or not. All I'm saying is that if it did, it shouldn't have. If Spirko hadn't retaliated after Rankin's cheap shot (and it was clearly a cheap shot), the incident probably never would have escalated to the level that it did. I don't blame Spirko for retaliating because I probably would have done the same thing. I'm only pointing out that he wasn't entirely blameless in what happened.

Here are today's SCSU University Chronicle poll results on whether UND should keep or change the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo: 65% - It's fine, keep it 29% - It's wrong and offensive, lose it 6% - I don't care It looks like the Saigopaths (credit The Sicatoka) have mobilized a get-out-the-vote effort. They've managed to overtake the "I don't cares," but are still far behind the "keep its."

The NCAA says "never" and that's been the way they've always played it. It you remember the infamous Cory Larose incident from 2000, you know exactly what I'm talking about. Shepherd found a loophole that shouldn't have been there and used it. Whether that was a wise move or not remains to be seen. Is it right that Rankin got DQed for fighting and Spirko didn't? Did Chris Harington do something against Niagara that Oshie didn't do against Mankato? A lot of people will probably disagree with me for saying this, but I don't think the fact that Spirko's parents were here from Slovakia should have any bearing on the decision.

Finley's number is 2. Spirko has two number 1's on his jersey. 1 + 1 = 2 I could see how that would confuse Zelkin. You got Shepherd, but not the one you asked for.

That's what apparently happened. All I can say is that this was a really screwed up situation and I doubt that Greg Shepherd has heard the last of it.

That's true. I am grumpy.

No, he wasn't right because a DQ wasn't overturned. It was shifted from one Sioux player to another. No penalties were reduced or rescinded.

Actually, in the second game against the Gophers at the Ralph this season, the Sioux scored two goals that were the result of very good fortune. Chorney's shot would have gone well wide of the net if it hadn't deflected off a Gopher player. Prpich's goal was almost a comedy of errors that turned out right. Duncan tried to center the puck from behind the net, but it hit the side of the net and bounced to Kozek. Kozek then tried to center it, but it bounced off a Gopher's skate and directly on to Prpich's stick.

What I'm saying is that our two toughest opponents are on the road where we've played well. Our weakest opponents are at home where -- up until this past weekend -- we haven't played as well.

Porter came out on the ice with Kozek and Watkins. Watkins won the faceoff in the Sioux zone that led to the breakout pass that sprung Kozek. I clearly remember this because Porter had been skating with Stafford and Toews up to that point. I see that Clayton has explained why this happened. Radke was trying to dump the puck in, but a Maverick player deflected the shoot-in with his stick. The puck sort of blooped up in the air and came down behind the defense. I don't think the Mavs had any idea where the puck went. I talked to Toews after the game and he was as surprised as anybody that the puck just happened to land right in front of him. He said that he thought the play might be whistled offsides, but it wasn't.

Because SCSU is playing at UND this weekend, the University Chronicle student newspaper is back on the issue of the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo. They're running a poll on the newspaper's Web site which asks, "What do you think of the UND Fighting Sioux name and logo?" The three choices are A) It's fine, keep it B) It's wrong and offensive, lose it and C) I don't care. The last time I checked, 75 percent want UND to keep its name and logo, 17 percent don't care and 8 percent want it changed. The lesson here is not to judge a university by its president. Coral Shirin Jentz sent a letter to the editor to the paper headlined "Chronicle needs to ban use of UND logo." She offers the following insight: Apparently Ms. Jentz doesn't recognize the irony of demanding that a newspaper engage in censorship. And what color is a "no logo color"? Where did she get the idea that UND has "no logo color" jerseys? GrahamKracker? She goes on to say: In that case, I predict that the Fighting Sioux will sweep the Huskies this weekend because they'll certainly be too nauseated to play in the Ralph. In response to Ms. Jentz's letter, the University Chronicle's editorial board ran an editorial explaining the newspaper's policy on the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo. The newspaper almost gets it right. The job of journalists is to report the facts as they are, not as reporters and editors wish them to be. When the reporters and editors deliberately choose not to use the Fighting Sioux nickname, they are, in fact, sugar coating the news. If that's not enough irony for you, there's this letter to the editor by Matt Hayward headlined: "Drunk whites are insulting." It's just a matter of time before SCSU president Roy Saigo asks the St. Cloud city council to revive prohibition. Obviously, alcohol is making white people do things that black people find offensive.

Could I ask a question? Why do we care?

Last season, after the holiday break, the Sioux went 3-6-1. They tied and squeaked by Bemidji State. They split with MSU and UAA. They were swept by CC and DU. That, to me, was the low point of the season. I'd place the turning point last season during the Feb. 26-27 home series against Wisconsin when the UND took 3 of 4 points from the Badgers after going 0-4 in the last two series against them. After that, the Sioux went 9-2-2, the only two losses being to DU at the WCHA Final Five and the NCAA Frozen Four. So far, this year's team is 5-3-0 since the holiday break -- not great, but not bad, either. I think the upcoming series against SCSU will give us a much better idea of where this year's Sioux team is in comparison to last year's team.

Remember when what?

I agree, especially given UND's schedule for the remainder of the regular season.

One more time...

As my late great neighbor used to say: I have a terrific memory, but it's very short.

Yes.

Not bloody likely unless the WCHA has decided to disregard the NCAA 2006 ice hockey rules.

Yes, I think you're right. I know that it took a long time to get all the penalties sorted out after the the game. Try this one instead.

The article says that Joel Hanson took down Spirko, but I'm almost 100 percent sure it was Rankin. As rw77 noted, MSU doesn't have an Olson on its roster. Here's the box score from collegehockeystats.net that lists who got what penalties. I assume that it's accurate.