AZSIOUX Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 Not a halo statement IMHO You got that right 77. Something has to be called or the "goons" will take care of it and rightfully so. The play on Lucias penalty..I was glad to see someone, anyone, finally say enough is enough. Kangas is our best player, our Crosby. Act like it boys, you touch Kangas and you will pay. They should make shirts sorry, just had to laugh i know your point and agree but just a good laugh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing77 Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 Why do you post over here when you have nothing nice to say over at goofers live. He posts hate-ful stuff on GPL? Anti-Sioux or Anti-Gopher? I'm sure Anti-Sioux. Gopherguy33- Much obliged. I think Kangas shouldn't have to pay for a meal for the rest of the season. He's saved your guys' collective lunches almost every 2 minutes or so. Too bad for Bachman or he'd surely be the WCHA ROTY. He's certainly the Gopher MVP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiouxAddict Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 The Gophers are such a soft team, that's why they didn't do anything back. Plus, I'm sure the Gophers did something on the ice that caused them to run into Kangas a handful of times, so it was justified. If you're not being sarcastic, then you've just posted the dumbest thing I've read in a long time! Crashing the goalie is never justified, period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopherguy33 Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 sorry, just had to laugh i know your point and agree but just a good laugh What's so funny? He HAS been worth at least 1.5 points a game!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Whistler Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 If you're not being sarcastic, then you've just posted the dumbest thing I've read in a long time! Crashing the goalie is never justified, period. I would say if they're crashing yours...... Best one ever in that kind of way was Ryan Bayda way back when. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagies Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 Tony Lucia actually said after the game he was happy he scored to cover his OT penalty. He said he took the penalty( cross checking behind the goal) defending Kangas after he thought MSU-M ran him. That was the only time I believe and retaliation was done. I might not remember the play well, but he retaliates for running the goalie by cross-checking a guy who DIDN'T run the goalie into the boards, after the whistle? I guess it's true, only the Sioux are goons and hacks. Shocking, Sioux fans ripping a ref, and it's not even a Sioux game. I thought it was a brilliant job of officiating. They called it fair during game play (they allowed physical play, but not cheap play), and then they let the players settle it in overtime. Both teams got a way with bad penalties at different points. But it did not effect the outcome one bit. The players decided the games, not the officials. I think the Gophers got the favor of the calls early, then the Mavs caught up. It should be noted, the only penalty called in overtime las tonight was against the Gophers, and I'm still pleased. That's how every overtime game should be played and called. Even Woog disagrees with you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 Even Woog disagrees with you. If Wooger agrees it has to be bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bienek Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 bicker, bicker, bicker! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackheart Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 Which would be a dumb-ass thing to have done. You get tossed in the box for two minutes and give up a shorthanded goal. Then at least while you watch someone else advance to the Final Five you can puff out your chest and say you protect the goalie. The best way is to light the guy up the next chance you get. It is better to be patient and tough than dumb and out of the tournament. First of all if you get tossed into the box you don't give up a shorthanded goal. If you are in the box and they score it would be a power play goal. Second, I'm glad the Sioux don't run like scared little girls when someone takes a cheap shot. Teams know that they will pay the price if they mess with the Sioux. I'll take someone with an edge, like Radke, over somebody who doesn't dare do or say anything unless he's hiding behind his coach (Sue Bickel). Gotta go with Mujack on this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 hoop- Interesting thought... but the Mavs and the Gophers have been ones to intentionally run the goaltender. I'm sure Sioux players have run the goaltender in the past, but not even at half the rate of the Mavs. Yeah, sounds like a "halo" statement, but goaltender interference is a BIG deal to me. I can't believe the amount of goaltender interference and the number of dangerous hits the goaltenders have taken in recent years that have gone unanswered. It might go back to the incident that happened last season when Tourmey got hurt. But also the Goofs have been know to run goalies in the past. I don't see them doing it to UND if they play again. We know it would be responded to. If someone runs the goalie a simple cross check will take care of the sending the message back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stickboy1956 Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 Anyone that watched the series saw the Gophers "run" Zacharias as much as Kangas was "run" by MSM. Goal 1 on Sat by the Gophs included contact with Zacharias. Muz-sucko started whining about this Sun during the OT during a no-goal review. If he hadn't said anything I doubt we would be talking about it. Going hard to the net is part of college hockey and NHL hockey - there is contact with the goalie all the time. As long as you are making a play on the puck contact is ok. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 Anyone that watched the series saw the Gophers "run" Zacharias as much as Kangas was "run" by MSM. Goal 1 on Sat by the Gophs included contact with Zacharias. Muz-sucko started whining about this Sun during the OT during a no-goal review. If he hadn't said anything I doubt we would be talking about it. Going hard to the net is part of college hockey and NHL hockey - there is contact with the goalie all the time. As long as you are making a play on the puck contact is ok. Anyone who saw game 3 would have seen Zacharias make a fairly routine save in double-OT, the whistle blows, and a full second later, a Gopher player takes a clean swat right to Zacharias' chest. The commentary even mentioned how in the first period of the first game of the year, that's an obvious penalty, but there it was not. My response? If you're callling lame "too many men on the ice" penalties, then you should call an obvious hack on the goaltender after the whistle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mujack Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 Which would be a dumb-ass thing to have done. You get tossed in the box for two minutes and give up a shorthanded goal. Then at least while you watch someone else advance to the Final Five you can puff out your chest and say you protect the goalie. The best way is to light the guy up the next chance you get. It is better to be patient and tough than dumb and out of the tournament. First thing, not knowing the difference between a powerplay and shorty makes you suspect! You're right I'd rather have my guys take all the goofers cheap crap (like mankato did) and not do a thing about it ... Look where it got Mankato. At some point you have to let the other guy know that you mean business. I'm not saying punch everyone in the mouth that skates by you, but by no means back down to a soft team... Also the Mavs player was checked into the goalie when luciapet jr. cross checked. That's why kangas was not upset, he should be mad at his own player for being dumb... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tnt Posted March 18, 2008 Author Share Posted March 18, 2008 Tony Lucia actually said after the game he was happy he scored to cover his OT penalty. He said he took the penalty( cross checking behind the goal) defending Kangas after he thought MSU-M ran him. That was the only time I believe and retaliation was done. I only got to see the overtime periods in a couple games, but there seemed like a lot of times that Kangas was on his back and being piled into. I also saw the recap of other times, including one where Kangas got whacked in the mask with a stick. Whether any or all of them were intentional, my point is that if the Sioux ran into the goalie that many times, there would be no question in the minds of others whether it was intentional or not, they would be guilty. My knowledge base only comes from these games and our games with the Mavericks, but it doesn't seem like you can hit the goalie that many times without there being some culpability on the part of the Mavs. Hakstol himself said the time for fighting is done, so I don't know how the Sioux would have responded in the playoffs had the situation been the same. I think retaliation would have to come in a different form. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tnt Posted March 18, 2008 Author Share Posted March 18, 2008 By the way, is there something different in the way Lucia responded compared to how Zajac cross-checked Anderson in Minneapolis? Oh yeah, the Mankato player was much closer to the boards and in a more dangerous position. Where are the cries for suspension there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 By the way, is there something different in the way Lucia responded compared to how Zajac cross-checked Anderson in Minneapolis? Oh yeah, the Mankato player was much closer to the boards and in a more dangerous position. Where are the cries for suspension there? Hum, that is a good question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SportsDoc Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 If you were paying attention to the game, Lucia got a penalty for cross-checking a Mankato player pretty hard into the boards after running Kangas in OT. Not something they wanted to do, as the Gophers were very motivated to win the game, not goon it up. Lucia even said it almost cost them and thanked Kangas for bailing him out for those 2 minutes. Also, Kangas didn't flip-out after getting run into like most goalies would have, he just got up and focused on stopping the puck, not adding drama. Problem was, Lucia did not check the player who ran Kangas. He ran Harrison, that's why he got the penalty. If he had ran Kalinski(?) they both would have gone, at worst, even from Shepherd. Someone mentioned that Lucia cross-checked Harrison into Kangas. Not true, he checked him behind the net, not into the net. There was no instance Sunday where a Mankato player could not have stopped short of running Kangas due to opponent contact, yet they did. Teams must protect their goalies, or the ramming will continue, which it did. I give Kangas high marks for staying focused and not letting the contact bother him. Not many goalies could do that. He is a special player, I like him and his demeanor a lot. His interview afterward showed that, too. But, the Gophers should have handled it the first time. If they had, there wouldn't have been a second and a third, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprig Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 Hakstol himself said the time for fighting is done, so I don't know how the Sioux would have responded in the playoffs had the situation been the same. I think retaliation would have to come in a different form. Stuff like this is the primary reason fighting should be allowed without the stiff suspension penalties. Going looking for someone to cheap shot since that doesn't get you a suspension (and may get you nothing the way this game, and most games are called), creates situations where players will get hurt. It's obvious the Shepturd group isn't going to handle it by making the calls that should be made. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sagard Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 Problem was, Lucia did not check the player who ran Kangas. He ran Harrison, that's why he got the penalty. My first thought after seeing it was that Lucia lost it because he thought Kalinski had scored and it was a blatant cheap shot. Had Lucia gone after Kalinski I'm guessing Shep would have given coincidentals as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.