Goon Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 ties suck, they suck and have always sucked. Ties are like kissing your sister. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux_Hab-it Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 Laughing at ties is unacceptable apparently. I'll laugh at any tie, I think they are terrible. Which is why we were all having such a good laugh last evening. I will make sure to post plenty of laughter when the Gophs go down in the playoffs so based on what you have posted I guess you will just accept it and understand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprig Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 Which is why we were all having such a good laugh last evening. I will make sure to post plenty of laughter when the Gophs go down in the playoffs so based on what you have posted I guess you will just accept it and understand. If nothing else, gopherz is annoying as hell; odd that she doesn't go over and constantly yap with her friiends. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
808287 Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 Does anyone have clips of VandeVelde's "bowling" save? And or Frattin's goal? Thanks! Oh...and TWO POINTS TONIGHT!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxweet Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 a tie is not the worst thing in the world as it is better than a loss, does it suck we didn't-yeah. but we didn't lose and we did get a point. if the boys can go out and get a win tonight we the series and come home with 3 points onthe road against a pretty decent team and have a 3 game unbeaten streak. I was unable to see the game last night other than the overtime period, did we play well and just couldn't score again or did we come out flat again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Upper Deck Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 I'm having a brain cramp this morning. Last night, when both teams had five in the penalty box, how does it work when they come off the ice when their penalties expire? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iceberg Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 I'm having a brain cramp this morning. Last night, when both teams had five in the penalty box, how does it work when they come off the ice when their penalties expire? I thought in cases like that (multiple people in the box but nothing goes on the board) its the first stoppage after 2 minutes...of course I could be wrong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoggy Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 Whatever happened to the ignore poster option? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gopherz Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 Whatever happened to the ignore poster option? View Member Profile -> Profile Options -> Ignore user Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gopherz Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 Which is why we were all having such a good laugh last evening. I will make sure to post plenty of laughter when the Gophs go down in the playoffs so based on what you have posted I guess you will just accept it and understand. Losing in the playoffs is completely different than tying a seemingly meaningless regular season game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxtimestwo Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 I am very frustrated after tonight. I was pissed by both late penalties on us (Stalock hooked our guy and fell down because of it and we got called for??? not sure what. Also we dove to stop a two on one pass and the Duluth guy skated into our guy and fell - tripping? Wow I'm upset.) But, when they scored and we looked at replay, I knew the rules should have said no goal Duluth. I was beside myself. How can I know more than the WCHA refs on the ice? I thought I should look up the rules to determine if I am correct. Here's what I found (straight from NCAA rule book): High Sticks SECTION 21. a. Carrying sticks above the height of 4 feet (the height of the goal cage) is prohibited. HR-72 RULE 6 / PLAYING RULES PENALTY—Minor. b. A player shall not violently use the stick for contact to the head or neck region of the opponent. PENALTY—Major or disqualification at discretion of the referee. c. When the puck is above the height of 4 feet [1.22m] it shall not be batted with the stick, and when it occurs there shall be a whistle unless: 1. The puck is batted to an opponent, in which case the play shall continue. When a player bats the puck to an opponent, an on-ice official shall give the washout signal immediately. 2. A player of the defending team bats the puck directly into his or her own goal, in which case the goal shall be allowed. PENALTY—Faceoff at one of the end-zone faceoff spots adjacent to the goal of the team causing the stoppage of play. d. When the puck is struck above 4 feet directly to the goalkeeper, there shall be an immediate whistle. PENALTY—Faceoff at one of the end-zone faceoff spots adjacent to the goal of the team causing the stoppage of play. Don't letters C) and D) say the goal should not have counted? I can't believe I watched the game and called this (as an average joe) and the WCHA officals - using replay missed this! Wow.... It's tough to win as it is, this just makes it impossible. I've never been more frustrated. I believe that C-2 shows exactly why the goal should have counted. As far as D is concerned, I interpret the said goalkeeper to be the opposing goalie, not your own. In the Sioux-UMD game, if Watkins had struck the puck with a high stick directly to UMD's goalie, it would have been an immediate whistle, even if the goalie doesn't cover up the puck. If a player is dumb enough to high stick the puck directly at his own goal, why would they blow the play dead? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
808287 Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 Losing in the playoffs is completely different than tying a seemingly meaningless regular season game. Just fyi...with the PWR there really are NO meaningless games. Every W-L-T has an impact when it comes to tourney selection time. (Unless you are Wisconsin and are hosting a Regional). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxforce19 Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 To be a bit optimistic... if we win tonight, and a large amount of the teams ahead of us lose, we could be in a semi-decent position in the WCHA. (i think) it seems pretty even in the middle here. Minnesota (sadly) has been the clear top team thus far, but i think everyone else seems to be pretty evenly matched after that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodak hockey fanatic Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 I'm having a brain cramp this morning. Last night, when both teams had five in the penalty box, how does it work when they come off the ice when their penalties expire? any coincidentals or misconducts that don't go on the board, they get out first whistle when their penalty has expired. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthDakotaHockey Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 Big win tonight. I will be in the house. As in DaDECC. Can't beat yer Saturday night in the WCHA. It is an especially strong and amazing league, top to bottom, this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petey23 Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 So will Shep suspend his kid and Marco Hunt for incorrectly allowing a goal last night after looking at the replay, ala Randy Schmidt? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 So will Shep suspend his kid and Marco Hunt for incorrectly allowing a goal last night after looking at the replay, ala Randy Schmidt? No, Greg will never suspend his kid. Are you talking about the last goal? It was really hard to tell who stick touched it. On the third view of the replay it looked as if the UMD player touched it but dunno. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxguyinFF Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 I believe that C-2 shows exactly why the goal should have counted. As far as D is concerned, I interpret the said goalkeeper to be the opposing goalie, not your own. In the Sioux-UMD game, if Watkins had struck the puck with a high stick directly to UMD's goalie, it would have been an immediate whistle, even if the goalie doesn't cover up the puck. If a player is dumb enough to high stick the puck directly at his own goal, why would they blow the play dead? Rule C-2 states that the player bats the puck directly into the net. In this case, the puck did not go directly in the net - it bounced off our goalie into the net. Think if this occurred somewhere else on the ice: The way the rule is stated, the only way the whistle would not be blown is if the puck is touched by the opponent. It does not say the high sticking team needs to control the puck for a whistle to occur, like a delayed penalty, so I would interpret that to mean if it touches a player from the high sticking team, the whistle is blown immediately. I've seen this happen many times. I guess it may just be how someone interprets the rule, but the arguement is there that the goal possibly should've been waved off. I'm just more frustrated than anything else - a win would've been huge last night and the tie didn't sit well with me. Like someone said earlier lets win tonight and take a 3 game unbeaten streak back home. 3 points on the road would be big. GO SIOUX!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petey23 Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 No, Greg will never suspend his kid. Are you talking about the last goal? It was really hard to tell who stick touched it. On the third view of the replay it looked as if the UMD player touched it but dunno. UND player played the puck with a high stick, not arguing that. As soon as Eidsness touches the puck the play is dead. For them to allow the goal, they have to rule that Eidsness never even touched the puck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
808287 Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 Big win tonight. I will be in the house. As in DaDECC. Can't beat yer Saturday night in the WCHA. It is an especially strong and amazing league, top to bottom, this year. NDH - Looking forward to seeing you here tonight. Safe travels! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoggy Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 So will Shep suspend his kid and Marco Hunt for incorrectly allowing a goal last night after looking at the replay, ala Randy Schmidt? Also consider that they only have overhead view for replay. (I believe) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxweet Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 maybe the goal should have counted, maybe it shouldn't have. are the refs bad-probably yes. but we demand perfection out of the refs yet we don't always demand it out of our players and coaches-give the refs some kind of break. we should have won this game in OT if Watkins buries that shot he had in front of Stalock-but he didn't. there were numerous other chances we had to win this game but did not. offensively this team is not clicking and for that reason shouldn't have to count on being bailed out by a call with 90 seconds left. we had a five minute major pp with 10 minutes left and we blew that opportunity by taking what 2 penalites matro even before it started and lapoint during it. we had our opportunities but didn't cash in. until we start cashing in we can't leave the outcome of a game to be determined by a refs call or no call. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZSIOUX Posted November 22, 2008 Author Share Posted November 22, 2008 maybe the goal should have counted, maybe it shouldn't have. are the refs bad-probably yes. but we demand perfection out of the refs yet we don't always demand it out of our players and coaches-give the refs some kind of break. we should have won this game in OT if Watkins buries that shot he had in front of Stalock-but he didn't. there were numerous other chances we had to win this game but did not. offensively this team is not clicking and for that reason shouldn't have to count on being bailed out by a call with 90 seconds left. we had a five minute major pp with 10 minutes left and we blew that opportunity by taking what 2 penalites matro even before it started and lapoint during it. we had our opportunities but didn't cash in. until we start cashing in we can't leave the outcome of a came to be determined by a refs call or no call. great point, this team has whiffed on more across the slot one timers its crazy. just not clicking right now seems to be the answer to it. its simple but its true. sometimes it can just take 1 game to snap out of it but until then we cant allow more then 2 goals if we want to keep getting wcha points. eidsness was very solid again. great to see Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petey23 Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 Not arguing any of that. When players don't perform they get benched and are held accountable. when refs screw up and don't know the rules of the game they get paid to ref they get suspended or at least have in the past? Just wondering if Daddy Shep will hold his kid to the same standards that he held Randy Schmidt to last year? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing77 Posted November 23, 2008 Share Posted November 23, 2008 Not arguing any of that. When players don't perform they get benched and are held accountable. when refs screw up and don't know the rules of the game they get paid to ref they get suspended or at least have in the past? Just wondering if Daddy Shep will hold his kid to the same standards that he held Randy Schmidt to last year? Shep will only suspend a ref if he is put in a position such that not doing so would jeopardize his own job. Randy put him in that position. So did Adam after the Bina hit. However, he was able to pull the wool over McClown's eyes and actually hired him full time to keep his head in the sand. No. According to Daddy Shep, the officials have never been better. That's all McClown cares about. Accountability is nonexistent. 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.