Dumb and Dumber

[The Sicatoka]

I think we need a common location for reporting WCHA officiating gaffes. Why not here. We know our fellow WCHAers lurk here so they'll join in as needed.

And please, let's keep this focused on reporting the errors. Thank you.

Our first example:

http://boardsroom.blogspot.com/2010/12/about-that-goal.html

My first example: Why wasn't Cichy's "pipe" on Saturday reviewed?

[Big A HG]

I think we need a common location for reporting WCHA officiating gaffes. Why not here. We know our fellow WCHAers lurk here so they'll join in as needed.

And please, let's keep this focused on reporting the errors. Thank you.

Our first example:

http://boardsroom.blogspot.com/2010/12/about-that-goal.html

My first example: Why wasn't Cichy's "pipe" on Saturday reviewed?

It likely would have been reviewed upon the first stoppage of play. However, UND scored a legitimate goal before the first possible whistle, therefore there was no need to review. Either they counted Cichy's goal and the following goal would have been waved off, or vice versa.

The refs weren't at fault for that one.

[Mr. Boombastic]

It likely would have been reviewed upon the first stoppage of play. However, UND scored a legitimate goal before the first possible whistle, therefore there was no need to review. Either they counted Cichy's goal and the following goal would have been waved off, or vice versa.

The refs weren't at fault for that one.

If I were Jeff Jackson and Notre Dame I would demand that goal be reviewed. 2-3 minutes ran off the clock because of that non-call, in that time span either team could have scored the winning goal in a game that ended in a tie.

[bradjohn29]

As I understand the rule, they had to review to see whether the puck went in. Had it actually been a goal, they would have counted it and determined the time of that goal and reset the clock to that time. So, in this instance, the refs actually got it right.

[Vegas_Sioux]

no i think they would have both goals i think Oshie scored one that was off the pad then 3 minutes later he scores another one since they don't revert back to the 3 minutes prior they awarded him the reviewed goal and the goal that caused the reviewed goal.

[dagies]

If I were Jeff Jackson and Notre Dame I would demand that goal be reviewed. 2-3 minutes ran off the clock because of that non-call, in that time span either team could have scored the winning goal in a game that ended in a tie.

Absolutely agree. it makes no sense that if that team scores again that it negates the need to review the previous question.

no i think they would have both goals i think Oshie scored one that was off the pad then 3 minutes later he scores another one since they don't revert back to the 3 minutes prior they awarded him the reviewed goal and the goal that caused the reviewed goal.

I would find this surprising. There's no accounting for the events that could have followed the original goal. There could be hurricanes in China as a result. Seems like they would have to turn the clock back...

[WCHA-FAN]

It likely would have been reviewed upon the first stoppage of play. However, UND scored a legitimate goal before the first possible whistle, therefore there was no need to review. Either they counted Cichy's goal and the following goal would have been waved off, or vice versa.

The refs weren't at fault for that one.

It's not so much the refs getting it right as it is from upstairs. In that time they probably had reviewed it upstairs. Had there been a need for a review after the goal to cause the next stoppage that should have already been determined just cause I believe they would have looked at it. Every once and a while at a stoppage you get a horn from the penalty box because they notifed them from upstairs for a review.