UMDDogz Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Move over roommates!! We're moving into the penthouse with ya!! Quote
sprig Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Quick whistle friday canceled a would-be big first goal. Game probably should have been a 3-3 regulation tie, though I think if there was an OT winner - UND had the advantage. Saturday the would-be late goal was waived appropriately, there was definately no control by a Gopher player after the Parise deflection. Games are over, time to get over the goals that didn't count. Neither should have counted, the games ended as they should have. Quote
7>4 Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 My buddy went to the game, called Ryan Potulny while he was at the hospital and Ryan told him it was a 3rd degree seperation, this was sometime between 9:30-9:45. Not a good situation for this year and potentially his future. Grant, although being a Gopher, is someone I've known forever and is a great guy, has always worked his tail off through a history of injuries that goes back to major back surgery when he was 11 or 12, and is the ultimate winner and competitor on the field, ice, and diamond. He should be in everyone's prayers, hopefully he will play again and at the same level. Well said. IMO Potulny is a class act and a damn fine hockey player. I hope he makes it back this year. Quote
CoteauRinkRat Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Set aside the crap about goal and non-goal, too much of this kind of stuff occurred on Shepherd's watch. Parise thought it was a goal and was not too happy with the explanation of why is was disallowed. http://www.grandforks.com/mld/grandforks/sports/7791335.htm Quote
PCM Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Sorry, but Parise is wrong. I watched the replay several times frame by frame. Zach clearly played the puck with a high stick. It did bounce off Ballard, but the rules say that an opposing player must control the puck before another player can touch it. Ballard obviously never had control of the puck. Say what you want about Shepherd's officiating, but he got that one right. Quote
sprig Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Sorry, but Parise is wrong. I watched the replay several times frame by frame. Zach clearly played the puck with a high stick. I agree with you, but I've not actually seen the puck hit the stick on the replay. Did it hit the blade (which was obviously above cross bar height) or somewhere down the shaft? Of course Shepard's explanation that it did not hit a Goph player is wrong, but with control being in the rule, that makes no difference. Understandable that Parise, Sioux would want that goal to count. I certainly did. Quote
NorthDakotaHockey Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 It was a great weekend of college hockey at the Maruch. Sure, a sweep would have been lovely. The tight defense-dominated game left the fans on our hands more than we would have liked. Pioneer Press described it as a raucous crowd. I'm not so sure I'd agree with that, although I will agree that Gopher fans are rabid fans. I have always read, and sometimes seen, how they are big criers for penalties. I had some fun mocking them, standing near everytime there was a Gopher touched in an aggressive way, and holding my arms outstretched and pointing out the area of the ice where the shadow infraction was alleged to have occurred. The thin skins of some of the less knowledgeable Gopher fans were ripe to be burst last night. For their own sake, and for the sake of their wives, girlfriends, and children (women Gopher fans are more relaxed and somewhat more knowledgeable, on the average, than their male counterparts, and they do secretly, if not outwardly, admire the studliness of Sioux fans), it was a big Gopher win. That was clearly the edict that came down from the league offices. Actually, give the Gophers credit for solid play in a huge game that they needed to win. While I hated to see the Sioux lose, especially there, last night, it was good for a couple of reasons. 1. The Sioux realize that they need to do more than just show up every night, and that they need to skate hard for 60 minutes. 2. The loss will give the Sioux extra motivation next time, if there is a next time, that they play the Gophers this year. The Sioux are, imho, clearly the better team, and they will go into any rematch with both superior confidence and resolve. This might not have happened had the Sioux stole the game last night. 3. The Sioux will realize, as does anyone, that you will not win a game with under 15 shots-on-goal. The Gophers defensive intensity will make for some good "coaching moments" for Blais and his staff over the next several weeks. As for the goal, I was with Corn Cob, a Gopher fan who was indistinguishable from a thousand other Gopher fans, five rows off the ice behind the Gopher goal. Sheppard quickly waved off the goal, so we did not get too excited. I will need to look at the replay to see if the puck went off a Gopher. Zach's stick may have been a shade high, but he certainly could not have let the puck go by him with the time left. It was a great play by him. I understand, likely incorrectly, that the whistle blows when the puck is played. No? If so, then does it matter if the puck subsequently bounces off a Gopher for the tying score? I don't know. In any event, it was a real pleasure, if only for a moment, to hear the very distinctive collective sound of 9,000 Gopher sphincters slamming shut at the 59:46 mark of a great WCHA hockey contest. Get your tickets now for Duluth Feb. 27-28. It is there, and then, that the Cup will be decided. Quote
PCM Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 I agree with you, but I've not actually seen the puck hit the stick on the replay. Did it hit the blade (which was obviously above cross bar height) or somewhere down the shaft? The puck hit the blade of Parise's stick which appears to be over his head. It was a heck of a play to deflect the puck out of the air and toward the net. From behind, you can't see it hit the Gopher player, but you can tell by the way the puck changes direction that it probably did. They showed another angle from up ice where you can see it hitting Ballard. Shepherd may not have seen the puck hit Ballard because it happened so fast and it's difficult to see, even when slowing down the replay. Ballard might not have known that the puck hit him. Quote
NorthDakotaHockey Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Glen Somnor, the Goph's radio guy, was crying up a storm on the post-game. Comparing the penalties, and how the Gophers infractions were routine, and the Sioux infractions were always for roughing, roughhousing, foul play, and incivility!! First, I disagree. Both teams were intense. Gophers cried for more calls and got them. A great "seventh man" advantage at the Maruch. After all, Gopher fans do know their penalty calls. State of Hockey y'know, eh? Anyway, I could not help but think it odd of Somnor crying of Goon Hockey. First, it was, and is, unfair. The Sioux win on speed and talent. Second, Somnor ran some of the biggest goon squads in the world, first at Minnesota, and later with the Fighting Saints. Regardless, time to look toward the Pioneers. It is a huge series next week, and it will be fun to put our lower-tiered league opponents and rivalries behind us and look to our best, and most contested, rivalries with the Colorado-based schools. Quote
sprig Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Glen Somnor, the Goph's radio guy, was crying up a storm on the post-game. Comparing the penalties, and how the Gophers infractions were routine, and the Sioux infractions were always for roughing, roughhousing, foul play, and incivility!! If that is the case on the penalty calls, then the Gopher roughing, slashing, etc, was missed. Think Sonmor still believes it's the dirty Canadians against the lily white Minnesotans. I'd guess it's Alzheimers Quote
dagies Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 I'm sure more penalties could have been called on the gophers but frankly more could have been called on the Sioux as well. I think the game ended the way it should have. Time for the team to learn what it can from last night and apply it the rest of the way to their benefit. Quote
Taz Boy Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 ...women Gopher fans are more relaxed and somewhat more knowledgeable, on the average, than their male counterparts, and they do secretly, if not outwardly, admire the studliness of Sioux fans... I was still cranky this morning, mulling over what I thought was lackluster play by the Sioux last night. Then this little gem. Thank you, NorthDakotaHockey. taz Quote
jnv Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 So who else wanted to kick Woog and Mazzoco (sp?)'s #%#$@% Can they get ANY more biased? You would have thought that Prpich was out to KILL Taylor? Look who it's against? I don't know who is the cheaper player...Taylor, or Ballard? Get a clue Woog! Too bad it wasn't you out there that got smoked! I have had ENOUGH of their commentary! Quote
redwing77 Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 So who else wanted to kick Woog and Mazzoco (sp?)'s #%#$@% Can they get ANY more biased? You would have thought that Prpich was out to KILL Taylor? Look who it's against? I don't know who is the cheaper player...Taylor, or Ballard? Get a clue Woog! Too bad it wasn't you out there that got smoked! I have had ENOUGH of their commentary! I didn't think Woog was all that bad from what little I listened to the broadcast. They did get riled up about a few noncalls but never once questioned the noncalls that would have gone against the Gophers, but that's par for the course with them. Taylor was cheap all weekend long. Prpich was cheap for one game. No excuses for either of them. The thing to note was that, at least for a time, Woog thought Brandt was the goalie last night. All in all, I think Parise needed this start and this outcome. We needed to know how he would handle a game against an opponent that could beat us at a time when it really matters. No, he didn't win, but it isn't like we helped him any. I also had the honor of finding someone who thinks both Parises suck because they don't fight enough. Trying to get a rise out of me I'm sure, but he's been saying that all year. Anyone know how I can arrange for my friend to say that to Zach or Jordan's face? Quote
bertibm Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 So who else wanted to kick Woog and Mazzoco (sp?)'s #%#$@% Can they get ANY more biased? You would have thought that Prpich was out to KILL Taylor? Look who it's against? I don't know who is the cheaper player...Taylor, or Ballard? Get a clue Woog! Too bad it wasn't you out there that got smoked! I have had ENOUGH of their commentary! What do you want Woog to do? Cheer againist the Gophers? Last I heard it is a Gopher broadcast. They are suppost to cheer for them. All I can say is can you ask for a better weekend of Hockey? This was by far the best weekend this year. Dont worry I am not trying to stir things up, but did the Gophers hold the Sioux to 1 shot in the 3rd period. The game was just the oppsitte of Friday's game. The Gophers controled the 1st on Friday and Sioux 2nd and 3rd. Sat It was just the oppsite. SCSU STILL SUCKS Quote
Goon Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Shepherd may not have seen the puck hit Ballard because it happened so fast and it's difficult to see, even when slowing down the replay. Ballard might not have known that the puck hit him. Theres a shock: a ref in the WCHA not watching/seeing the play. I am convinced that Shepard was refing the game to get the split. I beg for someone to prove me other wise. Call me a conspiracy theorist, Fine. Last night I told a buddy that was watching the game with me. I explained how the league office wants to see/make sure that Wisconsin and UofM in the Final Five. Its all about money. So UND is not going to get the breaks when it comes to playing UofM and UW... Hence the goal being waved off that should have counted no doubt... Quote
yellowdog Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Theres a shock: a ref in the WCHA not watching/seeing the play. I am convinced that Shepard was refing the game to get the split. I beg for someone to prove me other wise. Call me a conspiracy theorist, Fine. Last night I told a buddy that was watching the game with me. I explained how the league office wants to see/make sure that Wisconsin and UofM in the Final Five. Its all about money. So UND is not going to get the breaks when it comes to playing UofM and UW... Hence the goal being waved off that should have counted no doubt... Is there anyone following you right now? How do you explain the quick whistle on Friday night that cost the gophers a goal? Did the ref forget for a second that he was supposed to let Minnesota win? Get a grip. Why then have the refs allowed Minnesota to fall to 5th place and the sioux to rise to 1st? They aren't doing a very good job of throwing the conference for Minnesota or the badgers are they? Those were both great games and a ton of fun to watch. I look forward to our next meeting, as it will have a much greater importance I suspect. The final five is sold out by the way, so how is it about money? Quote
Goon Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Is there anyone following you right now? How do you explain the quick whistle on Friday night that cost the gophers a goal? Did the ref forget for a second that he was supposed to let Minnesota win? Get a grip. Why then have the refs allowed Minnesota to fall to 5th place and the sioux to rise to 1st? They aren't doing a very good job of throwing the conference for Minnesota or the badgers are they? Those were both great games and a ton of fun to watch. I look forward to our next meeting, as it will have a much greater importance I suspect. The final five is sold out by the way, so how is it about money? WCHA officials go for the split, mission accomplished. Look at the way the second game was called. Call off the goal, it should have counted and the disparity in penatly minutes. UND should have gotten a few breaks from the officials too. Again you proved my point the reason the Final Five is sold out is many expect UofM and UofW to be there. Now the officals will start calling the games in favor of these two schools. Again lets see it it keeps shaking out that way. Look at it from this perspective see what happens if either school (UoW or UofM) doesn't make it... Attendance will be down. Quote
yellowdog Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 WCHA officials go for the split, mission accomplished. Look at the way the second game was called. Call off the goal, it should have counted and the disparity in penatly minutes. UND should have gotten a few breaks from the officials too. Again you proved my point the reason the Final Five is sold out is many expect UofM and UofW to be there. Now the officals will start calling the games in favor of these two schools. Again lets see it it keeps shaking out that way. Look at it from this perspective see what happens if either school (UoW or UofM) doesn't make it... Attendance will be down. First you say the refs are trying to get UM and UW to the final five, next you say it is sold out because everyone assumes they are going to be there anyway. So, which is it? The sioux earned all those penalties, because ( I know this is hard for you) the gophers outplayed them most of the weekend. The team who is playing better usually gets penalized less because the other team needs to trip, hold, slash, etc. to keep up. I am not saying the gophers are the better team so don't get all defensive. I just think they played better most of the weekend and I didn't see this huge officiating problem that you do. You should just learn to enjoy a very good hockey team when you have one. The sioux do not need help from the officials and neither do the gophers. The series was officiated correctly and both teams were able to showcase just how good they both are, be happy with that. Attendance will not drop without those schools, especially if UND is there. Your fans travel well. Is it so hard for you to admit that the reason the gophs will be in the final five is because they belong there, or do you think there are 5 teams better than both Minnesota and Wisconsin who should be there. You need to come around to the reality that the refs aren't out to get your sioux. You never did explain the quick whistle friday night, did shepherd forget he was a gopher fan on that one or what? Quote
sprig Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 You never did explain the quick whistle friday night, did shepherd forget he was a gopher fan on that one or what? Waste of time explaining anything to yd, but I've nothing else to do today. The puck did stop, clearly shown on the replay, alongside/under Brandt's pad. Because of the delayed penalty, or, because Shepard lost sight of the puck, the whistle goes (this in spite of Woog's commentary over and over and over that the puck kept moving, while showing the replay of it clearly stopped). When Brandt pulled his stick in, he knocked the puck into his own net, after the whistle. The call was correct, just as the no goal for the Sioux last night. Understand, moron Quote
flatspin7 Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Relax Guys----- Yeah the Sioux lost last night. But it was the second game giving us a split at GooferLand. On top of that it was only the 3rd loss this season. Thats freakin awesome. Not to mention the fact that we took 3 of 4 from the gophers this year. Good by any ones measure. Despite the arguement of good call/bad call on the high stick the Sioux only put up 14 shots. In my book that isnt deserving of a win. Yeah maybe we got screwed but with that low of a shot count a win would not have been in the cards. Sorry guys--- It has been a well established fact that Shep is an awful ref and deserves to be at the receiving end of a crosscheck to the head, but bitching isnt going to change a thing. We just have to focus on playing a better cleaner game than everybody else and kick ass in the process. Quote
Goon Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 First you say the refs are trying to get UM and UW to the final five, next you say it is sold out because everyone assumes they are going to be there anyway. The refs will do everything in their power to make it happen. Face facts its true... You just can't see it through your maroon colored glasses. yep your right UofM is a 3rd-5th place team. I think its funny that I have seen UofM say that UofM outplayed UND most of the four games. However only won one game was won by UofM. Quote
Goon Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Sorry guys--- It has been a well established fact that Shep is an awful ref and deserves to be at the receiving end of a crosscheck to the head, but bitching isnt going to change a thing. We just have to focus on playing a better cleaner game than everybody else and kick ass in the process. I was thinking more like having Prpich run him into the boards. That would be more appropriate. Quote
gobig6 Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Here it is from the NCAA rule book, section 19A: If the puck, after being batted in the air by a high stick, is controlled first by an opponent, all players are eligible to play the puck and play shall not be stopped. If the puck, after being batted in the air by a high stick, is controlled first by that player or by a teammate, play must be stopped immediately. Don't think it's arguable that Murray wasn't the first to control the puck after the ZPar high stick. Wish Shepard had missed it, he sure missed everything else. Goon, have you read this post by a fellow Sioux fan? The wave off of the goal on Saturday was the correct call. Quote
WPoS Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Heck, I'd help with bail money for him (Prpich that is)! WPoS Quote
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.