yellowdog Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Goon, have you read this post by a fellow Sioux fan? The wave off of the goal on Saturday was the correct call. Goon is right and the rulebook is wrong. We all need to deal with that. Is anyone behind you goon or do you just have a overactive imagination? Quote
redwing77 Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 I admit that I agreed with Goon for a little while last night, but for different reasons. I thought Sheperd wanted the split so that he could give Lucia his 400th at hime in front of a sold out crowd against one of the top two heated rivals of the Gophers. Then I realized that the wave-off was a good call by Sheperd and that they play the Badgers at home next weekend so my reasoning was off. That's why I deleted my earlier post saying that. Thanks to sprig, Scooby, and PCM for correcting me. Although not all of the correcting was done here. Quote
Goon Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Goon, have you read this post by a fellow Sioux fan? The wave off of the goal on Saturday was the correct call. That call could have gone either way really, we have seen this happen in the past. Who cares its over. UND still took three out of four games from Minnesota this season. Quote
Goon Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 I admit that I agreed with Goon for a little while last night, but for different reasons. I thought Sheperd wanted the split so that he could give Lucia his 400th at hime in front of a sold out crowd against one of the top two heated rivals of the Gophers. Then I realized that the wave-off was a good call by Sheperd and that they play the Badgers at home next weekend so my reasoning was off. That's why I deleted my earlier post saying that. See its not too hard to see this point of view. Actually I have heard Tim Hennesey say the same thing and I gave a it a lot of thought and it shoulds good... Quote
PCM Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 That call could have gone either way really, we have seen this happen in the past. All I can say is that if they would have counted Murray's goal Saturday after waving off an apparent Gopher goal on Friday, I know which teams' fans would have had the best case for a WCHA conspiracy theory. Quote
OETKB Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Truth is, a desperation play with a few seconds left on the clock that was called off (correctly) is not really the story of the game. The story of the game is that UND had a paltry 17 shots on goal, the season's lowest. I thought UM dominated play most of the night. If UND can't get better puck control when playoff time comes, they'll suffer the same humiliation as last year. Quote
farce poobah Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 A few other postmortem reactions: The John was close to full last night; a pleasant surprise. Lot of Sioux colors in the stands; perhaps as many as 1000. Nice turnout. I was very Happy about the Sioux PK last night. Not only did we kill all 5 pp, the Rodents didn't generate a lot of great chances. To a layman's eyes, two strategies were obvious. One, don't let Ballard one-time from center point; a forward always stayed between Ballard and the goal, dropping back to prevent the cross-ice pass when others had the puck. Second, Parise and Bucks were out against the Rodent #1 unit which has Vanek on it. The Gopher seniors stepped up last night. Riddle and Koalska, in particular, on the big ice, were tough to defend. I thought our D did a good job of forcing them wide and not giving up the middle. But they use the extra width very well. I marvel at Zach's skills and effort every time I see him. I thought he was the best player on the ice last night, with about 5 "just missed" scoring opportunities, and a fistful of terrific defensive plays. I'm concerned about a letdown after this weekend, and hope we don't underestimate DU. They will be looking for a bit of revenge, methinks. Quote
Goon Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 All I can say is that if they would have counted Murray's goal Saturday after waving off an apparent Gopher goal on Friday, I know which teams' fans would have had the best case for a WCHA conspiracy theory. Ha, Ha, Ha, LOL... Yep your probably right, Gopher fans would have been all over this. But I do remember questionable calls being allowed in big games. The next one that comes to mind is the Final Five and Kollar getting decked and SCSU scoring the winner. So these controversial goals are out there. Quote
PCM Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 I'm concerned about a letdown after this weekend, and hope we don't underestimate DU. They will be looking for a bit of revenge, methinks. I am not so much concerned with the loss to Minnesota as I am with how the team reacts to it. Quote
Goon Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 I am not so much concerned with the loss to Minnesota as I am with how the team reacts to it. I think Blais will have their full attention. Nothing to hang their heads about, they may have been emotional gassed after winning on Friday night. Quote
WPoS Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Ha, Ha, Ha, LOL... Yep your probably right, Gopher fans would have been all over this. But I do remember questionable calls being allowed in big games. The next one that comes to mind is the Final Five and Kollar getting decked and SCSU scoring the winner. So these controversial goals are out there. what would the sport be w/o SOME controversial calls? Tennis! ICK! WPoS Quote
DamStrait Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Warning: MN fans read the following at their own risk. Due to my strong dislike for your team, I am incapable of being objective. If you go ahead, read the below, and don't like it, I don't want to hear about it. After a night of reflection, I still think it stinks. As I said before the series, MN is back and they are good. I was willing to take a split before the series started, but after having won on Friday, and coming so close on Saturday, after not sweeping down there in 24 years, it's a bitter pill to swallow. If the boys had lost on Friday, and then won Saturday, I think I'd be in a lot better mood. JP's dive was embarassing. He deserved the penalty, and I hope to never see such a display again. The 'hooking' call on the MN player was non-existent. He made contact with JP without having to do so and with the intention of hindering his return to the crease, but there was no hook. Should have been interference, but if JP hadn't taken his dive, does anybody out there think the infraction on the MN player would have been called (as it should have been IMHO)? I have no confidence that it would have. On the disallowed goal: I would like to see those replays again. It looked like it probably was a high-stick, but the angles were such that to me it was not conslusive, also, Zach's stick was initially much higher before coming down to make contact with the puck. Zach's contention that he made contact at waist level is conclusively mistaken based on the replays I saw IMHO. I would also like to see the bounce off of Ballard again. It seems to me that there was something that indicated he knew the puck hit him and may have even kicked at it, but I don't believe he made contact. Not sure it would have made any difference, but an official interpretation of what constitutes control would be interesting. It seems to me in the past, that a puck played by a high-stick needed only to be touched by an opposing player to be waved off. I will be watching these calls in the future to see how this 'control' is ruled in practice. Also, we will never know how Shepherd would have ruled had he known it went off Ballard, since he told Zach that it was waved off because it went off his stick and was first touched by a Sioux player. Anybody out there think that if it was MN down 2-1 at that point in the game and they scored the same exact way that it would have been waved off? I have zero confidence that it would have. The difference in shots (2:1 in favor of MN) is at least partially due to the (unearned, IMHO) difference in PPs (2.5:1, in favor of MN). Not only do the PPs give the opposition a better opportunity to get more SOGs, it also limits the good guy's opportunities. MN plays positionally much better on the big ice than do the Sioux, but in the 3rd especially, MN ran several (well maybe four that I can specifically picture in my head) obivous offensive and defensive picks that were not called. Hard to get possession of the puck when that is let go. Whenever there was a puck that got banged around randomly, it always seemed to land on a MN stick, which I take as further evidence that they played the big ice well positionally. As I noted before the series, the Sioux don't seem comfortable on the big sheet. They let MN puck carriers in way too deep without taking the body, IMHO. A favorite set play by MN seemed to be to carry the puck in wide and deep and then try to get it to the 3rd man in in the slot, which the Sioux defended well for the most part by keeping a body on that third man. MN's second goal came off such a play, however, even though the Sioux player seemed to have pretty good position, just a great play by Koalska. The MN assistant ad that threw our boys out of the press box is a no-class putz, even if it is against NCAA rules. I mean, what the hell could the penalty be for that anyway? If it is in fact not against NCAA regs, he should be stiffly fined by the league and forced to apologize in person to our boys. Shepherd did not have a good weekend. He is without redeeming value whatever. If his daddy has any hope of keeping his job, he should be forced to give his boy the pink slip. Even then he should be canned. And if the officiating doesn't rapidly improve McClod should be given his walking papers too. Best league in the NCAA, with the biggest rinks and revenue and they can't solve the bad officiating problem? BS!!!! Sorry for the length, but I feel better now! Quote
PCM Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Zach played the puck with a high stick. No Gopher player ever had control of the puck before Murray shot it in. Shepherd made the right call. Let's move on. Quote
The Sicatoka Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Shep correctly blew the whistle Friday when he lost sight of the puck. Shep called "playing the puck with a high stick" correctly ("controlled" is the key word in the rulebook) as well. The sword has two edges and each side was used. If the Sioux had played better during the preceding 39 minutes and 45 seconds, that goal wouldn't matter so much now, would it? Quote
Diggler Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Sheppard made the right call. My only problem is that he waited for 119 minutes and 45 seconds to make his first right call. Why did he have to start then? Quote
schmidtdoggydog Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Off topic, but some clown on POI just started a Is Parise Overrated? thread! How absurd is that? Quote
The Sicatoka Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 ... Is Parise Overrated? Oh horribly-terribly so. So much so that I think NJD should leave him at UND to develop for the full four years. This way the skeptics can witness his full development to their satisfaction. [/cynical tone] Quote
WPoS Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Warning: MN fans read the following at their own risk. Due to my strong dislike for your team, I am... <snip> Sorry for the length, but I feel better now! actaully read it (ALL of it) and you actually didn't go after the Gophs as bas as Ithought you were, all in all not a bad piece of writing. So why the warning? Not liek I'd not expect some negative comments on this from a Sioux fan. Quote
Riverman Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Zach played the puck with a high stick. No Gopher player ever had control of the puck before Murray shot it in. Shepherd made the right call. Let's move on. Ok, what if the puck was NOT played with a high stick? Goal correct? I can see where ZP was upset probably figured goal since it went off a Minny player. The burning question what is the % league 5 on 3 vs the Sioux. Who do we have to know to get a call? Glad to see daddy's little boy keep up the fine tradition that the WCHA Refs deserve! On the other he( derek sheep-herder) does take my mind off Don Adam! Quote
WPoS Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Off topic, but some clown on POI just started a Is Parise Overrated? thread! How absurd is that? agreed...POI has its own that need control once in a while, let the kid go, he is a good player! WPoS Quote
sprig Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Off topic, but some clown on POI just started a Is Parise Overrated? thread! How absurd is that? Could there be a pothole in the collective "state of hockey" hockey knowledge. A group lobotomy has been done? Or just beer brain dead? Quote
The Sicatoka Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 On the other he( derek sheep-herder) does take my mind off Don Adam! Did I mention that Don "Get Smart" Adam is doing this weekend's DU series? Quote
sprig Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Did I mention that Don "Get Smart" Adam is doing this weekend's DU series? We were all trying to forget. Thanks for the reminder Quote
cfm567b27 Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Off topic, but some clown on POI just started a Is Parise Overrated? thread! How absurd is that? My point exactly...that site is a rag...low rate clowns post.... ....With the exception of the few Gops fans that post here POI is mostly made up of arrogant whiners. 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.