Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

NORTH DAKOTA @ Boston U. - FRIDAY Gameday


Recommended Posts

Posted
11 hours ago, BigGreyAnt41 said:

Parallax has nothing to do with Hoff being over the line.  The only way for him to have been not across the line but still appear across the line would be if his skate was lifted up.  Still offsides.

You mean like 3 inches? About the height of a white tuuk? hum....

Posted
11 hours ago, BigGreyAnt41 said:

Parallax has nothing to do with Hoff being over the line.  The only way for him to have been not across the line but still appear across the line would be if his skate was lifted up.  Still offsides.

It's his back foot in question, which is likely in recovery, which is likely off the ice.  

Not to mention the construction of the skate...

he was called offsides, so he's offsides and we lost...this just tortures me more dwelling on it

Posted
7 hours ago, InHeavenThereIsNoBeer said:

I think so but can't be sure. I know he was the events manager(or similar title) at REA but not 100% sure he was in 2006.

With everyone talking about SF as a possible regional site, I have some questions.  Who would have traveled an extra 239 miles to go to an arena when it for sure would have been 2 nights hotels and everything that goes with it?  Do you think that a 10k plus stadium would sell out if it isn't UND there? Would NCAA let UND be the host school that far away?

Posted
3 minutes ago, ringneck28 said:

With everyone talking about SF as a possible regional site, I have some questions.  Who would have traveled an extra 239 miles to go to an arena when it for sure would have been 2 nights hotels and everything that goes with it?  Do you think that a 10k plus stadium would sell out if it isn't UND there? Would NCAA let UND be the host school that far away?

Seeing how we lost the Fighting Sioux name, because we had to get approval from an Indian tribe that was located partially in South Dakota, the NCAA better not consider it too far away.

  • Upvote 1
Posted

Having finally watched the video of the goal, I can't believe they waived it off. Can't really say it's indisputable. To top it off, there needs to be some sort of common sense on these video replays. Maybe his skate was off by a centimeter or two, Boston had a chance to clear the puck, the defenseman gained control of the puck and had his pocket picked. They skated around for 30+ seconds after the entry. Disallowing that goal seemed ridiculous. Go to a regular game in which replay isn't necessary after every goal and I doubt they would have even looked at it twice. 

Posted
8 minutes ago, ringneck28 said:

With everyone talking about SF as a possible regional site, I have some questions.  Who would have traveled an extra 239 miles to go to an arena when it for sure would have been 2 nights hotels and everything that goes with it?  Do you think that a 10k plus stadium would sell out if it isn't UND there? Would NCAA let UND be the host school that far away?

I think I would drive the extra few hours still. I drove 4 and left at 530 am to get out there. If UND wasn't there I wouldn't. I still think the arena would fill up as long as one of local schools made it. Interesting, SCSU fans dont travel well. I can only see UMD or UM or maybe Denver tricking in a few fans or a few omaha. Interesting question for sure.

Posted
Just now, Feff said:

Having finally watched the video of the goal, I can't believe they waived it off. Can't really say it's indisputable. To top it off, there needs to be some sort of common sense on these video replays. Maybe his skate was off by a centimeter or two, Boston had a chance to clear the puck, the defenseman gained control of the puck and had his pocket picked. They skated around for 30+ seconds after the entry. Disallowing that goal seemed ridiculous. Go to a regular game in which replay isn't necessary after every goal and I doubt they would have even looked at it twice. 

I still cant find a video of the call...

Posted
6 minutes ago, siouxfan512 said:

Seeing how we lost the Fighting Sioux name, because we had to get approval from an Indian tribe that was located partially in South Dakota, the NCAA better not consider it too far away.

In all reality, I would think that if any school was to host in SF, it would be Mankato.

Posted
Just now, ringneck28 said:

In all reality, I would think that if any school was to host in SF, it would be Mankato.

They would need to qualify first...true I forgot about them

 

Posted
10 minutes ago, ringneck28 said:

In all reality, I would think that if any school was to host in SF, it would be Mankato.

possibly, but I assume it comes down to a bidding process and money talks. Don't really know how it works though.

Posted
29 minutes ago, Kooshnitz said:

I still cant find a video of the call...

No video but here's a picture of the moment in question. If you believe this to be conclusive to overturn a goal, I also have some pictures to sell you that prove Bigfoot is real.

IMG_1298.JPG

  • Upvote 1
Posted
59 minutes ago, Feff said:

Go to a regular game in which replay isn't necessary after every goal and I doubt they would have even looked at it twice. 

There's a key few have brought up:
Regular season rules and that's a good goal. 

Posted
26 minutes ago, InHeavenThereIsNoBeer said:

Zoomed in, it appears he's offsides to some only because his skate blade blends in with the ice and all you see is the boot. For reference, look at Wolanin's boot height compared to his skates and add that to Hoff's boot. 

IMG_1299.PNG

If Hoff had black skate blades, who knows we might be heading to the frozen four.    

Posted
On 3/26/2017 at 10:19 PM, yzerman19 said:

Holy f'ing Christ.  Puck looks well across when it is not.  Same as Hoff...f'ing identical.  If those refs were versed in this, they would not have overturned it- no f'ing way

Same thing with Wild-Stars Game 6. One angle looked easily in. http://www.wfaa.com/sports/nhl/stars/heres-how-close-the-wild-came-to-tying-up-game-6/151986069

If the camera would've been on the SE side of the rink instead of SW corner this last weekend, the angle would've favored UND in my opinion. Not saying he wasn't off-sides, just saying angles play tricks.

  • Upvote 1
Posted
17 hours ago, Siouxphan27 said:

If Hoff had black skate blades, who knows we might be heading to the frozen four.    

Still amazed that he apparently played the whole game with a black shoe on his left foot.

  • Upvote 2
Posted
18 hours ago, ringneck28 said:

In all reality, I would think that if any school was to host in SF, it would be Mankato.

Pretty sure that isn't happening. Mankato isn't in a financial position to be able to guarantee ticket sales to a game we may not be in.

Posted
9 minutes ago, bale31 said:

Pretty sure that isn't happening. Mankato isn't in a financial position to be able to guarantee ticket sales to a game we may not be in.

If that is the case, why break something that isn't broken.  I would say keep bidding Scheels.

Posted
17 hours ago, InHeavenThereIsNoBeer said:

No video but here's a picture of the moment in question. If you believe this to be conclusive to overturn a goal, I also have some pictures to sell you that prove Bigfoot is real.

IMG_1298.JPG

The other thing that bothers me besides being able to see the incontrovertible evidence somewhere that must exist to overturn this goal is that the Linesman is in perfect textbook position on this play(i.e., he isn't trailing the play nor does he have the play coming at him but is perched on the blue line) and normally in this situation if the linesman gets the call wrong it is probably 80-90% he misses it the other way out of caution.

Posted
15 minutes ago, petey23 said:

The other thing that bothers me besides being able to see the incontrovertible evidence somewhere that must exist to overturn this goal is that the Linesman is in perfect textbook position on this play(i.e., he isn't trailing the play nor does he have the play coming at him but is perched on the blue line) and normally in this situation if the linesman gets the call wrong it is probably 80-90% he misses it the other way out of caution.

Careful petey, we're not allowed to discuss this play anymore according to Kim Jong... err I mean 'SJHovey' :)

But at the risk of being chastised for discussing the most important hockey play of our season on this hockey message board... yes, I agree that the linesman was in great position to see down the line and they had been calling offsides pretty tightly all game from what I could tell. It's one of those instances I think that Sicatoka's suggestion to look at how much the offsides in question actually led to the goal(similar to skate in the crease) would be a welcome change.

Posted

On November 9th, 1997 (almost 20 years ago), we had the "Montreal Screwjob":*

On March 24th, 2017, we experienced the "Fargo Screwjob":

58da86d06c7d6_FargoScrewJob.JPG.41df431b8bc9a211a9508f376cff1f4e.JPG

*For people who don't know what the "Montreal Screwjob" is, just Google it or type it into the search bar in YouTube and you'll get a good education on it. It was the first thing I thought of when that travesty of justice went down on Friday. :angry:

Posted
22 hours ago, yzerman19 said:

It's his back foot in question, which is likely in recovery, which is likely off the ice.  

Not to mention the construction of the skate...

he was called offsides, so he's offsides and we lost...this just tortures me more dwelling on it

He wasn't called offsides on the ice. In real time and the best angle straight down the line.  

  • Upvote 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...