It's upset city baby!

[jk]

I think everyone likes to see the lower teams steal games from the top teams, and I'm no different there. I'm having a little trouble reveling in our rivals' misfortunes, though, since UND has earned a grand total of two league points in 2005. If UND could just go out and gather some WCHA points, I would feel a lot better about things.

[WPoS]

I think everyone likes to see the lower teams steal games from the top teams, and I'm no different there.  I'm having a little trouble reveling in our rivals' misfortunes, though, since UND has earned a grand total of two league points in 2005.  If UND could just go out and gather some WCHA points, I would feel a lot better about things.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

jk, you da man!

it is always fun to poke at other teams misfortunes when your own team isn't doing well themselves, if it makes you feel better I guess go ahead and laugh all you want...

WPoS

[sprig]

it is always fun to poke at other teams misfortunes when your own team isn't doing well themselves, if it makes you feel better I guess go ahead and laugh all you want...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I won't feel better until the Sioux win something, but that won't stop the

Posts in the scoring thread on USCHO went wild in the second period Sat. when the Gophs were scoring and taking the lead. The bandwagon suspension has to be stressed with so much jumping on and off in the middle of one game.

[cfm567b27]

Just goes to show you that the curse of being #1 again holds true. I'm just happy that I can make my "Golden Novembers" sign next year for the UMN/UND series.

[Fetch]

Are all these Goalies really that good ?

[dagies]

jk, you da man!

it is always fun to poke at other teams misfortunes when your own team isn't doing well themselves, if it makes you feel better I guess go ahead and laugh all you want...

WPoS

Thanks, I'll do that! We've taken enough abuse from gopher fans the last few years.

[WPoS]

[cfm567b27]

WPos please tell me you fired up your E36 this past Saturday for a spin ?

[WPoS]

WPos please tell me you fired up your E36 this past Saturday for a

[schmidtdoggydog]

I'm not sure the use of instant replay would have affected the calls on the off-the-skate" goals (none of which I saw). My understanding is that the use of the replay is solely to determine if the puck crossed the line and nothing else.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

From today's INCH WCHA notebook:

Instant Replay is Under Review

WCHA Notebook

Instant replay might have cost Gino Guyer a chance to celebrate last weekend.

If WCHA officials get their way next season, each game

[Goon]

From today's INCH WCHA notebook:

Instant Replay is Under Review

WCHA Notebook

Instant replay might have cost Gino Guyer a chance to celebrate last weekend.

If WCHA officials get their way next season, each game

[redwing77]

[CoteauRinkRat]

[DamStrait]

The question is: Even if it's implemented, will they use it? Ass-clown crap-sack Todd Anderson refused to use it this year when the Sioux were at CC (player preceding the puck into the crease on a Sioux goal). Maybe that's not a reviewable call. If not, it should be. I know, I know, shithead ruled that he was not pushed in and what needed to be reviewed was not whether he preceded the puck into the crease, but whether he was pushed in. The former may be reviewable, but not the latter. IMHO both should be reviewable.

[WPoS]

having been on both sides of a blown goal call this year, I STILL don't like all the instant replay crap...part of the game is the humanity in the calls and thusly the errors that humans make...why don't we just sensor everything up and get rid of refs all together? Hmmmm, not a bad idea in some ways...

WPoS

[I Ranger]

We just want replay do to the fact that in a series versus Denver when the Sioux hit five or six pipes and had one or two goals that were dissallowed that may have been in. It would have been nice if the ref could have taken a look at the replay.

[dagies]

I like having replay to tell if a puck went in the net. The net is obstructed view almost from every angle. I wouldn't want to be checking every little call, icing, offsides, etc with replay. Just if the puck went in the net, and to clear up if it was kicked in, or if a player was in the crease obstructing the goalie. That type stuff is worthwhile. It's hard enough to score.

[redwing77]

having been on both sides of a blown goal call this year, I STILL don't like all the instant replay crap...part of the game is the humanity in the calls and thusly the errors that humans make...why don't we just sensor everything up and get rid of refs all together?  Hmmmm, not a bad idea in some ways...

WPoS

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Normally, I'd agree with you. However, how much "human error" is acceptable before you start wondering what is necessary to correct the problem?

Instant replay, as bad as it could become (or is), is necessary in the WCHA simply due to the gross incompetance displayed consistantly by certain refs. Since Greg is too buddy buddy (and should be fired anyhow), handling the refs is not an option. So, until those refs leave or Greg is fired and changes occur personnel wise, instant replay, IMO, is a necessity.

[WPoS]

Normally, I'd agree with you.  However, how much "human error" is acceptable before you start wondering what is necessary to correct the problem?

Instant replay, as bad as it could become (or is), is necessary in the WCHA simply due to the gross incompetance displayed consistantly by certain refs.  Since Greg is too buddy buddy (and should be fired anyhow), handling the refs is not an option.  So, until those refs leave or Greg is fired and changes occur personnel wise, instant replay, IMO, is a necessity.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I will agree 110% about the refs being poor in the WCHA and it will not improve till old shep leaves....but replay, in my mind should not have to be used to cover incompetance...the league should recognize the issue and resolve it, this is the WCHA from cripes sakes!

WPoS

[redwing77]

[WPoS]

heck, I was calling for his dismissal when he was a plain old ref! I have never liked him and have always thouht he was an incompetant boob...he just keeps on proving me right every year he is in charge!

WPOS

[Goon]

You've never served in an organization that had, at its head, a complacent leader.

These problems with officials aren't getting fixed because Greg doesn't think it's broken.  He doesn't see an official being poor in his job.  He sees an official having a bad day and that it will improve next time.  I believe he is truly incapable of disciplining his staff.  Hence, why it is a buddybuddy system.

You are right, replays should not cover up for incompetance, but there are no alternatives until Greg leaves.  It really really sucks, dude, but it is true.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah because he is a big proponent of nepotism.

[PCM]

The biggest problem with college hockey officiating -- especially in the WCHA -- is situational officiating.

Two or three years ago, Dean Blais was on the UND coaches' show complaining about the clutching and grabbing that's allowed to go on. That brought up the subject of the meeting that happens at the end of every season during which the coaches can talk to the league about officiating.

Blais said that when he asked for obstruction to be called more often, the WCHA officials responded by talking about when and where it would be called. In other words, the game isn't called by the rule book. It's left to the official to make a judgement about whether a penalty should be called in certain circumstances.

It's no wonder that WCHA officiating is so wildly inconsistent. When referees know that that they'll be allowed -- even encouraged -- to call some penalties and ignore others, then it's unrealistic to expect any sort of consistent standards.

This approach dominates college hockey officiating, and the NCAA knows it. In closing its open letter to the hockey community, the NCAA said (emphasis added):

The attempt to treat the above situations with more stringent enforcement is only the start of a longer process. We hope to see greater enforcement in a wider area of situations beginning in the 2005-06 season. One area for future consideration is the culture of situational standards. By this, we mean the changing of standards according to the time and score of the game. Is there a tougher standard to meet in overtime for a penalty to be called? If Team A receives a penalty in overtime, don't we currently expect the standard to be lightened so that a penalty can be called on Team B to mitigate the situation? Isn't the standard different for a team already killing a penalty?

Unlike the topic of restraining fouls detailed above, there is no consensus currently on the concept of situational standards. And so we wish to begin a national dialogue on the subject in the coming months to see if there is reason to address this in the future.

The situational officiating approach needs to be be banished from college hockey. It'll be interesting to see how serious the NCAA is about doing this and whether it can force the WCHA to follow suit.

[Goon]

The biggest problem with college hockey officiating -- especially in the WCHA -- is situational officiating.

Two or three years ago, Dean Blais was on the UND coaches' show complaining about the clutching and grabbing that's allowed to go on. That brought up the subject of the meeting that happens at the end of every season during which the coaches can talk to the league about officiating.

Blais said that when he asked for obstruction to be called more often, the WCHA officials responded by talking about when and where it would be called. In other words, the game isn't called by the rule book. It's left to the official to make a judgement about whether a penalty should be called in certain circumstances.

It's no wonder that WCHA officiating is so wildly inconsistent. When referees know that that they'll be allowed -- even encouraged -- to call some penalties and ignore others, then it's unrealistic to expect any sort of consistent standards.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think that pretty much sums up the way a lot of people feel. In watching the replay of the Final Five Championship game, it was apparent that there is less clutching and grabbing this season, however, there is still too much in my opinion. In watching that game I saw Keith Balard all but tackle one of our skilled players right in front of the ref and nothing gets called. Hell you can't even do that in the NFL or the NHL. That being said, I think UND does a lot of picks and I think that is why they spent a lot of time in the box this season. I can see how the players get confused.

[redwing77]

The biggest problem with college hockey officiating -- especially in the WCHA -- is situational officiating.

Two or three years ago, Dean Blais was on the UND coaches' show complaining about the clutching and grabbing that's allowed to go on. That brought up the subject of the meeting that happens at the end of every season during which the coaches can talk to the league about officiating.

Blais said that when he asked for obstruction to be called more often, the WCHA officials responded by talking about when and where it would be called. In other words, the game isn't called by the rule book. It's left to the official to make a judgement about whether a penalty should be called in certain circumstances.

It's no wonder that WCHA officiating is so wildly inconsistent. When referees know that that they'll be allowed -- even encouraged -- to call some penalties and ignore others, then it's unrealistic to expect any sort of consistent standards.

This approach dominates college hockey officiating, and the NCAA knows it. In closing its open letter to the hockey community, the NCAA said (emphasis added):

The situational officiating approach needs to be be banished from college hockey. It'll be interesting to see how serious the NCAA is about doing this and whether it can force the WCHA to follow suit.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I never thought of it that way before. It's nice to have a person who has a broader view on the issue. Thanks PCM.

Needless to say, you can't enforce anything with Greg in charge.