Fedorov Posted March 22, 2005 Share Posted March 22, 2005 Why is everyone just learning that there was a delayed penalty with the Bina hit? I wrote about it in the first posts discussing it. Just because my name isn't PCM, you can still read my posts. Nobody seemed to have a problem when I offered to send out the video. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagies Posted March 22, 2005 Share Posted March 22, 2005 Come on, do you really want a game where they call everything? It would seriously look like a park game. I think a lot of your comments have made sense. However, this one I have issue with. I think last fall there was quite a cry from the fans with this same attitude. I also suggest (I have no proof, only perception) that the Sioux and other teams were starting to adjust about the time the enforcement was relaxed. I agree that for a period of time the games will be ugly. I saw some of those games on tv and they were hard to watch. But maybe that was the price we had to pay. The WCHA should probably have stayed with it. And us fans will have to be patient. Unfortunately 2 things may be the result of the relaxation of enforcement: 1. We'll have to re-live through the whole acclimation period again if they try to clamp down. 2. WCHA teams may struggle in the postseason, now. If we think the rules enforcement is a good thing, we will have to accept the break-in period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted March 22, 2005 Share Posted March 22, 2005 The game evolves. Equipment changes, training changes, innovation occurs. Change is inevitable. The refs interpret the rulebook. As far as being quicker to the puck or in better position? Do you just surrender goals every time that happens? Any player worth his salt who knows anything about puck protection could score at will if the rules were enforced to the letter. Or if another player is a half-step faster or stronger up top or is a better position when the puck takes a funny bounce, am I just supposed to give up? Do you want offensive holding called on every play in football too? It happens every single play. I don't advocate cheap play, but there is so much going on you don't see. If you think the WCHA is bad you should try a shift in the MJHL. Yes, the game evolves. It's evolved from skating and speed to clutching and mugging. I want to put the game back to skating and speed. As far as your posits: - Get into better position than the opponent, legally. - Even The Great One didn't have perfect puck protection. - Never give up. Chase. Battle. Legally. - If they're faster, you have to be smarter; if they're smarter, you have to be faster. You make it sound like you have to cheat (break the rules) to play and win. PS - Ask anyone who's skated against me: I can cheat with the best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Posted March 22, 2005 Share Posted March 22, 2005 Along the lines of what Sicatoka is trying to explain - Move your feet, not your stick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted March 22, 2005 Share Posted March 22, 2005 If you want guys to play defense you have to let some little stuff go. Otherwise you will have scores like in a park game. No one will backcheck, no one will want to go in the corners. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No offense, I thought the Championship game of the final five was horrible, it was a horrendus game to watch. It was worse than watching the NJ Devils win the Stanley Cup during the 1990's, Boring I would rather watch paint dry or womens golf. Last season's NCAA title game was also horrendus. This type of hoickey is very reason some won't watch the NHL, because it is boring to some. Defensive hockey is horrible to watch and it suck frankly. A 4-2 game is more exciting than a 2-1 game or a 1-0 game. Denver is boring to watch play and if they get a ref that calls the game like its supposed to be called they are in trouble. Personally if I was a hockey coachI couldn't coach that crap. I would feel sleazy and dirty. It doesn't take much talent to hook, slash, hang on, hold and obstruct thats not hockey that all star wrestling. UofW does the same crap. I think that is why UND fans would rather watch UofM, B.C. and C.C. play against us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fedorov Posted March 22, 2005 Share Posted March 22, 2005 Denver is boring to watch play and if they get a ref that calls the game like its supposed to be called they are in trouble. Personally if I was a hockey coachI couldn't coach that crap. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Cue Marty to come in and tell you that is why you aren't a coach. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted March 22, 2005 Share Posted March 22, 2005 Cue Marty to come in and tell you that is why you aren't a coach. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Marty is the dude from Denver right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fedorov Posted March 22, 2005 Share Posted March 22, 2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted March 22, 2005 Share Posted March 22, 2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted March 22, 2005 Author Share Posted March 22, 2005 Along the lines of what Sicatoka is trying to explain - Move your feet, not your stick. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Don't listen to Canuck. He's always moving his stick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagies Posted March 22, 2005 Share Posted March 22, 2005 Goon, I agree. That championship match-up that I anticipated was way boring. Neither team had any consistent offensive flow. CC wouldn't dump the puck (maybe because the few times they did they couldn't cycle it and generate anything). It gave me new appreciation for our team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Runninwiththedogs Posted March 22, 2005 Share Posted March 22, 2005 I don't want Ogie Oglethorpe and Dr. Hook McCracken out there, but I think the players should be allowed to enforce the cheap stuff. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> So you want Old Time Hockey? Like Eddie Shore? The penalty should match the crime. A boarding penalty should be that a player delivering a hit (Paukovich) can not play another NCAA game until the receiver of the hit (Robbie Bina) can, with a minimum suspension being an escalating games suspenion (ala fighting). <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Ok that's stupid. I've been seeing that suggested by a few other people and it would never fly. Plus, it is possible to board someone or check them from behind and not f*ck them up horribly. Like in the Bulldogs vs. Vermont game, the 'Dogs took 2 game misconducts for checking from behind (one where the player turned at the last second) and the Vermont players didn't even miss a shift. Oh yeah, that was the same game where 2 'Dogs players were checked from behind and lying on the ice hurt, and NO CALL was made on one hit, and another was just a 2:00 boarding. I think that was the game that ended Ryan Geris's season, too, as he was one of the players hit from behind. Yeah, really fair. Crap. I'd tried to forget about that game. Now I'm all riled up again. Oh, right, my point. Extent of injury shouldn't dictate how severe the penalty is. I mean, do you have to wait to find out what is the real problem? And then what if they reassess? Whatever. Doesn't make any sense to do it that way. Why is everyone just learning that there was a delayed penalty with the Bina hit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted March 23, 2005 Author Share Posted March 23, 2005 Ok that's stupid. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'm sure the Sicatoka's idea doesn't sound stupid to Robbie Bina's family and teammates. However, I don't think it's a practical approach. What I think is practical would be if the NCAA treated boarding just as it treats fighting. Let's face it: Few players are ever seriously injured in fights. But every time boarding occurs, there's a potential life-threatening or career-ending outcome. That's why I think that if one player boards another player, the ref should have no discretion in assessing a major or a minor penalty. It should automatically be a major penalty. And as with fighting, every time a player engages in boarding, he should get an extra game added to his suspension time. I'd go so far as to say that if a player received three boarding penalties in a season, he's done for the season. And if he did it two seasons in a row, his college hockey career would be over. I see no value whatsoever in keeping chronic boarders in college hockey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux_Hab-it Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 I'm sure the Sicatoka's idea doesn't sound stupid to Robbie Bina's family and teammates. However, I don't think it's a practical approach. What I think is practical would be if the NCAA treated boarding just as it treats fighting. Let's face it: Few players are ever seriously injured in fights. But every time boarding occurs, there's a potential life-threatening or career-ending outcome. That's why I think that if one player boards another player, the ref should have no discretion in assessing a major or a minor penalty. It should automatically be a major penalty. And as with fighting, every time a player engages in boarding, he should get an extra game added to his suspension time. I'd go so far as to say that if a player received three boarding penalties in a season, he's done for the season. And if he did it two seasons in a row, his college hockey career would be over. I see no value whatsoever in keeping chronic boarders in college hockey. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That is the best suggestion yet. How do you get it presented to the league? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted March 23, 2005 Author Share Posted March 23, 2005 That is the best suggestion yet. How do you get it presented to the league? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'd take it right past the league and get the NCAA to adopt it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing77 Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fedorov Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted March 23, 2005 Author Share Posted March 23, 2005 Uh, PCM, did you learn anything from the NCAA open letter? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fedorov Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 It's not wise to tick of the 2,000-pound gorilla too many times. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I have a name you know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wreckincrew Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 I have a name you know. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I remember back when you were 800 pounds.......lay off the bananas! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted March 23, 2005 Author Share Posted March 23, 2005 I have a name you know. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> So that was you in those "I am the NCAA" commercials? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagies Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 I have a name you know. TFF! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fedorov Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 I remember back when you were 800 pounds.......lay off the bananas! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Too many banana daiquiris. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fedorov Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wreckincrew Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Too many banana daiquiris = 800 pound bedmates! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.