2/6: Cornell 4 Dartmouth 2. Final.

Not making a comparison to eLynah, certainly not knocking this site, Age's photos are far better, but any else think the Dartmouth Hockey site is pretty good? Big Red's official athletic hockey site isn't bad, but you certainly get more content at Dartmouth's.

Sound bites, video highlights updated the morning after a game, and apparently being hosted by the College with them picking up bandwidth charges, that's pretty sweet.
I kind of feel if CU tried something like that someone would get a cease and desist letter or it would cost $10 a month.
Any one know of other really good official college hockey team pages?



Post Edited (02-07-04 12:42)

That isn't the official site (anymore - it used to be 2-3 years ago). The official site is your standard OCSN format at [athletics.dartmouth.edu]
But they do link to the "extra" one on the top of the official men's hockey site, so it works out.

And yeah, I guess the fact he waited to blow the whistle after McKee went down until we had a scoring chance is what set the crowd off. Had he blown it while the puck was in the corner it wouldn't have been as bad, but by waiting til the puck was in front, oh well.

I guess he wanted to wait as long as he could to see if McKee got up, and once there was about to be a scoring chance, he blew the whistle. Not necessarily the best move but it's not improper either, just likely to set the crowd off.

ben, did you get a good look at the scrum after the game had ended? the description by adam was a little sketchy, but i guess that happens when you are short a color guy. anyways, all i got was that jessiman gave a slash at the end of the game and abbott jumped in and maybe o'byrne. you got anymore details than that?

The videographer for Dartmouth needs a tripod really badly. Video quality isn't too bad, but whoever is taking video really needs to hold the camera more steady.

[Q]anyways, all i got was that jessiman gave a slash at the end of the game and abbott jumped in and maybe o'byrne[/Q]

There were actually some penalties handed out:

COR-6 Jeremy Downs (5-Cross-Checking) 20:00
COR-7 Mike Iggulden (2-Roughing) 20:00
DAR-8 Hugh Jessiman (5-Cross-Checking) 20:00
DAR-9 Sean Offers (2-Roughing) 20:00



....according to the boxscore: [www.collegehockeystats.com]

(p.s. has a thread ever gone over 200 posts before?!)



Post Edited (02-07-04 13:54)

[q](p.s. has a thread ever gone over 200 posts before?!)[/q]

I can't verify this, but check out the "Colgate Pep Band" thread from last season. The final post on it was just about this time last year (Early Feb.)

[Q]I can't verify this, but check out the "Colgate Pep Band" thread from last season. The final post on it was just about this time last year (Early Feb.)[/Q]


That thread, classic though it was, "only" had 150 posts. I know a couple game threads this season (other than this one) had more, including Cornell at Brown (173 posts) and Cornell vs Ohio State at the Everblades (196).

The ticket line procedure thread was pretty long.

[Q]The ticket line procedure thread was pretty long.[/Q]


Good point! That was 204 posts. But then again, so was this until we (okay, I) started talking about thread lengths

I'll stop now....

Yeah, because of all the lateral movements McKee was making, I thought it might have been a muscle pull, but the last Green player coming across the crease area looks like he might have tripped over the end of McKee's right leg pad. Maybe that last jolt was what caused the muscle to go a little too far. Certainly inadvertent.

As was the Glover incident. Pretty much every description I've heard matches Ben F's.

I would expect Marr to play tonight. First of all, it sounds that the team on whole seemed to wake up when Marr went in at DC. Maybe having to worry about protecting a cold goaltender got their minds working a little better than they had been for the past month. Whatever works. Second, UVM is the right team to have to face if you want someone to get back into game situations. And if McKee isn't 100%, I'd rather he not risk hurting himself more.

Definitely a useful media site at Dartmouth. And the animated broom for a 4-point weekend is kinda funny.



Post Edited (02-07-04 15:05)

Avash '05 wrote:

[Q]The ticket line procedure thread was pretty long.[/Q]


Good point! That was 204 posts. But then again, so was this until we (okay, I) started talking about thread lengths

I'll stop now....

I think there was a thread debating the merits of Hot Truck and Louie's Lunch that got up very high.



Post Edited (02-07-04 20:01)

same player that got ejected is the player who checked cook from behind.this is why these type hits need to be turned into central place so kids who are constant offenders are identified. in pro hockey this player would have to pay the price!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ditto

[q]same player that got ejected is the player who checked cook from behind.this is why these type hits need to be turned into central place so kids who are constant offenders are identified. in pro hockey this player would have to pay the price!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![/q]

I'm not sure what you are saying, but the guy who hit Cook (cleanly, btw, hard but clean) was Tanner Glass, the guy who got ejected was Max Guimond.

Yeah Glass got ejected in the Union game, but that was a completely bullshit call, unlike the one against Guimond.

Hey all, got back into Ithaca a few hours ago and wanted to see what everyone was saying. Not really much more to comment on that hasn't already been said, particularly by Ben Flickinger (in other words, someone else who was actually at the game). Let me just say that I agree with Ben 100% about the nature of each of the hits.

It was good to see a really good hockey game involving Cornell for the first time in a long time. Obviously, it was great that Cornell won, but even better was the fact that each team really brought their 'A' game to the ice.

Really, I'm not completely inept... at least I think I'm ept... but I can't seem to find these video highlights you speak of.

what a weekend to go NE to see some games.

gotta sleep so i will make it short. jessiman is a punk and a goon. from uscho...

after seeing him twice this year, and especially after this weekend, I have decided that he is a sleezeball. during the cornell game he was called offsides (i think it was offsides) and he yapped at kotyra and the linesman. he failed to do whatever he was trying to do to kotyra. he proceeded to skate towards the bench and instead of going around the outstretched arm of the linesman he went thru the arm! At the end of the game he stealthily snuck behind a cornell player and crosschecked him in the back -> a shoving match. he was frustrated for missing the net 4 times in a row. what a classless punk. i can't wait to cheer against him when he is a ranger - let stevens deal with him



Post Edited (02-10-04 19:10)

jy3 wrote:
what a classless punk. i can't wait to cheer against him when he is a ranger let stevens deal with him

Oh, the irony.

So... basically, he might join Dominic Moore in Hartford?

Sigh.

Does anyone know what this penalty actually was? chs.com simply has it listed as:
DAR-1 Mike Hartwick (2-OBSTRUCTION) COR 0x1 10:57

Since, to the best of my knowledge, Obstruction on its own is not a penalty, and apparently our "extremely astute SID" didn't pick up on it, I'm just looking for clarification.

Here, let me muddy the waters a little.

The minor penalties table in the Penalties section of the NCAA 2004 Ice Hockey Rules and Interpretations lists "Obstruction" (Rule 6 Section 28): [www.ncaa.org] But that index contains both penalties and actions for which penalties can be assessed, so the listing in itself is neutral.

Added to this, the section on Obstruction in the Rules section is Rule 6 Section 35 (not 28, which is Instigation), which says Obstruction shall be followed by the name of the infraction (e.g., obstruction-holding). Sections 6-28 and 6-35 in the Summary of Penalties section and in the Interpretations section are omitted. The Index to Interpretations does not list any reference to obstruction.

In other words, a cursory glance at the rule book is not enlightening, and I hope I never have to be a ref, because finding anything in that book would be a nightmare.

It looks to me that it is indeed an error and Obstruction all by itself is not a valid penalty designation. But I wouldn't bet on it, and after reading all the relevant sections of the rule book, that's sad.



Post Edited (02-09-04 14:56)

Cowbell Guy wrote:
Since, to the best of my knowledge, Obstruction on its own is not a penalty, and apparently our "extremely astute SID" didn't pick up on it, I'm just looking for clarification.

Good lord. And you wonder why it is so hard for you to get help...

Perhaps I can suggest a book: [www.amazon.com]

I was under the impression that just "Obstruction" is synonymous with "Obstruction-Interference". I could be wrong.

big red apple wrote:
Perhaps I can suggest a book: [www.amazon.com]

I have enough friends
On the other hand, Dilbert definitely spoke to me today...

The great thing about working on government contracts is the absence of scenario number 3 above.

Client (with big grin): "You didn't deliver the polka dot elephant."
Greg (nonplussed): "Where is the Requirement for the polka dot elephant?*"
Client: "There isn't one."
Greg: "You can go now."
Client: "Um..."
Greg: "Scoot!"
Client: (Exits. Sticks head back in office): "Sorry..."
Greg: "You still here?"

*Notice, the question of whether or not the polka dot elephant is an intelligent goal does not enter the conversation. That is the not so great thing about working on government contracts.

The obstruction penalty was obstruction-interference. Don't know if there are other obstruction-*** penalties that are called.

Ken Pavelle '92 wrote:
Don't know if there are other obstruction-*** penalties that are called.

I've seen Obs-Tripping, Holding, Hooking, and Cross-Checking(!)

Hornby still has a month or two left to be the first player ever penalized for obstruction charging.

From the USCHO forum, it sounds like that's more likely to be McCallister.

ummm, that is the point of the wink right? to say something in jest?

Heh, maybe I didn't realize what you meant. My bad.

np josh