Florida Hockey Classic post-game

Another coulda, woulda, shoulda weekend. Cornell played well enough to win the first game vs. UMass Lowell and then could have taken down Maine in the title game. But didn't. Two game changers vs. UML were the bad judgment by soon-to-be-yanked goalie Ben Scrivens that gave UML the early first goal. Then when Cornell scored in the second period and came back 15 seconds later to apparently take a 2-1 lead except the referees ruled the whistle (for a UML penalty) had already blown. We were on the far side of the rink and couldn't see if UML's goalie had relaxed or if the shot had beaten him regardless.

There were some good individual efforts. Starting with the ability of both Davenport Friday and Scrivens (returned to Schafer's good graces Saturday) in stopping all those bleeping breakaways.

Our power play currently represents a good time to hit the refreshment stands.

Would be nice if we beat one team based in Massachusetts in 2007-08.

This is a young team (not as freshman-laden as UML though) and so you've got to assume there'll be improvement in the second half of the season. But enough improvement to carry us how far: Into the round of four in Albany in the ECACs (one hopes) and maybe into the title game but beyond that ... ?

Win or tie (sometimes lose) Cornell hockey is still fun to watch.

About the tournament: Attendance seemed down from previous years. And for good reason: Clarkson and UMass Lowell don't have the fan base of a Notre Dame or Ohio State. I though the Cornell contingent was down vs. other years. It was nice that the Cornell Club hosted a hospitality area. It was too bad there was no Cornell student or alumni pep band. At least we had the cowbell.

billhoward
Then when Cornell scored in the second period and came back 15 seconds later to apparently take a 2-1 lead except the referees ruled the whistle (for a UML penalty) had already blown. We were on the far side of the rink and couldn't see if UML's goalie had relaxed or if the shot had beaten him regardless.

I'm still confused about this one. I too was in the Cornell fan section on the far side of the rink from the action, and it appeared that we drew a penalty, and the puck then squirted out to a Cornell player (Mugford I believe) who shot and scored, but not before a whistle blew. I'm not sure why exactly the whistle blew as UML didn't touch the puck after the penalty occurred, but I think UML's goalie definitely heard it since it appeared to me that he relaxed and almost allowed the shot to get past him. I seem to remember the UML player going down when he committed the penalty so perhaps he fell on the puck after committing the penalty and that was enough to draw the stoppage?

I think the ref blew the whistle because he lost track of the puck, I saw him look to the linesmen who had no clue where the puck was either.

sah67

billhoward
Then when Cornell scored in the second period and came back 15 seconds later to apparently take a 2-1 lead except the referees ruled the whistle (for a UML penalty) had already blown. We were on the far side of the rink and couldn't see if UML's goalie had relaxed or if the shot had beaten him regardless.

I'm still confused about this one. I too was in the Cornell fan section on the far side of the rink from the action, and it appeared that we drew a penalty, and the puck then squirted out to a Cornell player (Mugford I believe) who shot and scored, but not before a whistle blew. I'm not sure why exactly the whistle blew as UML didn't touch the puck after the penalty occurred, but I think UML's goalie definitely heard it since it appeared to me that he relaxed and almost allowed the shot to get past him. I seem to remember the UML player going down when he committed the penalty so perhaps he fell on the puck after committing the penalty and that was enough to draw the stoppage?

Mugford and Holmstrom tussled near the left faceoff circle and each appeared to take the other down. Mugford broke free, collected the puck and slapped it home from inside the circle, and when it was whistled no goal, I thought Mugford (or Holmstrom) had 50-50 chances of going off for holding, but it was someone else. If I read the box score right (http://www.cornellbigred.com/Pdfs/mhockey/2007/12/28/FCC1.PDF), there was a penalty called at that point and it was UML's Ryan Blair who drew two minutes for holding. And Cornell didn't appear to protest the non-goal too much, which suggests that the play had been whistled dead, rightly or wrongly (given that the puck squirted out and Mugford got to it first).

I posted about 5 photos of the non goal sequence. You'll see no one else appeared to touch the puck before Mugford got back to it. Start at about the 25th photo in the slideshow. [www.billhoward.phanfare.com]

billhoward
Would be nice if we beat one team based in Massachusetts in 2007-08.

Or New York.

billhoward

sah67

billhoward
Then when Cornell scored in the second period and came back 15 seconds later to apparently take a 2-1 lead except the referees ruled the whistle (for a UML penalty) had already blown. We were on the far side of the rink and couldn't see if UML's goalie had relaxed or if the shot had beaten him regardless.

I'm still confused about this one. I too was in the Cornell fan section on the far side of the rink from the action, and it appeared that we drew a penalty, and the puck then squirted out to a Cornell player (Mugford I believe) who shot and scored, but not before a whistle blew. I'm not sure why exactly the whistle blew as UML didn't touch the puck after the penalty occurred, but I think UML's goalie definitely heard it since it appeared to me that he relaxed and almost allowed the shot to get past him. I seem to remember the UML player going down when he committed the penalty so perhaps he fell on the puck after committing the penalty and that was enough to draw the stoppage?

Mugford and Holmstrom tussled near the left faceoff circle and each appeared to take the other down. Mugford broke free, collected the puck and slapped it home from inside the circle, and when it was whistled no goal, I thought Mugford (or Holmstrom) had 50-50 chances of going off for holding, but it was someone else. If I read the box score right (http://www.cornellbigred.com/Pdfs/mhockey/2007/12/28/FCC1.PDF), there was a penalty called at that point and it was UML's Ryan Blair who drew two minutes for holding. And Cornell didn't appear to protest the non-goal too much, which suggests that the play had been whistled dead, rightly or wrongly (given that the puck squirted out and Mugford got to it first).

I posted about 5 photos of the non goal sequence. You'll see no one else appeared to touch the puck before Mugford got back to it. Start at about the 25th photo in the slideshow. [www.billhoward.phanfare.com]

I think you're right. I was confused at the time, but after looking at your photos and thinking back, this seems the most plausible explanation. Oh, and great pictures, by the way.