RULE ?

An o man cannot be in the crease when a goal is scored?

Look at this photo and a toothpaste player is clearly in the crease!



Can anybody explain?

If the puck is in the crease, the offensive team can follow... it's only when the offensive player steps in the crease first. Of course, I'm not really sure where the puck is in that picture, it's entirely possible that the Colgate guy got out of the crease before the puck ever entered.

I saw the video last night and I'm pretty sure he was in the crease for the whole play.

That was the 1st thing I thought about.

In the other picture, the puck has just entered the net, but you can't see it. In this pic, it's moments before, and Doyle is skating into the crease without being pushed, well before the puck. Shouldn't be a goal.

Crap, I didn't need to know that... if we had to lose in OT, I'd rather it be legit... damnit I want Saturday!

I couldn't agree more!
At 1st I was not worried having seen this because I have seen goals disallowed for much less!
If this had been reg, the goal wouldn't have counted but the refs wanted to go and the home team put the puck in the net, why not let it stand.
The good news is it means nothing to us but toothpaste u. needs it bad.

maybe it was a blown call and maybe the refs suck and all. but it's not like the OT period is twenty minutes long. the refs were gonna go home in a few minutes anyway, so it's quite the conjecture to think they'd call it different because of that.

I'll just copy and paste my response from USCHO here.

Doesn't matter since the goaltender was outside his crease. If the goalie isn't in his crease then you can sit in there as long as you like.

Rule 6-17-c-7
c. A goal shall not be allowed in any of the following cases:

7) If any member of the attacking team (other than the player in possession of the puck) was in or skating through the goal crease when the goal was made from outside the crease, unless the goalkeeper was outside the crease when the play was made (in which case the goal is allowed).

(emphasis added)

At the most LeNeveu had a toe on the line when the shot was fired, and that's iffy from the snapshots I've seen. Depending where the ref was, there's a high probabilty he wouldn't have been able to notice a skate edge on a line. I know I sure as hell wouldn't have made that call during live action. Maybe with the help of video replay, but that isn't used in NCAA play until the tourny.

Looking at the pics he has a skate in the crease (imho), you believe what you like.
Again, the game is meaningless, I just don't like to lose and especially on a bad call.
As far as I can tell that is just a loophole rule, so the ref. can call what he wants and they wanted to go home!

That's what a message board is for (IMHO), doesn't matter they may have been worried about a fight and the soon it's over the better, 15 minutes or 2 seconds.

It's not meaningless if they end up losing to Harvard

It depends on what the tiebreaker is and even so what difference does it make if the are 1 or 2. We still want to win the ECAC!

there is no tiebreaker. I think it matters to the team that they finish ahead of Harvard at the end of the regular season. I doubt they want the distinction of finishing second to them and then being the underdogs in the tourny. Also, it is not meaningless for attitude reason. Colgate now knows they can beat Cornell. I guarantee you will see a better, more inspired Colgate team tomorrow night. Hopefully, one for Cornell as well. Other teams also know that Colgate beat Cornell. It says a lot. I hesitate to label anything meaningless in the conference, especially when playoff positions have not yet been determined.

I always hated the crease rule growing up watching Hockey. The guy was driving to the net, and the puck went in. I don't care if he was in the crease or not before the puck or not, but he didn't interfere with Lenny in any way. As much as it pained me to watch that puck go in, I would have to agree that that goal was good.

I know that we have to follow rules .. blah blah blah.. but come on... this is hockey.. play the game the way it's suppose to played and stop bickering about minor details.

Being a Cornell fan, I have to say that yesterday's game was definitely exciting to watch. I was hanging on the edge of my seat the entire 3rd period. Despite the outcome, it was still a great game.

I disagree with your logic for many reasons:

1: They were not going go undefeated the rest of the way, it doesn't happen, we haven’t lost to a NY team in over a season of play, the odds are we would lose eventually,
2: Believe me, other teams know that they can win on any given night, they are competitors also,
3: I chose to believe that this lose will motivate the team to destroy them Saturday,
4: In a way I’m glad they lost now, they may work even harder,
5: There has to be some sort of tiebreaker so the teams can be seeded.
6: TOOTHPASE U. IS NOT A GOOD TEAM, THE BIG RED OUTPLAYED THEM THE WHOLE GAME, EVERYONE GETS A LUCKY GAME!

But that said we are both rooting for the BIG RED, LGR.
.

AMEN Fred!

ok, let's say the tiebreaker is head-to-head games and they lose to Harvard. Then what? what if their record is even otherwise? All I'm saying is nothing is ever meaningless. But it does bother me when the losing team complains about how the goal should have been disallowed. God, is that frustrating. they lost, get over it. and it's not unreasonable to speculate that cornell will win the rest of their regular season games. There are only 7 more. They've already won 6 in a row, twice. It's not logic, it's speculation

There are tiebreaking procedures, listed here:

[hockey.ecac.org]

As one who has wrestled with these for more years than I care to admit, I'd advise you to do yourself a favor: don't bother trying to apply them, as it gets very messy very quickly. John Whelan has/had an excellent "Hypothetical finish in the ECAC" page that showed the tiebreakers being applied. The link I have didn't work -- John, is it down for rewrite (minor change in the tiebreakers this year, top 4-8 rather than top 5-10), too early to work right, or am I just confused?

Huh? Why would the Colgate game matter in head-to-head against Harvard? ??

Fred, the picture of LeNeveu with the skate on the line is before the shot.

The one where the puck has just entered the net you cannot see his skate. For all we know he slid out of the crease in those few moments. I can't tell, and there's no replay in college hockey during the regular season. I wouldn't wave off a goal like that.

The ref made the right call.

I’m not exactly sure of your point but they have 9 more games. The point I was making is that winning streaks longer than 6 games are rare, in other words it is unreasonable to expect Cornell to win out no matter whom they are playing. Now they have that lose out of the way, YA. Are you a big red fan?

YOU ARE ENTITLED TO YOUR OPINION.
I JUST DON’T AGREE!

French Rage wrote:

Huh? Why would the Colgate game matter in head-to-head against Harvard? ??

It wouldn't matter in that tie-breaker, but it could matter in the subsequent tie-breakers such as record against top 4 (not likely) or top 8 (reasonably possible).

To clarify, since I think someone said there are no tie-breakers:
The ECAC has tie-breakers to determine final standings.
The Ivy League does not break ties and awards a co-championship if two teams (or more, I suppose) finish tied for first.

The reason why the Colgate game counts is because if they lose to harvard (and assuming their records are the same otherwise), the Colgate game is what made those records the same. Anyway, the point is that I disagree with this game being labeled meaningless. It may prove to have some meaning, it may prove to have none. We shall see. Losses are never ok

No game (and in particular, no loss) is meaningless. Some games/wins/losses mean more than others, true, but every game counts, right to the very end.

It was far, far from meaningless in the PWR

One of the guys who got revenge on Volonnino wrote:

No game (and in particular, no loss) is meaningless. Some games/wins/losses mean more than others, true, but every game counts, right to the very end.

I think it's safe to assume Coach Schafer and the team see it the same way.

I think we've beaten this dead horse long enough. We lost because we managed one goal against a goalie whose goals-against-average was 5.8 and save percentage .824 in his previous four ECAC appearances.

The ECAC Playoff Possibilities script and the ECAC Race in a Nutshell go live as soon as the home stretch starts, defined as the point where every remaining weekend consists three straight-up travel-partnership-on-travel-partnership series (give or take Harvard's Beanpot-related nights off). This year that condition will be fulfilled as of Sunday.

Thanks for everything, John.