ELynah Forum

what a weekend! great set of games.

wow what a win! Came home hoping to watch on espn+ but so happy about the result. Lets go RED!

Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82Went to the women's game yesterday - my very first women's hockey game ever.  It's a very different style game than the men's game.  

In the women's game, because of the "no checking" it's a lot more stick work on defense.  In the men's game, you just bull your way through the defense. There also seemed to be a lot fewer scrums in the corners in the women's game. It leads to more passing, more skating, and a more fluid game with lots of cycling.

I also noticed a lot of difference in our goalies' styles.  On dump-in shots on net, Galajda knocks the puck down in front of him, and then plays it with his stick to a teammate.  Browning uses her blocker to simply deflect the puck into the corner for a teammate to pick it up.  I wonder if that's because of her experience playing with the boys in HS.  It gave her faster reflexes, and since the women's shots aren't quite as fast as the men's, she has that extra split second to react.  

Of course, the fact that it was 3-0 before you could blink made it a lot more relaxing than the men's game, too  :-D

since getting espn+ we have watched a few of the games as well. I second your observations. Unfortunately we have not been able to watch in person

place is going nuts. wish I was there!

The crease rules have changed over the last 15 years multiple times in college hockey. Here is the current iteration. I initially thought the goal was scored with a kicking motion on first look. That does not seem to be the case. Being in the crease does not invalidate the goal. It appears to me by the definition below the goal is good.



Rule 73 - Interference on the Goalkeeper
73.1 Interference on the Goalkeeper - The overriding rationale of this rule
is that a goalkeeper should have the ability to move freely within the
goal crease without being hindered by the actions of an attacking player.
However, an attacking player's position, whether inside or outside the
crease, should not, by itself, determine whether a goal should be allowed
or disallowed. In other words, goals scored while attacking players are
standing in the crease may, in appropriate circumstances, be allowed.
Goals should be disallowed only if an attacking player, either by positioning
or by contact, impairs the goalkeeper's ability to defend the goal.
Section 9 / Other Fouls 61
If an attacking player has been pushed, shoved, or fouled by a defending
player and causes contact with the goalkeeper, such contact will not be deemed
contact initiated by the attacking player for purposes of this rule, provided the
attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact.
If a defending player has been pushed, shoved, or fouled by an attacking
player so as to cause the defending player to come into contact with the
goalkeeper, such contact shall be deemed contact initiated by the attacking
player for purposes of this rule, and if necessary a penalty assessed to the
attacking player and if a goal is scored it shall be disallowed.
Rights of the Goaltender – The rules must protect the goaltender and allow
him or her to defend the goal, within the goal crease, without interference
from an attacking player. This includes allowing a goaltender to move
effectively and efficiently within the crease, as well as being able to see the
puck unimpeded by a player who has established a position in the crease.
Rights of the Attacking Player – Attacking players who are outside of the
crease have some rights to the space they occupy. In cases where an attacking
player makes contact with goaltender's equipment that extends outside the
plane of the crease (e.g., glove, blocker, stick, etc.), provided that the attacking
player does not initiate distinct and deliberate actions aimed at impeding the
goaltender's use of their equipment (e.g., slashing the goaltender's glove), this
contact should be considered incidental and goals scored on such plays shall
be allowed.
If an attacking player establishes a significant position within the goal
crease, so as to obstruct the goalkeeper's vision and impair his ability to
defend his goal, and a goal is scored, such goals shall be disallowed. For this
purpose, a player establishes a significant position within the crease when, in
the referee's judgment, his/her body, or a substantial portion thereof, is within
the goal crease for more than an instantaneous period of time.
Role of the Official – Officials are encouraged to use their


video review rules have changed over the years as well. There was a point in the NHL that play would resume while the review was happening and you could seriously play minutes while the review was going on and then have to replay if the original play was overturned by the review. This was insane and this rule was quickly changed.

Under 93.4, it is correct that the initial off-sides is not reviewable because the puck left the Clarkson attacking zone.
12. To determine if a goal was scored as a result of an offside play or as
the result of an undetected too many men on the ice infraction by
the attacking team. The opportunity for review exists during the time
the puck entered the attacking zone illegally as a result of the offside
infraction and until the puck either:
a) Leaves the offending team's attacking zone;
b) A stoppage of play occurs and a faceoff is conducted; or
c) The defending team gains possession and control of the puck

http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/IH20.pdf

Those are the rules.  The crease/goal tender interference rule is a tough one because you have to balance safety with fairness for the attacker.  The review rule likely was determined as you have to cut off how far back you can review.  So it looks like the offsides was missed but the goal was legal.

Own child playing in a tournament Saturday. Wish we could make it to Mass.
Screw BU!

so basically get match ups like the #4. I know they seed by band but really....

Quote from: KenPCornell gets the #1 overall IF:

• Cornell wins out AND
• St. Cloud is held to one point or less (semi-final loss AND loss or tie in the consolation game)

The CHN Monte Carlo simulation shows a non-zero chance of Cornell at the #5 PWR.  Denver needs to beat St. Cloud in the finals AND Ohio State needs to lose AND all RPI factors work to bump Ohio State up to #4 despite a loss:

• ECAC Semifinal #1: Princeton def. Cornell
• ECAC Semifinal #2: Harvard def. Clarkson
• ECAC Championship: Harvard def. Princeton
• Hockey East Semifinal #1: Boston College def. Boston University
• Hockey East Semifinal #2: Northeastern def. Providence
• Hockey East Championship: Northeastern def. Boston College
• Atlantic Hockey Semifinal #1: Robert Morris def. Mercyhurst
• Atlantic Hockey Semifinal #2: Air Force def. Canisius
• Atlantic Hockey Championship: Robert Morris def. Air Force
• WCHA Championship: Michigan Tech def. Northern Michigan
• Big Ten Championship: Notre Dame def. Ohio State
• NCHC Semifinal #1: St. Cloud State def. North Dakota
• NCHC Semifinal #2: Denver def. Minnesota-Duluth
• NCHC Championship: Denver def. St. Cloud State
• NCHC Consolation: North Dakota ties Minnesota-Duluth

I was playing with this and did not have time to figure out these scenarios. Thank you for posting this. Always good to check out elynah this time of year. LGR!

Quote from: marty

Quote from: jy3hahvahd sucks.

I assume no free audio anywhere for this game, right? Looks like video is on ivy league network.

WHCU is streaming.

thanks, Marty! Hope you are doing well. Been a while.

hahvahd sucks.

I assume no free audio anywhere for this game, right? Looks like video is on ivy league network.

what a game!

sny has the ecac games this coming weekend here on here in Buffalo.

Quote from: Trotsky

Quote from: jy3Ah, wish we could make the trip. So long since we made it. This series brings back the first ECAC final as a student,
Championship[edit]
(1) Clarkson vs. (2) Cornell[edit]
March 15,1997   Clarkson      1 – 2      Cornell   Olympic Arena

http://www.tbrw.info/seasons/1997/box19970315.pdf

Hard to believe that was 20 years ago.

yes, it is!  20 years since Freshman year. Crazy

Ah, wish we could make the trip. So long since we made it. This series brings back the first ECAC final as a student,
Championship[edit]
(1) Clarkson vs. (2) Cornell[edit]
March 15,1997   Clarkson      1 – 2      Cornell   Olympic Arena

we have been waiting SO long for a game at Niagara. What a great one. The forecheck and trap of Niagara was giving the Red fits.

Of course I missed the game winning goal since I took my 3 year old to the bathroom. Oh how times have changed.