Quinny Redux 02/05/16

ugarte · February 05, 2016, 09:37:24 PM

Did not like watching this team play but I'll take this result. The Vanderlaan goal to tie was nice, even if it was helped a lot by Gartieg getting crowded.

Scersk '97 · February 05, 2016, 09:42:59 PM

Quote from: Johnny 5I never thought I'd be rooting for a tie!

::panic::

A tie, on the road, vs. the #1 team in the country is a pretty much a win, as far as I'm concerned, particularly with how our team has played of late.

ugarte · February 05, 2016, 09:55:21 PM

Quote from: Scersk '97
Quote from: Johnny 5I never thought I'd be rooting for a tie!

::panic::

A tie, on the road, vs. the #1 team in the country is a pretty much a win, as far as I'm concerned, particularly with how our team has played of late.

Particularly how our team played tonight! We definitely stole a point.

TimV · February 05, 2016, 09:56:53 PM

He was jammed up on Kubiak's goal too. Q's a good team, but they needed OT to beat us the first time, had trouble with RPI and Dartmouth blew a 3-goal lead with 15 min to play, so I don't think theyl sweep the ECAC.

Scersk '97 · February 05, 2016, 10:33:15 PM

Quote from: TimVHe was jammed up on Kubiak's goal too. Q's a good team, but they needed OT to beat us the first time, had trouble with RPI and Dartmouth blew a 3-goal lead with 15 min to play, so I don't think theyl sweep the ECAC.

At this point, I hope they go undefeated for the rest of the regular season: Colgate, @SLU, @Clarkson, @RPI, @Union, Brown, Yale.

Swampy · February 06, 2016, 12:55:07 AM

Quote from: Scersk '97
Quote from: TimVHe was jammed up on Kubiak's goal too. Q's a good team, but they needed OT to beat us the first time, had trouble with RPI and Dartmouth blew a 3-goal lead with 15 min to play, so I don't think theyl sweep the ECAC.

At this point, I hope they go undefeated for the rest of the regular season: Colgate, @SLU, @Clarkson, @RPI, @Union, Brown, Yale.

Shame on you. The 1970 team and Ken Dryden, especially, deserve better than this.

billhoward · February 06, 2016, 09:01:31 AM

Quote from: Johnny 5I never thought I'd be rooting for a tie!
::panic::

Others before us were smug about a tie. In Harvard's case, 2 TDs and 2 2-point conversions in the last 2 minutes.

dbilmes · February 06, 2016, 10:59:46 AM

This game story has more details about Schafer's concussion and about how Syer helped build Quinnipiac into a national powerhouse. He doesn't get a mention in the story, but Gillam really stole a point for us last night. He wasn't happy about the second goal he gave up, the one-timer by Anas, but he kept us in the game all night. In particular, with Q leading, 2-1, he made a great glove save on Anas in the second period, and in the third period, he made a great sprawling save on a shot headed into the momentarily open net. Q also helped us out with some ill-advised penalties in the third period, which helped us start to get some momentum.

upprdeck · February 06, 2016, 11:13:14 AM

the team played well.. a few times the got out positioned and speed plays hurt us cauing penalties. the bad pass on the PP when it was 1-1 led to two more penalties and that second goal. other than that more then enough chances to win, includnig having 3-4 chances to stuff in a goal in OT.

the 2 late collapses last week are really all that changes us from being 2-3 in the league and solidly in the tourney and outside looking in.. even 2 ties puts us in a good spot.. need the 2 tonight

andyw2100 · February 06, 2016, 05:06:10 PM

Pecknold is quoted in the story upthread being upset our second goal wasn't ruled a no-goal because of players in the crease interfering with Garteig, the Q goalie. He also made comments about it in the post-game press conference, as did Garteig. The replay is shown after Garteig talks about it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BzrAWHoPPI

It is really clear that the two players in the crease were there because the Q player took out the Cornell player. Perhaps neither Pecknold nor Garteig realized that.

I was almost 100% certain that in that situation, the goal should count, but with both of those guys suggesting it should have been a no-goal, I looked up the rule. I was correct:

"No goal may be scored with an attacking player in the goal crease unless the puck has preceded the player(s) into the goal crease or the goalkeeper is out of the goal crease area.

However, if the attacking player has been physically interfered with by the actions of a defending player that causes him to be in the goal crease, play shall not be stopped and any legal goal scored shall be allowed."

http://www.usahockeyrulebook.com/page/show/1084676-rule-625-interference

Of course it's likely that neither Pecknold nor Garteig had the benefit of watching the replay before commenting, so I guess we've got to give them that.

Dafatone · February 06, 2016, 05:59:50 PM

The Q announcers, whose homerism and whining were absurd, both agreed it was a good goal.

Scersk '97 · February 06, 2016, 06:19:02 PM

Quote from: DafatoneThe Q announcers, whose homerism and whining were absurd, both agreed it was a good goal.

Right up there with the Brown radio guys, and that's saying something.

Trotsky · February 06, 2016, 06:36:57 PM

One of the few things I dislike about Mike is how he works the refs on almost every goal, call, or non-call.

Nice to see Pecknold remains even worse.

Dafatone · February 06, 2016, 06:55:48 PM

Quote from: TrotskyOne of the few things I dislike about Mike is how he works the refs on almost every goal, call, or non-call.

Nice to see Pecknold remains even worse.

Sportsmanship-wise, it's a little weak, but it can work. Bobby Cox made arguing this call in order to get the next call into an art form with the Braves.