Cornell 3 at 3 Union 2/9/07 postgame

[Steve M]

I guess this season is meeting the low expectations I had at the outset.  Trotsky/Kepler had a USCHO poll at the beginning of the year on how far we would fall.  I voted for something like "Borderline TUC/Slightly above 0.500 ECAC."  That's exactly where we are and I'm not expecting any more.  Yes I know the season isn't over and anything can happen, but the odds of this team making the NCAAs are slim.

I just hope this is truly a rebuilding year like 2004 and not a long term shift in power.

[ebilmes]

I'll try not to step on what Ari will write about the game, but this was a loss.

Carefoot looked really bad as he left the ice, but he came back out to watch at least the 3rd period from along the glass. I'm sure he enjoyed the taunting he received from 2 Union students as they walked by him on their way to an early departure.

I'm not familiar with the process for reviewing goals using replay or whatever, but Murphy was very wishy-washy on his goal calling. Carefoot's was a clear goal--he scored and was cross-checked into the crossbar.

McLeod is not the answer on defense. Coyle owned him on the first goal, and McLeod ended up having to commit a penalty later on because he got beat again. I realize he's just filling in, but our D looks atrocious with Seminoff gone and Glover still playing timidly.

You take a 3-1 lead into the 3rd against a horrible hockey team and lose.

Where were the Faithful tonight? There were a hell of a lot more students/recent alums at Union last year.

Oh, and our band was penalized by Onion for daring to play Davy after lineups were announced. Their punishment? The band could not play between periods. Instead, they hummed My Old Cornell and other songs.

I'm glad I am far away from Schenectady.

[ebilmes]

Oh, and it's always nice to chat with the locals. My friend and I are walking around the rink between periods, trying to find concessions, and we run into this group of kids, none of whom can be more than 9. We tell them we go to Cornell, etc., and the kids are genuinely curious about college. Then, one kid, clearly a local, comes up and informs us that he "wipes his ass" with Cornell. We walk away.

We had hard candy thrown at us by Union fans who didn't appreciate the fact that we cheered, and then of course I mentioned how Carefoot was taunted after returning to the rink. Nice place, Union.

[daredevilcu]

Messa truly has the least classy fans I've ever encountered in college hockey.  I haven't been everywhere, but they seem to not care at all about the sport, and simply do everything they can to offend and instigate opposing fans.  Their arena director is also very unaccomodating, and while it's unfortunate that your band was treated badly, at least you can take some solace in knowing you aren't being singled out -- we were treated just as poorly.

[Roy 82]

2-0-1 Bill. You have noone to blame but yourself for the blemish on your perfect threadstarter record.

What was that remark in the game thread about Ari's 3-2 prediction coming true? ::smashfreak::

[jtwcornell91]

[quote Jim Hyla][quote Larry72]Just watched the replay of the waived off goal.  Union goalie just bumped the net. It was never off the peg. Unbelievably bad call!!![/quote]I can't disagree more. I also watched the replay. He came over to cover up the back door, hit the post with his skate, as you should do, and the net raised up an inch or so and moved back an equivalent amount. Agree it never came off the posts but was dislodged. The last view, after the puck was in, still showed the net off the ice. If we had the rule, did it affect the play or the goal, the answer would be no, and it would be counted. But I believe our rule is, if the net is dislodged, then no goal.[/quote]

I'm pretty sure they changed the rule a couple of years ago so that if the defense dislodges the net, the offense can still score into the dislodged net.

[Jim Hyla]

[quote jtwcornell91][quote Jim Hyla][quote Larry72]Just watched the replay of the waived off goal.  Union goalie just bumped the net. It was never off the peg. Unbelievably bad call!!![/quote]I can't disagree more. I also watched the replay. He came over to cover up the back door, hit the post with his skate, as you should do, and the net raised up an inch or so and moved back an equivalent amount. Agree it never came off the posts but was dislodged. The last view, after the puck was in, still showed the net off the ice. If we had the rule, did it affect the play or the goal, the answer would be no, and it would be counted. But I believe our rule is, if the net is dislodged, then no goal.[/quote]

I'm pretty sure they changed the rule a couple of years ago so that if the defense dislodges the net, the offense can still score into the dislodged net.[/quote]But then it has to be a goal.

[RichH]

[quote ebilmes]Oh, and our band was penalized by Onion for daring to play Davy after lineups were announced. Their punishment? The band could not play between periods. Instead, they hummed My Old Cornell and other songs.[/quote]

I asked some band members why they weren't playing between periods, and the real reason is that they were told they can't because of the TV booth, which was placed on temporary media tables at the top of the bleachers.  

Personally, I think that's that's horseshit.  If TV wants to cover an event, they should adapt to the atmosphere, not vice-versa.   Even an atmosphere that's as Mickey-Mouse-high-school as Achilles.  Especially when it's just a local cable outfit.

I screamed a bit at the TV booth from across the rink and started a modest "Let Them Play!" chant during the 2nd intermission.

[RichH]

[quote Jim Hyla]Well, does anybody think a Schafer team from earlier years, would so easily blow a 3^rd period 3-1 lead. We looked terrible after we lost that goal, and were lucky to get 1 point.[/quote]

Just sloppy, sloppy play all around.  We're carrying hockey sticks, not whisk brooms...I wish we'd show that.  So many swipes at the puck that were near whiffs, and the turnover bug that has hit us in at least 2-3 other games was back.

For the first time in a long time, CU looked like it was playing scared with a lead during the 3rd period.  Never mind the big dump truck of momentum that was backed up in the first minute of the 3rd for Union.  Flub at the blue-line leading to a SH breakaway goal, followed immediately by a stabilizing goal being waved off...you could just see where this was going.  The Union fans and team were just lifted.  Problem is, where the past few CU teams would've aggresively said "NO!" at that point.  This team seemed to turtle back and hope for the best.  I'm actually surprised that we didn't lose in OT...that's exactly what I felt would happen.  Frankly, the way we played in OT, we probably should've lost.


I neglected to complement Scrivens for his good game vs. St. Larry.  He played confidently, stayed on his feet, and was overall very stable.  It was his best looking game to date.  There were a few moments at Union where the lunging moments came back, but he made a few good saves.  The SHG to start the 3rd was weak...it was a weak shot that beat him, despite being a breakaway.  To his credit, he did stop another breakaway later in the game.  And the tying goal...we've seen this before.  A sharp-angle shot that found his 5-hole off his pad as he dropped down.  Once, I can forgive as a fluke...now it's clear he needs an adjustment to stop exposing that possibility.

The team needs to get the killer instinct back when we have a 3rd period lead.  Playing scared won't even get us to Albany.

[Dafatone]

Scrivens wasn't amazing, but he could have easily let in another two or three goals in the third period, given all the breakaways and good shots we let up.

And Nash needs to stop whiffing on pucks when he tries to take a shot.

[Trotsky]

So are we assuming Davenport tonight, and a regular rotation for the rest of the season?

[Rita]

[quote Trotsky]So are we assuming Davenport tonight, and a regular rotation for the rest of the season?[/quote]

After the Colgate series we thought we would see a goalie rotation, but Scrivens got the next three starts. I just don't know.

[billhoward]

[quote Roy 82]2-0-1 Bill. You have no one to blame but yourself for the blemish on your perfect threadstarter record. What was that remark in the game thread about Ari's 3-2 prediction coming true?[/quote]

[quote The Hound of the Baskervilles]"Put into plain words, the matter is this," said he [Holmes]. "In your opinion there is a diabolical agency which makes Dartmoor [but not London] an unsafe abode for a Baskerville--that is your opinion?"


"At least I might go the length of saying that there is some evidence that this may be so."

"Exactly. But surely, if your supernatural theory be correct, it could work the young man evil in London as easily as in Devonshire. A devil with merely local powers like a parish vestry would be too inconceivable a thing." [/quote]

So eLynah's reach is greater than that of a local parish vestry, in the words of Conan Doyle. How about Ari's reach? He predicted we'd be 18-4-3 after this weekend. Do note the score stayed at 3-2 for at least 45 seconds after Ari's 3-2 ending-score prediction was noted.

Regardless, I'm taking the eLynah buyout package and will pursue other opportunities. What was Richard Nixon's exit line in 1960 (if only he'd kept his word?)?

[TimV]

Can't score into a dislodged net.  

Rule 6  Section 18 c (12) If the goal cage has been moved or dislodged. The goal frame is considered to be displaced if any portion of the goal frame is not in its proper position (e.g., Frame must be completely flat on the ice surface, goal posts must be in proper place and affixed securely
in place with its pegs.).

Edited because link below didnt seem to work.

Check http://www.achahockey.org/files/2006-2007_ncaa_handbook.pdf::worry::

[Dafatone]

So what's to stop a goalie from "accidentally" knocking the goal off its posts when he's in trouble?  If he's too obvious, it would be a delay of game, right?