Regionals Sunday March 28

[judy]

I watched the third period of the Yale game. Yale used three goalies, none of whom played well. There was virtually no defense being played by either team. It was certainly an entertaining game to watch!

Their empty net was outstanding.

It was, wasn't it! It did better than their sieves!

[RatushnyFan]

Michigan just got screwed. Go BC. Go RIT.

Jim refers to a Michigan rebound tipped past the goalie in OT and a very quick whistle. The replays (audio and video) showed the whistle going off after the puck was headed into the net, or at very worst at the same time as the whistle blew (b/c the ref couldn't see the puck?) but IMO before the players could react to the whistle.

Ah, well, the Wolverines have been to the final four 22 or 24 times, so what's one less? For Miami it's their second straight (and only two total I believe) trip.

That's how the puck bounces (slides?) sometimes I guess.  Both Michigan and Miami were at times, on the ropes and hanging on or dominating the game.  Beyond the potentially quick whistle in OT (in fairness, the color commentator Sean Ritchlin, a Michigan grad, thought that Knapp had done enough to establish possession since a penalty was called), I thought that the ref had a very slow whistle on the second Miami goal.  Hunwick had the puck under his pad and I thought it was frozen before the Miami player pushed it out.  I always tell my kid to keep poking until you here the whistle!

I thought both teams played incredibly hard and were moving their feet well throughout a very physical game.  A great, classic NCAA game with good goaltending on both sides.  And after what happened to Miami last year, they could use a bit of good luck.  With Yale out, here's to a Miami vs RIT final.  Well, I can wish at least, and Miami is good.

Interesting to see that Miami went with Knapp in goal versus CCHA player of the year/Hobey Baker candidate Cody Reichard (15-0-2 in CCHA league play with a 1.23 GAA and 95.0% save %).  It must be nice to have two goalies of that caliber.  Presumably Knapp got the nod because Reichard wasn't sharp in the CCHA tourney semifinal loss to............Michigan.

[Jim Hyla]

Michigan just got screwed. Go BC. Go RIT.

Jim refers to a Michigan rebound tipped past the goalie in OT and a very quick whistle. The replays (audio and video) showed the whistle going off after the puck was headed into the net, or at very worst at the same time as the whistle blew (b/c the ref couldn't see the puck?) but IMO before the players could react to the whistle.

Ah, well, the Wolverines have been to the final four 22 or 24 times, so what's one less? For Miami it's their second straight (and only two total I believe) trip.

That's how the puck bounces (slides?) sometimes I guess.  Both Michigan and Miami were at times, on the ropes and hanging on or dominating the game.  Beyond the potentially quick whistle in OT (in fairness, the color commentator Sean Ritchlin, a Michigan grad, thought that Knapp had done enough to establish possession since a penalty was called), I thought that the ref had a very slow whistle on the second Miami goal.  Hunwick had the puck under his pad and I thought it was frozen before the Miami player pushed it out.  I always tell my kid to keep poking until you here the whistle!

I thought both teams played incredibly hard and were moving their feet well throughout a very physical game.  A great, classic NCAA game with good goaltending on both sides.  And after what happened to Miami last year, they could use a bit of good luck.  With Yale out, here's to a Miami vs RIT final.  Well, I can wish at least, and Miami is good.

Interesting to see that Miami went with Knapp in goal versus CCHA player of the year/Hobey Baker candidate Cody Reichard (15-0-2 in CCHA league play with a 1.23 GAA and 95.0% save %).  It must be nice to have two goalies of that caliber.  Presumably Knapp got the nod because Reichard wasn't sharp in the CCHA tourney semifinal loss to............Michigan.

Not how the puck bounces. Last year's loss by Miami to BU was how the puck bounces, this was how the ref blew it. That's especially true when compared to the Miami goal you mentioned. Michigan got screwed. A slow whistle on a Miami goal and a fast whistle on their game winning goal.

By the way, I interpreted the commentary differently. They consistently said the puck was free, just that he may have blown the whistle because he thought the puck was covered and there was a penalty being called. However, that comment was nonsense, since once the goalie covers the puck the whistle blows, regardless if there is a penalty or not. Stupid comment by him.

I can't believe I'm going to root for BC, but Miami lost the game and shouldn't be there. The only salvation is the ref having to live with his blown call determining the outcome of the game.

As an aside, I never noted before that NCAA refs never have their name on their shirt. At least I assume it's an NCAA rule. Any help from others out there?

[Al DeFlorio]

As an aside, I never noted before that NCAA refs never have their name on their shirt. At least I assume it's an NCAA rule. Any help from others out there?

I noticed that at the RIT/Denver and someone wearing a Clarkson hat behind me said that it was an NCAA thing.  Can't vouch for his credibility, but the evidence seems to support it.

[RatushnyFan]

I can't believe I'm going to root for BC, but Miami lost the game and shouldn't be there. The only salvation is the ref having to live with his blown call determining the outcome of the game.

A little bitter?  I went to Michigan for grad school and follow the team (second closest to my heart), but stuff happens, refs make mistakes.  Miami didn't lose the game and they move on.

[Jim Hyla]

I can't believe I'm going to root for BC, but Miami lost the game and shouldn't be there. The only salvation is the ref having to live with his blown call determining the outcome of the game.

A little bitter?  I went to Michigan for grad school and follow the team (second closest to my heart), but stuff happens, refs make mistakes.  Miami didn't lose the game and they move on.

Maybe more than a little, so? Michigan completely dominated the OT and didn't deserve to lose, especially after the first call you mentioned.

[Greenberg '97]

I don't even consider it a "blown call."  In the situation, the ref has to blow his whistle if he either loses sight of the puck or feels the goalie gained possession (not covered or deflected the puck, but directed or possessed the puck).  Maybe the whistle was for the latter.

The last thing a ref wants in that situation is a goal being scored after possession changed.  I think a quick whistle was appropriate given the circumstances.

Also, at the NHL level and apparently in the NCAAs as well, the play becomes dead when the referee intends to blow the whistle, not actually blows it.  So the goal could have been in the net before the whistle sounded and it still could have been waved off if the referee determined that he began the thought process of blowing the whistle before it crossed the goal line.

In summary, yes it was a quick whistle, but no, not a blown call.

NHL: http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=26489 Rule 78.5 (xii)

NCAA: http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/IH10.pdf Rule 6, Section 60.a.1.c. (Page HR-89)

[adamw]

Maybe more than a little, so? Michigan completely dominated the OT and didn't deserve to lose, especially after the first call you mentioned.

Miami completely dominated the third period.  So .... there you go ...

I think Ritchlin's comment was correct. Delayed penalty call, and he established "possession," so blowing the whistle there is correct, even if it's still free.

[Jim Hyla]

Maybe more than a little, so? Michigan completely dominated the OT and didn't deserve to lose, especially after the first call you mentioned.

Miami completely dominated the third period.  So .... there you go ...

I think Ritchlin's comment was correct. Delayed penalty call, and he established "possession," so blowing the whistle there is correct, even if it's still free.

Completely is much too strong, Michigan out shot them 15-12. Yes, there was a long stretch where they had the puck in the Michigan zone, but they weren't able to do anything with it. So, not so complete.

I haven't looked at the rule, but to establish possession on a delayed penalty, doesn't the goalie need to do more than just touch it? If it was free wouldn't they let the play go on? If it was just the delayed penalty, they wouldn't have needed to review the play. No, I think the review was to see if the puck crossed the goal line before the whistle and the penalty had nothing to do with it.

I'm sure if this was Cornell, we'd be talking about it for years, after all we've been talking about sticks and crossbars for 7 years so far. Bitter, are we?

[RatushnyFan]

I'm sure if this was Cornell, we'd be talking about it for years, after all we've been talking about sticks and crossbars for 7 years so far. Bitter, are we?

I don't look at it that way and I went to Michigan.  Can't speak for all of you but I think it's best to let it go.  Michigan played well, I was proud of their effort.

That said, it took me about 10 years to "let go" of Michigan's '97 FF loss to BU.  Maybe because I was in grad school at the time and losing with about 10 future NHLers seemed incomprehensible.  Unless you have that kind of dominant team, I think you're just looking for a solid effort.

[Jim Hyla]

I'm sure if this was Cornell, we'd be talking about it for years, after all we've been talking about sticks and crossbars for 7 years so far. Bitter, are we?

I don't look at it that way and I went to Michigan.  Can't speak for all of you but I think it's best to let it go.  Michigan played well, I was proud of their effort.

That said, it took me about 10 years to "let go" of Michigan's '97 FF loss to BU.  Maybe because I was in grad school at the time and losing with about 10 future NHLers seemed incomprehensible.  Unless you have that kind of dominant team, I think you're just looking for a solid effort.

I'm not sure what way you don't look at it. My point was that we talk about those things and complain about them for years, so complaining for a few days doesn't seem terrible. By the way my wife (she's a grad) and I also went to Michigan, and they are my second favorite team as well. My problem is not having a team to really root for now. I don't know if I'll spend the time and money to go to Detroit now.

As an aside, I wonder if RIT will be as helpful to get their students to Detroit as to Albany.

[Greenberg '97]

As an aside, I wonder if RIT will be as helpful to get their students to Detroit as to Albany.

If they really want to be helpful, they should expedite the passport process.  Cuts an hour off the drive each way.

[judy]

As an aside, I wonder if RIT will be as helpful to get their students to Detroit as to Albany.

If they really want to be helpful, they should expedite the passport process.  Cuts an hour off the drive each way.

Or, they could also tell some of their professors to cancel classes or exams to all go cheer on the team coughjtwcough

[adamw]

Or, they could also tell some of their professors to cancel classes or exams to all go cheer on the team coughjtwcough

LOL

[jtwcornell91]

As an aside, I wonder if RIT will be as helpful to get their students to Detroit as to Albany.

Yes, they are.  We got an email saying that they'll have $189 all-session tickets in the RIT section available to students for $100, and have a bus leaving at 7am Thursday, taking the US route to Detroit for the RIT game, and returning afterwards, due back in Rochester in the wee hours of the morning, with a similar bus Saturday if RIT is playing in the final.  The email also included advice on the visa/passport requirements for people going themselves via Canada.