NCAA regionals 2011

[DeltaOne81]

Completely disagree. His head snapped based on the body hit, but there was absolutely no initial contact to the head. It was a dreadful call. Both the announcers disagreed (not that Barry Melrose holds much weight)... but it was an absolutely dreadful call. *Maybe* *maybe* you could argue a 2 (and still be wrong), but a 5 and a game for a clean open ice hit?

[underskill]

any close call like that hit is going to go that way given the crackdown on headshots now though.  Besides, watching Yale choke this away is pretty amusing.

[Rosey]

Yale on PP. Hopefully they can get something started.

[Rosey]

Besides, watching Yale choke this away is pretty amusing.

I will derive enjoyment from the outcome either way, but all things being equal, I would rather see Yale win.

[Scersk '97]

any close call like that hit is going to go that way given the crackdown on headshots now though.  Besides, watching Yale choke this away is pretty amusing.

I would normally agree, but the refs just did a wonderful job of bringing me firmly into Yale's camp.

[underskill]

assuming the score does hold up, it does lend some support to the idea that the way for ECAC teams to compete nationally is through defense and goaltending, b/c no matter how talented you are offensively, it won't hold up against the WCHA teams' skill level.

[Jordan 04]

O'Neill went in for a clean body hit. It was the UMD player's head that thrust into O'Neill's, not vice versa.  This wasn't a case of a footballer lowering the crown of his helmet on an opponent.

Maybe: it was hard to tell from the replay. I think the call was questionable, but not completely unreasonable given the video evidence.

Edit: by "completely unreasonable" I mean "obviously wrong".

Under the rules, it absolutely is "obviously wrong."  I don't see how anyone looking at the replay can claim that O'Neill "directly targeted" the UMD players head and neck area.  It's just not the case.

[Scersk '97]

assuming the score does hold up, it does lend some support to the idea that the way for ECAC teams to compete nationally is through defense and goaltending, b/c no matter how talented you are offensively, it won't hold up against the WCHA teams' skill level.

You know, I was thinking instead about how UMD doesn't look all that skilled but looks hard-nosed and, to use that word, "systems"-oriented.  They're doing a great job of plugging up the neutral zone and reducing the effects of Yale's speed.  And they're almost brutalizing Yale off the ice.  Now, I think there has been some borderline stuff that UMD has been doing (destabilizing pushes from behind, some holding along the boards) that has gone uncalled, but I've really been sitting here thinking, "We can/have done that.  Why couldn't we this year?"

[ajh258]

Now, I think there has been some borderline stuff that UMD has been doing (destabilizing pushes from behind, some holding along the boards) that has gone uncalled, but I've really been sitting here thinking, "We can/have done that.  Why couldn't we this year?"

Agreed.

[Rosey]

claim that O'Neill "directly targeted" the UMD players head and neck area.

Is that what the rule says? I admit to complete ignorance on the precise rules related to head hunting. If that's the case, then I agree: it was a bad call.

A rule-neutral justification for it being a bad call is this: watching it again, it's not clear who hit whom. It looks like one of those cases in which one player gets called for a penalty because the other guy went down.

[underskill]

assuming the score does hold up, it does lend some support to the idea that the way for ECAC teams to compete nationally is through defense and goaltending, b/c no matter how talented you are offensively, it won't hold up against the WCHA teams' skill level.

You know, I was thinking instead about how UMD doesn't look all that skilled but looks hard-nosed and, to use that word, "systems"-oriented.  They're doing a great job of plugging up the neutral zone and reducing the effects of Yale's speed.  And they're almost brutalizing Yale off the ice.  Now, I think there has been some borderline stuff that UMD has been doing (destabilizing pushes from behind, some holding along the boards) that has gone uncalled, but I've really been sitting here thinking, "We can/have done that.  Why couldn't we this year?"

Except, its being done by a 3d seeded, good but usually second tier program in UND against supposedly the deepest, most offensively skilled ECAC team in how long?

[Ben]

And they're headed to a 2nd OT in Green Bay. North Dakota must be quite pleased.

[nyc94]

Rondeau pulled.

[Jordan 04]

claim that O'Neill "directly targeted" the UMD players head and neck area.

Is that what the rule says? I admit to complete ignorance on the precise rules related to head hunting. If that's the case, then I agree: it was a bad call.

A rule-neutral justification for it being a bad call is this: watching it again, it's not clear who hit whom. It looks like one of those cases in which one player gets called for a penalty because the other guy went down.

The rule book makes it pretty clear that the targeting of the head is the issue.

A player shall not target and make contact with an opposing
player's head or neck area in any manner (including, but not limited to, with
the shoulder, stick, elbow, etc.).

PENALTY—Major and game misconduct or disqualification at the
discretion of the referee.

...
 
Any contact which directly targets the player's head and neck area must be
penalized with a major penalty and a game misconduct or disqualification.

There are further clarifications that contact initiated on the body that results in incidental contact to the head does not constitute a major penalty.  While in this case I think the heads technically touched before the bodies, I think it's clear that O'Neill's intent -- based on the position of his arms, hands, and elbows -- was to initiate body contact, and he certain was not targeting the head.

[Rosey]

against supposedly the deepest, most offensively skilled ECAC team in how long?

Not just "most offensively skilled", but "insanely talented". :-D

This must make UMD "ludicrously talented".