Game 3: Cornell 1, Clarkson 0 (OT)

[daredevilcu]

The pic shows it very clearly as a goal, but in review I believe the referees only have access to the overhead camera. An overhead shot or a view from anywhere but right on the glass in Section O would not have been able to see the puck through all the bodies. I'm not mad that it wasn't overturned on review, I'm just annoyed they didn't get it right to begin with in both cases.

[Chris '03]

(and bad news for Cornell)

Not at all.  Better opponents (particularly our traditional rivals) --> better conference --> better for us.

Here we go again...

Can we at least wait until Q and U are playing in April to have this discussion? ::deadhorse::

[Josh '99]

edit:  never mind, answered downthread.

[daredevilcu]

To think I could have gone through the whole day without seeing those pictures and getting pissed off all over again.

[upprdeck]

perhaps they also ruled he was pushed into the net which is what he implies in the interviews..  no way the puck is seen in the overhead videos..

in the first picture, is it really the puck? looks a bit funny more like tape.

[andyw2100]

The Cornell write-up of the game says that the play in which Iles wound up across the goal line on the break-away was ruled not to be a goal because he was pushed in by the Clarkson player. Here's the quote from the article:

"The Golden Knights had another close call with 12:30 to play in the third period when a funny bounce off the glass sent DiNallo away on a breakaway. He attempted to beat Iles with a shot between the legs, but the Big Red's goalie smothered the puck. There was some controversy as he slid backward toward the goal line with the puck still underneath his pads, but the referee closest to the play ruled he was pushed into the net by Christian Powers' poke at the pads."

Watching as it happened, my thoughts were that the only reason there wasn't a 1 on the scoreboard for Clarkson was that the ref must have ruled that either he had blown the whistle or had intended to before the puck crossed the line. I didn't think the Clarkson player had any impact on moving Iles across the goal line. I haven't seen video, but seeing the picture above reinforces my belief that that must have been the ruling, as the Clarkson player is just getting to Iles who is already well into the goal. I think there's a pretty good chance the writer is not correct with respect to why that was not a Clarkson goal. If I am mistaken, then I think we really dodged a bullet, and got the benefit of a blown call. Does anyone have video of this play?

Edit: The Twitter caption above is consistent with my assessment.

[daredevilcu]

in the first picture, is it really the puck? looks a bit funny more like tape.

It's definitely the puck. Even after everyone stood up and moved away from the net, it was still sitting in that exact spot.

[marty]

(and bad news for Cornell)

Not at all.  Better opponents (particularly our traditional rivals) --> better conference --> better for us.

Here we go again...

Can we at least wait until Q and U are playing in April to have this discussion? ::deadhorse::

He won't be as pissed this year - the Elis at done.

[Trotsky]

My impression of the non-goal was that it was a quick whistle, hence the final position of the puck is irrelevant.  Both teams missed so many great chances it really collapses down to one of those "we'll never know who really won," like the 2000 election.  All we have is the ruling; 99.9% of the time that's a clearcut reflection of what "really" happened, but in that fractional case it's an approximation of an unknown.

Still, Clarkson fans have my sympathy.  If that game had gone the other way I'd be irritated too.

[daredevilcu]

The one thing nobody can say is that it was a poorly played series. It was one of the most fun series I've ever been to.

[Trotsky]

The one thing nobody can say is that it was a poorly played series. It was one of the most fun series I've ever been to.

It was a great series, and the final game was one of the best games I've ever seen.

[Jim Hyla]

The Cornell write-up of the game says that the play in which Iles wound up across the goal line on the break-away was ruled not to be a goal because he was pushed in by the Clarkson player. Here's the quote from the article:

"The Golden Knights had another close call with 12:30 to play in the third period when a funny bounce off the glass sent DiNallo away on a breakaway. He attempted to beat Iles with a shot between the legs, but the Big Red's goalie smothered the puck. There was some controversy as he slid backward toward the goal line with the puck still underneath his pads, but the referee closest to the play ruled he was pushed into the net by Christian Powers' poke at the pads."

Watching as it happened, my thoughts were that the only reason there wasn't a 1 on the scoreboard for Clarkson was that the ref must have ruled that either he had blown the whistle or had intended to before the puck crossed the line. I didn't think the Clarkson player had any impact on moving Iles across the goal line. I haven't seen video, but seeing the picture above reinforces my belief that that must have been the ruling, as the Clarkson player is just getting to Iles who is already well into the goal. I think there's a pretty good chance the writer is not correct with respect to why that was not a Clarkson goal. If I am mistaken, then I think we really dodged a bullet, and got the benefit of a blown call. Does anyone have video of this play?

Edit: The Twitter caption above is consistent with my assessment.

Post-game interview with Casey. He says the ref told him he blew the whistle.

The other goal is more questionable. Was it stopped and then everyone pushed in? No way that I think the refs could have seen whether it crossed, but they must have been looking at something, they were in there a long time.

[Trotsky]

The other goal is more questionable. Was it stopped and then everyone pushed in? No way that I think the refs could have seen whether it crossed, but they must have been looking at something, they were in there a long time.

I don't know how he knew this, but Jason mentioned on the broadcast that during that stoppage the refs were reviewing both situations.  That's why it took so long.

[Icy]

The Bardreau save at 12:30 in the first period, part 1:
(1) Sexton takes a backhand shot from the slot
(2) Iles makes the save, but the rebound slides to his left
(3) Josephs makes a backhand grab of the puck, wide open net.

[Icy]

The Bardreau save at 12:30 in the first period, part 2:
(1) Josephs brings the puck to his forehand
(2) Shoots as Bardreau dives in front of him
(3) And Bardreau blocks the shot with his stick.