First round vs Union

[ugarte]

GIMME GOAL VIDEO

Here it is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3o6LRFh-pMw&feature=youtu.be

I can't for the life of me figure out why the first Union non-goal was waved off. Quick whistles on one for each side after that too.

[KeithK]

Slew.

(I know.  But "slayed" just sounds so, so wrong.)

[andyw2100]

GIMME GOAL VIDEO

Here it is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3o6LRFh-pMw&feature=youtu.be

I can't for the life of me figure out why the first Union non-goal was waved off. Quick whistles on one for each side after that too.

Watch the replay a couple of times. Number 18 on Union may have knocked the puck out from under Gillam. He certainly made contact with Gillam, and was immediately knocked off his skates by Weidner. I expect the goal was waived off because of whatever happened with number 18.

[Dutchman]

Congrats on a well deserved win !!! Good luck in Connecticut.

[Johnny 5]

Yes.
I feel terrible that we missed both contests due to family illness.
But, I'm sure the neighbors all heard me screaming when our boys scored.
(It's OK, they know by now that's it's Cornell hockey season,...again.)
Buckles must be feeling quite the prodigal son today, yes? Fattened calf & all.

So, it's on to Qinnehtukqut!
And, may the best team (us) win.

"LGR"!!

::cheer::::cheer::::cheer::

[upprdeck]

why dont they have a system that explains the calls?  how hard to add  a statement,  the whistle blew, man in the crease, contact with the goalie? the NFL finally figured that out years ago

[Trotsky]

Hope everything works out OK with your family, Johnny 5.

[BearLover]

Great way for the seniors to finish their Lynah careers :-)

[andyw2100]

why dont they have a system that explains the calls?  how hard to add  a statement,  the whistle blew, man in the crease, contact with the goalie? the NFL finally figured that out years ago

The announcement Arthur made at the time the play was to be reviewed was particularly odd, I'm guessing based on what the refs instructed him to announce. Normally the announcement would be something along the lines of, "The ruling on the ice is a goal. The play is being reviewed." or "The ruling on the ice is no goal. The play is being reviewed." Last night the announcement was, roughly, "The ruling on the ice is that the play is being reviewed."

So the refs officially had made no ruling, if I understood the announcement correctly. I didn't know they could do that.

[Bahnstorm]

why dont they have a system that explains the calls?  how hard to add  a statement,  the whistle blew, man in the crease, contact with the goalie? the NFL finally figured that out years ago

The announcement Arthur made at the time the play was to be reviewed was particularly odd, I'm guessing based on what the refs instructed him to announce. Normally the announcement would be something along the lines of, "The ruling on the ice is a goal. The play is being reviewed." or "The ruling on the ice is no goal. The play is being reviewed." Last night the announcement was, roughly, "The ruling on the ice is that the play is being reviewed."

So the refs officially had made no ruling, if I understood the announcement correctly. I didn't know they could do that.

I was surprised by this as well and I suspect that is what they probably told the scorer's table.  I expected the refs to come back from the video room and hear Arthur say "The ruling on the ice is confirmed, the play is indeed under review."

[Johnny 5]

Hope everything works out OK with your family, Johnny 5.

Thank you, sir. Very much appreciated.
After 40 it's all down hill.
Golden years, right?!

P.S., Please, don't tell my wife.

::thud::

[Chris '03]

Incredible number of empty seats late in the third (nice goal though):
http://ecachockey.com/men/video/2015-16/20160304_Cornell_Union_MH

According to the box score attendance was only 3484, which means a hell of a lot of tickets that weren't sold. Not too unusual for playoff games if I remember correctly.

A few years ago when I was a student, all of the playoff games were 100% full, even during disappointing years.

I'm pretty sure you're wrong. I don't know what years you mean but playoff games, especially Fridays have not sold out in recent memory. Go back and look at box scores.

[BearLover]

Incredible number of empty seats late in the third (nice goal though):
http://ecachockey.com/men/video/2015-16/20160304_Cornell_Union_MH

According to the box score attendance was only 3484, which means a hell of a lot of tickets that weren't sold. Not too unusual for playoff games if I remember correctly.

A few years ago when I was a student, all of the playoff games were 100% full, even during disappointing years.

I'm pretty sure you're wrong. I don't know what years you mean but playoff games, especially Fridays have not sold out in recent memory. Go back and look at box scores.

Is there a way to locate these easily?  I'm referring to the first round of the ECAC (i.e., the final weekend at Lynah) between 2008-09 and 2011-12.

[upprdeck]

I dont know if we sold out but it was common practice on the townie side to skip the friday game.

[CowbellGuy]

Here are the numbers (from http://db.elynah.com ). 2010 is probably skewed since it's Harvard. Not including playoff tickets in student season tickets and making them optional for townies has always hurt playoff attendance.

2009 vs RPI
3813
3952
3812

2010 vs Harvard
4267*
4267*

2011 vs Quinnipiac
3978
4037
3813

2012 vs Dartmouth
3869
4267*

*sellout