Harvard at Cornell post-game thread

[DL]

[quote ebilmes]From Adam Wodon at CHN

[q][Cornell] got credit for one of the biggest phantom goals in hockey history. Folks, I was standing right there in the corner by the Harvard goal, along the goal line, and the puck wasn't close to going in.[/q]

The CSTV replay made it seem much closer...[/quote]

Adam should take another look at that replay, a split second after the disputed couple of frames before making that kind of statement.  From what I saw, Harvard scored on their own goalie.

[billhoward]

Rich, you guys take this so seriously. (Or you rise to the bait so quickly.) Clarkson is better, academically, than say 95% of colleges in America and Cornell is better than, what, 98%, 99%? Big deal. And no matter how much we make fun of Harvard, it will still have a bigger endowment and loftier reputation than Cornell or Clarkson. That's life.

And as one has seen by the comments posted by pep band members (Section A Banshee), no one can attempt to insult the band and come away unscathed. They could probably hold their own against Rodney Dangerfield. Especially recently.

I'd say truce ... but you know that only means until one of us says something inflammatory a week from now and we're at it again.

It's fun to have you on the forum.

[DeltaOne81]

[quote Darren Leung][quote ebilmes]From Adam Wodon at CHN

[q][Cornell] got credit for one of the biggest phantom goals in hockey history. Folks, I was standing right there in the corner by the Harvard goal, along the goal line, and the puck wasn't close to going in.[/q]

The CSTV replay made it seem much closer...[/quote]

Adam should take another look at that replay, a split second after the disputed couple of frames before making that kind of statement.  From what I saw, Harvard scored on their own goalie.[/quote]

Well, at the very least, the puck was on the line (if not over). And if its "on the line" I'd say that qualifies as "close to going in".

[Rosey]

[quote jmh30]It's not debatable.  Look up rankings of engineering programs.  RPI is a better school than Clarkson.[/quote]
And clearly Harvard, Duke, Northwestern, and Penn are better undergrad colleges than Cornell.

Citing rankings, even in jest, and EVEN against Rich, is reaching.

Kyle

[Trotsky]

[quote billhoward]They could probably hold their own against Rodney Dangerfield. Especially recently.[/quote]

I dunno.  Apparently Rodney did the last thirty years of his career stoned to the gills every day.  He could probably do "Caddyshack 3" from the grave.  (Hey, it would be better than Caddyshack 2"....)

[Trotsky]

[quote krose][quote jmh30]It's not debatable.  Look up rankings of engineering programs.  RPI is a better school than Clarkson.[/quote]
And clearly Harvard, Duke, Northwestern, and Penn are better undergrad colleges than Cornell.

Citing rankings, even in jest, and EVEN against Rich, is reaching.

Kyle[/quote]

True sentiment, although it's much less of a reach to cite department rankings as opposed to those silly monstrosities which purport to rank entire universities (Duke over Cornell?  Please.  Duke is roughly in the same ballpark as USC.  Very nice place; very cute girls.  Brains?  Not so much.)

But it's probably bogus to ever try to compare undergrad rankings of anything.  Grad departments really do have a superior-inferior pecking order which is all about faculty.  Undergrad departments vary most greatly with the resourcefulness and seriousness of the student admitted, since the biggest library on the planet doesn't matter if the little bastards don't use it.  On that theory, Brigham Young is probably the best undergrad school on the country.  And pretty girls, too.  Though very scary.

[RichH]

From my vantage point in Section O, my immediate reaction was that it didn't completely cross the line, but if Darren's analysis is correct that it bounced off an H player and in after being swept from the line (he had the benefit of TV), then I feel better knowing that we didn't get away with something.

Order of what I focused on:

Puck on line (not over), being swept out
flurry of bodies
Red light on
F Murphy frantically pointing to signal a good goal
Walsh absolutely losing it at the top of the circles
Walsh skating hard towards F Murphy
Walsh going all Earl Weaver in F Murphy's face and delivering a chest bump
Ass't Ref guiding Walsh against the boards

Given the passion and intensity of the game, I think the refs handled it right.  Before assessing the penalty, they spoke with a calmer Walsh several times and gave him the 10-minute misconduct.  I was calling for a Game Misconduct, but given everything that was going on, that was the cool-headed thing to do.

However, this is from the current NCAA rulebook:

[q]Rule 6, Section 1: Abuse of Officials

b. A player shall not challenge or dispute the rulings of any official before or during a game.
PENALTY—Misconduct.

m. A player shall not physically or deliberately make contact with an official before, during or after the game.
PENALTY—Disqualification.[/q]
I contend it was a deliberate bump, but it was indisputably a physical bump.  By the book, that really should have been a Game DQ.

[CowbellGuy]

[quote Rich S]why on would a Techer want to transfer for the privilege of going to school in Troy?[/quote]

Electricity and running water?

[John Harvard]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[CowbellGuy]

[quote John Harvard]HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA[/quote]

...with eloquence befitting a Cantabrigian.

*points to standings and laughs*

[Beeeej]

[quote CowbellGuy][quote John Harvard]HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA[/quote]

...with eloquence befitting a Cantabrigian.

*points to standings and laughs*[/quote]

ECACHL standings, natch.

Beeeej

[CowbellGuy]

What else is there? :-P

[Rich S]

[quote Al DeFlorio][quote redhair34]You are the second person to suggest that our team speed doesn't compare to Harvard.  Am I the only one that disagrees with this sentiment?[/quote]
I thought we were as fast as Harvard at the Lynah East game.  We certainly had more transition chances.  I find it hard to judge watching on TV.  Getting to loose pucks can be a matter of hustle and desire, not just speed.[/quote]

Right, in fact getting to loose pucks first is almost always a function of those two factors along with the ability to read or anticipate the play.  Get the first step or even half step and you will often beat a faster skater to the puck.

I think all coaches agree with that and that's why we/they often cite "winning the loose pucks battle" as a key factor in determining who wins a game.

The notable exception to the above is a flat out race up or down ice where e.g., an icing call is at stake.

[DL]

[quote RichH]From my vantage point in Section O, my immediate reaction was that it didn't completely cross the line, but if Darren's analysis is correct that it bounced off an H player and in after being swept from the line (he had the benefit of TV), then I feel better knowing that we didn't get away with something.

Order of what I focused on:

Puck on line (not over), being swept out
flurry of bodies
Red light on
F Murphy frantically pointing to signal a good goal
Walsh absolutely losing it at the top of the circles
Walsh skating hard towards F Murphy
Walsh going all Earl Weaver in F Murphy's face and delivering a chest bump
Ass't Ref guiding Walsh against the boards

Given the passion and intensity of the game, I think the refs handled it right.  Before assessing the penalty, they spoke with a calmer Walsh several times and gave him the 10-minute misconduct.  I was calling for a Game Misconduct, but given everything that was going on, that was the cool-headed thing to do.

However, this is from the current NCAA rulebook:

[q]Rule 6, Section 1: Abuse of Officials

b. A player shall not challenge or dispute the rulings of any official before or during a game.
PENALTY—Misconduct.

m. A player shall not physically or deliberately make contact with an official before, during or after the game.
PENALTY—Disqualification.[/q]
I contend it was a deliberate bump, but it was indisputably a physical bump.  By the book, that really should have been a Game DQ.[/quote]

Ah yes, they didn't show this part on TV, which stinks.  I would love to have seen a Sucks player accosting a ref.

[Cactus12]

I don't think we were particularly slow when compared to Harvard... (I did have similar sentiment after watching Rangers/Isles/other NHL games just about every day over winter break). We just played mediocre at best, and didn't seem to give total effort until it was too late.