Final Four: Cornell vs UNH

[cetaele]

You all realize, of course, that arguing about whether it was a goal or not is irrelevant at this point. The score is 1-0 in favor of UNH, and nothing is going to change that...until more hockey is played.

[sioux fan in phoenix]

Originally posted by *Saint*
You are correct, sir!

Good Ed McMahon impersonation!:D

[jrnewps]

It is a high stick when hit above the cross bar, which is 4 feet. I did not see the play but just thought I would give my 2 cents. There seems to be some confusion when there is a highstick.

[ScoobyDoo]

Originally posted by jrnewps
It is a high stick when hit above the cross bar, which is 4 feet. I did not see the play but just thought I would give my 2 cents. There seems to be some confusion when there is a highstick.
From what I saw the stick got to about shoulder height when the puck was tipped. That would definetly be above 4' which is probably why the call was made. I didn't see Cornell complain too much about it.

[HockeyJock]

For those of us stuck at work with no TV to look at, what were the shots on goal for the 1st period?

[flatstick96]

Well, 20 minutes in the books; Cornell has carried play and yet they trail. Even though Cornell deserved to get scored on (horrible turnover), I can't help but wonder how much the disallowed goal shifted the momentum. The rule is four feet (i.e. the height of the crossbar) and I didn't see any replay angle that even suggested that the puck was touched above that height. As someone else mentioned, even the UNH "homers" thought it was good - I think the refs blew that one.

Regardless, I still think that Cornell is the better team, and I still think they will win as long as they continue to forecheck hard and play just a little bit smarter in their own end. GO RED!

[flatstick96]

Originally posted by ScoobyDoo
From what I saw the stick got to about shoulder height when the puck was tipped. That would definetly be above 4' which is probably why the call was made. I didn't see Cornell complain too much about it.

Agreed that is was at about "shoulder height", but that is a pretty vague measurement when a guy isn't standing completely erect. As the camera pans across, you see the tip and then in the next couple of frames you see the crossbar come into the picture - the tip certainly appeared to occur below the height of the crossbar.

[Cat71]

First Period SOG

UNH - 11
Cornell - 7

[*Saint*]

Originally posted by cetaele
You all realize, of course, that arguing about whether it was a goal or not is irrelevant at this point. The score is 1-0 in favor of UNH, and nothing is going to change that...until more hockey is played.

****, I thought the officials would read this and change their minds.:(

I am just hoping for a good game the rest of the way. So far it's looked pretty good, I just don't like when decisions by the officials take over what the guys on the ice are doing. Hopefully there won't be to many more debatable calls in this game and the one tonight.

[GOPHER FREAK]

Originally posted by flatstick96
Well, 20 minutes in the books; Cornell has carried play and yet they trail. Even though Cornell deserved to get scored on (horrible turnover), I can't help but wonder how much the disallowed goal shifted the momentum. The rule is four feet (i.e. the height of the crossbar) and I didn't see any replay angle that even suggested that the puck was touched above that height. As someone else mentioned, even the UNH "homers" thought it was good - I think the refs blew that one.

Regardless, I still think that Cornell is the better team, and I still think they will win as long as they continue to forecheck hard and play just a little bit smarter in their own end. GO RED!
You don't have to wonder. The disallowed goal was huge momentuem
killer for Cornell.

BTW-- Adam and shepperd blow lots of calls.

[ScoobyDoo]

Originally posted by flatstick96
Agreed that is was at about "shoulder height", but that is a pretty vague measurement when a guy isn't standing completely erect. As the camera pans across, you see the tip and then in the next couple of frames you see the crossbar come into the picture - the tip certainly appeared to occur below the height of the crossbar.
Right. I agree with Bruce. Inconclusive evidence should go to the call that was made on the ice. In this case it is inconclusive. I was just rationalizing for the call.

[flatstick96]

Originally posted by cetaele
You all realize, of course, that arguing about whether it was a goal or not is irrelevant at this point. The score is 1-0 in favor of UNH, and nothing is going to change that...until more hockey is played.

This is it in a nutshell, good point - let's play some more hockey!

[FJL]

Originally posted by Bruce Ciskie
On the Cornell goal/no-goal:

Hockey needs a rule like the one in place in the NFL. No goal should be overturned without irrefutable visual evidence that the call was wrong.

The evidence existed to overturn the goal call, but it was far from irrefutable. I went back and forth about four times while watching the replays. If that's the case, the call should stand. If the replay official thought that was irrefutable, he's either A) seeing replays that we aren't (which isn't happening, he gets what ESPN has, and ESPN shows what they have), 2) blind, 3) biased, or 4) he doesn't know the rules regarding stick height.

So, yes, Cornell Fan, you have a beef.

I totally agree with everything you said, but kudos to UNH for taking advantage of the momentum shift after the bad call with a goal of their own.

[sioux fan in phoenix]

If Cornell loses this game I can only imagine what
their fans will be talking about the entire summer...
suspect decision by the replay official...

[*Saint*]

1-0 UNH

Here we go with period 2!





Eventhough an eastern team scored, it was a Minnesotan that did it. ;) :cool:

[cguarino]

Originally posted by KenP
Regarding the disallowed Cornell goal....

Rules state stick must be less than 4ft off the surface of the ice. Announcers said that generally is around hip level. Looking at replay, Paolini's stick clearly hit the puck around chest level, hence the goal was disallowed.

Did the announcers really say that the hip level of a player was around 4 feet off the ice? Gee, that would make the average player around 7' tall. I know Manute Bol played hockey once, but I was unaware that it was for Cornell. :confused:

[GOPHER FREAK]

Originally posted by sioux fan in phoenix
If Cornell loses this game I can only imagine what
their fans will be talking about the entire summer...
suspect decision by the replay official...
You don't have to imagine, You already know.

[DMoriarty]

I think the no-goal call for Cornell was a good call, but then again I am biased! :) Cornell reminds me of B-Who (say where are they anyways?) clutch grab and a lot of cheapshots. So far I'd favor Cornell from watching the first, but momentum shifted and out boys need to keep that pressure on.

"Where is BU?"

[nmu_27]

Just stopping in between classes. Sounds like a good game so far.


GO UNH

[Case_04]

Saviano scores on the breakaway!