Conference Tournament Results: March 2nd through March 5th

[Eeyore]

Re: Conference Tournament Results: March 2nd through March 5th

That's about right. I thought from the replay it was probably too high, but it wasn't clear enough to overturn the original goal call.

Watching it live, it was definitely a high stick. The puck was traveling downwards, and didn't get under the bar by much.

[Blackbeard]

Re: Conference Tournament Results: March 2nd through March 5th

Watching it live, it was definitely a high stick. The puck was traveling downwards, and didn't get under the bar by much.

When having the benefit of watching the replay several times you could see that her stick was parallel to the ice at chest height when it contacted the puck, not shoulder height.

Looked like the right call.

[Eeyore]

Re: Conference Tournament Results: March 2nd through March 5th

When having the benefit of watching the replay several times you could see that her stick was parallel to the ice at chest height when it contacted the puck, not shoulder height.

Looked like the right call.

Shoulder height has nothing to do with it; that is only the standard for playing a puck with a high stick to a teammate. When looking at a goal, it's whether the stick is above the crossbar, and this one was.

[Blackbeard]

Re: Conference Tournament Results: March 2nd through March 5th

Shoulder height has nothing to do with it; that is only the standard for playing a puck with a high stick to a teammate. When looking at a goal, it's whether the stick is above the crossbar, and this one was.

Yeah, I'm aware. I misspoke.

Just watched it again several times. Her hands were closer to waist height when stick contact was made with the puck and as mentioned her stick was parallel to the ice.

If you follow the line of the crossbar to where the puck was when stick contact was made, it was close but still looks like the right call to me.

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: Conference Tournament Results: March 2nd through March 5th

For what it's worth -- and I was really, really strongly rooting for Duluth -- I thought it was a high stick. I think if that's in regulation they might overturn the call.

It was BARELY above crossbar level. I don't think it was egregious to call it a goal after the call on the ice was "goal," but I think the stick was above the crossbar.

[charlieconway]

Watching it live, it was definitely a high stick. The puck was traveling downwards, and didn't get under the bar by much.

Here's a look many of you probably didn't see, courtesy of UMD Women's Hockey on the Twitter

Sure likes a good goal from that angle.

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: Conference Tournament Results: March 2nd through March 5th

Here's a look many of you probably didn't see, courtesy of UMD Women's Hockey on the Twitter

Sure likes a good goal from that angle.

That is just a fantastic shot -- although, in fairness, the camera angle is from above the cross bar, so there might be an optical illusion going on there.

Either way I don't think it was wrong to leave the call on the ice.

What a goal that is... geez.

[shelfit]

That is just a fantastic shot -- although, in fairness, the camera angle is from above the cross bar, so there might be an optical illusion going on there.

Either way I don't think it was wrong to leave the call on the ice.

What a goal that is... geez.

Definitely looks like a legal goal even with the camera angle being from above the crossbar. Think of her height, where her hands are, and the angle of her stick. You'll see she made no move with her hands to reach up for the puck to hit it down into the net. She simply reached out to swat it in at the height the puck was at, which was below the crossbar for sure. Great hand-eye coordination!

[Blackbeard]

Re: Conference Tournament Results: March 2nd through March 5th

That is just a fantastic shot -- although, in fairness, the camera angle is from above the cross bar, so there might be an optical illusion going on there.

Either way I don't think it was wrong to leave the call on the ice.

What a goal that is... geez.

You beat me to it. I agree, what a great view of the goal and ditto on the possible optical illusion for the reason you stated.

The WCHA replays show it fairly well and they are still viewable on their site even though it says the game has ended.

[D2D]

Re: Conference Tournament Results: March 2nd through March 5th

I would like to know the odds of a team losing a hockey game after putting up 63 shots on net. Despite UMD's Lara Stalder scoring the winning goal, after assisting on her team's first, Maddie Rooney played one heck of a hockey game, coming up with 62 saves while limiting the Gophers to a single goal.

[Sean Pickett]

Re: Conference Tournament Results: March 2nd through March 5th

I would like to know the odds of a team losing a hockey game after putting up 63 shots on net. Despite UMD's Lara Stalder scoring the winning goal, after assisting on her team's first, Maddie Rooney played one heck of a hockey game, coming up with 62 saves while limiting the Gophers to a single goal.

Based on the limited dataset of Women's Division I Longest Hockey Games I counted 12 games where one team had 63+ shots on goal. Of those 12 games the team with 63+ shots won 8 and lost 4, so that would make odds of losing 1 in 3 (there was also one game which each team had 62 shots).

Sean

[ne7minder]

Re: Conference Tournament Results: March 2nd through March 5th

Yeah, I'm aware. I misspoke.

Just watched it again several times. Her hands were closer to waist height when stick contact was made with the puck and as mentioned her stick was parallel to the ice.

If you follow the line of the crossbar to where the puck was when stick contact was made, it was close but still looks like the right call to me.

Our seats were just to the side and behind Stalder. I told my wife when as they were celebrating "It will be waved off. That was a high stick". Except for the tweeted replay I have seen nothing to change my mind. But it should never have gotten to that point anyway and wouldn't except for Rooney. Except for the second period when the Bulldogs seemed to find a rhythm the Gophers controlled play and generated great chances. Remember when I said it would be fun having the dogs back? Well, the game was sure fun but not as fun as I like.

[robertearle]

Re: Conference Tournament Results: March 2nd through March 5th

Here's a look many of you probably didn't see, courtesy of UMD Women's Hockey on the Twitter

Sure likes a good goal from that angle.

That is a great view. But I'm not sure it settles anything.

The one height we can really trust - looking downward at the top of the goal and crossbar, etc - is that Stalder is listed at 5'6", plus skater-blade height. She's crouching a bit as she swings, and her stick is at a slight upward angle, and the stick itself is - what?- maybe four feet from her hand-hold to the heel. Take a straight edge (piece of paper. like Ludwig did) and hold it up to your screen, and she is hitting the puck at a height about even with her dipped right shoulder.

Does that put the point of contact with the puck above, below, or right about the four foot height of the crossbar? I dunno. What's shoulder-high for a 5'6" woman wearing skates, somewhat dipped?

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: Conference Tournament Results: March 2nd through March 5th

What do we have for TV today?

The Hockey East final is on ASN nationally:

NESN+ in New England
Something called "K47OQ (Tuff TV)" in Minneapolis
Something called "WIFS-4" in Madison
Other channels found here

[ARM]

Re: Conference Tournament Results: March 2nd through March 5th

Even with the great play by Stalder, that wasn't as prime a scoring chance as each team had throughout the game that did not wind up in the net. In a different game, maybe her shot bounces in a different direction off of Peters or goes straight through the crease w/o touching anything. The hockey gods determined enough hockey had been played, and I think that was the right call on their part. It wasn't doing either team a favor to play on into the night. Maybe next time the bounce goes the other way.

Anyway, big congratulations to the 'Dogs. They played a far better game than they did a year ago in the Final Face-Off, and I think it is a sign of how far Crowell has taken them.