PDA

View Full Version : Termination of penalty question: who comes out of the box?



LakersFan
02-15-2015, 01:01 PM
During Saturday's Penn State at Mercyhurst game, the following situation occured:

Mecyhurst (#4) takes a penalty at 6:54 (5 PSU - 4 MU, PSU PP)
Penn State (#40) takes a penalty at 8:01 (4 PSU - 4 MU, Even)
Penn State (#11) takes a penalty at 8:45 (3 PSU - 4 MU, MU PP)
Mercyhurst does not score during the 4 on 3, #4 returns to the ice at 8:54. Now 5 on 3 for Mercyhurst.
Mercyhurst scores at 9:34 during the 5 on 3.

Who comes out of the box for Penn State?

Keep in mind the following statement from the NCAA Ice Hockey rulebook:


Note: Short-handed means that the team must be below the numerical
strength of its opponent on the ice at the time the goal is scored. The minor
penalty that terminates automatically is the one that causes the team scored
against to be short-handed.

After much discussion among the refs, #11 came out of the box. Did they get it right?

EvilTaxi
02-15-2015, 01:08 PM
Should've been 40 I believe.

TonyTheTiger20
02-15-2015, 01:12 PM
Yeah why would it not have been #40?

LakersFan
02-15-2015, 01:17 PM
Yeah why would it not have been #40?

Because the penalty taken by #40 did not result them in being short handed, at the time. At least that is the way the logic was explained to the off-ice officals.

We think the refs got it wrong. I am wondering if there is some written rules clarification that I have been unable to find via google.

pgb-ohio
02-15-2015, 01:23 PM
During Saturday's Penn State at Mercyhurst game, the following situation occured:

Mecyhurst (#4) takes a penalty at 6:54 (5 PSU - 4 MU, PSU PP)
Penn State (#40) takes a penalty at 8:01 (4 PSU - 4 MU, Even)
Penn State (#11) takes a penalty at 8:45 (3 PSU - 4 MU, MU PP)
Mercyhurst does not score during the 4 on 3, #4 returns to the ice at 8:54. Now 5 on 3 for Mercyhurst.
Mercyhurst scores at 9:34 during the 5 on 3.

Who comes out of the box for Penn State?

Keep in mind the following statement from the NCAA Ice Hockey rulebook:



After much discussion among the refs, #11 came out of the box. Did they get it right?Fun scenario. Have to admit I'm not 100% sure. Just to focus in a little bit:

1. Had Mercyhurst scored during the 4x3, #11 is clearly the correct answer.

2. Had Mercyhurst not been penalized at all -- in other words a straight up 5x3 from the start of #11's penalty -- it's equally clear that #40 would be the correct answer.

But this case seems to have arguments for both possible outcomes. In general, first in/first out applies unless there's a specific exception. And yet at the time of the first penalty, #40 did not cause a short-handed situation, so maybe the exception applies. Anyone have a definitive answer?

Hammer
02-15-2015, 01:38 PM
From what I see here, upon the expiration of Mercyhurst #4's penalty, Penn State's #40 is the player that causes PSU to be shorthanded in the first place. #11 just happens to put PSU down two skaters. I think the officials got it incorrect here.

UCONN FAN
02-15-2015, 01:56 PM
From what I see here, upon the expiration of Mercyhurst #4's penalty, Penn State's #40 is the player that causes PSU to be shorthanded in the first place. #11 just happens to put PSU down two skaters. I think the officials got it incorrect here.

I agree with hammer. There's no question since Hurst scored. The penalty with the least amount of time left on comes out. Unless there is some crazy NCAA rule like when a team scores on a delayed penalty and the penalized team still serves the penalty.

TonyTheTiger20
02-15-2015, 01:58 PM
I agree with hammer. There's no question since Hurst scored. The penalty with the least amount of time left on comes out.
Yep.

ARM
02-15-2015, 02:00 PM
I know that if the Lakers had scored during the 4-on-3, #11 comes out and that is correct. The reason is that she was the only reason for PSU being shorthanded to that point. Given that reasoning, then I can see where #11 would come out in the scenario that you describe. I don't know for sure, but I think that the refs may be right. When I last saw something like that, it took a lot of discussion among officials and explaining to coaches before it was all sorted out. Yet another reason players should do their best to stay out of the box. :)

Hammer
02-15-2015, 02:07 PM
Had Mercyhurst scored 4x3, that would have been the absolutely correct call. She would have been the reason that Penn State was down 3x4. But once the Mercyhurst penalty expired, circumstances changed. Once the Mercyhurst player came out of the box, #11's penalty was secondary as it relates to why Penn State was shorthanded at that point. Penn State would have been down a skater (#40) regardless if #11 had taken a penalty, stayed on the ice, hid behind the bench, or went to the concession stand to go get popcorn. That's why I think the referees got this one wrong.

Eeyore
02-15-2015, 02:13 PM
The problem here is that the phrase, "the one that causes the team scored against to be short-handed," is not clear and unambiguous. No amount of us hashing it out here is capable of changing the fact that it is reasonably open to multiple interpretations. The only solution is for the NCAA to revise the rulebook in a way that clarifies it.

Writing rules is a lot harder than most people realize.

D2D
02-15-2015, 02:15 PM
The problem here is that the phrase, "the one that causes the team scored against to be short-handed," is not clear and unambiguous. No amount of us hashing it out here is capable of changing the fact that it is reasonably open to multiple interpretations. The only solution is for the NCAA to revise the rulebook in a way that clarifies it.

Writing rules is a lot harder than most people realize.
As is refereeing a hockey game.

ARM
02-15-2015, 02:16 PM
... as it relates to why Penn State was shorthanded at that point. And that's the question. Does "causes the team to be shorthanded" mean at the point that the team became shorthanded or someone who committed an infraction that would eventually have resulted in the team being shorthanded? The referees went with the former.

Hammer
02-15-2015, 02:35 PM
The problem here is that the phrase, "the one that causes the team scored against to be short-handed," is not clear and unambiguous. No amount of us hashing it out here is capable of changing the fact that it is reasonably open to multiple interpretations. The only solution is for the NCAA to revise the rulebook in a way that clarifies it.

Writing rules is a lot harder than most people realize.

Sure. But talking about this on a bitter cold Sunday is a whole lot better than watching someone get shot with needles on Mythbusters, or crocodiles on Nat Geo.

There is also a spot early on in the rulebook (I do not have one in front of me, and I'm not Googling one at this point in time) that goes along the lines of "the referees are the final arbiters", or something like that.

robertearle
02-15-2015, 02:45 PM
After much discussion among the refs, #11 came out of the box. Did they get it right?

This obviously can't be the first time such a scenario has played out.

I can't point to any specific instance at the moment, but I have never seen (or noticed) a situation where is has ever been anything other than 'first in, first out'.

No, IMO, they got it wrong.

(Discounting any 'five minute majors' mixed in to the scenario, that is.)

ref11
02-15-2015, 07:22 PM
Ref's had it correct #11 comes out
- Throw out the USA Hockey thinking where the player with the least amount of time comes out.
Player that caused the short handed - #11 (it was 4 on 4 before this minor was accessed) - that is the penalty that expires (Rule 16 NCAA book - page 28).