Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

UML vs. N'eastern title game rules question ...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • UML vs. N'eastern title game rules question ...

    I quickly scanned the relevant game thread(s) and didn't see this mentioned, so here goes - a question for the Rules Mavens:

    After UML scored to tie the game at 1-1 early in the 1st period, a video review ensued (that is customary after scoring plays in the play-offs). But much of the review apparently focused not on the goal just scored, but on a 'potential' UML goal from a minute or two earlier that was judged to have deflected down into the crease after banging flush off the cross-bar; play never stopped. The tying goal just scored was the first stoppage of play after the earlier 'potential' goal, so it was the first opportunity to give it a closer look. But let's say for argument's sake that after video review it was judged to have gone in; it wasn't just a 'potential' goal but an ACTUAL goal. What then?

    Would UML have been awarded *2* goals? Both recorded to have been scored at the same time (hee, hee :-) Or would the goal just scored have been wiped off the board and the clock rewound to the time of the earlier goal (that now counts) and the ensuing time between the 2 'goals' replayed? Would the interpretation be different if the earlier now-judged-good goal had been scored by N'Eastern instead of UML? I know there have been earlier instances of similar non-goals judged good after the fact - IIRC Michigan once had a goal awarded them in an NCAA game that was judged at a later whistle to have slipped *under* the back of the net as it was being tipped forward by scuffling players. I can't recall how these earlier after-the-fact scenarios were eventually resolved (an abundance of 'senior moments,' apparently :-) so can someone with a better memory than me summarize the pertinent details? Thanks ...

  • #2
    Re: UML vs. N'eastern title game rules question ...

    If the first goal had gone in you go back to that time on the clock and face-off from center ice.
    Northeastern Huskies

    Beanpot Champions: 2018, 2019
    Hockey East Champions: 2016, 2019

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: UML vs. N'eastern title game rules question ...

      IIRC, the first goal would have counted, the second goal wouldn't have, and the clock would have gone back to the time after the first goal. Same thing if NU scored the 2nd goal I think.
      2016 and 2019 HOCKEY EAST CHAMPIONS
      2018, 2019 and 2020 BEANPOT CHAMPIONS


      MATTHEWS ARENA 1910-Present: THE CATHEDRAL OF COLLEGE HOCKEY

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: UML vs. N'eastern title game rules question ...

        If the review determined that the earlier play was a goal, everything that happened since that play is wiped out. The officials would put the clock back to the time the goal was scored and and the puck would drop at center ice
        Lowell Forever
        Forever Lowell

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: UML vs. N'eastern title game rules question ...

          Originally posted by SkinsFan09 View Post
          If the first goal had gone in you go back to that time on the clock and face-off from center ice.
          Correct. Happened in BC vs Gophers game in NCAAs in Worcester a few years back.
          Originally posted by reBlur
          the sober Trivino I know is not a guy who would force his way into a girl's room and attempt to rape her. I can't imagine him ever making anyone even feel uncomfortable when he's sober.There are plenty of players in my time covering the team who have looked at me differently or flirted with me or the like. Trivino has never been one of those players. Even outside of the rink, he'll say hi and is plenty of friendly, but has never been even close to saying or doing anything inappropriate.

          Comment

          Working...
          X