PDA

View Full Version : Northeastern Huskies 2016-17 -- Great Expectations



Pages : 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51

omahasioux1
10-08-2016, 01:11 AM
Northeastern shoots towards sections 42-48 twice. 42-48 is also the student section.

I expect that game to be pretty packed, first home game of the year + unveiling the banner. If you can snag a seat in the balcony front row somewhere, I'd advise that.Looking at section 40. Waiting for some softball parents to get back with me. What will the temps likely be? Vegas kids freeze at 58.

TheRevengeance
10-08-2016, 01:14 AM
I'd expect to freeze then. Reallistically if it breaks 60 it'll be a warm day for October, and it'll certainly be in the 40's-50's by night.

northeastern
10-08-2016, 09:51 PM
..lots to learn, tough outing.

Thiessen'sBetter
10-08-2016, 11:46 PM
..lots to learn, tough outing.

Certainly a learning experience against a very good team. Gaudette was very good, no one else was particularly impressive. Rebound next weekend against a team who dismantled UNH tonight.

scorer
10-09-2016, 05:32 PM
Certainly a learning experience against a very good team. Gaudette was very good, no one else was particularly impressive. Rebound next weekend against a team who dismantled UNH tonight.

Well, after considering the UNH loss and reflecting on being swept by the Falcons last year, at least motivation should not be a factor next weekend.

Gr8Sk8M8
10-11-2016, 07:22 AM
..lots to learn, tough outing.

What's to learn? QPac is a decent team but they will not finish the year in the Top 10.

Friday night that first goal should have been waved off...a player does not have the "right" to race a goalie to the crease and then impede his ability to make a save. NU scored later in the 3rd but the goal wasn't even waved off; the puck was simply retrieved from the net and a face-off.

Saturday night, which I saw live, was equally insane. A high sticking call made on a player sitting on the bench..an interference call for checking a puck carrier...consecutive 5 on 3s...there was no flow to the game whatsoever. Both Cameron (chyea, his name is Cameron, go figure) Lynch and Katie Guay are going to very rough years if they call games as they both did this past weekend.

As for the play, the Big Line played very well even with ZAR's turnover. They jammed the net created traffic and movement and the dirty goals they scored this weekend is what we've come to expect. Gaudette showed up to play and this kid Jozifek was impressive.

What didn't impress me was, as usual. Garret Cockerill. I don't get the coaches' obsession with giving this kid the playing time that he gets let alone on the Top PP. They started last season with him there and he coughed up the puck for shorties - as he did Saturday - shoots the puck with no shooting lane and he continually forces passes into traffic. And why they've put Jeremy Davies on the first unit is a puzzler as well. They did so well with Williams and Sikura on the unit at season's end why would you change that?

NU_Husky
10-11-2016, 10:08 AM
What's to learn? QPac is a decent team but they will not finish the year in the Top 10.

Friday night that first goal should have been waved off...a player does not have the "right" to race a goalie to the crease and then impede his ability to make a save. NU scored later in the 3rd but the goal wasn't even waved off; the puck was simply retrieved from the net and a face-off.

Saturday night, which I saw live, was equally insane. A high sticking call made on a player sitting on the bench..an interference call for checking a puck carrier...consecutive 5 on 3s...there was no flow to the game whatsoever. Both Cameron (chyea, his name is Cameron, go figure) Lynch and Katie Guay are going to very rough years if they call games as they both did this past weekend.

As for the play, the Big Line played very well even with ZAR's turnover. They jammed the net created traffic and movement and the dirty goals they scored this weekend is what we've come to expect. Gaudette showed up to play and this kid Jozifek was impressive.

What didn't impress me was, as usual. Garret Cockerill. I don't get the coaches' obsession with giving this kid the playing time that he gets let alone on the Top PP. They started last season with him there and he coughed up the puck for shorties - as he did Saturday - shoots the puck with no shooting lane and he continually forces passes into traffic. And why they've put Jeremy Davies on the first unit is a puzzler as well. They did so well with Williams and Sikura on the unit at season's end why would you change that?

IIRC Sikura and Williams are running one of the PP units, I recall seeing them together at the points at least a couple of times this weekend. Stevens and Cockerill were the other two I often saw at the points- it's also possible due to the vast number of penalties called, they changed PP personnel due to exhaustion of players

DownOnTheFarm
10-11-2016, 02:47 PM
Friday night that first goal should have been waved off...a player does not have the "right" to race a goalie to the crease and then impede his ability to make a save. NU scored later in the 3rd but the goal wasn't even waved off; the puck was simply retrieved from the net and a face-off.

Rule 73 - Interference on the Goalkeeper

73.1 Interference on the Goalkeeper - The overriding rationale of this rule
is that a goalkeeper should have the ability to move freely within the
goal crease without being hindered by the actions of an attacking player.
However, an attacking player’s position, whether inside or outside the
crease, should not, by itself, determine whether a goal should be allowed
or disallowed. In other words, goals scored while attacking players are
standing in the crease may, in appropriate circumstances, be allowed.
Goals should be disallowed only if an attacking player, either by positioning
or by contact, impairs the goalkeeper’s ability to defend the goal.
If an attacking player has been pushed, shoved, or fouled by a defending
player and causes contact with the goalkeeper, such contact will not be deemed
contact initiated by the attacking player for purposes of this rule, provided the
attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact.
60 SECTION 9 / Other Fouls

If a defending player has been pushed, shoved, or fouled by an attacking
player so as to cause the defending player to come into contact with the
goalkeeper, such contact shall be deemed contact initiated by the attacking
player for purposes of this rule, and if necessary a penalty assessed to the
attacking player and if a goal is scored it shall be disallowed.

Rights of the Goaltender – The rules must protect the goaltender and allow
him or her to defend the goal, within the goal crease, without interference
from an attacking player. This includes allowing a goaltender to move
effectively and efficiently within the crease, as well as being able to see the
puck unimpeded by a player who has established a position in the crease.

Rights of the Attacking Player – Attacking players who are outside of the
crease have some rights to the space they occupy. In cases where an attacking
player makes contact with goaltender’s equipment that extends outside the
plane of the crease (e.g., glove, blocker, stick, etc.), provided that the attacking
player does not initiate distinct and deliberate actions aimed at impeding the
goaltender’s use of their equipment (e.g., slashing the goaltender’s glove), this
contact should be considered incidental and goals scored on such plays shall
be allowed.

If an attacking player establishes a significant position within the goal
crease, so as to obstruct the goalkeeper’s vision and impair his ability to
defend his goal, and a goal is scored, such goals shall be disallowed. For this
purpose, a player establishes a significant position within the crease when, in
the referee’s judgment, his/her body, or a substantial portion thereof, is within
the goal crease for more than an instantaneous period of time.

Role of the Official – Officials are encouraged to use their discretion
in determining the effect of an attacking player making contact with a
goaltender or with goaltender equipment. Referees are instructed to give more
significant consideration to the degree and nature of the contact than to the
exact location of the goalkeeper at the time of the contact. If, in the opinion
of the official, the incidental contact had no effect on the goaltender’s ability
to defend the goal, a goal may be allowed in such situations.

73.2 Penalty – If, in the opinion of the official, an attacking player initiates
contact that physically prevents the goalkeeper from defending the goal,
the attacking player may receive a penalty. This penalty may be enforced
whether or not the goalkeeper is inside or outside the goal crease and
whether or not a goal is scored. The referee should give significant
consideration to the degree and nature of the contact with the goalkeeper
rather than to the exact location of the goalkeeper at the time of the
contact.
If an attacking player establishes position in the goal crease, and is physically
or visually screening the goalkeeper and impairing the ability to defend the
goal, and a goal is scored, the goal will be disallowed.

73.3 Face-off Location – Whenever the Referee stops play to disallow a goal as a
result of contact with the goalkeeper (incidental or otherwise), the resulting
face-off shall take place at the nearest neutral zone face-off spot outside the
attacking zone of the offending team.

73.4 Rebounds and Loose Pucks - In a rebound situation, or where a
goalkeeper and attacking player(s) are simultaneously attempting to play
a loose puck, whether inside or outside the crease, incidental contact with
SECTION 9 / Other Fouls 61
the goalkeeper will be permitted, and any goal that is scored as a result will
be allowed.
In the event that a goalkeeper has been pushed into the net together with
the puck by an attacking player, the goal will be disallowed. If applicable,
appropriate penalties will be assessed.
In the event that the puck is under a player in or around the crease area
(deliberately or otherwise), a goal cannot be scored by pushing this player
together with the puck into the goal. If applicable, the appropriate penalties
will be assessed, including a penalty shot if deemed to be covered in the crease
deliberately (see Rule 67 – Delaying the Game).

73.5 Overall Philosophy - Officials must use a philosophy of “when in doubt,
the goal must count.” Unless the official is certain that a goal was scored
through an illegal action (e.g., physically hindering the goalkeeper’s ability
to move freely while in the crease and defend the goal), the goal must
count. Games that have video replay available may correct egregious errors,
but the standard of evidence required to disallow a goal is significant.

NU_Husky
10-11-2016, 09:05 PM
Matt Benning made the Oilers opening day lineup!!!!

TheRevengeance
10-11-2016, 09:08 PM
Matt benning made the oilers opening day lineup

If memory serves, there's a certain poster here who has a copy of the Boston Globe to eat. Great job Matt.

NU_Husky
10-11-2016, 09:12 PM
You would be correct. User name: JERRYP66, your dinner is served. Would you prefer the Sunday Globe or any day of the week?

Scarlet
10-11-2016, 09:21 PM
He also said that BU's Forsbacka-Karlson was going to leave BU and join the Bruins this year.

northeastern
10-11-2016, 10:58 PM
Matt Benning made the Oilers opening day lineup!!!!

congrats Matt.. way to go & enjoy all of it.

Gr8Sk8M8
10-13-2016, 07:09 AM
Rule 73 - Blah blaf blaf


A) He ran into Ruck

B) He stayed on top of Ruck

C) When he got up he clearly showed an intent to keep Ruck from getting back into position.

D) Stopped dead center in the crease and impeded Ruck's ability to make a save.

There was a reason that they reviewed that goal. It should have been waved off.

I've been playing hockey for 50+ years...played Major Junior...played CIS and then came south for a Masters and a JD and have played, coached and officiated...but thanks for making no point at all.

NU_Husky
10-13-2016, 08:27 AM
Weekend preview http://northeasternhockeyblog.com/2016/preview-bentley-falcons-northeastern-huskies-hockey-argue-french/

UML Puck Hawk
10-13-2016, 11:37 AM
A) He ran into Ruck

B) He stayed on top of Ruck

C) When he got up he clearly showed an intent to keep Ruck from getting back into position.

D) Stopped dead center in the crease and impeded Ruck's ability to make a save.

There was a reason that they reviewed that goal. It should have been waved off.

I've been playing hockey for 50+ years...played Major Junior...played CIS and then came south for a Masters and a JD and have played, coached and officiated...but thanks for making no point at all.

How does NU keep finding these guys.

NU_Husky
10-13-2016, 11:46 AM
How does NU keep finding these guys.

I've been under the assumption they are finding us. We're definitely not actively recruiting them....

omahasioux1
10-13-2016, 11:19 PM
Raise the banner, tickets booked. Cross one off the bucket list.

northeastern
10-14-2016, 04:09 PM
Go Huskies.. lets make it a good couple games!

sterlippo1
10-14-2016, 09:41 PM
so i didn't read any of your thread except for this page but i have a relative in the NU athletic dept and i was just told that Madigan's record vs Bentley is now 0-4-1 after tonight's 1-1 tie. Can that actually be true?