PDA

View Full Version : Gophers vs Badgers Nov. 9-10: Yeah, we still hate each other...



Pages : 1 2 3 4 [5] 6

Timothy A
11-10-2018, 10:30 AM
Not much to say. The Badgers gift wrapped it nicely for the gophers by pushing the player into their own goalie, getting a penalty on top of the goal, and allowing two goals that shouldíve been saved.

I'm not sure about the 2 goals that should have been saved, meaning the 2nd and 3rd? What's your take on why they should have been stopped?

trixR4kids
11-10-2018, 01:09 PM
I love that they called some interference penalties. Those uncalled interference plays kill the speed and flow of the game.
I didnít have a problem with the Zuhlsdorf interference call, the puck was past and he kept engaging for a good second or two after, easy call and as long as itís called consistently Iím fine with it.

trixR4kids
11-10-2018, 01:12 PM
Still not sure what I think of the rule that requires a team to serve a penalty even if other team scores. I liked the outcome last night. And In last night's game, the Gophs didn't get a sixth skater on the ice to make a difference. But it still feels strange to me when a team does get a sixth skater out and they score because of the mismatch, that they also get the powerplay.If you cheated and still get scored on I donít see the point in rewarding you with nullifying a penalty.

That and more PPís should theoretically increase scoring which is what most people want to see.

solovsfett
11-10-2018, 01:29 PM
Last season's Gopher sweep at the Kohl was the beginning of a season ending 6 game BADger losing streak. Can we do another "losing streak" kickoff at the Kohl tonight? I think we can, can, yes we can, can. Kickoff is at 7pm. NOTE: Inamoto deserves another *** kickin'. ;)

EDIT:

2018-19 Tony Granato 4 5 0 .444
2017-18 Tony Granato 14 19 4 .432
2016-17 Tony Granato 20 15 1 .569
2015-16 Mike Eaves 8 19 8 .343
2014-15 Mike Eaves 4 26 5 .186

Alvy cares only about football and has been letting the UW hockey program crash and burn for years. This is not good for B1G hockey. Granato's days are obviously numbered. It's too bad that Alvy, the oldest and highest paid athletic director in the B1G, has a contract extension until heís 74 in 2021. There lies your problem BADger jugheads.

Why are Granatoís days numbered?

Heís essentially got 2 classes in. One 20 win season and one sub .500 season. Theyíre not even 1/3 into the season yet.

They have 2 top 10 nhl draft picks coming in to light it up and from the early returns the frosh and sophs are good.

Iím not happy at the moment but expect ncaaís this season. Nothing less will do.

digitalbooya
11-10-2018, 02:17 PM
Why are Granatoís days numbered?

Heís essentially got 2 classes in. One 20 win season and one sub .500 season. Theyíre not even 1/3 into the season yet.

They have 2 top 10 nhl draft picks coming in to light it up and from the early returns the frosh and sophs are good.

Iím not happy at the moment but expect ncaaís this season. Nothing less will do.

We will see about top 10 picks. Definitely 1st rounders though. Turcotte probably in the 5-10 range. Caufield probably in the 10-25 range.

Koho
11-10-2018, 02:48 PM
I didn’t have a problem with the Zuhlsdorf interference call, the puck was past and he kept engaging for a good second or two after, easy call and as long as it’s called consistently I’m fine with it.

What? That was the worst call of the game. Even the Scoonie announcers said they 'can see why he had an objection to that call.' Dhooghie played the puck past him and Zuhlsdorf kept skating backwards. Dooghie had a path around him on either side, and instead chose to jump up forward and come down on Zuhlsdorf's head. What is a D supposed to do, step out of the way of every opposing player? Go back and watch again. If that is interference, there should be 15 interference calls per game.

trixR4kids
11-10-2018, 03:07 PM
Well yeah, interference should be called far more often and isnít. And then people wonder why scoring is down across every level of the sport since 2006 when refs decided to actually enforce the rules again.

Maybe in 1995 thatíd be a bad call but if they want to enforce the actual rules of the game thatís clearly intetference. Zuhlsdorf engages the player after the puck is well past and then Dhoogie jumped to sell the call, which doesnít negate the infraction.

Obviously refs are horribly inconsistent about calling it but thatís a separate issue.

Stauber1
11-11-2018, 02:45 AM
I'm not complaining because on balance officiating was fine, but that was a horrible call on Zuhlsdorf.
I'm all in favor of the rules on interference in regards to "dump and chase tactics," but his only "engagement" was a slight shoulder drop immediately following the release of the puck. His skates were on rails and never moved sideways.
I think you need to watch it again Trix.

Koho
11-11-2018, 08:56 AM
I'm not complaining because on balance officiating was fine, but that was a horrible call on Zuhlsdorf.
I'm all in favor of the rules on interference in regards to "dump and chase tactics," but his only "engagement" was a slight shoulder drop immediately following the release of the puck. His skates were on rails and never moved sideways.
I think you need to watch it again Trix.

Yeah, I think Trix missed my point that it was a horrible call, not that it should always be called but isn't. I saw a few worse ones yesterday, that weren't called (and I don't think most should have been). If Zuhlsdorf's is called every time, all a forward would have to do is play the puck a little past a defender and the defender would have to step out of the way and let him pass for a free lane to the net. Even on some calls where the defender engages after a forward dumps it past him I am uncomfortable with when the defender was clearly lining up the hit while the forward still had the puck on his stick. You've got a defender skating backwards slower than the forward, in order to close the gap. If the forward tries to carry the puck around the defender, the correct reaction of the D is to check the forward. In this position, if the forward dumps the puck at the last second around the D, you can't require the D, who is skating backwards slower than the forward, to completely avoid the forward when the forward skates straight towards the D. And there should be some leeway with a hit that starts while the forward still has the puck (contact is after puck leaves his stick, but checking motion starts sooner). And I am all for most penalties against impeding players to keep the game open. Since the NHL became tougher on interference, hooking, and the clutch and grab stuff that used to dominate I enjoy watching games. It is clearly a more open, free skating game with more emphasis on speed rather than size. But you can't call a penalty on a D for skating backwards when a forward skates into, instead of around him, then jump on the D's head.

trixR4kids
11-11-2018, 12:56 PM
I saw one play yesterday where we tried to dump it past #2 and he pivoted towards the puck and played the puck, which is what should happen. If you're a Dman and someone dumps it past you and you initiate contact to slow the guy up though that's interference, the rule is pretty simple.

And you can see that Zuhlsdorf engages the guy for like 2 seconds well after the puck is past him, at which point Dhoogie jumps and tries to sell the call which worked. Yes he did jump but Zuhlsdorf also didn't make any attempt to play the puck and I felt like it was an obvious call at the time. You can even see he never makes an attempt to pivot toward the puck and is looking straight at the guy who dumped it past him, at which point he's making contact with a guy who is nowhere near the puck. In real time it looked pretty obvious and I watched it again and it also seemed obvious so :shrug:. The defender doesn't have to step out of the way there but they do need to be able to have good gap control and actually change direction toward the puck rather than just playing the body while the puck is ten feet away.

Koho
11-11-2018, 01:14 PM
I saw one play yesterday where we tried to dump it past #2 and he pivoted towards the puck and played the puck, which is what should happen. If you're a Dman and someone dumps it past you and you initiate contact to slow the guy up though that's interference, the rule is pretty simple.

And you can see that Zuhlsdorf engages the guy for like 2 seconds well after the puck is past him, at which point Dhoogie jumps and tries to sell the call which worked. Yes he did jump but Zuhlsdorf also didn't make any attempt to play the puck and I felt like it was an obvious call at the time. You can even see he never makes an attempt to pivot toward the puck and is looking straight at the guy who dumped it past him, at which point he's making contact with a guy who is nowhere near the puck. In real time it looked pretty obvious and I watched it again and it also seemed obvious so :shrug:. The defender doesn't have to step out of the way there but they do need to be able to have good gap control and actually change direction toward the puck rather than just playing the body while the puck is ten feet away.

I guess we agree to disagree. Zuhlsdorf did not come in contact with Dhooghie. Dhoogie initiated contact. Zuhlsdorf was skaiting backwards and got run into. If that is what you call 'engaging' a guy, please don't become a ref. How that should be interference is beyond me. The closest I could find in the rules is; A defending player who changes his skating lane or foot speed in an effort to play the body of an opponent who is no longer in possession and control of the puck. he did neither of these. Watch again at slow motion. And the rest of the examples have to do with contact, which, as I mentioned, wasn't initiated by Zuhlsdorf. When even the Wisconsin announcers comment that Zuhlsdorf has a right to be upset with the call, I think that suggests I'm not in the minority with my opinion.

Wisko McBadgerton
11-11-2018, 01:53 PM
It's Roman Achan, not Dhooghe vs. Zuhlsdorf. Zuhlsdorf's skates are not on a rail, nor does he turn for the puck. Achan pushes the puck past to the right, throws a head and shoulder fake right then moves left. When Achan moves right then left, Zuhlsdorf moves with him. It's not much, in fact unless you're right behind him where the official is, it's not all that noticeable. But that's it, the hand goes up. It's technically correct, but called more tightly then we often see. I'd have had no problem if they don't call it there either. It's like the Mersch call - do I think it should be a 5 and game? No. Is it technically a 5 and game? Yep.

trixR4kids
11-11-2018, 02:06 PM
A defending player who changes his skating lane or foot speed in an effort to play the body of an opponent who is no longer in possession and control of the puck. he did neither of these. Zuhlsdorf does ever so slightly change his skating lane when Achan* goes to his left/Z's right at which point Achan jumps the other way and sells the call. Notice how Zuhlsdorf never turns to go to the puck either. It's subtle but Zuhlsdorf definitely goes slightly to his right when Achan tries to get around the left side and then he goes the other way into Zuhlsdorf and jumps.

IDK, even if you think it's the wrong call Zuhlsdorf could do himself a favor and not look directly at the skater with the intent to engage as the puck is ten feet past him. It's like when a football CB never looks back toward the ball on a pass and gets flagged, you don't tend to get the benefit of the doubt in that situation. I made a GIF of the replay that shows it twice (and it's worth keeping in mind that refs are calling this in real time not slow motion nor do they get five replays).

https://gfycat.com/VastChiefFlyingsquirrel


It's Roman Achan, not Dhooghe vs. Zuhlsdorf. Zuhlsdorf's skates are not on a rail, nor does he turn for the puck. Achan pushes the puck past to the right, throws a head and shoulder fake right then moves left. When Achan moves right then left, Zuhlsdorf moves with him. It's not much, in fact unless you're right behind him where the official is, it's not all that noticeable. But that's it, the hand goes up. It's technically correct, but called more tightly then we often see. I'd have had no problem if they don't call it there either. It's like the Mersch call - do I think it should be a 5 and game? No. Is it technically a 5 and game? Yep.Yeah not Dhoogie, my bad. See above

Koho
11-11-2018, 03:51 PM
It's Roman Achan, not Dhooghe vs. Zuhlsdorf. Zuhlsdorf's skates are not on a rail, nor does he turn for the puck. Achan pushes the puck past to the right, throws a head and shoulder fake right then moves left. When Achan moves right then left, Zuhlsdorf moves with him. It's not much, in fact unless you're right behind him where the official is, it's not all that noticeable. But that's it, the hand goes up. It's technically correct, but called more tightly then we often see. I'd have had no problem if they don't call it there either. It's like the Mersch call - do I think it should be a 5 and game? No. Is it technically a 5 and game? Yep.

I was surprised that was 5 instead of 2..

Wisko McBadgerton
11-11-2018, 04:34 PM
I was surprised that was 5 instead of 2..

I just figure the ref made that call for ecological reasons.

Probably saved that gopher's life by not letting Mersch circle around again for the third bombing run. :D

SteveO
11-12-2018, 03:47 AM
Interesting points on both sides of this argument on the Interference call on Zuhlsdorf. The 2018-19 and 2019-20 NCAA Ice Hockey Rulebook offers some help here:

Rule 59 - Interference

59.1 Interference - A player shall not interfere with or impede the progress of an opponent who is not in possession of the puck, deliberately knock a stick out of an opponent’s hand, prevent a player who has dropped the stick, or any other piece of equipment, from regaining possession of it or knock or shoot any abandoned or broken stick or illegal puck or other debris toward an opposing puck carrier in a manner that could cause the player to be distracted.

Waving of arms in front of a goalkeeper by an opponent is interference.

PENALTY—Minor.

Note 1: The last player to touch the puck, other than the goalkeeper, shall be considered the player in possession. In interpreting this rule, a referee should make sure which of the players is the one creating the interference — often it is the action and movement of the attacking player that causes the interference since the defending players are entitled to stand their ground or shadow the attacking players. Players of the team in possession shall not be allowed to run interference for the puck carrier.

Note 2: In dump and chase situations, immediate contact may be made against the attacking player who dumps the puck past a defender. The defender is obligated to release immediately so as not to be guilty of interference. The standard is no longer two seconds or two strides after releasing the puck. It should be noted that allowing offensive players more freedom here must not be taken as license to create collisions at higher speed.

Note 2 seems to indicate that Zuhlsdorf had the legal right to impede Achan's progress in the case of a D & C. Lacking in this ruling is any reference to limiting defensive players to specific lateral movements that may impede the progress of an attacking player in the case of a D & C.

The question is: Did Zuhlsdorf release Achan "immediately" within the 2 second or two stride limitation after Achan "released" the puck?

It appears to me that Achan took at least two strides after releasing the puck, at which point Zuhlsdorf is "obligated" to not impede Achan's progress any further. At that point, Zuhlsdorf should have turned to pursue the puck, and avoid engaging in contact with Achan. I can see where a ref would consider that interference on Zuhlsdorf.

gopher wes
11-12-2018, 11:32 AM
Expected a split and that's what we got. Gophers were lucky to win Friday and thought they easily could have won Saturday had a couple pipe shots found their way in.

Quite honestly, that felt like two non-NCAA teams going at it but there are still a lot of games to play. See you again in January.

Wisko McBadgerton
11-12-2018, 12:32 PM
Note 2 seems to indicate that Zuhlsdorf had the legal right to impede Achan's progress in the case of a D & C. Lacking in this ruling is any reference to limiting defensive players to specific lateral movements that may impede the progress of an attacking player in the case of a D & C.

The question is: Did Zuhlsdorf release Achan "immediately" within the 2 second or two stride limitation after Achan "released" the puck?

It appears to me that Achan took at least two strides after releasing the puck, at which point Zuhlsdorf is "obligated" to not impede Achan's progress any further. At that point, Zuhlsdorf should have turned to pursue the puck, and avoid engaging in contact with Achan. I can see where a ref would consider that interference on Zuhlsdorf.

You can make immediate contact but there is no 2 seconds or 2 strides to make contact on zone entry. That's literally what it says. And if you do make contact the standard for release is immediately, not seconds or strides, so I'm not sure why you're pointing out how many strides Achan did or didn't take as it's irrelevant. When the puck goes, so must the defender.

They do spell out lateral movement. You are allowed to be a traffic cone, but if you move into the F's path you are impeding. If you don't move, or move in another direction, you are not impeding. Not impeding is the direction laterally, and otherwise, you are to move.

Wisko McBadgerton
11-12-2018, 12:47 PM
Expected a split and that's what we got. Gophers were lucky to win Friday and thought they easily could have won Saturday had a couple pipe shots found their way in.

Quite honestly, that felt like two non-NCAA teams going at it but there are still a lot of games to play. See you again in January.

If I look at Saturdays's game in the 5x5, I think that it's two pretty good teams with good skaters playing hard and limiting what the other team wanted to do quite a bit. Both teams have some players with real speed, but the other team's guys with speed negated the advantage to a degree. Both teams need to grow a lot from here though. Badger PP is an example. Credit the hard pk but the Badgers PP did not look like a top 40 team. But when I consider the skill level of the players on it, it's pretty likely to improve a good deal as the year wears on. (I hope!)
There's a lot of upside on both these teams, so it's a matter of who realizes the most potential the quickest.

Glad we play two more as I must have hundreds of other Motzko jokes. Odds are I'll hit on a funny one eventually.

digitalbooya
11-12-2018, 12:47 PM
The only time I felt truly threatened by the gophers was when they were on the power play. The badger penalty kill is horrible. 5v5 I thought the badgers were the better team the entire weekend. Canít wait for the elite forwards coming next year.