The Michigan OT Goal

[slurpees]

Re: The Michigan OT Goal

Paraphrased? How does changing the entire meaning of a sentence constitute paraphrasing? Do you agree that it is totally different to say: "people TEND to side with the idea that the goal is inconclusive" vs. "EVERYONE that isn't a Mav/Wolverine fan agrees with my argument?"

You see the difference right?

Yes, please don't make inferences on my intelligence. I'm not going to continue to split hairs with you, the difference between "tend" and "everyone" does not change the entire meaning. One says most the other one says all. Both convey the point of how many agree with said belief, one more conclusively than the other. Last from me on this stupid argument of journalism on a message board posting.

[fangers]

Re: The Michigan OT Goal

If the situation was reversed, I'm quite sure the MI fans would be complaining it was no goal. It's very hard to tell, just a ****ty way to end a game.

[Wol4ine]

Re: The Michigan OT Goal

Post #54 renders this thread over. The photo and video link are CONCLUSIVE. Nothing more to see here follks.

[northeastern]

Re: The Michigan OT Goal

Slurpees is a BU fan.. so he just expects the call to go his way when it comes to the zebras ..

Slurpee where was your magic marker & er 'conclusive evidence' when the Lowell puck crossed the line.. oh wait...

[slurpees]

Re: The Michigan OT Goal

magic marker

Hey now, don't be joshin' my MS paint skills.

[gomavs#1]

Re: The Michigan OT Goal

Glad it is the last because you proved it clearly. Unfortunately, however, you make it hard not to make inferences on intelligence. The difference between tend and all is huge and changes an entire argument. But go ahead and believe differently.

[IrishHockeyFan]

Re: The Michigan OT Goal

Was the puck in? Yeah, it was. Would I have overturned the no-goal call? No, I don't think I would have as IMHO there wasn't sufficient video evidence as to approach being conclusive. But while I have no dog in the fight, so to speak, one could argue that being a Notre Dame fan, I am sort of biased, once removed or something, so maybe I saw what I wanted to see. But most of you are forgetting one simple thing:

Don't blow two goal leads, I guess.

UNO was up 2-zip before the first period was half over on about 4 shots, and Hunwick looked shaky. After that? Nada. Squat. Zilch. Nothing keeping you from blowing it apart and getting up 4 or 5 like CC did later on. Pot a couple more before the period is over, or a PP goal on one of your subsequent 6 power plays (including one in the OT) and the whole controversy never comes about. The officials may have made a mistake on one play. UNO seemed to be off their game for 2 1/2 periods after getting up 2-0.

[IrishHockeyFan]

Re: The Michigan OT Goal

Post #54 renders this thread over. The photo and video link are CONCLUSIVE. Nothing more to see here follks.

If the puck is ON THE ICE, yes I agree. If it is in the air, the perspective is off a little bit, and proves nothing more than what many saw last night.

[MUnRPI]

Re: The Michigan OT Goal

if you watch an HD view of the far-end camera, you can tell that its at least 4 inches in the net. That's just my opinion and I hate to see a team lose on that close of a call.

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the eavesdropping Michigan fan that let everyone know it was a goal before the official did. It was kinda funny to see him trying to peak at the monitors and put his ear up to the glass. I would have done the same thing though

[gomavs#1]

Re: The Michigan OT Goal

Irish - Not only did they look off their game, Ambroz took a dumb penalty in front of the ref that didn't help. Also, the power play was atrocious - 0-7. Ouch.

[Neil Diamond]

Re: The Michigan OT Goal

post #54 renders this thread over. The photo and video link are conclusive. Nothing more to see here follks.

lol!!

[Plante26]

Re: The Michigan OT Goal

Post #54 renders this thread over. The photo and video link are CONCLUSIVE. Nothing more to see here follks.

Conclusive? Hardly. Puck looks like it's in the air to me.

That's OK. Michigan doesn't have a chance against CC.

[gomavs#1]

Re: The Michigan OT Goal

The whole day was a mess for UNO athletics in general. Hockey team loses in OT on controversial call. Regents approve UNO's move to Division 1, at the same time eliminating their football and national champion wrestling programs. Just wasn't mean to be I suppose...

[jdevoejr]

Re: The Michigan OT Goal

I was all set to come on here and say how UNO got so screwed last night but after reading through the previous posts in this thread, reviewing the evidence presented here and consulting with my son, who didn't see the game or any of the subsequent replays and who was completely unaware that there was any controversy immediately stated, "Oh, that's a goal." The on ice officials got it right. Good job, regardless how long it took. And not only do I not have a dog in this fight, my dog got shot by Colorado College last night.

[Hockeybuckeye]

Re: The Michigan OT Goal

Post #54 renders this thread over. The photo and video link are CONCLUSIVE. Nothing more to see here follks.

In the post game interview Piotrowski clearly stated that only the overhead view was used to make the ruling. No determination could be made from that view so does that make him a liar or stupid?