Maine thread (cont) - Hobey Abbott goes Dancing

[whatever]

Re: Maine thread (cont) - Hobey Abbott goes Dancing

Jackie and company

He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named

[acs64]

Re: Maine thread (cont) - Hobey Abbott goes Dancing

unless your name is Lucas Lawson

Yeah, but that was against UHN, so it was okay

[BobF]

Re: Maine thread (cont) - Hobey Abbott goes Dancing

Any early word on pregame event location and time for Friday?

Maine's Black Bears of Boston group will host a pregame event at The Greatest Bar on Friend Street http://thegreatestbar.com/ before the game on Friday, and would expect it to be back at the same place Saturday should Maine win Friday night.

[acs64]

Re: Maine thread (cont) - Hobey Abbott goes Dancing

Methinks there will be an absolute HHHHHhhhhhuuuuuugggggggeeeeeee contingent of Mainuhs for this weekend. They may have to do an emergency TDB expansion for this one.

[UncleRay]

Re: Maine thread (cont) - Hobey Abbott goes Dancing

There was a western thread this year about a puck off a skate. I don't remember the teams involved. But I do remember in some of the discussion that the skate in the crease (similar to Maine's) shouldn't matter, and that a player in the process of stopping would not be deemed to be directing the puck. To me, the Maine player was trying to stop to avoid plowing into Cannata. I believe the goal should have counted, but I can see why, with the timing of when he turned his skate to stop, it was waved off.

[acs64]

Re: Maine thread (cont) - Hobey Abbott goes Dancing

Theres a connection between Bahstan and Irish folks, right

Voted Best Joke in Ireland

John O'Reilly hoisted his beer and said, "Here's to spending the rest of my life, between the legs of me wife!"
That won him the top prize at the pub for the best toast of the night!
He went home and told his wife, Mary, "I won the prize for the Best toast of the night."
She said, "Aye, did ye now. And what was your toast?"
John said, "Here's to spending the rest of my life, sitting in church beside me wife."
"Oh, that is very nice indeed, John!" Mary said.
The next day, Mary ran into one of John's drinking buddies on the street corner.
The man chuckled leeringly and said, "John won the prize the other night at the pub with a toast about you, Mary."
She said, "Aye, he told me, and I was a bit surprised myself. You know, he's only been in there twice in the last four years. Once he fell asleep, and the other time I had to pull him by the ears to make him come."

[UncleRay]

Re: Maine thread (cont) - Hobey Abbott goes Dancing

Q: How many Irishmen does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
A: Five. One to hold the lightbulb and the other four to drink until the room spins.

[chickod]

Re: Maine thread (cont) - Hobey Abbott goes Dancing

KIA, I'd like to hear your take on the use of video review to make penalty calls on hitting after the whistle. I'd never seen that before. Is it provided for in the rule book?

I'd like to chime in here. I refereed basketball (and the sport doesn't matter - the principle is the same) for 17 years. My personal opinion is that they should scrap ALL replays for ANYTHING. First of all, it opens up a can of worms for more second-guessing. Secondly, the game is played by humans and officiated by humans. Do players NEVER make mistakes? The problem is, by bringing the spotlight directly onto the official, it just puts more pressure on them to the point where they're thinking about what the replay will show instead of just making the call. You may not agree, but what's next? A laser to call balls and strikes? Are we going to "review" every foul in basketball? If you remove all judgment from the game, then why not just have someone sitting in a box above the ice call the game remotely? Also, you are watching the replay in slow-motion, but we have to make the call in "real time" with a split-second, instinctive decision. So much of the criticism about "well, he SHOULD HAVE seen that" is unfounded. Yes, officials make mistakes? So what? It's part of life. But this society wants to legislate EVERYTHING now so that life is perfect. That's not the way the world is...

[gscott13]

Re: Maine thread (cont) - Hobey Abbott goes Dancing

KIA, I'd like to hear your take on the use of video review to make penalty calls on hitting after the whistle. I'd never seen that before. Is it provided for in the rule book?

it is

"To correctly identify individuals who participated in a fight or committed an infraction"

in section six... right before section 7 starts
http://www.ncaapublications.com/prod...loads/IH12.pdf

and facemasking can be a minor, major, or dq depending on the adjudged severity...

[gscott13]

Re: Maine thread (cont) - Hobey Abbott goes Dancing

diamond will need to walk the straight and narrow from here on out

A player who receives three (3) game misconduct penalties in the same
season (including exhibition games) shall not be permitted to play in
the team’s next regular-season or tournament game against an NCAA
member institution. For each additional game misconduct penalty (e.g.
four, five, etc.) assessed to the same player in the same season, the player
shall be suspended for one (1) additional game. This shall not be part of a
progressive penalty structure. Exhibition games cannot be used to fulfill the
suspension for this violation

[Priceless]

Re: Maine thread (cont) - Hobey Abbott goes Dancing

Here's the rule. Clear as mud.

A goal shall not be allowed if the puck has been kicked or directed into the goal off an attacking player’s skate or any body part. When in doubt, the goal shall be disallowed. A goal shall be allowed if a puck deflects off an attacking player who is in the act of stopping.

So part a of the rule says a goal cannot be "directed" into the net with a skate. Part b says if the player is stopping, then the goal is good. Makes perfect sense!

[chickod]

Re: Maine thread (cont) - Hobey Abbott goes Dancing

So part a of the rule says a goal cannot be "directed" into the net with a skate. Part b says if the player is stopping, then the goal is good. Makes perfect sense!

Not sure what you don't get about that. "Kicked or directed" is meant to be synonymous. You're implying that "directed" is different from kicking. Therefore, the point is that they are addressing intent. If a player "kicks" or "directs" the puck toward the goal, it is considered intentional and, therefore, disallowed. If it deflects off the skate of a player who is stopping, that is interpreted to be NOT intentional, so, therefore, the goal would count.

Now, it may be true that the call they made was not consistent with the intent of the rule, but that's a different issue. The rule itself seems perfectly clear to me (but maybe your mud is murkier than my mud).

[Priceless]

Re: Maine thread (cont) - Hobey Abbott goes Dancing

Not sure what you don't get about that. "Kicked or directed" is meant to be synonymous. You're implying that "directed" is different from kicking. Therefore, the point is that they are addressing intent. If a player "kicks" or "directs" the puck toward the goal, it is considered intentional and, therefore, disallowed. If it deflects off the skate of a player who is stopping, that is interpreted to be NOT intentional, so, therefore, the goal would count.

Now, it may be true that the call they made was not consistent with the intent of the rule, but that's a different issue. The rule itself seems perfectly clear to me (but maybe your mud is murkier than my mud).

If the puck goes in off a skate, no goal.
If the puck goes in off a skate, it's a goal.
When in doubt, it's no goal.

Why bother adding the clause about stopping? The referees ignore it. To properly administer the rule requires them to become psychologists and determine "intent".

If they had interpreted the rule correctly, Maine would have been up 3-1. They don't even bother so just take that line out.

[chripy]

Re: Maine thread (cont) - Hobey Abbott goes Dancing

I'd like to chime in here. I refereed basketball (and the sport doesn't matter - the principle is the same) for 17 years. My personal opinion is that they should scrap ALL replays for ANYTHING. First of all, it opens up a can of worms for more second-guessing. Secondly, the game is played by humans and officiated by humans. Do players NEVER make mistakes? The problem is, by bringing the spotlight directly onto the official, it just puts more pressure on them to the point where they're thinking about what the replay will show instead of just making the call. You may not agree, but what's next? A laser to call balls and strikes? Are we going to "review" every foul in basketball? If you remove all judgment from the game, then why not just have someone sitting in a box above the ice call the game remotely? Also, you are watching the replay in slow-motion, but we have to make the call in "real time" with a split-second, instinctive decision. So much of the criticism about "well, he SHOULD HAVE seen that" is unfounded. Yes, officials make mistakes? So what? It's part of life. But this society wants to legislate EVERYTHING now so that life is perfect. That's not the way the world is...

I get it. The problem in this particular case is that the officials had already taken the spotlight for themselves. They made mistakes-that's fine. Yet they kept making mistakes. The. Same. Mistakes. Much like Maine made the same mistakes in the form of retaliation.

I like replay for goals, time left on the clock, and that is about it. There is too much at stake in a lot of these games to put it all on the officials. They are human after all.

[chickod]

Re: Maine thread (cont) - Hobey Abbott goes Dancing

If the puck goes in off a skate, no goal.
If the puck goes in off a skate, it's a goal.
When in doubt, it's no goal.

Why bother adding the clause about stopping? The referees ignore it. To properly administer the rule requires them to become psychologists and determine "intent".

If they had interpreted the rule correctly, Maine would have been up 3-1. They don't even bother so just take that line out.

But you're conveniently leaving out the part that you don't want to talk about. It doesn't say "If the puck goes in off a skate, no goal" - it says if it is DIRECTED in it's no goal, if it's NOT directed in, it's a goal. In BOTH cases it goes in off a skate. You're deliberately trying to muddle the issue. True about the "stopping" part, but that doesn't negate the rest of it, which you are (I feel) intentionally leaving out...and I don't care one way or another because I'm not a Maine OR Merrimack fan.