Wisconsin Badgers 2018-2019

[Connaught Point]

Re: Wisconsin Badgers 2018-2019

It was deflected by Steffen's stick.

Thanks for reply, didn't see that.

[Timothy A]

Re: Wisconsin Badgers 2018-2019

Were in! Section 8 row 7. Called at 8:33 this morning, sorry you wont be there. If I here of any tickets, do you want me to let you know?

Sure, that would be great. I'd need at least 2 if not 3 to keep everyone happy.

Cogan was back in the line-up, albeit on the 4th line, and I don't think they played much at all yesterday, though with the great pace of the game I wasn't paying too much attention to the lines.

I'm trying to decide if I want BC or Clarkson to win. On the one hand, Clarkson is better than BC, so BC could do UW a favor and knock them out. On the other hand, I'd like to see UW end Clarkson's run themselves.

[robertearle]

Re: Wisconsin Badgers 2018-2019

Cogan was back in the line-up, albeit on the 4th line, and I don't think they played much at all yesterday, though with the great pace of the game I wasn't paying too much attention to the lines.

.

The WI radio broadcast has UW goalie coach Mark Greenhalgh as the 'analyst', and somewhere along the way, he mentioned that Cogan's problem was her right shoulder (though if he gave any more detail - separation, etc - it didn't register with me). As best I noticed, she got a couple shifts each day with Clark and Pankowski, and maybe a turn or two on a PP or PK.

[TinyViking]

Re: Wisconsin Badgers 2018-2019

The WI radio broadcast has UW goalie coach Mark Greenhalgh as the 'analyst', and somewhere along the way, he mentioned that Cogan's problem was her right shoulder (though if he gave any more detail - separation, etc - it didn't register with me). As best I noticed, she got a couple shifts each day with Clark and Pankowski, and maybe a turn or two on a PP or PK.

Cogan had some great clears during the PKs. Glad to see her back. I liked having Mauermann in the first line again.

[ARM]

Re: Wisconsin Badgers 2018-2019

I liked having Mauermann in the first line again.

While it may not be your top line, I felt that Roque's line was more dangerous this weekend.

[ndodge]

Re: Wisconsin Badgers 2018-2019

I had fun watching Badgers this weekend (I live in MN), was surprised attendance was lower than when I went in the regular season (had to settle for standing then). I'm hoping for tv/streaming options next two weekends.

[robertearle]

Re: Wisconsin Badgers 2018-2019

I had fun watching Badgers this weekend (I live in MN), was surprised attendance was lower than when I went in the regular season (had to settle for standing then). I'm hoping for tv/streaming options next two weekends.

Unless I'm mistaken, all Final Four games are on 'regular TV', BTN. It currently says "Streaming information will be announced later this week" on the UW web site.

[robertearle]

Re: Wisconsin Badgers 2018-2019

Somebody pointed out (on Instagram? Twitter?) that Pankowski went four-for-four on WCHA tournament championships.

(Clark, too, unless I'm mistaken.)

[Timothy A]

Re: Wisconsin Badgers 2018-2019

While it may not be your top line, I felt that Roque's line was more dangerous this weekend.

I agree. MJ has not been able to unlock the mystery of Clark's production and as hot as Annie is now, she's creating her own shots/shooting not dishing, which is probably not doing Clark any favors. Roque between those 2 would have been interesting to see.

[HockeyThumper]

Re: Wisconsin Badgers 2018-2019

Badgers got lucky that #13 only got 2 minutes for this play. Looks like a 5 or 10 minute misconduct to me!
https://youtu.be/QEZCaS7lT8U

[Nowheresville]

Re: Wisconsin Badgers 2018-2019

Unless I'm mistaken, all Final Four games are on 'regular TV', BTN. It currently says "Streaming information will be announced later this week" on the UW web site.

That's correct about BTN carrying the Frozen Four.

All of the Quarterfinals have traditionally been on a free stream, of course the WCHA tourney had previously been on a free stream too. Hopefully the FloHockey deal won't change that for the NCAAs.

The Badger QF game has also been picked up by 27-2 in Madison in past years, although we'll have to see if they do that again.

[clubaclub]

Re: Wisconsin Badgers 2018-2019

Badgers got lucky that #13 only got 2 minutes for this play. Looks like a 5 or 10 minute misconduct to me!
https://youtu.be/QEZCaS7lT8U

That's funny, the announcers thought that was an obvious call, then they saw the replay and thought maybe there could have been a bit embellishment but ultimately agreed with the call... Is it so hard just to say it was a bad call?

[Still Eeyore]

Re: Wisconsin Badgers 2018-2019

That's funny, the announcers thought that was an obvious call, then they saw the replay and thought maybe there could have been a bit embellishment but ultimately agreed with the call... Is it so hard just to say it was a bad call?

Once again, the call was interference. Embellishment has nothing to do with it. The penalty is that Rolfes got in Potomak's way, and occurred the instant contact was made, without regard for what happened after that. I think it was a marginal call, as I don't think Rolfes slid over very much to obstruct, and certainly paled to the instance a few minutes later when Potomak got run over going around the defender with no call. And, I have no trouble believing that there would have been no call if she doesn't go down, but that shouldn't have mattered.

[Timothy A]

Re: Wisconsin Badgers 2018-2019

Badgers got lucky that #13 only got 2 minutes for this play. Looks like a 5 or 10 minute misconduct to me!
https://youtu.be/QEZCaS7lT8U

Surely you are missing the . Now that I have seen the replay, it's even a more bogus call. Why? Because the puck was not in the direction the rodent was trying to skate, it was along the boards, away from where she was trying to skate. And the flop gets a 7.1, the 4.8 I gave her earlier was way too low.

[Timothy A]

Re: Wisconsin Badgers 2018-2019

That's funny, the announcers thought that was an obvious call, then they saw the replay and thought maybe there could have been a bit embellishment but ultimately agreed with the call... Is it so hard just to say it was a bad call?

You expect Darwitz to be objective? I will say she's not a mega homer, but be real.