Shot heard ‘round the world! Congrats and good luck in the NC!!
Phew, yeah. The mass fans were getting quiet in the 3rd. Thought denver would pull it out as they took over the 2nd and 3rd.
Fill up the rink saturday umass!!
Umass could and should have had 3 game misconducts. Officials missed the last one and didn't review it. I don't understand why? I am rooting for UMass, but a team can't play like that and expect to win most games. I don't recall them being an undisciplined team during the regular season.
According to CHN, "I asked them to take a look at it," Carle said. "I was asked if I wanted to use my challenge and I chose not to." I wonder if the NCAA will review the play and impose sanctions on Trevigno?
According to CHN, "I asked them to take a look at it," Carle said. "I was asked if I wanted to use my challenge and I chose not to." I wonder if the NCAA will review the play and impose sanctions on Trevigno?
Wow, that was a mistake not using the challenge. That was a pretty obvious head shot. Hard to believe the officials missed that one.
According to CHN, "I asked them to take a look at it," Carle said. "I was asked if I wanted to use my challenge and I chose not to." I wonder if the NCAA will review the play and impose sanctions on Trevigno?
I'd be very surprised.
This one was egregious though. Carle should have challenged it if that's the case as he is quoted above.
Originally posted by Greg Ambrose on 3/7/2010
The fact that you BC fans revel in the superiority of your team in an admittedly weak league leads me to believe you will be more sorely disappointed when the end comes than we will.
I'm not a coach but I can't fathom why he wouldn't use his challenge at that point with the game clearly on the line.
Wow...and that hit was/looked worse than the others. Maybe being 29 on that big stage...anyway...UMass breathed a sigh of relief and the rest is history!
Wow...and that [third] hit was/looked worse than the others. Maybe being 29 on that big stage...anyway...UMass breathed a sigh of relief and the rest is history!
Totally agree. The first two hits (especially the second) were arguable in that the primary contact was shoulder into the chest and the head contact could have been incidental to the shoulder-on-chest impact. But the third (Trevigno) hit was flagrant and obvious. (There's an old saying in hockey referee circles that when everyone in the building and the people walking by outside know it's a penalty, your arm better be in the air.)
Not a good showing by the WCHA crew for this and other reasons. By contrast, the Atlantic Hockey crew that worked the first game did a nice job, IMO.
Totally agree. The first two hits (especially the second) were arguable in that the primary contact was shoulder into the chest and the head contact could have been incidental to the shoulder-on-chest impact. But the third (Trevigno) hit was flagrant and obvious. (There's an old saying in hockey referee circles that when everyone in the building and the people walking by outside know it's a penalty, your arm better be in the air.)
Not a good showing by the WCHA crew for this and other reasons. By contrast, the Atlantic Hockey crew that worked the first game did a nice job, IMO.
Any chance the NCAA takes a second look at that Trivigno hit? And 100% agree on Carle needing to use his challenge there. I wonder if the refs were not clear to him on what he would be challenging.
Any chance the NCAA takes a second look at that Trivigno hit? And 100% agree on Carle needing to use his challenge there. I wonder if the refs were not clear to him on what he would be challenging.
From what I understand, you present the challenge and it's up to the refs to clarify if you are not allowed to challenge in that situation. In other words, they didn't have to be "clear" to him...he just has to say "It was a direct hit to the head...look at it again." If they can't, then the ref tells him "that's not reviewable."
I'm not a coach but I can't fathom why he wouldn't use his challenge at that point with the game clearly on the line.
What's the rule on a challenge? Would Denver get a penalty if they challenged and didn't get the call? That's the only reason I can think of for not challenging, although that was a pretty obvious penalty. Was the game tied at that point?
Didn't agree with the call on Hildenbrand. I never saw direct head contact and at least thought simultaneous body contact. Shouldn't be throwing kids out for hits like that. The one by the Denver player and the one by Trivigno were the obvious ones. I am guessing what happened with Trivigno is no ref saw it clearly so in that case it has to be challenged? If so, big rookie mistake from Carle there. Could easily have been the difference between winning and losing.
I'll be honest the CTH majors that I saw that were called.... I was not a big fan of them (I did miss early parts of the game, I may have missed one). One guy is leaning over looking for a puck in his skates and his head is literally sticking out toward the player making contact.
As with any major, especially if you are reviewing it, you better be 100% sure it's a good call. They were 50/50 calls at best and you give a team a 5 min PP and kick a guy out in FF semifinal. And then go and miss the absolute 100% CTH major.
Originally posted by Greg Ambrose on 3/7/2010
The fact that you BC fans revel in the superiority of your team in an admittedly weak league leads me to believe you will be more sorely disappointed when the end comes than we will.
Comment