Two thoughts related to UMA's win last night.
 
First, I spotted the name of Blair Manning in a post on rec.sport.hockey
about Seattle of the WHL, and I realized it was probably the same one
who played for UMA last season as a freshman and was one of their
leading scorers.  Any word (Leigh?) on why he left?  I think he
started this season with UMA.
 
It's interesting that UMA lost two of their apparently better players
in Manning and Rich Alger after the first semester, but they have been
much more successful in the second semester.  0-12-1 through Christmas,
6-15-1 since then.
 
Second, in his recap, Rick McAdoo writes:
>The game turned when freshman Jamie O'Leary was called for an
>elbowing penalty at 17:07.  (There were some bitter comments about this
>penalty being called so late in the 3rd period of a tie playoff game later,
>and my own feeling is that they let many possible calls like this go all
>through the game, so they should not have called this one.  But, ....)
 
I thought I would offer an opinion here since I have no connection to
either school and wasn't pulling for either one to win.  (Unlike some
of the BU folks who just like to see BC lose. :-))
 
After a night to think about it, I believe Jerry York and BC would be
quite justified in being angry at the call that cost them the game.
Often I have said here that the amount of criticism directed towards
referees on HOCKEY-L is wrong and that one reason is that very few
times have I seen officiating affect the outcome of a game.  But the
UMA-BC game was one such game.  Consider:
 
* The penalty on BC's O'Leary came with 2:53 left in a 4-4 game.
* The penalty was the only one called over the final 26:38 of the
game, compared with 9 minors over the first 33:22.
* The last penalty before the one called on O'Leary and the last goal
before UMA's winner both came at almost the same time, a little more
than halfway through the second.
* The penalty was obvious, but no more obvious than an uncalled hit
from behind committed by UMA's Dale Hooper a minute or two earlier and
in front of one referee.
* BC's penalty killing has been terrible this season.
 
The call was very inconsistent with the way the referees had called
the game to that point.  You do not begin the game calling things
normally, then back off halfway through the game when it is tied and
stays tied for a long time, and suddenly make what appears to be one
arbitrary call very late to give one team a golden chance.
 
IMO, it was a *serious* blunder by the officials assigned to work this
game that they allowed the game to be decided the way it was.  They
had established with the Hooper non-call and several other non-calls
that they were not going to call anything in the final minutes with
the game tied.  It certainly appeared to this unbiased viewer as if
they were going to let the teams decide it on their own.  To make such
a call on O'Leary was, IMO, *not* typical of the way officiating has
gone in HE this season but still worthy of some kind of reprimand or
sanction from the league against the referee who called it.  This is
not a good precedent to set, and referees should be held to a higher
level of performance than we saw last night.
 
It shouldn't take away from UMA's win, because 1) either team could
have won if the game had gone to overtime, and 2) UMA accomplished a
lot by staying in the game during the rough spots so they could get to
the point where a break here or there might enable them to win.  If
UMA hadn't done that, the issue with the penalty would have been moot.
---                                                                   ---
Mike Machnik                                            [log in to unmask]
Cabletron Systems, Inc.                                    *HMM* 11/13/93