Indeed.

I saw this game (on CSTV).  One announcer thought (1) it clearly went in 
and (2) went off a BC leg, not kicked.  The other announcer seemed to 
think it probably did not go in.

I was with the other announcer.  Though not conclusive, replays (Hansen 
had no replay) showed the BC player leg probably touched it, but the 
puck bounced along the goal line and probably never went it.  

I'd say it the replay showed conclusively there was no high stick or kick.

Hansen may have got it right, but IMHO for the wrong reasons.

York may be wrong about "the goal judge is strictly there to tell the 
referee if the puck goes over the red line" ... the book says "The 
referee may ask the goal judge how the puck entered the goal cage."  

Interesting play.  Hansen was fine (except, perhaps, for not seeing the 
play).

cheers, wayne

Deron Treadwell wrote:
> Scott Hansen is having a good week, see below:
>
>
>
>   
>> Date:         Sat, 20 Jan 2007 11:04:17 -0500
>> From: Richard Henry <[log in to unmask]>
>> Subject: BC Protests loss at UVM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>
>> http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?
>> AID=/20070120/SPORTS/701200316/1002&theme=
>>
>> Quting from link above:
>>
>> Then BC thought it had the tying goal at 15:06, a goal that Hansen
>> finally 
>> deemed had been propelled over the line by illegal means, a call that
>>
>> prompted York to protest the game. 
>>
>> "Scott Hansen explained to me was the goal judge told him it was a
>> high 
>> stick," York said.
>>
>> York said Hansen said he didn't see it and that the puck had crossed
>> the 
>> goal based on the goal judge's input. 
>>
>> "Our protest is that, and (Hockey East commissioner Joe Bertagna)
>> will 
>> take it under advisement, the goal judge is strictly there to tell
>> the 
>> referee if the puck goes over the red line. That's his only job,"
>> York 
>> said. "It's not to call penalties, it's not to talk about high
>> sticks. 
>>
>>