At 10:46 AM 2/1/98 -0500, you wrote:
>Healey was skating in the neutral zone with the puck towards the RPI
>bench when he just got leveled on what (I thought) was a clean hit. He
>fell into the boards and his stick broke. He got up and, out of frustration,
>threw his stick (what was left of it), but apparently not intentionally
trying
>to hit the official with it. It hit the linesman in the face, but I don't
think
>Gallagher saw it. At the next whistle, the officials convened. They called
>a bench minor probably because the lineman never knew what hit him
>and found immediately after the incident, two Union players on the ice
>(both with sticks) and an RPI player diving into the bench. Thus, he didn't
>know WHO threw their stick, but he knew which team he played for.
>
>During the "break" in which the officials convened, I found it very
>interesting that Gallagher was really laying into someone on the
>RPI bench. I thought he may have been putting Healey in his place,
>as he skated up & down the bench until he found a particular player.
 
This is consistent with the report in Sunday's Times Union (and we all know
that, if the T-U says it, it must be true :-)  ). They claim that the call
was due to the thrown stick and the fact that the referees didn't know who
the culprit was. As far as the hit against Healey, I'm not surprised. He
was targeted all night (not a criticism, just sound defensive hockey).
Some of the man to man defense was a bit cheap but, then again, so was
some of Healey's reactions to it. As far as the particular hit preceding
the stick incident, I didn't see the hit so I cannot comment on whether
it was clean or not. As far as the penalty was concerned, I'm not sure
I agree with it. Throwing a stick a hitting someone seems to be worth
more than a 2 minute minor. A 10 minute misconduct (if you find the
guilty party) or even a major should be warranted for such a stupid
and dangerous act.
 
>re: Moxham's major in OT
>Being at the opposite end of the ice, I never saw it happen. However, seeing
>the type of game that was being played (tight-checking, evenly-played, yet a
>little bit open), why on Earth would you call a major penalty??? It goes
back to
>the unwritten rule of calling a one-sided penalty in an OT playoff game - you
>just don't do it unless it's clearly blatant. In this case, it may have
been a
>blatant penalty by Moxham, but a 5-minute major and game disqaulification????
>I know this game will not have much of an impact on who goes to the NCAA
>tournament or anything, but Gallagher just gave RPI a chance to win the game
>with 3 minutes left in OT. I can easily understand a 2-minute penalty for
>roughing
>or something similar, but not a 5-minute major.
>
I agree with your questioning the call but let me tell you what I saw.
I sit in section 9 right in front of the play. Healey put a shot into
the side of the net but it looked (to the players and some fans) as
if it went in. Murphy skated off behind the net and threw his arms into
the air to celebrate the "victory". Moxham skated up behind him and thrust
the blade of his stick into Murphy's exposed mid-section. I presume that
Moxham, seeing the celebration, also thought the game was over and reacted
in frustration. To me this was nothing more than a vicious attack which
could have caused very serious injury. While I agree with your assessment
as to when a major and DQ should be called, I think that this fell under
the "blatant" category and had to be called and was justified. As I said
in the previous post, even the players and coach had no argument about the
call.
 
>I can see why RPI fans were disappointed with the tie. As Mark said, RPI is
>better
>than Union - on paper. But, THAT'S WHY THE PLAY THE GAME!!!! Union
>was not intimidated whatsoever by the "freaks" in the stands and showed a lot
>of poise and composure. I feel that Union is better than their 4-15-2 record
>shows,
>but that statistic doesn't show up on any piece of paper, unfortunately.
;-)
>
 
Agreed. If paper decided the outcome of games, why would we, fans,
keep coming back?
 
 
>Regarding the "5500+ screaming lunatics".....
>
>Where was the screaming?? I was expecting to not be able to hear myself
think.
>However, I could hear the Union contingent in Section 11 (opposite end of the
>ice from my seat in Section 1) more clearly than the "screaming lunatics"
>two rows
>behind me! Saturday afternoon's mass at St. Edward's would rival this!
>
>OK - I exaggerate, but I think my point is clear. This really wasn't the
>crowd I was
>expecting to see. Yes, it was packed & sold out, but the majority of them
>seemed to
>be sitting on their hands for most of the game. Definitley, not the freakout
>that I've
>seen in the past.
 
Agreed again. The sad part is that this was louder than most of the earlier
games this season. One of the reasons for this goes back to a posting
I made to this list last year. Union seems to consider their #1 rival as
RPI. But to RPI, their number 1 rival is Clarkson. So this particular
game was not as big a deal as the 2/14 game against Clarkson will be.
Another reason is that the Engineers erratic play this year hasn't
generated the enthusiasm as in other years. On paper, we're in a 3 way
tie for 4th place in the ECAC, but it doesn't seem like we're playing
that well.
I agree that this was nothing like Freakout's past. And the attendance
and noise level in the Field House is nothing like it has been in the past.
I wish I had an answer as to why and how to reverse the trend.
It will be interesting to see what happens on 2/14 against Clarkson.
By then the ECAC run for the playoffs will be a little better defined.
Also, the Engineers have to be remembering the 11-0 rout up in Potsdam
and will want to make up for that.
 
OTOH, I was also disappointed at the Union turnout for the game. There was
one group over in the Southeast corner (section 7?) and another in
the West grandstand (section 1?) but it seemed much smaller and much
less vocal than Union crowds in the past. Is that a trend Union is seeing
also or was it that Union fans couldn't get the extra tickets because
the Freakout game usually sells out well in advance?
 
 
Mark Lewin
RPI - class of '69
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.