Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Sat, 27 Jan 2001 23:03:58 -0600 |
Content-Type: | TEXT/PLAIN |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
After a particularly egregious fight in tonight's Vermont-Union game
the following penalties were called (snipped from
<http://www.collegehockeystats.com/boxes/muniver1.j27>):
UNI-9 Jason Ralph (2-Charging) VER 2x7 4:46
UNI-10 Bryant Westerman (2-Roughing) VER 2x8 4:46
UNI-11 Bryant Westerman (5-Fighting) 4:46
UNI-12 Bryant Westerman (5-Fighting) VER 2x9 4:46
UNI-13 Bryant Westerman (10-Game Disqualification) 4:46
UNI-14 Bryant Westerman (10-Game Disqualification) 4:46
VER-12 Chris Hills (5-Fighting) 4:46
VER-13 Chris Hills (10-Game Disqualification) 4:46
After the last four cancel out, we're left with a 2, a 2, and a 5 for
Union. Since Westerman's penalties have to be served successively, I
would expect one of them (presumably the major) would be put on hold,
and UVM would have had two minutes of 5-on-3 followed by a 5-minute
major. As it turns out, they scored on that 5-on-3 (at 5:35), and
according to the TV announcers it was then 5-on-4. And in fact a shot
of the clock seemed to indicate 4:56 remaining on the major right
after that. Now what I don't understand is what happened to the other
minor penalty. Shouldn't UVM still have been 5-on-3 for the first
1:31 of the major? I.e., shouldn't the sequence have been:
4:46: Ralph's and Westerman's minors begin (Westerman's major is on hold) 5x3
5:35: UVM goal ends Westerman's minor; Westerman's major begins 5x3
6:46: Ralph's minor ends 5x4
10:35: Westerman's major ends 5x5
Or does the major have to be served first, in which case Westerman's
minor would not have started until 9:46, and UVM would indeed have
been on a 5x4 power play from 5:35 to 11:46?
John Whelan, Cornell '91
[log in to unmask]
http://www.amurgsval.org/joe/
Consider the alternative: http://slack.net/~whelan/cgi-bin/tbrw.cgi?kpairwise
|
|
|