I can't add too much to the summaries of Union's 5-3 defeat of Harvard
Saturday afternoon (although I believe Harvard's second goal, by
Halfknight, was shorthanded, not the third). I credit Union with a
determined and well-planned attack, and solid defense (special applause for
assistant coach Kevin Sneddon), building a 5-0 lead. Harvard remains an enigma
to me--they outshot Union in the second, and in the third played a
credible if not overpowering game, though it was too little too late. What
didn't help is that Martins, who had a 4-point night against RPI, didn't
play from about five minutes into the first until the beginning of the
third. No penalty was announced, and based on the attention he received
from the trainer, he seemed to have some sort of twist or cramp. In the
third he was everywhere, but he ended up having to do too much on his own.
 
Without wishing to slight Union, I believe that the first two periods
were among the worst I've seen Harvard play in years. Don't get me wrong:
Union deserved it's lead, but it was kind of a boring game from where I
sat, in that there really wasn't much competition. Union showed nice
speed and attack, and wasn't really faced with much. Tracy could perhaps
be faulted on one of the first period goals, but in general, he had no
support. The defense would just collapse and the offense looked tentative
and wimpy -- I mean, Union just muscled them to the outside.
 
Martins returned in the third and almost immediately scored on the
powerplay. Harvard looked much more alive, and most of the play in the
third was in the Union end, with Martins leading the attack. The game got
more exciting: Harvard's sloppy defense still allowed Union to
counterattack, and the Dutchmen continued to play solid defense, and their
goalie came up with several excellent saves. When Martins shot over the net
from five feet out, and only a minute or so to go, I was pretty sure the game
was over.
 
Now, I'd like to put in my vote in support of Martins: obviously he's not
having a season like last year's, and he shouldn't win the Hobey, but in
the nine Crimson games I've seen, he's consistently been the best player on the
ice, for either side. Although he still pulls some god-awful penalties, his
overall playing and leadership are excellent -- he does it all,
penalty-killing, powerplay, you name it. His numbers are actually OK: 13-19 in
24 games played, or 1.33 ppg, and I think he'd rack up a lot more if there was
someone with him who could put away his set-ups. So, not that he hasn't been
credited, but I think he should get attention at least for the All-ECAC
teams.
 
Sandy