Mark said:
>I only listened to the game on the radio (and the RPI school station
>to boot) so I didn't even see the game. But it is my understanding
>that the goal was reviewed by the replay officials. If they didn't disallow
>the goal, they didn't find the disqualifying evidence as obvious as
>you apparently did.
>
>Not that the replays are always conclusive (the winning goal in
>last year's CC-UVM game come to mind) but the ruling is that
>the referee's call stands unless there is clear evidence that
>it was wrong. For some reason, the replay officials didn't
>find that clear evidence.
 
The difference here is that the referee on the ice didn't signal a goal.
For a goal to be called after a replay review, the evidence should have had
to be clear that there WAS a legal goal, and the replay made that a rather
large question mark in most people's minds.
 
Jeffrey Anbinder
Ithaca Times
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.