HOCKEY-L Archives

- Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List

Hockey-L@LISTS.MAINE.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
David Josselyn <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
David Josselyn <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 15 Dec 1997 15:56:03 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (23 lines)
----------
 
>
> The whistle blew because of a delayed penalty call.  The delayed penalty
> on Ronan was signaled prior to the scrum.  As soon as the BU goaltender
> made contact with the puck, the whistle was blown.  He did not have to
> freeze it, just "control" it.  Gravallese made the right call.
 
I'm sure Mike M. can quote us the complete rule, but I would have thought
that delayed calls were made for situations just like this-- to prevent a
team from committing a penalty to stop an offensive play in progress. From
that perspective, it hardly makes sense to call anything short of
"freezing" the puck "control" on the part of the goaltender. If the puck is
loose, then the goalie doesn't have control. And if the puck ended up in
the net, then he probably didn't have it frozen. Either way, it seems like
the whistle might have been a bit quick; but that seems to be a general
trend and not an isolated incident. I've seen a few such calls this season
where incidental contact with the puck by the opposition resulted in a
whistle, where play probably should have continued.
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2