Comments on UMass-Lowell vs. RPI, 11/19/94
 
or
 
Did I dream about that sweep against Clarkson and St. Lawrence?
 
 
Had you viewed only the first period of this game at the Tully Forum,
a 5-2 UML win would not be an unexpected result.  In fact, you
would have thought the margin of victory to be greater.  The River
Hawks dominated play from the opening face-off.  At least 15
minutes of the first period was spent in the RPI defensive zone.
Surprisingly, the score was 0-0 after the period ended.  I have no idea
how the River Hawks didn't score a goal.  They took 23 shots, many
of high quality, and a handful of times had the puck in the Engineer
crease, but just couldn't get the score.
 
The second period saw better play by the Engineers, and UML
couldn't maintain the same domination as in the first period.
However, UML scored, moving the puck around the back of the net
and coming from Mike Tamburro's blind side to take a 1-0 lead at
4:08.  This livened up UML, but they still couldn't finish on their
subsequent possessions, and at 12:11 the Engineers tied it up with a
goal by Eric Healey.  The rest of the period was rather even, and it
stayed 1-1 after two.
 
At this point, the Engineers should have considered themselves
extremely lucky not to have been blown out of this game.  Their luck
continued, as just 4:05 into the third Jeff Mathews scored all alone
against Scott Fankhouser.  Credit the assists to UML, as they had
four, yes four, people in the zone against one Engineer (Mathews).
Then on a fifty-fifty puck, three opted to head up ice and the fourth
couldn't get the puck.  Mathews gained control and went in alone for
the score.  Engineers now led 2-1 in a game they should never have
led in.  The dream died on two quick power-play goals, Jeff Daw at
10:29 during a 5-on-3, then Christian Sbrocca at 11:30 during a 5-
on-4.  The rest of the game belonged to UML, as they added two
more, by Neil Donovan at 18:07 and Eric Brown at 19:58 to give the
final 5-2 in UML's favor.
 
Engineer notes:
 
1.  Kelly Askew injured his ankle during the second period and did
not return.  His status is in question for next weekend.
 
2.  The fourth line (Kwasniewski, Kiley, Maye) played sparingly,
though Maye saw substantial work on the penalty-killing unit for the
Engineers and acquitted himself well.  With the absence of Askew for
the second half of play, this contributed to the first three lines being
more tired near the end of play than in the previous weekend.
 
3.  Bryan Richardson was taken out of the action for most of the
game.  UML did a great job of limiting his role.  His biggest
contribution to the outcome was taking the cross-checking penalty in
the third that led to UML's tying goal.
 
4.  Patrick Rochon's thought processes are not working properly.
He doesn't seem to know what he should be doing half the time.
 
5.  Chris Aldous was seen sparingly.  He has not adjusted to the
college game yet.
 
6.  Jeff Mathews played outstandingly.  His goal was due to tenacity
of his part, not giving up against overwhelming odds.
 
7.  Eric Healey with a solid game.  Got the first goal, hit the pipe on
another excellent opportunity.  He's the freshman who's looking like
the scoring wizard, which most thought would be Doug Battaglia.
 
8.  No discipline, stupid penalties.  RPI has a 2-1 lead almost half-
way through the third and on the power-play.  What happens?  Bryan
Richardson, who was frustrated most of the day, takes a cross-
checking penalty in the offensive zone.  Then Wayne Clarke takes an
absolutely moronic roughing call 33 second later.  These penalties led
to two power-play goals and a 3-2 UML lead.  All season long the
Engineers have been taking penalties in the offensive zone while on
the man advantage.  Stupid, stupid, stupid.
 
UMass-Lowell notes:
 
1.  As goes Greg Bullock, so go the River Hawks.  When Bullock
has free reign, UML dominates, as in the entire first period.  When
RPI was able to contain him, during most of the second and early
third, the River Hawks had trouble.  However, RPI could not contain
him all game long in the manner UML took care of Bryan
Richardson.
 
2.  Both goaltenders played well, though I think Scott Fankhouser
did better, despite giving up both goals.  Martin Fillion played the
first half and looked shaky on some saves.  He benefited from the
River Hawks' domination in the first period.  Fankhouser faced many
more quality shots and looked more solid.
 
3.  UML parked men in the crease all night long.  They just would
not be moved, creating havoc for an already shaken RPI defense.
 
4.  Mike Nicholishen impressed me with his skill and mental
alertness.  At least a half-dozen times he made a simple play that
most other players would not have, merely with good stick-work or
quick thinking.  I think this freshman defenseman has a bright future.
 
5.  Finishing.  This game should have been decided in the first 10
minutes.  If UML wants to compete on the national level this year,
they have to learn to score goals when they dominate play.  Had they
done so in period 1, RPI would have been down 5 or 6 goals.  Right
now, there doesn't appear to be the killer instinct that's always
needed.
 
 
Not an outstanding game by team, but UML seems to have the
brighter future.  RPI must to get their act together by this weekend,
or they will start falling further and further behind, and this team is
not the kind that knows how to come from behind.
 
Kurt Stutt
[log in to unmask]