OK, let me weigh in on the controversy.  I thought it was a goal.  However
my account of it is different than Mark's.  I sit on the other side of the
ice, almost directly opposite Mark, a shade closer to center ice.  From my
vantage point I had the puck hitting just inside the post on Laing's stick
side.  I saw the puck go across the goal mouth and hit on the net side of
the post.  The puck fell to the ice on the outside of the goal line.  The
T-U this morning interviewed ref Mike Noeth.  "What I saw and what the
assistant referrees saw was the puck hitting the post, so we let play
continue."  Noeth added that it wasn't necessary to check with the goal
judge, bcause he didn't turn the light on.  Which was absolutely correct.
Also Noeth had a perfect view of the goal/non-goal, as he was looking
directly at the net when the shot took place.
 
The T-U describes the shot as a slapper that went through Laing's legs.
That is clearly wrong.    But all accounts have the puck hitting the left
post, including coaches Schafer and Fridgen.  Fridge: it looked like it
had hit the post and come back out.  If it would have hit something
softer, I think it would have stayed in the net."  Schafer: "My kids
aren't going to lie to me.  They said it hit the post, hit the pad and
came back out."  Remember both coaches are leaders in penalty minutes at
each of their respective alma maters.  :-)
 
NewsWatch 54, and independent station from Ithaca, showed a replay that
was reportedly inconclusive.
 
Everyone around me was vociferous that the puck hit the post and came out
however.  But then some of the fans around me have the hockey sense of,
well now that I think of it, Mike Noeth. (Begin segue here...)
 
I thought the officiating was particularly wanting last night.  And I know
that sounds like a broken record on Hockey-l.  Noeth was fine on Friday,
even though he swallowed his whistle in the third.  But last night Noeth
was the epitome of inconsistency.  Through the second Noeth let a lot of
stuff go uncalled, including a double-arm choking of Chris Aldous by
Tymchysyn (sp) off the boards.  Fine.  Fair is fair.  But come the third
period he starts calling minor obstruction stuff, and little holds here
and there.  The character of the third period was radically different
than the first two.  Schafer showed his coaching acumen by pulling his
goalie for the last three minutes, resulting in a 5 on 3 during matching
minors, and then a 6 on 4. This came from a peculiar too many men on the
ice penalty at 16:44.
 
And man did Laing come up big.  Lost in the sturm und drang was the
performance Laing turned in.  He won the game.  Period.  In the third
there were countless saves where Laing simply robbed Cornell.  Point blank
stuff.  Pucks just sitting in front of the crease.  Lots of open Cornell
forwards.  Obviously if Prekaski had played like Laing on Saturday, the
series would be over. An immense difference.  Elliott in contrast has been
adequate.  Very big on Friday.  A little soft on Saturday, especially on
Gosselin's blue line special which changed the character of the game last
night.
 
And BTW I would have like to have seen a replay on Cornell's second goal
on Friday night.  I had some doubts on whether it went in or Prekaski made
the just-in-time save.
 
Other random observations: cool--Cornell's band singing "Schafer is the
one beer to have" after Friday's ending.  Lame--RPI fans chanting "It's
all your fault" and pointing at the Cornell fans camped behind Laing.
And I rate Cornell's band the best in the ECAC.  But still light years
behind Wisconsin's.
 
If tonight's redux is as good as last night's it will quite simply be a
barn burner.
***************************************************************************
Brian Morris                RPI Engineers--One for Lake Placid
[log in to unmask]
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.