Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Fri, 12 Apr 2019 13:08:14 -0500 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Hey Tony,
There hasn’t been this much chatter in a long time. I am loving it as I am not in Buffalo!
Carol, QoGH
Sent from my iPod
> On Apr 12, 2019, at 12:53 PM, Anthony Buffa <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> I love the “old time” discussion, as viewed from here out on the west coast — where dinner might (it didnt) interfere with watching the games!
>
> Great to hear from Mike M again and as to Mark’s comment …. Dont call me Surely! :-) (some of you might be old enough to get the reference to “Airplane”??) ….
>
> Sorry for the non-hockey content, but just watching the NCAAs with no team to root for has become, unfortunately, rather routine for us RPI folks. :-(
>
> Cheers to all, enjoy the game on Saturday.
>
> Tony Buffa
> RPI ‘64
> San Luis Obispo, CA
>
>> On Apr 12, 2019, at 9:46 AM, Mark Lewin <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> Not sure I agree with Mike's assessment. The only reason I could see Carle not challenging the non-call is if both he and his staff upstairs did not see the hit.
>>
>> At that point in the game, the clock is running down and DU has UMass back on their heels (do hockey skates have heels?). A 5 minute major plus the loss of another forward would afford an enormous advantage to the surging Denver team. Well worth the risk of losing a challenge. Even if the referees claim they didn't see it or didn't think it was a major penalty, forcing them to look at the video would "surely" have changed their minds (as surely as anything is sure when dealing with referees).
>>
>> I think the first year coach was overly cautious and made a bad choice. I think he will look at the replay and regret his decision of non-challenge for many years to come
>>
|
|
|