And yet, this is Friday morning comments. :-)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sometimes I use big words I don't full understand
in order to make me seem more prosopagnosic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
On 4/12/2019 1:30 PM, Mark Lewin wrote:
> As I always say, it's just soooo easy to be a Monday morning
> quarterback. And, it takes no talent whatsoever.
>
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon>
> Virus-free. www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 2:21 PM David Parter <[log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
> 1:50 left in a 3-3 national semi-final game. You can use your
> challenge for a potential major penalty, or save it for a disputed
> goal (for or against you). That's the decision the coach has to
> make, and has to make right now.
>
> --david
>
> On 4/12/19 11:46 AM, Mark Lewin 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
>>
>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon>
>> Virus-free. www.avast.com
>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 10:00 AM Mike Machnik
>> <[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all — David Carle is a pretty smart guy. To make the
>> decision to risk his challenge at that time in the game, he
>> had to be pretty sure that he would win the challenge, and I
>> think he wasn't. That could have been due to several things —
>> we don’t know if anyone he was in contact with on his staff
>> (i.e. up above) had access to a replay that showed what we
>> saw on the broadcast, and we don’t know if the officials told
>> him they didn’t see it at all, or that they did see it and
>> didn’t consider it a penalty (big difference). Also, it had
>> to rise to the level of being a major, because if they looked
>> at it and decided it should have been called but just a
>> minor, then no call is made and he still loses his timeout.
>> In short, I think he made the best decision he could based on
>> the info he had at the time.
>>
>> BTW — David’s younger brother Alex played the last four years
>> at Merrimack. When Denver played at Merrimack after Christmas
>> this season, it was the first known time that an NCAA
>> Division I coach went against his brother on another team.
>> Kind of a neat moment. DU won the game, last season, MC won
>> at Denver (when David was assistant coach) and my
>> understanding is some brotherly jabs were exchanged in the
>> handshake line. :) David is a good guy and coach, and I
>> thought he and his staff came up with a terrific game plan vs
>> UMass. They had the better of the play 5-on-5 and certainly
>> could have won the game in regulation with the third period
>> they had, despite having to go without their best player. He
>> will do good things at DU and already did this season in
>> getting them where he did in a season where few expected it.
>>
>> The final should be a good one. UMass found a way to win when
>> not playing its best, but UMD will be the best team they’ve
>> faced all season, and a team that is full of guys who have
>> won it before.
>> —
>> Mike Machnik
>> Merrimack Radio
>> College Hockey News
>>
>>> On Apr 12, 2019, at 7:31 AM, Carol White
>>> <[log in to unmask]
>>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Those were my thoughts as well David. It was thought
>>> (someone on the broadcast) that the officials didn't want to
>>> call the penalty because it would adversely effect the
>>> outcome of the game. WHAT?? Chickensheet! There is one
>>> advantage to watching the games at home, they replay the
>>> call over and over. And we get to see it a lot.
>>>
>>> I think Carle should have used that challenge, he might have
>>> won the game.
>>>
>>> Carol, QoGH
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 2:35 AM David Parter
>>> <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I didn't see it live, and did not see where the
>>> officials were (or what they might have seen).
>>>
>>> According to College Hockey News:
>>>
>>>> "I asked them to take a look at it," Carle said. "I was
>>>> asked if I wanted to use my challenge and I chose not to."
>>>
>>> I want that call made at the time, and the NCAA wants
>>> that call made. But if it wasn't made during play, and
>>> the officials did not see enough to call for video
>>> review on their own, and the coach chooses not to use
>>> his challenge.. then that's the way it is.
>>>
>>> Why didn't he use his challenge? saving the
>>> challenge/timeout?
>>>
>>> ---david
>>>
>>> On 4/12/19 12:31 AM, Tom wrote:
>>>> I have never been a fan of the ref swallowing the
>>>> whistle so they don't influence the outcome of a game.
>>>> If its a penalty in period one, its a penalty with 2
>>>> min to go in period 3! If you swallow the whistle you
>>>> ARE influencing the outcome of the game just as much as
>>>> if you call the penalty. Clearly that 3rd major should
>>>> have been called. I question the first major or UMass
>>>> where it looked to me like the chest glanced off the
>>>> shoulder then hit the head, but it was called. why,
>>>> then, not the last one which was more egregious?
>>>>
>>>> Tom Rowe
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Sometimes I use big words I don't full understand
>>>> in order to make me seem more prosopagnosic.
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> On 4/11/2019 10:37 PM, Mark Lewin wrote:
>>>>> Of all the stupid hits, the one that probably
>>>>> qualified as a game DQ was the one they didn't call.
>>>>> Refs don't like to make a call that will affect the
>>>>> outcome of the game, especially a championship game,
>>>>> but that was just negligent on the part of the
>>>>> referees. Of all penalties to call consistently, no
>>>>> matter when in the game or whether it affects the
>>>>> outcome of a game, you would expect that contact to
>>>>> the head to be the one they always call.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm thinking this might not be the last we hear about
>>>>> this.
>>>>>
>>>>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon>
>>>>> Virus-free. www.avast.com
>>>>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 11:30 PM Joe LaCour
>>>>> <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Unless the NCAA, after reviewing the call(s),
>>>>> imposes supplemental discipline and says he (they)
>>>>> sit out the next game.
>>>>>
>>>>> Trivigno got away with one.
>>>>>
>>>>> Joe LaCour
>>>>> Sent from my Mobile phone
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Apr 11, 2019, 11:23 PM Mark Lewin
>>>>> <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> No. They were game misconduct penalties.
>>>>> Suspensions are issued for game disqualifications
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>>
>>>>> > On Apr 11, 2019, at 23:14, Carol White
>>>>> <[log in to unmask]
>>>>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > There were three 5-min major penalties
>>>>> called in the game. Each had a 10 min game
>>>>> Misconduct with it. Are the players suspended
>>>>> for the next game?
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Carol, QoGH
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Sent from my iPod
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
