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 >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >