ckersh74

February 27th, 2010 at 8:39 PM ^

Here's how you get a penalty one way plus an embellishment call the other:

Player A hooks Player B on the arm, egregious enough for the referee to call, but not much more. Player B then tosses his stick and flops to the ice like someone just hacked his arm off with a chainsaw. Two minutes for the hook, two minutes for the ensuing embellishment. We're playing hockey, not handing out Academy Awards here.

Wolverine318

February 27th, 2010 at 8:45 PM ^

fuck wilkins fuck hall...

In my short hockey career i was hit with one 10 min misconduct once...if i was playing i would have already taken a swing at Hall or Wilkins...

Bobby Digital

February 27th, 2010 at 9:12 PM ^

For the dude who asked, I'm at the northern game, looking for an update on M. Northren's up 2-0 after two. What's the Michigan score at? Hoping Michigan might come up to mqt somehow in a couple weeks

Bobby Digital

February 27th, 2010 at 9:13 PM ^

For the dude who asked, I'm at the northern game, looking for an update on M. Northren's up 2-0 after two. What's the Michigan score at? Hoping Michigan might come up to mqt somehow in a couple weeks

Michigan Arrogance

February 27th, 2010 at 9:34 PM ^

Bobsled
Curling
Skeleton
Luge
down hill sking
slalom
Super G
Super combined
snowboard cross
down hill snowboard
ski cross
biathalon
archery
nascar
bicycling
bowling
kayak
speedskating (long track)
golf
motocross
rowing
sailing
shooting
swimming
track
tug of war
speed walking

the key? no refs and/or judges

JustGoBlue

February 27th, 2010 at 9:59 PM ^

One of the reasons I started liking hockey in the first place was because it seemed like the calls were fairly well defined, the sort of thing I could call, were I to be on ice level and thus the refs really didn't affect the game so much. The polar opposite of fouls in basketball, if you will, which I couldn't call (or non-call) for the life of me, despite literally hours spent on the internet staring at the rules, trying to figure it out. Add in the simplicity of "Goal" or "No Goal" and it's pretty much perfect.

Then there's the CCHA officiating, which needs no further explanation. And then I find there's things like "intent to blow the whistle" and "that's no goal even though the overhead, which is the only view I have, clearly shows the entire puck over the goal line". I guess I should try to figure out basketball again.

Also, it's sort of ironic that Notre Dame keeps complaining about contact to the head and how many injuries they've had because of it, given the way they play. I noticed the same thing last night, but gave it a bit of a pass because they were losing, but I guess that's just how they play.

Mr. Robot

February 27th, 2010 at 11:52 PM ^

They don't have "refs", but NASCAR is famous for making it up as they go from time to time. I've seen a race decided on a rules interpretation before (Specifically the "going below the yellow line while in sight of the checkered flag" incident).

They seem to be cutting down on the BS though. Before this year they pretty much decided to throw the decision-making out the window and just told the drivers to police themselves (Bump drafting and what not).