NCAA Hockey Tourney 09: Why not?

Submitted by lhglrkwg on
I just saw Bemidji crush notre dame and I was thinking 'wow, how nuts can it get'. well the answer is significantly more nuts. i just saw a puck go through the net (maybe?) to send vermont to the frozen four. WTF. it went in the net maybe and came out the otherside slighty deflected and at the same speed. we think. you could see the refs had no idea what happened. so let me ask, what else do you think will happen. anything goes, because it will probably happen. i think bemidji will play BU in the final and bemidji will win because BU didn't show up for the game

DoubleB

March 28th, 2009 at 11:26 PM ^

Saw the Vermont-AFA game as well. Weird, weird ending to say the least. I thought BU was the best team in the tournament before it started and the path just got a whole lot easier for them. They crushed OSU today. I think they win it going away.

Sparky79

March 28th, 2009 at 11:43 PM ^

No doubt in my mind that was the right call in the Vermont game, especially when they showed the ice level view from the blue line. From the overhead view, the puck takes a line right through the net. If it goes over the net, the netting doesn't make a quick pop like that. When you see the ice level view from the blue line, it absolutely went right under the cross bar and through the back. A very anti-climatic way to end the game and a tough way for Air Force to lose, but it was the right call. As for the rest of the tourney, wow. Bemidji destroyed Notre Dame. Here's the deal, folks... at least Michigan was competitive in their game against Air Force. They pretty much skated circles around the Falcons and did everything but put the puck in the net. Notre Dame, on the other hand, lost 5-1 and did none of the above (well, except they got one goal when they were down 4-0). Even crazier, the Frozen Four as it stands right now: #3 Vermont #4 Miami #1 Boston U. or #3 New Hampshire #3 Cornell or #4 Bemidji Three of the four teams, and possibly all four, are going to be #3 seeds or lower. Never would have imagined that!

Clarence Beeks

March 29th, 2009 at 1:22 AM ^

I'm actually not so sure that it was the right call. No one on the ice thought it went in. Not any of the players of the officials. Couple that with the fact that replay wasn't completely conclusive (the frame rate was too slow to actually show the puck go over the line and through the net) and no hole in the net, and I really believe the right outcome would have been for it to have been no goal. Another thing to consider is that while the back of the net did in fact move, take a look at the replay and watch the water bottle on top of the net. It never moves. At all. Now obviously this isn't conclusive, but when you're using completely circumstantial evidence to call it a goal, that's just something else that needs to be considered. Now that said, I don't have any doubt that it did in fact go over the goal line, into the goal, and through the net (mainly because of the fact that (1) the net moved (although I wouldn't call it a "pop", (2) the on-ice angle showed it going in, (3) the overhead showed it going through the net, and (4) the angle that the puck hit the boards and rebounded off of the boards could only happen if the puck went through the net), but it seems like a cheap way to end a game when you couple all of those factors together. I guess basically my point is that when you have all those factors and it takes 30 minutes to review, it's not conclusive and should not be a goal, let alone a goal that ends a game and a team's season.

Clarence Beeks

March 29th, 2009 at 12:47 PM ^

I don't agree with this. The kid that shot it never raised his arms. As for the fact that the fans behind the net thought it went in, that's not really relevant because how many times have you seen fans react thinking that a puck went in when it didn't. Additionally, the fans behind the boards on that side of the net aren't on the ice, which is what I said.