Member for

8 years 10 months
Points
8.00

Recent Comments

Date Title Body
04/11/2011 - 12:37pm Okay

So you agree with the call but disagree with the rule. I can see that to a point, but...

The rule exists because human beings are not physically capable of both making a decision and vocalizing it simultaneously.  It's impossible.  Your expectation seems to be that the on ice officials should somehow be able to do something impossible. 

What's the appropriate length of time for the whistle to be blown?  I'm not sure exactly, but a couple seconds seems rational.

Let's take the argument to the logical next step though.  Let's say the ref gets run over by a player while trying to blow his whistle.  Let's say he has to catch his breath for a moment.  Let's say he has a brief cough and then blows it.  Are you saying play should continue in all of these scenarios when the ref has determined the play should be over?

 

04/11/2011 - 12:30pm no

In the NFL, if the player is ruled down by contact on the field, the play is over, done, finished.  If the ball pops out and replays show it popping out before his knee touched down, it doesn't matter.  Some calls in the NFL are unreviewable and mostly it's when a play is ruled on the field as being over, because you don't know what the ensuing action could have been.

In this case, in fact, the officials did review the replay and confirmed that the puck was covered by the goalie (which was the moment of the intent to blow and the end of the play). 

No official in any sport can simultaneously make a decision and make it audible.  It's impossible, our bodies don't work that way, and in fact officials in many sports (I'm a high school baseball umpire) are trained to actually pause a moment before making a call so as to allow your mind a moment to digest what it saw and so that your actions are deliberate.

It was the right call and the rule makes sense.

04/11/2011 - 10:13am First of all, the rule is the

First of all, the rule is the rule as you indicated.  The officials can't make up or ignore rules on the ice, so at worst the rule book screwed Michigan, not the officials.  I still don't believe that's the case because....

Second, the hockey rule is actually very consistent with other sports. Examples:

In the NFL, if there's a pile up and the ball pops out a moment before the whistle is blown, it is not a fumble.  The whistle is merely the signal to players that the referee has determined play has ended.  The play stops when the official determines that the runner was down by contact, not when that determination was signaled by the whistle blowing. 

In baseball, if there's a borderline infield fly rule situation and the umpire waits until the ball is either caught by an infielder or even is dropped to make the infield fly rule call, the result is the same and the batter is out. 

The point is that it's not the timing of the call that matters, but the referee's judgment that the play is over.  It was the right call and Michigan fans (who I 've generally found to be classy people) do their reputations a disservice by whining about it. 

04/11/2011 - 10:05am As I posted elsewhere, when a

As I posted elsewhere, when a team is getting outworked on the boards, they usually draw more penalties. Sometimes those penalties are the right calls and sometimes not, but when you're chasing the play from behind (due to getting outworked) you get called for more penalties.  In hockey, you make your own breaks.

04/11/2011 - 1:33am This.

This.

04/11/2011 - 1:32am integrity

So you're directly questioning the integrity of the official? Dude, read your own sig line (the part about no excuses). 

I watched the slow-mo replay on this site.  The only thing I can tell is that the puck was covered and stopped and the ref waves off the goal after it went in.  I saw the whistle in his mouth but couldn't tell when exactly it blew. 

So, if we go by the sound of the whistle and the ref has a cold and has a cough when he starts trying to blow the whistle and little/no sound comes out, does that mean the play is still live?  Just taking your argument to the next level here.

Lastly, Michigan took a lot of penalties in both games of the Frozen Four.  That's a fact.  They were able to dodge a bullet in the North Dakota game through outstanding defensive play.  In the UMD game, once again they had outstanding play on the PK and a very good game by Hunwick.  But they lost a lot of battles for the puck.  If they weren't deep enough to have fresh legs on the ice after killing the penalties, that's the maize and blue's problem.

04/11/2011 - 1:24am Neither, but I'm a

Neither, but I'm a knowledgeable long-time college hockey fan who rooted for Duluth last night because they're from my home state.  FWIW, I cheered for Michigan on Thursday.

The officiating wasn't perfect last night but I've seen a lot worse (including from some CCHA and WCHA crews).

Michigan had some nice chances on rushes but got outworked in the corners and behind the net all night.  Getting outworked leads to penalties (sometimes legit and sometimes bad calls) because it means you're trailing the play.  That's why they say you make your own breaks in hockey. 

04/11/2011 - 12:59am ah yes

Of course, a grand conspiracy to STEAL, I do say STEAL, a national title that the Wolverines had the right to just HAVE.  After all, they won their semi-final game against the vaunted Sioux.

There are quick whistles and slow whistles in hockey...at every level.  This might have been considered a quick whistle, but for the fact that if you watch the replay, UMD's Reiter had the puck stopped and covered by his pad.  At that point, play is stopped if the referee determines the goalie has covered the puck.  Doesn't matter if the whistle actually sounded before or after the final shot or before or after the puck goes in, much less whether the wave off signal comes before or after.  (And I have yet to see a replay that has fine enough audio to actually tell about the whistle).

As for covering the puck, it's the rule, but I guess when you take so many penalties in the frozen four, you start not liking the rules, huh?

And enough whining about the penalties.  Sure, there were a lot of them called for a title game and a few questionable ones BOTH ways, but Michigan did what it needed to do and killed most of them off.  The maize and blue lost that game because UMD was quicker through the neutral zone and in offensive zone entry and outworked them on the boards for long stretches.

08/08/2009 - 12:37am Vikings stadium

Target Field is actually the new home of the Twins next spring.

The Vikings will remain in the Metrodome through 2011 when their lease expires. Either they'll move to CA at that point or (more likely) they'll get their stadium when the economy turns around and may have to lease the dome for a couple extra years. The Vikings stadium plan du jour (there have been several) calls for a new stadium on the dome site so their only option would be to play on campus for a couple years while the dome is being torn down and the new stadium is built.

08/07/2009 - 3:00pm What????

Who dogged your fan base? I said you guys were the classiest fans in the big ten. Was that an insult?

Yes, I said that the big house was the quietest 100k+ people I've been around. That was simply true and something I've heard from a lot of people who have been to games there. It's largely a function of having a single shallow bowl for a stadium. Michigan stadium is intimidating to play in, but not because of crowd noise. It's because it is so damn big and so rich with history.

08/07/2009 - 2:40pm nfl vs college

A couple comments popped up here about it looking more like an NFL stadium than college. Let me tell you that the stadium has a distinctly college feel. The brick exterior and colonnade around the stadium are reminiscent of Memorial Stadium on campus and the open end is a distinctly college stadium attribute.

There are, however, amenities that not many college stadiums can boast: the giant video board, the incredible suites, the club room, the biggest locker room in college or pro football, etc. But those are things that are only going to help garner more donor support and boost recruiting in both the short- and long-term.

08/07/2009 - 2:34pm BlueBulls

The University did a sound study on how best to contain noise inside the stadium as part of the design process. It's about as steep as it can be given modern building codes (max rise for the steps) and the desire to keep sight lines clear of pillars and the like. The pictures might not give you the feel of being at the stadium but it "feels" like it's much bigger than 50k.

As for the other poster saying Michigan fans would be making most of the noise...good luck. Season ticket sellouts in our admittedly small-capacity stadium will keep most of you out. More importantly it will keep us from having 15,000 Badger or Hawkeye fans in the stadium annually.

Lastly, I really do like Michigan fans in general. The game I went to a few years back(2005-the Gary Russell run to set up the game winning FG) made it clear to me that Michigan fans are by and large the classiest in the big ten. I do find it very disappointing that there are people on the board bashing (profanely for some reason) what is going to be a huge boost to the Gopher football program and something that will actually be very good for the conference. If those posters were as secure in their Michigan supremacy as they probably should be, they shouldn't have any reason to bash on the Gopher program.

08/07/2009 - 10:34am you guys are funny

to make fun of the size. Sure, it's small compared to Michigan Stadium, but I guarantee it will be louder. The "big house" is the quietest 100,000+ people I've ever been around.