Gophs @ Irish 2/12 - 2/13

[streakygopher]

Gophers came on a little late in period

[thinkbui]

McManus 1-0.

[thinkbui]

Burke 2-0.

[thinkbui]

McLaughlin 3-0.

Offsides.

[The Rube]

That was a horrible overturn. From what I heard on radio, it was not conclusive.

[ddillon22]

Radio was wrong. No need for Stucker to be that close.

[Snowcool08]

That was a horrible overturn. From what I heard on radio, it was not conclusive.

TV has all the looks you could imagine. It definitely looks offside. The problem is they had 50 seconds between the missed call and the goal. There has to be some time limit on that. Yeah

[streakygopher]

Lame call but what is a defenseman doing getting ahead of the puck when he has literally 2 or three feet to skate? Dumb play by Stucker.

[Snowcool08]

Oh wow. After that penalty call (not a penalty again) but a Gopher player chirped “Hey you want the stretcher again?”

[streakygopher]

Was that even a penalty? Looked like two guys going for a puck

[Beauner]

Hard to say it was conclusive because the one view where Stucker's skate was off the ice the back of the puck was at the edge of the line. Literally millimeters apart.
The thing that drives me nuts? That was 60 seconds before the goal occurred and was a millimeter or two away. On the other side of the ice from the puck. How does that impact the play?

[F Da Sue]

God I can’t wait for artificial intelligence to replace humans in reffing and umpiring.

[thinkbui]

End of 2, Gophs up 2-0.

[theriot]

If it takes that long to determine it was offsides, they should just stick with the original call on the ice.

[streakygopher]

Too close to reverse in my view. MN dominated that period. Somebody greased their wheels at intermission. All four lines clicked in the second.

Need another effort like that in the third.

[gopheritall]

The goal challenge based on off sides is the worst rule in hockey. I hate it regardless of who does the challenge.

If linemens can't call offisdes then replace them with ones that can.

[streakygopher]

The goal challenge based on off sides is the worst rule in hockey. I hate it regardless of who does the challenge.

If linemens can't call offisdes then replace them with ones that can.

In fairness they just checked that over for 5 minutes, splitting seconds and millimeters frame by frame. No linesman could be blamed for calling that either way.

[trixR4kids]

Refs might want to look up the word indisputable in the dictionary.

[Steve MN]

Hard to say it was conclusive because the one view where Stucker's skate was off the ice the back of the puck was at the edge of the line. Literally millimeters apart.
The thing that drives me nuts? That was 60 seconds before the goal occurred and was a millimeter or two away. On the other side of the ice from the puck. How does that impact the play?

This is my complaint. They had to add over a full minute back to the clock. That's just ridiculous. If the Gopher player had been in deep, ok, maybe? But, his back skate was less than an inch from the blue-line.
If they called that offside right away, sure, no big deal. But to have to add 69 seconds or whatever back on the clock? That's insane. And, they took SO long looking at the replay, while it was probably the right call in the end, the rule is silly. Anything more than 15-20 seconds or so after the "offside" shouldn't be reviewable.

[Rau4SkiUMah]

Is it just me or has neither team's PP looked that impressive tonight?

[Steve MN]

The Gophers looked pretty good on the PP leading in to the non-goal, but other than that, neither has been very good.

[thinkbui]

Ranta 3-0.

[00xtremeninja]

Sampo had himself a damn fine game tonight, good to see

[Bigbeer]

This weekend has gone swimmingly

[Rau4SkiUMah]

Gotta love Jaxon Nelson

[thinkbui]

Game over, Gophs win 3-0.

[Bigbeer]

A 10 min misconduct for that seems like a bit much

[Steve MN]

A 10 min misconduct for that seems like a bit much

Depends on if it's a Game Misconduct, or just Misconduct. The former can lead to suspensions, the latter is just a "calm the down"

[JDUBBS1280]

Great rebound weekend!! Now, hopefully the games next weekend can be played.

[frozen4champs]

Bob on radio--
Outstanding last 2 periods
Said it was a bad offsides by Stucker. Can't do that
Thought Perbix line was outstanding
Faber was a beast this weekend

[Steve MN]

I agree that the call on the offside was correct, given the rules. I just think it's stupid that the rules allow you to go back and look at something that happened more than a full minute before the goal is scored, that had no actual impact on the play, and have that disallow the goal.

[Steve MN]

Laffer the 1st Gopher Goalie with Back-to-back road shutouts. Only the 3rd time for the team, but in 1929 and 1995, it was two different goalies.

[frozen4champs]

Where are all the nay sayers this week?

[Cowgirl]

That. Was. Fun!!

Agreed that the offsides review wasn’t conclusive enough to overturn; the view right behind Stucker did show his skate off the ice, but the puck was also partly over the line at that point.

Oh well. Thankfully it didn’t matter in the end, just feel bad McLaughlin couldn’t keep the streak going.

Now let’s keep this energy going into next weekend. First place is once again ours to lose.

[Steve MN]

Agreed. Same with Nelson's faux-Major last night, it didn't change the result, so, I'm going to move on (still hate the rule).
Gophers are back in control of their destiny. If they keep playing like this, they'll be fine, but can't let off the accelerator.

[Cowgirl]

Agreed. Same with Nelson's faux-Major last night, it didn't change the result, so, I'm going to move on (still hate the rule).
Gophers are back in control of their destiny. If they keep playing like this, they'll be fine, but can't let off the accelerator.

I agree with your above comment however - there should be a time limit on offsides to be challenged in regards to its impact on a reviewed goal. Especially when it clearly has zero impact on the goal. I know there needs to be a clear definition for rule book purposes, but if it’s that close it takes five minutes to look at and the play went on for a minute in the zone...

[JoeGopher]

The off-sides was off-side. The view behind Stucker showed he was off and the puck wasn't entirely in the zone yet. Is it a bush-league call by Jackson knowing full well it didn't impact the goal? Absolutely. Should the rule exist where it's possible? Hell no. Maybe something that's reviewable when there's 5:00 to go in the game or something like that, but still ridiculous.

Boys looked good this weekend and definitely recovered from last weekend's debacle. While they should go 4-0 over the next two weekends, I am still concerned about the Michigan series. Could determine the B10 champ, especially if they beat Becky tomorrow.

[streakygopher]

Bob and company passed this week's test. Team was committed to defense all weekend. I hope they figure out this is how they're going to win big games.

It seems like when they shut down the other team their offense gets a lift. That's what happened in tonight's game, and even last night they could have had 2 or 3 more goals if they had a bounce or two. Commit to defense first and good things will follow.

Many players did well tonight, but I thought Lacombe was exceptional and I would applaud the Munson line too...but like I said not too many stinkers tonight.

[thinkbui]

It did seem like Notre Dame got more of the benefit of the doubt this weekend, so that whole offsides call was pretty irritating.

It did look like the puck was still touching the blue line after Stucker had already dragged his skate into the zone on that one camera angle closest to him, but it's really hard to fault him given how close it was. Assuming the camera was filming 30 frames per second, we're talking about him being only about 33 milliseconds ahead of the play, probably less.

[JWG]

See, team is not as bad as last weekend.

[upnorthkid]

Good sweep. Hopefully we get done help from Michigan again tomorrow.
Wisconsin has ND OSU and mich st to finish
Michigan has OSU Mich St and us
Minnesota Mich st PSU Mich.
would be nice to have a 5 point buffer going into that stretch

[thinkbui]

TV was a lot better than last night, but with the conference postseason being held in this building, I sure hope NBC Sports doesn't hold any of the games hostage as I'd much rather have Dan Kelly call the whole thing.

[Slap Shot]

TV was a lot better than last night, but with the conference postseason being held in this building, I sure hope NBC Sports doesn't hold any of the games hostage as I'd much rather have Dan Kelly call the whole thing.

I doubt NBC has any say on the matter of televising the postseason?

[thinkbui]

TV was a lot better than last night, but with the conference postseason being held in this building, I sure hope NBC Sports doesn't hold any of the games hostage as I'd much rather have Dan Kelly call the whole thing.

I doubt NBC has any say on the matter of televising the postseason.

Depends on the contract. They might technically have the rights to all games that involve the Irish in the tournament even if Notre Dame isn't the home team.

Presumably that was figured out when Compton was picked to host the whole tournament, but given how unusual this season has been, can't make that assumption.

[Steve MN]

I'm nearly certain that the conference has the contract for the tournament games. They'll all be on BTN

[JDUBBS1280]

TV was a lot better than last night, but with the conference postseason being held in this building, I sure hope NBC Sports doesn't hold any of the games hostage as I'd much rather have Dan Kelly call the whole thing.

I doubt NBC has any say on the matter of televising the postseason?

I certainly hope not

[Kelly Red]

Is there any video of the goal called off? Frank and Wally were carrying on like kids describing it. “Genuflecting” while scoring seemed appropriate at a Catholic college

[DreamLoss]

Is there any video of the goal called off? Frank and Wally were carrying on like kids describing it. “Genuflecting” while scoring seemed appropriate at a Catholic college

The full game can still be streamed on NBCSports.com and McLaughlin's disallowed goal is at minute 58:13 of the stream.

Here is a link to the stream: http://stream.nbcsports.com/nbc/?pid=2011461

[ZCar Guy]

My take is that offside's should not be re viewable. Something we will never know is how many offside's have been called (wrong) stopping the play that could have turned into goals. That being said did anyone catch how far ND was offside's in Fridays game when they got the chance from the bad bounce off the glass early in the game? (not called) Happened right in front of our bench maybe we would have called for a review if they had scored.

[Sioux/Bucky Hater]

Agreed. Same with Nelson's faux-Major last night, it didn't change the result, so, I'm going to move on (still hate the rule).
Gophers are back in control of their destiny. If they keep playing like this, they'll be fine, but can't let off the accelerator.

I agree with your above comment however - there should be a time limit on offsides to be challenged in regards to its impact on a reviewed goal. Especially when it clearly has zero impact on the goal. I know there needs to be a clear definition for rule book purposes, but if it’s that close it takes five minutes to look at and the play went on for a minute in the zone...

While one can argue the offsides didn't have anything to do with the goal, my argument would be that it did. The puck entered the zone illegally and never left the zone until the goal. Whether it was on the initial rush or 69 seconds later, it affected the play.

[Norm]

Agreed. Same with Nelson's faux-Major last night, it didn't change the result, so, I'm going to move on (still hate the rule).
Gophers are back in control of their destiny. If they keep playing like this, they'll be fine, but can't let off the accelerator.

I agree with your above comment however - there should be a time limit on offsides to be challenged in regards to its impact on a reviewed goal. Especially when it clearly has zero impact on the goal. I know there needs to be a clear definition for rule book purposes, but if it’s that close it takes five minutes to look at and the play went on for a minute in the zone...

While one can argue the offsides didn't have anything to do with the goal, my argument would be that it did. The puck entered the zone illegally and never left the zone until the goal. Whether it was on the initial rush or 69 seconds later, it affected the play.

For the sake of argument, suppose the puck came into the zone offside, then stayed in the zone 19.9 minutes before the offensive team scored. Do you think they should replay the whole period?

[Cowgirl]

Agreed. Same with Nelson's faux-Major last night, it didn't change the result, so, I'm going to move on (still hate the rule).
Gophers are back in control of their destiny. If they keep playing like this, they'll be fine, but can't let off the accelerator.

I agree with your above comment however - there should be a time limit on offsides to be challenged in regards to its impact on a reviewed goal. Especially when it clearly has zero impact on the goal. I know there needs to be a clear definition for rule book purposes, but if it’s that close it takes five minutes to look at and the play went on for a minute in the zone...

While one can argue the offsides didn't have anything to do with the goal, my argument would be that it did. The puck entered the zone illegally and never left the zone until the goal. Whether it was on the initial rush or 69 seconds later, it affected the play.

For the sake of argument, suppose the puck came into the zone offside, then stayed in the zone 19.9 minutes before the offensive team scored. Do you think they should replay the whole period?

If that ever happens......kudos to the team who kept it in for a period...but offsides should have an expiration date. 10 seconds seems legit to me.

[JWG]

If the offsides is not directly responsible for a goal, meaning either a shot/save occurs or the opposing team touches the puck then no reversal should be allowed.

[D2D]

If the offsides is not directly responsible for a goal, meaning either a shot/save occurs or the opposing team touches the puck then no reversal should be allowed.

That seems too logical to ever be adopted.

[Sioux/Bucky Hater]

Agreed. Same with Nelson's faux-Major last night, it didn't change the result, so, I'm going to move on (still hate the rule).
Gophers are back in control of their destiny. If they keep playing like this, they'll be fine, but can't let off the accelerator.

I agree with your above comment however - there should be a time limit on offsides to be challenged in regards to its impact on a reviewed goal. Especially when it clearly has zero impact on the goal. I know there needs to be a clear definition for rule book purposes, but if it’s that close it takes five minutes to look at and the play went on for a minute in the zone...

While one can argue the offsides didn't have anything to do with the goal, my argument would be that it did. The puck entered the zone illegally and never left the zone until the goal. Whether it was on the initial rush or 69 seconds later, it affected the play.

For the sake of argument, suppose the puck came into the zone offside, then stayed in the zone 19.9 minutes before the offensive team scored. Do you think they should replay the whole period?

Yup

Unless the rule is changed.

[The Rube]

I agree that the call on the offside was correct, given the rules. I just think it's stupid that the rules allow you to go back and look at something that happened more than a full minute before the goal is scored, that had no actual impact on the play, and have that disallow the goal.

Didn't read the rest of the comments after this, but they have to wait until a stoppage of play. It's a quirk in the rules. It happened in the BC/MN playoff game years ago.

[Bladepuller]

So then:
An off sides happened but didn't get called.
There was a delayed penalty called, obviously only in this scenario, on the defending team. Let's even same in review it would become a 5 min major.
The attacking team scores before a stoppage, other than the goal.
There is a review and O.S. is determined.

Then the goal is erased, the clock is reset to approx time the OS occured, but what happens to the penalty called?

[Composer]

I agree that the call on the offside was correct, given the rules. I just think it's stupid that the rules allow you to go back and look at something that happened more than a full minute before the goal is scored, that had no actual impact on the play, and have that disallow the goal.

Didn't read the rest of the comments after this, but they have to wait until a stoppage of play. It's a quirk in the rules. It happened in the BC/MN playoff game years ago.

That wasn’t an offsides. The Gophers scored, but not recognized. Play went on for around 5 minutes, when BC scored. They reviewed the Gophers play and called it a goal. That pulled the BC goal off the scoreboard and put the 5 minutes back on the clock. (I happened to be at that game)

[Steve MN]

So then:
An off sides happened but didn't get called.
There was a delayed penalty called, obviously only in this scenario, on the defending team. Let's even same in review it would become a 5 min major.
The attacking team scores before a stoppage, other than the goal.
There is a review and O.S. is determined.

Then the goal is erased, the clock is reset to approx time the OS occured, but what happens to the penalty called?

The penalty does get called, goes on the box score as the time of the adjusted clock after the OS is applied. A variant of that came up at the Final 5 against SCSU the one year, where a Huskie goal went right through the twine, and the Gophers got called for a penalty before they went back to review it. Penalty stood, even though the clock was re-wound to before the goal.

[Bladepuller]

So then:
An off sides happened but didn't get called.
There was a delayed penalty called, obviously only in this scenario, on the defending team. Let's even same in review it would become a 5 min major.
The attacking team scores before a stoppage, other than the goal.
There is a review and O.S. is determined.

Then the goal is erased, the clock is reset to approx time the OS occured, but what happens to the penalty called?

The penalty does get called, goes on the box score as the time of the adjusted clock after the OS is applied.

I intuited this as the result and also that you would be a definitive source. Thanks.
It also strikes me as disingenuous that some things " didn't happen" but some things, I.E. a penalty did.
Just one of those many things that leave me puzzled.

[Steve MN]

Don't know that I'd call myself a definitive source. But yes, these are the weird questions that come up when you have rules that allow you to rewind the clock on a game.

[gopheritall]

The goal challenge based on off sides is the worst rule in hockey. I hate it regardless of who does the challenge.

If linemens can't call offisdes then replace them with ones that can.

In fairness they just checked that over for 5 minutes, splitting seconds and millimeters frame by frame. No linesman could be blamed for calling that either way.

I agree about a linesman calling either way in this one.

My point is that it didn't impact play and this rule is the worst rule in hockey.

[Bertogliat]

So then:
An off sides happened but didn't get called.
There was a delayed penalty called, obviously only in this scenario, on the defending team. Let's even same in review it would become a 5 min major.
The attacking team scores before a stoppage, other than the goal.
There is a review and O.S. is determined.

Then the goal is erased, the clock is reset to approx time the OS occured, but what happens to the penalty called?

The penalty does get called, goes on the box score as the time of the adjusted clock after the OS is applied. A variant of that came up at the Final 5 against SCSU the one year, where a Huskie goal went right through the twine, and the Gophers got called for a penalty before they went back to review it. Penalty stood, even though the clock was re-wound to before the goal.

I was at the game against the Huskies sitting with a Husky fan buddy. The play went on for so long that we started receiving texts from people watching TV before a whistle blew that the Huskies had scored.

Those were the days of the Dog Pound and I think I sat near 3 Husky fans wearing “69” jerseys.

[Steve MN]

The goal challenge based on off sides is the worst rule in hockey. I hate it regardless of who does the challenge.

If linemens can't call offisdes then replace them with ones that can.

In fairness they just checked that over for 5 minutes, splitting seconds and millimeters frame by frame. No linesman could be blamed for calling that either way.

I agree about a linesman calling either way in this one.

My point is that it didn't impact play and this rule is the worst rule in hockey.

If you have to rewind the clock more than 15-20 seconds, or take more than 2 minutes to look at the review to make a decision, the call just needs to stand and you move on.

[Sioux/Bucky Hater]

The goal challenge based on off sides is the worst rule in hockey. I hate it regardless of who does the challenge.

If linemens can't call offisdes then replace them with ones that can.

In fairness they just checked that over for 5 minutes, splitting seconds and millimeters frame by frame. No linesman could be blamed for calling that either way.

I agree about a linesman calling either way in this one.

My point is that it didn't impact play and this rule is the worst rule in hockey.

If you have to rewind the clock more than 15-20 seconds, or take more than 2 minutes to look at the review to make a decision, the call just needs to stand and you move on.

Even if it's wrong? You don't agree with replay, I take it. Would you say the same thing if your proposal costs the Gophers a National Championship? Hockey is played at an incredible pace over a large area. Offsides, in last night's game, was a fraction of a second over 75 feet away from the only two eyes in the building that make the call. In other instances, there may be 1, 2, 3... other skaters in the linesman's line of sight. Replay is to help insure the correct call. It is not perfect, but it's better than not having it. Does it go on too long sometimes, sure. Does it take momentum away from a particular team in some cases, sure. When a single play can have such a huge impact on a game, tournament, season, and even a coaching job, it's best to make it right, regardless of the flow of the game.

[Cowgirl]

I think the point was more that if they are taking an excessive amount of time to review something and they can’t decide - meaning it really could go either way based on the information available - that means there is not incontrovertible evidence and you stick with the original call.

I could be wrong.

[upnorthkid]

The goal challenge based on off sides is the worst rule in hockey. I hate it regardless of who does the challenge.

If linemens can't call offisdes then replace them with ones that can.

In fairness they just checked that over for 5 minutes, splitting seconds and millimeters frame by frame. No linesman could be blamed for calling that either way.

I agree about a linesman calling either way in this one.

My point is that it didn't impact play and this rule is the worst rule in hockey.

If you have to rewind the clock more than 15-20 seconds, or take more than 2 minutes to look at the review to make a decision, the call just needs to stand and you move on.

This is my same nit pick about review. If have to replay it 40 times and try to split pixels to make the call taking 5-10 minutes to review it, stay with the call on the ice (or field as football is also notorious for this). Replay should be there for egregious errors, not the tiny fractions we’re trying to use it for now

[Bladepuller]

This ^^^^^^^

[gopherguy13]

The goal challenge based on off sides is the worst rule in hockey. I hate it regardless of who does the challenge.

If linemens can't call offisdes then replace them with ones that can.

In fairness they just checked that over for 5 minutes, splitting seconds and millimeters frame by frame. No linesman could be blamed for calling that either way.

I agree about a linesman calling either way in this one.

My point is that it didn't impact play and this rule is the worst rule in hockey.

If you have to rewind the clock more than 15-20 seconds, or take more than 2 minutes to look at the review to make a decision, the call just needs to stand and you move on.

This is my same nit pick about review. If have to replay it 40 times and try to split pixels to make the call taking 5-10 minutes to review it, stay with the call on the ice (or field as football is also notorious for this). Replay should be there for egregious errors, not the tiny fractions we’re trying to use it for now

Spot on. That's long been my opinion on instant replay. The refs should get to watch it again twice, at full speed.

If you can't CLEARLY see in two more full speed viewings that the call was obviously blown, stick with the call on the ice and move on.

[JDUBBS1280]

The goal challenge based on off sides is the worst rule in hockey. I hate it regardless of who does the challenge.

If linemens can't call offisdes then replace them with ones that can.

In fairness they just checked that over for 5 minutes, splitting seconds and millimeters frame by frame. No linesman could be blamed for calling that either way.

I agree about a linesman calling either way in this one.

My point is that it didn't impact play and this rule is the worst rule in hockey.

If you have to rewind the clock more than 15-20 seconds, or take more than 2 minutes to look at the review to make a decision, the call just needs to stand and you move on.

This is my same nit pick about review. If have to replay it 40 times and try to split pixels to make the call taking 5-10 minutes to review it, stay with the call on the ice (or field as football is also notorious for this). Replay should be there for egregious errors, not the tiny fractions we’re trying to use it for now

Exactly!

[streakygopher]

All this discussion could have been avoided if Stucker, who needed to pull up on the blue line anyway, had just waited. Really dumb play on his part.

[frozen4champs]

I have always hated the off side challenges. There are 2 linesmen that one of the main duties is to get that right in real time. Human error happens, so if they miss it by 4 inches, so be it. Even though I think they got it right last night, the time that it took was way to long, and it disrupted the flow of the game.

[JDUBBS1280]

All this discussion could have been avoided if Stucker, who needed to pull up on the blue line anyway, had just waited. Really dumb play on his part.

Agreed, but I do agree that the review rules need to be revamped. Reviewing a player offsides by perhaps millimeters a minute before the goal was scored feels very petty and outside the spirit of why replay was implemented. I agree with those saying it should be limited to the obvious miss calls. It should never take 5 minutes to review an offsides.

[Slap Shot]

Good luck adding in an arbitrary limitation that a call be defined as obvious in order to be reviewed. Never mind how many 'clearly obvious' calls do they get wrong in real time vs. those with a smaller margin of error?

[JDUBBS1280]

Good luck adding in an arbitrary limitation that a call be defined as obvious in order to be reviewed. Never mind how many 'clearly obvious' calls do they get wrong in real time vs. those with a smaller margin of error?

I don’t think you need to do that. Just add a time limit on the time a play can be reviewed. If you can’t determine if it should be overruled in that time, the call or no-call on the ice stands. They shouldn’t be spending 5 minutes to go frame-by-frame to determine if a player was offsides or not offsides by millimeters.