SSP Wins

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Sun Feb 26, 2006 10:24 pm

My guess is that somewhere along the line, she picked up the tip that wrapping to the far side is sometimes better - especially when the goalie is already on the near-post side as that's where the play originated?

Nostalgic Nerd · Post by **Nostalgic Nerd** » Mon Feb 27, 2006 12:40 am

I'm just saying her wrap around had such reach and speed because she wasn't exactly right next to the goalie from my vantage point. "Dream as if you'll live forever; Live as if you'll die today." --James Dean

Swoops26 · Post by **Swoops26** » Mon Feb 27, 2006 5:49 am

Thats it mngal, dont give up now. You are oh so close to the truth. You said it was a bang bang play. Now if you could just tell us all which bang was first it will set you free!

mnhockeygal · Post by **mnhockeygal** » Mon Feb 27, 2006 7:18 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Thats it mngal, dont give up now. You are oh so close to the truth. You said it was a bang bang play. Now if you could just tell us all which bang was first it will set you free! <hr></blockquote> I mistyped in my last post. This was a bang-bange play. Clearly. Also clearly, the whistle comes a split second before Jonnie bangs in the goal. Let me repeat that, yes, clearly whistle is prior. It is beyond laughable to say it was 2 seconds prior. I have seen the play more than 10 times now and its a very split second whistle, and I will submit that its so close that the puck is actually crossing the goal line within the length of the actual whistle. Thats a moot point however, as again, its after the whistle. My point is twofold. First and foremost this crap that it was 2 seconds and thus caused the D to stop is utter nonsense. The whistle affected nothing in that regard. Had it been as described and even a full second, then yes an argument could be made that players stopped and it may have affected the outcome of the goal being scored. However, this play it had ZERO impact. Secondly, the major point is this - people are acting like SSP got a bad goal handed to them that they didnt earn and they stole the game from Warroad. This is also crap. I agree the officiating below it on this, however, what should be being disussed is that a tragedy was avoided and SSP wasnt hosed out of a legit. hard fought game tying goal. I am sorry, but I am not going to be upset that SSP DIDNT get hosed. No one can argue there shouldnt have been a whistle in the first place.

SectionFan · Post by **SectionFan** » Mon Feb 27, 2006 7:54 am

No more spinning this one - please ! Whistle had blown, play is dead. SSP now gets the "Tainted Title", no matter how you would like to spin it. Don't celebrate too loudly...... not over this fiasco. Put the asterik by the SSP name and then close the books.

Swoops26 · Post by **Swoops26** » Mon Feb 27, 2006 7:58 am

No, the point is you should be arguing right now that the whistle shoudnt have been blown. ssp was given a bad goal.You must have been to hockey games that had quick whistles around the net. It happens quite often. You know, a play where the puck got poked out to suzy right infront of the net and she "would have" scored. The 'amount' of time after the whistle has nothing to do with it.Just like if someone takes a shot and the clock runs out before it crosses the line.Doesnt matter if its 6 inches or 6 feet away. You cant just say "awww that was so close we should just give them the goal" thats pretty much what happened. The ref lost sight of the puck and blew the whistle. Of all the bad calls that were made, that was actually one of the more legitimately acceptable ones

Nostalgic Nerd · Post by **Nostalgic Nerd** » Mon Feb 27, 2006 7:20 pm

I think the question is can the same referee overrule their own whistle/call in a tournament? And seperately, are tournament rules different than sectional or regular season games where a camera replay is not available? (See the Stillwater/EP game where the replay crew disallowed one on the hand pass.) "Dream as if you'll live forever; Live as if you'll die today." --James Dean

Nostalgic Nerd · Post by **Nostalgic Nerd** » Mon Feb 27, 2006 7:26 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Whistle had blown, play is dead. SSP now gets the "Tainted Title", no matter how you would like to spin it.<hr></blockquote> Or Warroad gets the tainted title on a 2-1 win which should have been 2-2 because the ref blew the whistle early. "Dream as if you'll live forever; Live as if you'll die today." --James Dean

mnpokecheck · Post by **mnpokecheck** » Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:25 pm

Interesting spin - it's not ok for ref to whistle puck dead if loses sight of puck, but ok to say did not blow whistle?

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 1:03 am

I knew this was trouble either way. It was only a question of who would feel shafted and who wouldn't. Had the goal been disalowed, this discussion would be the same, but the upset parties just reversed. I give the Warroad team and coaches a lot of credit as they are a classy bunch. I'm not certain that I could have shown that level of restraint after all the controversy and what transpired. Of course, it would have kept me under control to know all of this was on TV, but my first inclination would have been to have been pretty upset! I'm not saying that it should or shouldn't have been a goal - although we could forever argue it both ways - If the "whistle" was premature and the goal disalowed as a result, SSP would be furious. The way it went, Warroad is upset - and understandably so as it is controversial - I agree. One thing that was raised in this discussion is how was the video replay used, and how could it be changed to be better moving forward? I've heard that there were multiple loud "whistle like" sounds prior to the goal being scored (may be some screaming, then an actual whistle, then the puck being hit in, then the signal of a goal, then the drama we have today! Is this like the NFL where you need totaly solid (without a doubt) evidence that shoudl overturn a play, and was the concern that the "whistle" and "goal" were so close that they didn't feel they could overturn the "ruling on the ice" which was the "goal?" Edited by: <A HREF=http://p100.ezboard.com/bmnhs.showUserP ... ckeyfan</A> at: 2/28/06 1:04 am

SectionFan · Post by **SectionFan** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 11:54 am

I think that the issue central to this whole topic is that the ref made two calls on the same play. Call #1 - Play is dead as I blew the whistle. Call #2 - Play is dead as i blew the whistle but I will still call it a goal. The rules are the rules. If not, what would happen if there was a blatent off-side and the team with the puck scores? Do we then say, oops, should have blown the whistle and then disallow the goal? Premature or not, the whistle had clearly blown (I am sure that she remembered doing that) and then the same ref that blows the whistle calls it a goal. That, is the debate. If a ref makes a call, then (in this case) she needs to stick with it. She blew the whistle and she blew the call.

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 12:06 pm

Question - can a replay rule that a whistle was premature so a goal shoudl stand? No, I don't think so. My guess is what happened is that the video evidence was "inconclusive" and I haven't hard this but did they also potentially decide that they can't overturn the end ruling on the ice being a goal? Maybe had the goal signal not been made then they could have awarded the goal after the fact (meaning with just the whistle but not the signal), but I doubt they woudl have as they would have then just ruled on the whistle??? Gotta love controversy...<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/wink.gif ALT=";)">

Nostalgic Nerd · Post by **Nostalgic Nerd** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 12:52 pm

HTML Comments are not allowed "Dream as if you'll live forever; Live as if you'll die today." --James Dean

Nostalgic Nerd · Post by **Nostalgic Nerd** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 12:55 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> Interesting spin - it's not ok for ref to whistle puck dead if loses sight of puck, but ok to say did not blow whistle?<hr></blockquote> Did they say they didn't blow the whistle? I'm drawing my conclusion from the video replay which suggests the goalie had no shot at a rebound save. Had the goalie had a full 1-2 seconds after the whistle to recover, I'd probably agree with you. I guess that's just my interpretation of things. In the end it still doesn't change my happiness for SSP. I use the same analogy on the boys board about Moorhead '05 in the final. Should that deflection goal have tied the game 5-5. Yes! But the play stood and AHA won 6-4. If Moorhead were as great as they were the first 2 tournament games, they wouldn't have been in the situation in the first place. They wouldn't have been throttled by AHA's speed. Moorhead time and again were giving up either key breakaways or odd man rushes. AHA needed to capitalize on every one of their 18 shots on net and frankly made the vaunted Moorhead 'D' look suprisingly overrated. Moorhead had 41 shots on net and didn't get the job done. Coach Trebil must've said something like, 'we're gonna let them have the middle of the ice. Let them come into our zone, and when they make a mistake, we're gonna send one of our speedsters out.' And boy did they highlight Moorheads weakness. Speed kills! Mr. Hockey Brian Lee was a -3 for the game. A -3! The showcase game! They never should have been in the situation in the first place just as Warroad should have never been in the position of only being up 2-0. They were 1 for 9 on the power play. SSP elevated their game when they had to. Warroad didn't. It's the beauty of the greatest teams of all-time. '93 Jefferson made Hill-Murray look like a distant second place by beating them 4-0. They outshot them 33-13. You knew you witnessed something special. Just like EP won 6-1. They left no doubt about who was best. SSP beat Cloquest last year. They left no doubt by beating Ellison five times. And you hoped they'd do it in a convincing fashion because to me there is nothing worse then hearing about a huge team only to have them do a Moorhead last year. If Warroad were that legend the game would've been over long before. "Dream as if you'll live forever; Live as if you'll die today." --James Dean

hubbaa · Post by **hubbaa** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 12:59 pm

nerd, i agree. the game was given to warroad and they refused to take it. so it was then give to ssp and they didn't hesitate to take it. that is the difference between a true champ and something other...

dullblades · Post by **dullblades** » Wed Mar 01, 2006 2:33 pm

It sure is amusing reading through these message boards. It's almost like this is the first time some people have seen a game decided by a ref, this gal clearly lacking attention and determined to get it. What really sickened me more than anything was the complete lack of class by the SSP fans. Holding up signs like "Go back to Canada" and "Go Home Warroad". Kids learn this stuff from their parents. It appears everyone would be better off if the metro area schools that think they are better than everyone else would just hold their own tourney, complete with cake afterwards, and let the rest of the "lowly" outstate teams play in their own.

hubbaa · Post by **hubbaa** » Wed Mar 01, 2006 2:40 pm

blade, darn, you are right. the outstate teams/fans/schools would never do something as downright low as something like this...

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

SSP Wins

Re: refs

Re: refs

Re: refs

Re: refs

Enough

Re: SSP Wins

Re: SSP Wins

Re: SSP Wins

Re: SSP Wins

Re: SSP Wins

SSP

Re: SSP

Re: SSP

Re: SSP

Re: SSP

Metro area

Re: Metro area