The Real Story

[nala]

Lindenwood University beats Michigan State for the National
Title Again

[MBurke]

From CRHLnet:

Second Quarter Notes: The second quarter consisted of Lindenwood University holding the puck behind their net for the last 9 minutes of the quarter.

Third Quarter Notes: After 11:30 of no shots, no penalties, and no clock stoppage, Lindenwood got two shots off in the last thirty seconds, but MSU's Mike Mackert got the goal with 0:1:6 on the clock to bring the Spartans to within one.

I know roller hockey is all about puck control, but I know personally that I would have hated to have been in the stands to watch nearly 20 minutes straight of no shots, no offensive flow, etc. Is this a misleading review of the game?

Mike Burke
Commissioner
Eastern Collegiate Roller Hockey Association
http://www.ecrha.net

[TurtleMSU13]

Mike that is not a misleading review of the game although I wish it was. They spent the last 9 minutes of the 1st half behind their own net waiting for us to chase them but when we didn't they just stood there. The 3rd quarter was exactly like it said they didn't move the puck up at all they just waited, at first they tried to catch us off guard with Koz firing a shot from his own goal line, but that was the most action for most of that quarter. With 45 seconds left we pressed with Mackert and Hanley "Tweek" and got them to cough the puck up in the corner and that's how Mack got us to within one. With the score 3-2 we pressed with about 6:30 to go in the 4th to no luck they netted two more to close the game out. Just like last year we hit about 6 posts throughout the game.

[rollerfan]

I really don't quite understand the thinking here. If you pressed them behind the net, got the puck and scored - why didn't you continue to do that? I wasn't there (not involved) but it seems that letting them stand there and control you when you are LOSING the championship game is not good strategy. When Lindenwood romps and runs up the score, everyone says they are showboating and disrespecting the other team. When they stand there and give you a chance to make it an exciting game, now you complain that they didn't play right. Would you have rathered a 15 to 2 game. I don't think so. I respect all the teams involved, but if you want to beat Lindenwood, you'd better come up with a great game plan and press it.

[mackertm]

Lindenwood's players are not stupid. It's virtually impossible to catch someone behind the net, especially if the player behind the net is any good, which the Lindenwood players certainly are. When we got that goal, they came down on a 4-on-3 first. It was broken up, and the puck was dumped into their end - I managed to beat their goalie to the puck and ended up scoring. Hardly a recipe for success...

Rather than give Lindenwood an endless stream of 4-on-3s, which they were bound to score on a fair amount, it seemed like a better strategy to let them kill time, then try and take our shots with a few minutes left and see what we could do. Give them enough 4-on-3s and they're going to bury a bunch.

That said, NARCh has a rule that teams need to advance the puck to prevent just this sort of situation. It seems likely (to me) that this is something the CRHL would look at over the summer as a possible change in the rules.

Mike Mackert
Michigan State University

[DannyG]

Holy enchiladas!

I am very obviously missing something here...

Does not the CRHL rule book address this?

I have my USAHIL book at my office in the rink, so I will have to wait til morning to check this,

-but-

USA Hockey Inline rule book notes that "the puck must be kept in motion..." doesn't it!?!? It is not like the ice rule book, which states that the motion must be "forward" in nature, but I have some vague certainty (an oxymoron?) that there is such a mandate regarding the motion of the puck.

Locally here, any player who holds the puck behind the net is cautioned by the referee to put the puck into motion. Failure to do so directly brings a delay-of-game minor penalty. This is so accepted around here that players do try to shave a few seconds off the clock, but then it's back to business. Nobody has been hit with the delay penalty in over three years running.

I am incredulous that an organization such as the CRHL rules committee has let this situation even exist...I suppose that sounds negative, but is the rules committee so unfamiliar with usual and normal basic hockey rules of play, that they have up to now, failed to place in their rules the restriction to prevent this decidely unsportsmanlike tactic?

I will say it one more time, I am incredulous.

Anybody shed some light on this one???

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by DannyG on 03/09/03 10:59 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

[DannyG]

Mike & others:

I thought the CRHL used the USAHIL rule book...am I wrong about this???

also, please see reply above...

Still incredulous...

-Dan

[cakeuneke]

So why didn't MSU go after the puck? Don't blame Lindenwood, it won them the game obviously.

[cakeuneke]

To me, there are a ton of things in roller hockey that suck and make the game almost unwatchable. What's the difference between standing behind the net and passing it around for 10 minutes really. There's no difference. If I was winning, I'd be fine with standing back there if the other team was going to be lame enough not to come after me. You would have as much of a reason to call a penalty on MSU for not pursuing the puck as you would on Lindenwood. The same things that supposively make roller hockey "great" like no icing, no offsides, 4-on-4, and a lot of wide-open hockey are the same vices which can turn it into a game like the one yesterday. It's not fun to watch, but Lindenwood didn't have that duty to make it fun to watch, and for that matter, MSU is just as responsible.

[mackertm]

The first time this happened was Saturday night, during our first game against Lindenwood. I asked the referee during the game if he was going to call a delay of game penalty for them refusing to move the puck. He told me there was no such rule in the books, so there was nothing he could do.

Mike Mackert
Michigan State University

[mackertm]

It's not being "lame" to not chase behind the net in roller hockey. Any player who plays at an advanced level knows that it's a terrible play to chase a guy who's standing behind the net, since you're never going to catch him. You might as well just offer to take a guy off the floor, since you have a guaranteed 4-on-3 going the other direction. A lot of teams I play with set up a breakout sometimes with a defenseman behind the net, and we laugh abuot teams that chase, since they obviously have no clue what they're doing.

There is certainly a big difference between skating around and passing the puck for ten minutes and just standing there for ten minutes. Because when a team is actually passing the puck, there's always the possibility that they will miss a pass and turn it over.

To me, refusing to move the puck from behind the net when you have the lead is just refusing to play. I'm not saying Lindenwood owed it to the fans to move the puck and keep the game interesting. They had a strategy that was virtually guaranteed to win the game, and it worked. But it's hardly in the spirit of competition to stand behind the net for ten minute stretches without moving.

Mike Mackert
Michigan State University

[nala]

THE TEAM WITH THE MOST GOALS WINS.
THE REAL STORY.

[mackertm]

Yup, you're right, the team with the most goals most definitely does win. My complaint, and the complaint of most people that disagree with the way the game was played, is that this wasn't a real hockey game the way it played out.

Earlier that morning, Purdue had a 6-0 lead on us in the first quarter. They continued to play hockey, try to score goals, etc. In the end, it did cost them as we managed to stage a comeback and win the game. Purdue could have used the same tactics and just stood behind their net, but they wanted to keep playing.

Which game would you rather have played in? Watched?

The CRHL is trying to grow the college game and make it more entertaining. Yesterday's game was anything but entertaining, as I know a lot of fans who paid to get into the game asked for their money back. Lindenwood beat us four times in the regular season playing hockey for the full 48 minutes, and those games weren't as close as these two were - but they were infinitely more enjoyable to play in (and watch, I would assume) even on the losing side of the scoreboard.

Mike Mackert
Michigan State University

[DannyG]

I must again state that I do not know what is the official rule book used in CRHL competition,

-but-

The 2001-2003 Official Rules of USA Hockey Inline, Rule 628(a)(page 93), "The puck must be kept in motion at all times."

"Golly,"

At this point I can think of a million things I would like to say: sportsmanship, spirit of the game, challenges of fair play, etc., etc., etc. All I can really come up with, however, is just, "Golly..."

[DannyG]

Hey, Nala (and anybody else that thinks like this):

Let us make this very clear:

When you enter into an athletic competition, you have a responsibility to play the game as hard and as clean, and as fair as you can. You ask no quarter, you give none, but you demand of yourself that you play totally within the rules and the spirit of the game.

We all learned this in kindergarten.

Sorry if that sounds harsh, but the CRHL, the game officials (by Mike's report), and the Lindenwood coach all totally abdicated their responsibility to the game of hockey in this one...

and saying something like &quot;Nya, nya, look at the scoreboard,&quot; is particularly stupid behavior as well.

I guess that was a trifle more than &quot;golly...&quot;

-Daniel T. Guard
Recreation Services Supervisor,
City of El Paso Parks & Recreation;
League Director,
Nations-Tobin Hockey League,
USA Hockey Inline sanction number TX10017;
Head Coach,
Polar Bear Hockey

(Yeah, I want you to know exactly who I am on this one, I am now really p.o.'d...)

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by DannyG on 03/10/03 11:56 AM.</EM></FONT></P>