clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

More Replay Controversy in CCHA

It's been kind of a rough year for CCHA officials when it comes to video review, but nothing compared to what Michigan has gone through.

For the second time in a month, Michigan had a goal disallowed that perhaps should have counted, and while their opponent had a kicked puck count for a goal, and ended up losing the game by a goal.

Ohio State has highlights of the Big Ten Network's recap which includes some less than optimal video of the two goals.

It's hard to get a good look at Michigan's disallowed goal to see where exactly the puck hit Louie Caporusso. It looks like it got his stick, but the official had a better view and immediately waved it off, so maybe it caught his glove or body.

The second one is the really terrible call in my opinion. The puck is laying in the crease when Severyn goes after it, so there is no question about a deflection, which is the only time a puck can legally go into the net off a skate, and Severyn's stick never comes anywhere near the ice, so he obviously didn't get a stick on it. I guess the only plausible argument is that it's the Michigan defenseman that kicks the puck into his own net, but even then, I think Severyn touches the puck last and directs it in. Regardless, the rule does say "when in doubt, it's not a goal" and to have no doubt whatsoever on that play would require pure ignorance.

That said, I hate that I get a new piece of evidence every single week to bolster my argument, but we never even have this discussion if they just start allowing goals in off the skate. That play would be a million easier for the official to call, and everyone would be a lot happier. If you let some goals go in off the skate and disallow some, there's always going to be gray area and the opportunity for mistakes to be made.

It's going to be hard for Michigan to just laugh and shrug off those two weird games too. They're currently locked in a battle for the 2nd spot in the PWR with Notre Dame, which may not seem like a big deal, but is likely the difference between playing a regional in Grand Rapids or somewhere where their fans have to attend the game, and right now, those two games are looking like the difference. Though while we're making obvious changes to make the game better, I'll point out that this also would not be an issue if the highest seeds hosted regionals, rather than putting them in buildings that have terrible attendance unless a home or local team is in that regional.

Without bothering to look at any Bracketology's yet, the absolute worst case scenario is that those two calls could be the difference between playing someone like Niagara in Grand Rapids, and playing a first round match-up against Minnesota at Mariucci Arena. It's probably unlikely, but like Wisconsin's entry into the NCAA tournament last season, such possibilities exist with a broken system.