HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   National Hockey League Talk (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=60)
-   -   BCHL Playoff Game to be Re-played, the final 1:20 at least: (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=62108)

chris_dub 03-15-2004 02:51 AM

BCHL Playoff Game to be Re-played, the final 1:20 at least:
 
For those of you who don't know about this yet, it is getting bigger & bigger by the hour. On Saturday night in Nanaimo BC, the Nanaimo Clippers & Powell River Kings (of the BCHL) played Game 7 of their 1st round series. The game was tied 3-3 in the 3rd, with 1:20 left. Then a call by the referee was made, a call that could result in the final 1:20 being re-played. The PR goalie, Eric Bourbeau, came out to play the puck and froze it, resulting in a whistle. The referee originally called for a 2-minute minor for delay-of-game, then met with the linesmen & determined that a penalty shot shall be taken, in accordance to the rule book. After a 5-10 minute delay, Clippers forward Tyson Mulock took the penalty shot & scored. The Clippers went on to win the game & series 4-3.

Following the game, the Powell River Kings protested the call saying that the referee gave "an unfair advantage to a certain team". The league reviewed the appeal, and issued this statement just after 10:00pm pacific time:

---

Commissioner's Decision Re: Game 7
The British Columbia Hockey League has issued the following statement regarding Game 7 of the Powell River at Nanaimo Game, Saturday, March 13, 2004.
Circumstances:

At 1:20 remaining of the 3rd period in the above game where the teams were tied 3-3, Powell River Goaltender Eric Bourbeau left his crease to race a Nanaimo player for a loose puck. The goaltender reached the puck first and subsequently froze the puck.

At that time, the referee stopped the play and assessed the Goaltender a minor penalty for Delay of Game under rule 58 (b) FALLING ON THE PUCK.

Rule 58 (b):
A minor penalty shall be assessed any goaltender who, while outside his crease, deliberately falls on or gathers the puck into his body, or holds or places the puck against any part of the goal, thus delaying the game unnecessarily.
Specifically, in the Hockey Canada Referee’s Case Book, Situation 3 – Point 4:
The goaltender comes out of her crease to beat an attacking player to the puck and simply jumps on the puck, causing a stoppage in play. No warning shall be issued. A minor for Delay of Game shall be assessed the Goaltender.
After some discussion amongst the on-ice officials, the officials have reported that they were uncertain as to whether or not this would be a penalty shot due to the fact that this infraction occurred in the last 2:00 of the game. Their discussion took some time, and eventually a penalty shot was awarded to Nanaimo. The Nanaimo player subsequently scored on the penalty shot and ultimately won the game 4-3.

Upon completion of the game and after reviewing the rule book, it was determined discovered that the penalty shot should not have been awarded under rule 58 (b). From the rule book regarding Penalty Shots and Delay of Game in the last 2 minutes or overtime:

Rule 35. Penalty Shot - Situation 1 Referee’s Case Book

A Penalty Shot may be awarded due to any of the following illegal acts:

1. Rule 19 f
2. Rule 24 c
3. Rule 55 c
4. Rule 55 d
5. Rule 55 e
6. Rule 58 c
7. Rule 61 c
8. Rule 70 e
9. Rule 78 a
10. Rule 82 a
11. Rule 85 d

Rule 58 b – the infraction does not apply.
Upon notification of the game protest, the league office contacted the Referee-in-Chief of BCAHA and asked him to investigate the application of the rules. After his investigation, he determined that the incorrect call had been made and that a penalty shot should not have been awarded in this case. He notified the BCHL Office that the wrong call had been made.

The League Office and the Referee in Chief have received written statements from 2 of the 3 on-ice officials including the referee.

Commissioner’s Ruling:

The BC Hockey League has an obligation to its members, players, and fans to ensure the integrity of the game. The correct application of the rules is paramount to the fairness of the league.

Considering that the rules, in this case, at such a key time of a very important game for both teams were applied incorrectly, the League Office upholds Powell River’s Protest and directs the disposition of the game as follows:
1. The Nanaimo Clippers will secure ice at the earliest possible date.
2. Both teams will appear at the designated time to resume play at the 18:40 mark of the 3rd Period. Eric Bourbeau will be assessed a 2 minute minor penalty under Rule 58 (b).
3. The play will resume from that point (1:20 left) and will conclude when a winner is determined through the remainder of regulation time or in overtime if necessary.
4. Prior to commencing play, both teams will be allowed a 15 minute warm-up. After a 5 minute no clean break, the play will commence.
5. The officials will be assigned by RIC and will begin play – with a face-off in the Powell River end at the circle nearest the infraction.
The Nanaimo Clippers have the opportunity to Appeal the Decision of the Commissioner and the League will provide further information as soon as it is available.

Source - BCHL.bc.ca

---

The referee, Ian Zibin, and linesman, Larson Bauck, "retired" Sunday. As a result, the entire 2nd Round of the BCHL Playoffs will most likely be delayed as Nanaimo will appeal the decision made by the Commisioner.

This will be a very, very interesting story to follow.

Fedz 03-15-2004 03:04 AM

That is a joke. Plain and simple. There is no way you should be allowed to appeal an on ice call. Thats crazy. Especially in the BCHL, a pretty big Jr.A league. Not to mention Playoffs.:dunno:

Avery4Byng* 03-15-2004 03:41 AM

WOW.... I was out and about all day today so I never heard about this. Pretty interesting..... I never knew you could protest an on ice call like that.

rye&ginger 03-15-2004 03:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fedz
That is a joke. Plain and simple. There is no way you should be allowed to appeal an on ice call. Thats crazy. Especially in the BCHL, a pretty big Jr.A league. Not to mention Playoffs.:dunno:


the joke is that officials completey blew a call because they didnt know the rules, not because they made a judgement call. It being the playoffs is why it is such a big deal.

I think its right to replay the end of the game.

GKJ 03-15-2004 09:13 AM

I hope it doesn't end up being a 4 overtime game. Or imagine if they were to score off the face off :D


So do all of the other playoff teams have to wait for this game to end?



The Sixers and Nets did this once some time in the late 70's. The Sixers protested a call and the game got replayed from the point of protest. Before the game could be finished (which was like a month or so later). Both teams traded with each other, and one player, named Eddie Money, ended up playing for both teams in one game :eek:

Canadian Chris 03-15-2004 01:01 PM

Ugly situation to say the least, and thanks for posting what happened Chris_dub...heard it on Sportstalk tonight and was kinda wondering.

Not too sure what to think, but have to agree that if the wrong call was made, especially something as pivitol as that one was, then the right decision to replay the last little 1:40 has been made.

Still....little iffy on the whole situation.

Apparently the PR coach had a broom in hand and was hunting down the ref too

Finkle is Einhorn 03-15-2004 01:10 PM

Wow. Seems to me that a pretty dangerous precident is being set here.

Knucklez 03-15-2004 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rye&ginger
the joke is that officials completey blew a call because they didnt know the rules, not because they made a judgement call. It being the playoffs is why it is such a big deal.

I think its right to replay the end of the game.

Agree 100%

ohlund2.2 03-15-2004 01:44 PM

Can you imagine if something like this happened where a rule was broken, and it decides who wins the Stanley Cup? Can you imagine how history would be changed if Brett Hull's skate was IN the crease when Dallas beat Buffalo?


Oh wait..

chris_dub 03-15-2004 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ohlund2.2
Can you imagine if something like this happened where a rule was broken, and it decides who wins the Stanley Cup? Can you imagine how history would be changed if Brett Hull's skate was IN the crease when Dallas beat Buffalo?


Oh wait..


Exactly what we were saying when we heard about this.

(we = me & our hockey billets)

Crosbyfan 03-15-2004 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chris_dub
Exactly what we were saying when we heard about this.

(we = me & our hockey billets)

I "still" think Dallas deserves a chance to win that Cup. Kind of a shame, their names being on it when they didn't win it...a little embarassing really.

Interesting case in BC. I think they SHOULD continue the game as described. Funny enough if the ref had honestly blown the call in a different manner, say he thought the goalie had thrown his stick when he hadn't, then I think the result should stand.

My only problem is what if the penalty shot was unsuccessful and the goalie's team went on to win? The 2 minute penalty would not have transpired so what then? Even Bigger Balls would be required to overturn and force a replay of that scenario yet to be consistent that would have to happen.

chris_dub 03-15-2004 11:32 PM

From BCHL.bc.ca :

---

Nanaimo - Powell River Update

Statement from the BC Hockey League

The following is a statement to the fans of the BCHL with regard to the decision in the Powell River Nanaimo Game 7. This incident, regardless of any decision or possible outcomes, is a very unfortunate and disappointing turn of events for all parties involved.

The fundamental issue in this situation is the rules of the game. Officials, charged with administering the playing rules under which we play, have the difficult task of applying the rules and are in a position whereby they need to make judgement calls and decisions based on what they see and the applicable rules of the game. We are not questioning the judgement or integrity of the game officials who administered this game nor are we questioning the Referee’s decision to make the initial call. The Referee was correct in calling a penalty under rule 58(b).

However, the option of awarding a penalty shot for the infraction called doesn’t exist within the rules of Hockey Canada under which we as a league are required to play the game. Therefore, an unfair advantage was given one team over the other, due to in effect – the creation of a penalty. If an official were to award a penalty shot for elbowing – we would be in the same position and the same, if not more furor would exist, as everyone would acknowledge that there is no such rule.

Protests of a game at any level are rare. When they happen, they are unfortunate and the whole incident is regrettable.

The League will always support our officials. They have a very difficult job and the league will continue to work to help with the positive development of the officiating in our league. However, no official, either on-ice or off, can create and enforce a rule and or penalty that does not exist, within the Hockey Canada Rule Book and or any supplemental BC Hockey League rules – therefore giving one team an unfair advantage over the other.

The decision of the commissioner has been upheld by the BC Hockey League Board of Governors and Nanaimo has been directed to facilitate the playing of the game as advised in the initial ruling.

The League Office is waiting for the announcement from the Nanaimo Clippers as to when the game will be scheduled. The League can confirm that the Game will not be resumed today. We will notify everyone once the schedule is confirmed.

---

So the game will go on. A 15:00min warmup, followed by a 5:00min intermission, then resumed play from the 1:20 mark of the 3rd period, the scored tied at 3. Nanaimo will recieve a 2-min powerplay. IF the game is tied at the end of regulation, a 5:00min intermission will commence, and then the teams will play 10:00min of sudden death OverTime. If a result is not reached, another intermission will take place, the ice will be cleaned, and an OT Period of 20:00min will begin. This will continue until a team scores.

Roster will stay the same as the original game, all players who were dressed in the original game will be allowed to dress for the re-play game.

From what I understand, Nanaimo will decide the game time/date by 10:00am tomorrow (Tuesday). The "game" will take place either Tuesday night, or Wednesday night...no later. Admission will be free.

loveshack2 03-15-2004 11:42 PM

Why wasn't there a copy of the rulebook on hand so that in the 10 mins the refs were discussing whether it was a minor penalty or a penalty shot they could, oh I dunno, maybe look it up?

If a rulebook was in the arena somewhere and the officials chose not to consult it when they obviously didn't know what the correct call was then I'd expect them to be seriously reprimanded for being arrogant twits.

PecaFan 03-16-2004 03:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ohlund2.2
Can you imagine if something like this happened where a rule was broken, and it decides who wins the Stanley Cup? Can you imagine how history would be changed if Brett Hull's skate was IN the crease when Dallas beat Buffalo?

Only problem is, the right call was made in that game, since the puck carrier was allowed to precede the puck into the crease then, as now. But hey, it makes a great joke.

Kudos to the BCHL for making a gutsy move. They could have just buried their heads in the sand and say "the refs made the call, it's over".

rye&ginger 03-17-2004 05:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by loveshack2
Why wasn't there a copy of the rulebook on hand so that in the 10 mins the refs were discussing whether it was a minor penalty or a penalty shot they could, oh I dunno, maybe look it up?

If a rulebook was in the arena somewhere and the officials chose not to consult it when they obviously didn't know what the correct call was then I'd expect them to be seriously reprimanded for being arrogant twits.

I would expect refs at that level to have a rule book at least in their gear bag. I always did when I was a ref.

MacDaddy TLC* 03-17-2004 10:00 AM

Anyone remember the George Brett pine tar incident in the royals versus Yankees game in the 80s? I believe that they re-started the game from the point of Brett's home run.

TheBrew 03-17-2004 03:03 PM

Nanaimo won the game 4 Minutes into the first overtime so i guess it worked out.

eSabre 03-17-2004 03:14 PM

Why the hell didn't they do this in 1999????

:rant: :madfire: :shakehead :rant: :madfire:

Biggest Canuck Fan 03-17-2004 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eSabre
Why the hell didn't they do this in 1999????

:rant: :madfire: :shakehead :rant: :madfire:

Because that would actually make some sense, and why would the NHL do anything that made sense.

Having said that, it was a good clean goal. off the skate, to the stick and in the net. Completely 100% a goal.

Selfish Man 03-17-2004 06:12 PM

Because it makes no sense to replay part of a game 3 days later.

Because human error is part of sport.

Because Buffalo needed some more sports angst.

Because it was a clean goal.

Fish on The Sand 03-17-2004 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamBatspaz
Because it makes no sense to replay part of a game 3 days later.

Because human error is part of sport.

Because Buffalo needed some more sports angst.

Because it was a clean goal.

Skate in the crease, = no goal. That was the rule then. In fact, you could argue that the Stars don't even get out of the first round without that rule, as Edmonton had no fewer than 5 disallowed goals that series.

Toonces 03-17-2004 07:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fish on The Sand
Skate in the crease, = no goal. That was the rule then. In fact, you could argue that the Stars don't even get out of the first round without that rule, as Edmonton had no fewer than 5 disallowed goals that series.

I can't beleive how many people just don't care about what the rules said at the time.

I HATED that rule with a firey passion, but it should have been enforced to the letter.

Not that it matters, but I HATED the Sabres back then.

Selfish Man 03-17-2004 08:08 PM

The ruling was that Hull controlled the puck before his skate went into the crease... according to the rules at the time, a puck carriers' skate could precede the puck into the crease.

Disagree with the ruling if you like, but the ref judged that Hull controlled the puck. Sports history is littered with judgement calls that changed the course of series/games.

I don't really care whether the call was blown or not... it was a freaking awesome game, and the controversy makes it all the more memorable.

Verbal Kint* 03-17-2004 08:26 PM

Exactly, Hull kept control of the puck while entering the crease (his skate crossed into the blue paint after he kicked the puck to his stick). The refs made a good call.

dats-13 03-17-2004 08:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamBatspaz
Because it makes no sense to replay part of a game 3 days later.

Because human error is part of sport.

Because Buffalo needed some more sports angst.

Because it was a clean goal.

:handclap:

how can you replay a part of a game 3 days later...it makes no sense.

some major attributes of certain players is how well they perform during the end of a game, if they still have the drive, everyone's going to have the drive with 3 nights worth of sleep...

and the circumstances have changed, everything has changed, replaying a game to correct a missed call is an error in itself.....


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:47 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.