OK, so first things first: The Komets got hosed tonight.
Jason Tapp was so far back in his goal on Martin Gascon's last shootout chance he could have gotten his mail delivered there. The puck was somewhere underneath him. Ergo, the puck had to be in the net, too.
But referee Scott Bokal (who???) waved it off, and Quad City left with a wild 7-6 shootout victory that came right out of downtown Tombstone. And even if they probably ought to still be playing on, understand also that the Komets put themselves in that position to start with.
Again they took too many penalties, for which they finally paid when Quad City put four power play goals on them. Over and above that, they threw the puck all over the lot, played sloppy in their own end, and threw the puck all over the lot.
Yeah, I know I aready said that. But it bears repeating.
Bottom line is this was not the team we saw win four in a row. Even Pat Bingham, once he'd stopped blaming the officiating and even the temperature in the building, acknowledged that the team came out sluggish and everything spun out from that.
And so it's off to Muskegon. And here's hoping we never again see Scott . . . what's his name again?
-- Ben Smith
I sit behind the net Tapp guarded. While he was very far back in the net, he was always on his knees and his legs were pressed together. While the puck may well have been across the line, it was never visible in the goal.
The ref took a long time -- too long -- to skate close to the net to make the call. Before he got there, Tapp slithered back and forth about three times to exit the net.
When he got up, the puck was about a foot in front of the goal line. I sure don't think he stopped the puck that far out but to say for sure it was in from the press box is silly.
Gascon is lucky he didn't get a penalty for breaking his stick on the post. Clearly, his intent was to break the blade and send it to hit the ref, which he nearly did.
Rather than stay around and explain anything to anyone, the goaljudge beat it out of there very quickly.
Posted by: Skate | March 24, 2007 at 12:18 AM
I had a great view of it and while you did NOT see the puck in the net, he clearly was behind the line by at least 3 inches and THERE WAS NO PUCK ANYWHERE IN SIGHT. When he came back in front of the line, there was the puck. So obviously, he carried the puck in with him and it was hidden. I saw it drop out from between his pads. ON a shootout, you don't have to see the puck in the net when the goalie is all the way in and there is no puck in sight. It was in his pads, it came out when he came out, he took it in....that was a goal.
But I agree with Ben, we earned this loss. IN fact, it shouldn't have been as close as it was. Dan McWhinney was just plain awful in net, but then again--he had very little defense in front of him. The offense was spotty, they scored when it counted--but they never took control. This team was soft tonight, very soft.
AND WHO IS THAT MCALLISTER GUY? Maybe he had an off game, but he SUCKED! He had two opportunities to take his guy out of the play, but was afraid to hit them. He couldn't pass, could barely skate with the puck, etc. Hmmmm this team didn't skate hard and Morency was out, interesting....
It just boiled down to one simple thing, MENTAL ERRORS.
Posted by: Brad Lyons | March 24, 2007 at 12:27 AM
Apparently, Gascon DID get a game misconduct at the 20:00 minute mark.
If you were sitting on the sides and could see that all of Tapp's pads were behind the line, yes, the puck was certainly in. From behind the net you couldn't see if he was all the way in the net.
At no time was the puck visible until Tapp stood up.
Posted by: Skate | March 24, 2007 at 12:36 AM
I would not say Dan played bad tonight. At least three of the goals were pretty goals that he had no chance on! How do you stop a shot from the point with three guys in the middle of you and the shooter and he puts it just under (I think it hit) the cross-bar? And the shot the Mallard made from three inches in front of the goal line about five feet down the line? QC had some nice goals and we were luckey to get a point, and some tacos!!!
Posted by: Hoss | March 24, 2007 at 12:50 AM
Yes, yes we did get hosed tonight. Several things though... Since when did the UHL become the NBA and start calling "touch fouls?" There are a few things that bother me about the games here in the Fort. First of all, the Komets take too many stupid penalties. I think that might go along with being more of an emotional team now with Pat behind the bench. Remember, Komet fans got accustomed to seeing machine wall Puhalski behind the bench each night and emotion didn't exist from anyone other than ole numbers 31, 91, and 14 (D. Stewart) for a good portion of 5 years. But given that, you can't punch a guy in the back of the head while he is off to the box, and negate the ensuing powerplay for your team...you just can't! The worst part about the penalties is the Ft. Wayne fans. I swear we have some of the most clueless fans in the sport and it's odd because hockey has been here so long. I guarentee the majority have never had a skate on their feet before. It's obvious from the screaming and holering every time one of our players gets touched and blaming the ref for EVERY penalty that is called against us. Well fans, guess what...we commit penalties too...SHOCK. Many of them are cheap...yes, but you know what...the K's should know that the call will be made before they place the parallel stick on a player with the puck...it's a part of the game now-learn to play by the rules! A couple other things fans...a player is allowed to pass the puck to a teammate in the defensive zone. Believe it or not, that includes the road team also! And this is NOT the NHL, there is no deleay of game penalty for pucks that go directly into the crowd unless it is the goalie that does it! (This rule also applies for both teams...including the Komets' opponent). Can we stop the moronic booing and show a little knowledge of the sport by knowing more about the rules?
Lastly, the K's did get hosed tonight in the shootout. But I will say...do you think the arguement might have been taken more seriously if Bruce Richardson didn't have the reputation of being the biggest whinning crybaby, Rockford Icehog wanna be in the league? Aside from Steve Martinson, this guy is the worst and complains about EVERY call and refs know it. I would have left too like our clueless ref did tonight if I saw a crying Bruce Richardson (who actually had a case this time) skating after me with tears in his eyes (YET AGAIN) because a call didn't go his way. Sorry Bruce, you've cried wolf too many times and everyone knows it...shut the mouth and practice a little more...because your passion is focused in the wrong direction, and your complete lack of skill is making the Franke's look HORRIBLE for signing you over Colin Chaulk last fall.
That's all for now, Ben, I know you probably can't talk about this much but you are a much better writer than Mr. Sebring. I wish that it was you that wrote the new book, I might have been more apt to purchase one. I know this is just a mid-night post and there are probably several problems with it because it hasn't been proofread, but I appreciate a good, EDITED column in the paper that I pay money to read each day, and one that actually has thought behind it and isn't just "winged" each day.
Posted by: Jim | March 24, 2007 at 01:31 AM
Is there anyone else you would like to slam on Jim???? How about Fazoli's who sends out a mascot who looks more like an apple than a tomato???
Komets win: K's fans = Dr Jekyll
Komets lose: K's fans = Mr Hyde
Posted by: JR | March 24, 2007 at 03:46 AM
I do agree with Jim on the fans, but I think that's true with anywhere you go. The person that sits next to me has NO CLUE what the rules are, but thinks she does. I can't help it but to say "yes, that really was offsides" or "yes, that really was a penalty" or "yes, that was an accurate non-call", etc...it drives me NUTS!!! haha
As to my comment of McWhinney not playing good, I was referring to the high-shots. I've learned tonight, the high-shot might be a weakness of his. Like I said, you can certainly have a bad night--it happens.
You can't win them all, but this one we let get away. Ironically, the offense showed up--as out of sync as they were, they found ways to score. But defensively, just too many breakdowns.
Posted by: Brad Lyons | March 24, 2007 at 07:12 AM
Jim, I wouldn't want to touch all your opinions but I will correct an error about pucks into the crowd. UHL rule 63.2 states, in part, that "...a minor penalty for delay of game shall be imposed on any player or goalkeeper who deliberately shoots or bats the puck outside the playing area during the play or after stoppage of play." The rule goes on to cover the goalie specifically but it seems clear that a referee has discretion to call a penalty when any player shoots it out of the playing area, including into the crowd. (BTW, I wouldn't have called such a penalty at any time last night.)
Posted by: Annie | March 24, 2007 at 11:24 AM
I think Dan played fine, was unlucky to have a couple go in off iron but if you can't see it you can't stop it...So you go down and protect the bottom. My same question for the sixth time this year is...Did they change the rules and take contact out of the game cause touch fouls ruin it for me, Jim, Chuckitt and anybody else that has a clue!
Posted by: ds214 | March 24, 2007 at 11:29 AM
Jim-Ouch! Even though you had several good points (stupid penalties) at the worst times, I have to disagree with you on the fans who don't know all the rules. As pointed out to you on shooting the puck into the stands by a player other than a goalie. What keeps Komet Hockey Great! Is the new fans that keep coming to the games and don't know the rules or even perhaps the concept of the game. Stop your bitching and take someone under your wing. Perhaps you will find a new friend, and do you part on keeping out attendace the best. PS I do still miss #91 & #14
Posted by: ICE CREAM MAN | March 24, 2007 at 03:37 PM
Bottom line was the Komets took too many penalties last night. Yes Boakl was bad, but he was bad both ways. Richardson should have gotten a penalty for boarding McIntyre.
Posted by: Greg | March 24, 2007 at 06:52 PM
Jim...I think I might need to call the waaaaaambulance for you as well
Posted by: Farmer | March 24, 2007 at 09:33 PM
Greg,
Yeah, you're definitley right on that one. The moment it happened, I thought it was at least a minor Boarding. So when QC reacted, the ref called that and that started the spiral for that period of time for QC. Unfortunately, we just didn't shut them down right there on defense.
There was just no darn consistancy from the ref---let one obvious penalty go, then call a ticky-tack penalty. Where does the UHL get the officials and how do they prepare them? Whomever is the new commissioner next year, their first priority (aside from adding new teams to the league) best be HIRING SOMEONE IN-CHARGE OF OFFICIATING THAT WILL TAKE CHARGE OF OFFICIATING. I relate it to baseball...the umpire isn't calling the the outside corner at the knees, but he's not calling in consistantly so you adjust. BUT when he may not call that on one pitch and the next it's 6" farther outside and calls that one a strike, that's a major issue--and that's been the problem with a lot of the officiating this year.
Posted by: Brad Lyons | March 24, 2007 at 10:38 PM
Jim, get a life, you're the cry baby!! By the way your probably the one after game asking for an autograph to the players and you bitch about them. At least he cares.
Posted by: john123 | March 25, 2007 at 02:18 AM
Re: the "refereeing controversy: ---- zzzzzzzzzzz.
Why, oh WHY, does everyone expect the referees to be any better than the players at any level of sport?
These are AA players in a AA league with AA refs. Sure, I get frustrated with the refs sometines, but you think I don;t get frustrated with a guy like Martin Gascon and his blind pass turnovers?
Posted by: Skate | March 25, 2007 at 11:48 AM
Hey Jim get a life. Its to bad you do not know anything about the game. The majority of the players in the UHL are triple A players who have either played in the show or the AHL. They are here for the money.
Posted by: Ted | March 25, 2007 at 12:04 PM
jim the only reason you dont like mr sebring is because his writing is above the comic books you normally read
Posted by: rightmind | March 25, 2007 at 07:12 PM
bokal used to play for the river otters
Posted by: rightmind | March 25, 2007 at 07:13 PM
Comments. McWhinney let in 3 soft goals on Friday and also made some quality saves. Touchtone Enery light thing wasn't on in the first two periods and QC scored 4 power play goals, coincidentally I asked them to turn it on in the third and "BOOM" no more powerplay goals for QC. I am supersticious aobut those things and Friday just made it more true..no touchtone energy penalty kill if the light isn't on. moving on...Gascon had to have scored since Tapp moved back and forth until he knew where the puck was. The same thing happened in the Redwings game on Sat. Offense....worked well on Friday and Sunday but was absent on Sat. Overall a good weekend.
Posted by: Tom | March 26, 2007 at 10:40 AM
Jim, get some Prozac. While I do agree some fans do not understand the rules, it is still good to see them at the games and supporting the team. They can learn the rules over time, lighten up.
Yes, Richie talks alot and complains, but saying he has no talent I believe is a bit much. He has a world of talent. Not to mention he played the first part of the year with a hip injury.
I also can't believe you are now slamming other beat writers. You are a piece of work.
Sorry not everyone is as perfect as you. Is your name Jim or Jesus?
Posted by: Sniper | March 26, 2007 at 09:51 PM
Is it Jim Hawthorne? Because we know he is perfect...and always calls the perfect game....I miss Mondalek....Berkebile....and Hawthorne...I hope they officiate soon...maybe Gallagher will show up too. If those officials don't make you just a little sick to your stomach then you have not seen enough hockey games!
Posted by: Tom | March 28, 2007 at 03:00 PM