Mamaroneck loses in overtime
-
- March
- 1
Matt Supernault scored 29 seconds into overtime to give Massena a 3-2 win over Mamaroneck in a Division I state quarterfinal tonight at Hommocks Ice Rink.
Brian Conner had a goal and an assist for the Tigers, who end the season 23-4-1.
Massena plays Lancaster on Saturday at Utica in the state semifinals.
Update: Rye lost its state quarterfinal game as well, falling to Thousand Islands 4-2 in Division II action
More to come.
This entry was posted
on Saturday, March 1st, 2008 at 9:25 pm by Harold Gutmann.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Share and Enjoy: 
| 
Print
| 
Email
Advertisement
Harold do you know why the mamaroneck goal was disallowed with about 2:30 seconds left in the third period?
I believe it was because the puck was knocked down by hand before it went in
Syracuse.com reports Rye lost 4-2.
Did anyone from Mamaroneck FLIP off the other team after they lost?
Not sure…all good behavior during the game…we slipped out quick because it was so overcrowded in there…never saw so many people at Hommocks…lot of people were turned away
Re – the disallowed goal:
It was because the Massena fans had paid off the zebras. No way was the puck directly handed into the goal. There were several stick touches before it went it.
Other than that, it was a clean game that Mamk lost because of power plays. They converted zero of two or three; and Massena scored in the first ten seconds of two of their three.
All in all, a very good game.
it was a shame to get a goal taken away like that. love you guys mamaroneck hockey it was a great season all in all
The crying shame was this, the referees doing the game were not the best section 1 had to offer. Why could Rockland Refs not have done this game? They are section 1, why were the best in section 1 NOT doing the game. These guys were overmatched, could not keep up with the play and used horrible judgement.
Mamaronecks 3rd goal was called a goal by the ref that was on the goal line. There were at least 6-7 guys in front of the goalie, The ref from the blue line (after about 5 seconds or more) skates in and waves it off only after the goalie complained. He was not emphatic and did not call it right away.
Then more alleged bad judgement was when the ref called a penalty (away from the play) on Mamaroneck with 1:32 left in 3rd period. This is No blood No foul territory. If it does not affect the play, you don't call it. Mamk killed it off, but at this point in the game you keep the whistle in your pocket unless there is an really obvious call.
Then Massena scores on an alleged high stick in OT, the Massena players look for the refs to make a call, the mamk kids look to the refs to make a call, and no call was made. The two guys looked at each other not knowing what to say.
Bottom line is Mamk lost in heartbreaking fashion, and it sure is a shame that section 1 does not send their best refs to do a regional championship game. Maybe if they make the high stick call massena wins anyway, who knows.
No class on the massena coach who looks like Bozo the clown for taunting Mamk players and waving bye to them. Nice adult role model.
I am not sure if the waved off goal was correct or not. I do know that the ref waved it off after a 5 second celebration, and he was on the blue line looking through a crowd of players when he made the call, and the ref on the goal line had no problem with the goal. Sad. Oh well, great season by the Tigers, I guess we will never know what could have been.
Tough loss for the Tigers. Word has it that the goal in OT
was above the waist. It appears that the two best refs were
sitting on the bench watcing the game as backups. Mamo
got ripped off on both the goal that was disallowed and
the goal in OT. The film will tell the truth.
Too bad. Chap is a great coach and an even better guy. Congrats on such a great season Mamaroneck.
The no goal was legit… Conner threw it down. And the winner was a legal redirect. Look at the shots 2 to 1 Massena
Moose Dupont – - your eyes are bad. It wasn't Conner who's hand touched it; it was Fine's, so your opinion doesn't count.
i was standing behind messina's goal, and at first i did think that one of mamk's players hit the puck down with his hand (i was hoping the refs didn't see it)
however, the ref's delayed reaction proves that they may have been waiting for complaints from the goalie to make the call.
the refs were not from section one 90% sure of that,usually another section comes in for the game. Get it straight.High stick is above the cross bar not the waist.And overmatched if you dont know the rules dont comment on the officials.
well, this means that section one hockey is all over now, to everyone both teammates and opponents, great season! and to my fellow seniors across the section, best of luck, its been fun playing with and against you guys, one day we'll all think back upon the great memories we had playing high school hockey, I know you guys will miss it as much as I will. Great season, good luck to everyone next year
what a great comment
As a section player and senior, I just want to wish best of luck to all my fellow seniors across the section, we're all on to bigger and better things now, but we all leave this expirience with memories that will last a lifetime, I know we're all gonna miss it very much, there is so much to be proud of in this year's addition of Section One Varsity Hockey ranging from individual records to great team achievements. It was simply an honor to play with and against you guys. Best of luck to all my fellow seniors
Goal judge
Clearly you weren't at the game. The refs were from
Section I. Your knowledge of the rules clearly quailifes
you as a Section 1 ref. My advice: stick with your day job.
"It was because the Massena fans had paid off the zebras. No way was the puck directly handed into the goal."
I haven't seen referees that bad since ahhhhh Monday!!!! I'd like to know who paid off those refs too.
BTW Who was the guy who turned off the scoreboard, and couldn't get it to work again, to give Mamaroneck a rest before having to kill Hagan's penalty with 1:32 left in the 3rd??? If Mamaroneck won, he'd be up for MVP.
mamaroneck won the section finals over Suffern when Suffern had the go ahead goal disallowed and the Mamo scored the winning goal after a clear penalty that wasn't called. and I didn't see any posts from Suffern fans crying about the calls. Mamo fans should do the same. hold your head high and keep your dignity, even when it hurts.
To Goal judge,
You just exposed yourself as a person who knows NOTHING. BOTH officials were westchester officials and that is a fact.
I watched Channel 12 news hoping that they would show the winning goal (which I am not sure was a high stick, it was close). Or the waved off goal. Unfortunately they only showed the mamaroneck 2 goals.
Like I said before, I don't know for fact if it was pushed in with a glove or stick.
I do know this, the ref on the goal line 5-6 feet away from the goal, called it a goal and was emphatic and immediate with the call.
The ref on the blue line waved it off after 5 seconds and the goalie complaint, he was neither emphatic nor immediate with his call. Unfortunately the ref that called it a goal did not stick to his guns and let a guy from the blue line over-rule him.
hockey fan you should ref since you know so much. to bad i am no longer a ref, but if i was im sure i would be better than you. Get over it the game is over, shame someone had to go home. would have liked to see them both advance. Plus in the past they used other sections refs for this game. I will keep my day job it pays more money and no foolish, comments from fans who have no clue what is going on
Folks, just to clarify what the rule is instead of conjecture. The rule states that either the player initiating the hand pass, or a defensive player be in control of the puck to nullify a hand pass. From all that has been described so far, this was not the case. A puck that is merely deflected does not meet the criteria of control and should be blown down.
aww stinks to loose…..so quit ur b!tch!in…and get on with life…stop looking for ways to get around the fact you lost your season is over….way to rep section 1 boys go out like a baby!
GREAT COMMENTS "RTH SENIOR" AND "ITS OFFICIAL".
WITH THAT KIND OF POSITIVE ATTITUDE BOTH YOU KIDS SHOW YOU'RE GONNA BE ABLE TO ENJOY NOT ONLY THE "UPS" BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, COPE WITH THE "DOWNS" IN LIFE. YOUR PARENTS SHOULD BE PROUD OF YOU!
Why was it okay for the refs to call a penalty on Mamaroneck with 1:32 left when the refs on Monday said they didn't want to call a penalty on Mamaroneck in the last minute of the Suffern game because "it would have changed the outcome of the game."
The Truth Be Told- the refs had alot to do with the outcomes of both the Massena and Suffern games to the detriment of Section I.
Suffern 24-1-2; Mamaroneck 23-4-1. With these records, the only "team" that could be beat Section I was our own refs..
Great job Mounties and Tigers!
I really don't see anyone not "coping" with the loss last night. There was fury and anger because of the way it was handled by officials. Most of the time I would say you dont get on refs cases, however, last night was a disgrace. They took what was a great game going both ways for 2 periods, the whistles were in their pockets all game, they set the tone that 'if there is nothing flagrant, it won't be called'. Then in the 3rd they changed it all around, calling a penalty with 1:32 away from the play is a joke… any official knows you don't do this in any game, especially a huge one. Waiving off a goal in which one ref initially called it a goal, the other guy comes sauntering in and waives it off after a celebration. Then post game, one ref I saw literally screaming at one of the Mamaroneck players. Don't worry about Mamaroneck 'representing section 1' they did perfectly, unfortunately with officials screaming at kids after the game after the game they called was a disgrace in my opinion. It is BOCES who did not represent section 1 very well. When the best team is playing, you get the best refs, many of whom were "off ice officials".
I will say this, the Mamaroneck kids did not CRY, or collapse on the ice and cry. They handled it like men. Mamaroneck did not have fights, no punches thrown, no trash talk. Mamaroneck represented itself perfectly. I don't think Mamaroneck thought about representing section 1, they represent themselves first. They represent their school second, and then section 1 a far distant 3rd.
Great job Mamaroneck! You were the best, things got messed up, but there is no doubt in my mind you were the better team last night. And most importantly you were no doubt the best team in section 1 this year. To the MAMARONECK SENIORS, after 3 years of mediocrity (in mamaroneck standards) you burst through this year and brought Mamaroneck back to championship form. When it is all said and done, nobody can take away what you are : 2008 SECTION 1 DIVISION 1 ICE HOCKEY CHAMPIONS!!!!!
http://www.news12.com/NewCDA/articles/media_pop?region=WC&id=53022&preview=false
Some Suffern contingents feel that they should get calls with 2 minutes left in a championship game… they did and did not score. They also feel there should have been a penalty called on the game winner. Show me on this video where the penalty is, if the penalty happened to a defenseman deep in the mamk zone out of camera view… then I ask why is a d caught down low with less than 30 seconds left ina tie game. Next you will see a 3 on 1 because the mamaroneck kid outhustles 2 suffern players driving to the net, maybe this was because mamk played 3 lines all night while suffern barely played 2. Then ask yourself why would the D on suffern not take away the pass and let natoli handle the shooter? Conner is the highest goal scorer in section 1, why would you not take away that pass, and be confident in the best goalie in the state (which I agree with, he is the best goalie in the state) to stop jackson? There are so many reasons why suffern lost to Mamaroneck,,, the biggest one being that Mamaroenck outplayed them in every aspect of the game from beginning to end. Is Suffern an excellent team? Yes, howver, that night Mamk was better, faster etc. I will post this on the other blog too, let me know where I am wrong after you watch the tape.
maybe if that tape actually showed are player getting hit from behind it would be a little more obvious… oh and now you guys know how we felt when our goal was called back
Difference is… Mamaroneck did not cry, they were mad, but did not cry.. and our 1000 rowdy fans did not throw 1 item on the ice like a bunch of babies who did not get their way.
HOLY SMOKE, how can you say they were "no doubt" the best team in section 1. Didn't they lose 2 out of 3 games this year to suffern? I agree that they won the big game when it counted and i commend the team on that, but to say no doubt the best team is just idiotic. You also really sound like an a$$ by putting down the fact that some of the suffern kids took the loss pretty hard, I hope you are a kid because you really don't have any character at all. People react to different things in different ways and for an adult to insult a kid for crying is pathetic. I really feel bad for you.
It was a Suffern forward (not a defenseman as stated above) who got cross checked/hit from behind. Our defenseman was coming in for a scoring opportunity because that forward had the puck. So the ref made a non-call because he didn't want to change the outcome of the game, which changed the outcome of the game. Two Suffern players were behind the play, not because of a lack of hustle, but because of a penalty that wasn't called. And Suffern also had a goal disallowed when Glaser did not have control of the puck and yet the refs blew the whistle anyway. Suffern also had the game-winning goal disallowed last year in Utica in overtime which video showed was a bad call. That team, Ithaca, won the state title the next day. So Suffern knows about tough calls and tough losses. But what did our coach say when asked about both of those games? He did not make excuses/blame the refs. He said they were great games. And the players also did not say anything or blame anyone. Then some bloggers come on here and rip Suffern? Mamo's coach is quoted in the paper talking about illegal goals. He didn't talk about it being a great game between two great teams. He showed how tough it is to absorb a close loss in a huge game when there are calls that don't go your team's way. So give the Suffern coaches and players some credit for losing with dignity even though they have a lot more experience winning games.
mamo rules
sorry that our players cried, they had an undefeated season and lost, its not that easy, it just shows how much they wanted to win. i love how you guys ripped us apart when we complained about the refs and now you guys cant stop. also, everytime you guys lose your coach has an excuse-when you lost to suffern 2-1, both teams played great games, and your coach goes and blames the refs for making a bad icing call, yesterday he said that he knows mamo scored in regulation and the other goal was "illegal". maybe our fans werent the most respectful but dont go after our players or coaches
POSTMAN,
YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT IN YOUR COMMENTS TO "HOLY SMOKE".
1. SUFFERN WAS DEFINATELY THE BEST TEAM IN SECTION I THIS SEASON GIVEN THE DEPTH OF GOOD PLAYERS ESPECIALLY OF COURSE YOUR GOALIE.
2. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH KIDS BREAKING DOWN AFTER HUGE LOSSES. IN FACT ITS PROBABLY A HEALTHY THING TO "LET IT ALL HANG OUT". SAD BUT TRUE (MAYBE GOOD,MAYBE NOT) THAT BOYS EVENTUALLY WILL LOSE THIS INNOCENSE AND DEVELOP AN OUTSIDE SHELL AS THEY GROW OLDER. HOW MANY TIMES HAVE PARENTS LOOKED BACK WHEN THEIR CHILDREN WERE "KIDS" AND LONGED FOR THOSE TIMES OF "EMOTION" AND SPONTANEITY.
Wait till next year.
"I thought my goal was good and theirs wasn't. That's my opinion. It's hard for me to stomach losing the game on an illegal goal."—???
OR
"It was two great teams, and they got the best of us tonight. They played a great game, so did we, and they got a bounce at the end and got the win. It's tough when you have two great teams in the section. Only one can go on."—-???
which is classier?
"Unfortunately the winning goal came after an icing call that wasn't icing."—???
seeing those quotes, I really have to give Coach Schelling credit for handling himself so well, when you know he was hurting and frustrated. You learn more about athletes and coaches after a tough loss than you do after a close win. It is easy to be gracious when you are feeling good. It is a lot harder to do it when you are hurting.
All section one Coaches select the officials for the playoffs based on their ratings and perfered listed throughout the season. So to complain or blame the officials for doing their job is saying that the coaches did not do their job well.
That aside congradulations to all teams for a very exciting season. Now lets play lax !
Referee seminars start in late August and run thru Oct for USA Hockey. Which is how you start to become HS refs. So for anyone who would like to step up before 1000 spectators in a final someday, grab a whistle.
good one n 4 cer
to Overmatched and Holy Smoke:
When you come to the officiating clinic next year to earn your stripes (an excellen suggestion by N-4-cer), you will undoubtedly learn the following from your review of your dog-eared copy of the rules:
Mamaroneck v. Massena – to clarify the rules which dictated the calls on the two plays everyone seems to be talking about, note the following, which is taken directly from the NFHS rule book, which governs public HS hockey games:
Rule 6-15 Art. 3 A goal shall NOT be allowed if:
a. The puck is kicked, thrown, carried or otherwise deliberately directed into the goal by any means other than by a stick. . .EVEN IF THE PUCK BOUNDS OR DEFLECTS OFF THE PERSON OR EQUIPMENT OF ANY DEFENSIVE PLAYER INTO THE NET
When the Mamaroneck player deliberately directed the puck with his hand toward the Massena goal, it was possibly the worst thing he could have done, because the only way a goal could have been scored at that point was for him to shoot it in (which he did not) or for a Massena player to intentionally shoot it into his own net (fairly unlikely). He would have been better served to allow the puck to drop into the crease, where it was headed anyway before he played it with his hand.
The overtime goal:
Rule 6-18 Art. 1 The puck may not be played or stopped with any part of the stick when the puck is over 4 feet off the ice.
The Massena shot never got above 4 feet – the measurement reference is easy – the goal frame is 4 feet high. No matter what the puck hit (and it is not clear that it hit anything, let alone a stick), so long as it was 4 feet or less, the deflection would not nullify the goal.
Those are the rules and it takes a lot of fortitude to enforce them, not matter how unpopular. But that is what the officials are there for. The rules cannot be ignored out of convenience, to gain popularity with the home crowd or to "even up" a (poorly) perceived injustice.
The players played a fantastic game and left everything they had out on the ice. Unfortunately, one team had to lose. To criticize the officials, rather than congratulate Massena denegrates the effort put forth by the teams.
Before you comment on things you clearly know very little about, could you at least tell us what the color of the cover of the rulebook is, just to prove you have at least seen one – we know you never opened one up.