Rutgers No. 4 Field Hockey Hosts Indiana Friday, No. 1 Northwestern Sunday
- Thread starter Tango Two
- Start date
Our “winning shot” was off of a rebound. People around us said it was the 8 second rule that was reviewed. The ball has to cross the goal within 8 seconds and did not upon review. Also stick check by the NW goalie that isn’t allowed but we were out of challenges. I know nothing about FH, but it all seemed a weird ending. Coach Meredith slammed her stuff down at mid field and wasn’t happy
I mean that would be pretty easy to figure out if so, right? Rough way to lose IF it truly was over 8-seconds. My gut feeling, however, is that this was NOT the case based on the reactions from both sides?
No Kidding! What a screw job. These same refs tried to hose us in the past. One of them disallowed a Puck Winter goal saying he shot rose above a plane that only she could see. Total BS.
This time she got away with beating us. Should be some sort of review of this hosing.
I agree if it was simply a matter of reviewing the time it took to get off the winning shot how come the review took so long. Big time screw job. Never saw Meredith get mad like that before. She knew it was a screw job.
Everyone - EVERYONE - should be tweeting at AD Hobbs about this one. I would want a full explanation of the call WITH verifiable proof to back it up.
That tall black lady ref has been screwing us since I started following field hockey
Just watch the player reactions when she makes calls. The kids know...
Just watch the player reactions when she makes calls. The kids know...
The call was explained to the player and coach. The B1G won't do a thing about the call other than issue an apology like the OSU men's basketball fiasco if they feel an error was made.
Not enough. This cost is a title. There needs to be a DETAILED explanation of the call ALONG WITH FACTUAL PROOF that it was correct. PERIOD . If I’m Hobbs, I don’t accept anything less.
I was watching and didn't see anything explained. Did you?
Genuinely asking cause I missed it
And for sure the broadcast had no idea what was going on, and the rationale for reversing the goal
You are absolutely correct & the other ref has hosed us as well. Disgusting & disgraceful way to steal such an important win from Rutgers. Hobbs should go ballistic with the BIG TEN. Result needs to be reversed
i really hope he flips so tables over in Chicago...between the OSU game last year, and this game...it's beyond disgraceful.
our hazing period has gone on long enough...enough already!
there is no fkng way that would have happened to anyone else in the B1G. the announcers were literally dumbfounded as to what was happening. as were both teams. hell, NW was ready to congratulate us.
SUCH BS!
According to Wikipedia here is the rule :
Similar to a penalty shot in ice hockey, the attacker gets a chance to run with the ball in a one-on-one situation against the goalkeeper.[4] The attacker starts on the 23-metre line with the ball and the goalkeeper starts on the goal line. When the whistle is blown, both can move and the attacker has 8 seconds to score a goal.[5] Unlike a penalty stroke or penalty corner there are no restrictions on strokes the attacker may use to score and a goal is scored in the usual way. If the attacker commits an offence, the ball travels outside the field of play,[nb 3] or 8 seconds elapse before the ball crosses the line a goal is not awarded. If the goalkeeper unintentionally fouls the attacker then the penalty shoot-out is re-taken; in the event the foul was intentional[nb 3] a penalty stroke is awarded.[3]
It seems that the ball did not cross the line until 8.1 seconds.
Similar to a penalty shot in ice hockey, the attacker gets a chance to run with the ball in a one-on-one situation against the goalkeeper.[4] The attacker starts on the 23-metre line with the ball and the goalkeeper starts on the goal line. When the whistle is blown, both can move and the attacker has 8 seconds to score a goal.[5] Unlike a penalty stroke or penalty corner there are no restrictions on strokes the attacker may use to score and a goal is scored in the usual way. If the attacker commits an offence, the ball travels outside the field of play,[nb 3] or 8 seconds elapse before the ball crosses the line a goal is not awarded. If the goalkeeper unintentionally fouls the attacker then the penalty shoot-out is re-taken; in the event the foul was intentional[nb 3] a penalty stroke is awarded.[3]
It seems that the ball did not cross the line until 8.1 seconds.
I'm glad it was posted. I didn't watch so hearing the announcer totally aghast at what just happened was enlightening. Even if it was close, how in the world do these refs just steal an undefeated regular season and first ever Big 10 Championship with a decision that wasn't clear cut? Total bullcrap.
This is screaming for a sarcastic response, however m, the girls on the field for Northwestern didn’t do anything wrong.
From this video, I'm getting under 8 seconds with my stop watch every time. Unfortunately, this video doesn't seem to capture exactly when the play started.
So I'm reading about this more and RU was up 3-1 after 3 rounds? Man, this really sucks.
We can still get a share of the regular season title if UMD beats NW and we beat Iowa. Not impossible. Hopefully, this travesty gives RU extra motivation in the Big 10 and NCAA Tournaments.
It seems? In my view it seems that the ball crossed the line in under 8 seconds. You're going to take a win away from a team in such an important game on that basis! Total screw job. As Scarlet posted, this wouldn't have ever happened to another team in the BIG.
and furthermore, is FH like other sports where there has to be incontroversial evidence to OVERTURN a call on the field
look, let's all just acknowledge what happened here: RUTGERS GOT FCKED...AGAIN
When I say it seems, I'm not making that judgement call but that's apparently what the ref said. Also from the tweet above apparently there was no ruling on the field and it went right to review :
"It wasn’t overturned because there wasn’t a ruling on the field. It immediately went to review."
That last line quoted above is what stands out to me. No call on the field and immediately went to review. How does something that doesn’t get called go immediately to review. No one is saying the call was challenged by Northwestern,unless of course I missed that, and who is in charge of review? I can’t imagine there is a replay official watching for reviewable offenses. This has railroad job written all over it. If the ref didn’t make the “judgement call” as you say. The. Who did make the call?
the commentators said that the NW coach challenged the goal
not saying thats what happened...just saying what the B1G+ announcers said
but...I agree that this has railroad/fvkjob written all over it
In terms of when the play started -- I don't know the rule, but I have to imagine it starts WHEN THE OFFENSIVE PLAYER TOUCHES THE BALL, and NOT when she just starts her run toward the ball.
If so, this goal absolutely occurred before 8 seconds elapsed.
WE. GOT. SCREWED.
AGAIN.
Did watch the game as someone that has seen maybe 4 other FH games. The outcome is awful but cannot deny that the team had opportunities to win against the #1 team in the nation. RU played a great game, but just could not close the deal. The announcers mentioned how Rutgers lost the 2nd half - and seemed like the speed of NW was too much to overcome. Then RU had two of those corner shots in 2 OT, but missed (again, think the speed of NW just closed in on Rutgers too fast). Then in the shootout, RU was up by 3-1.
On the winning goal waved off, it was NW that challenged the call right away. However, as others have noted, the announcers could not see where the infraction was and thought it took way too much time. The announcers seemed confident at first when the refs were talking to the ground team, as if preparing for the celebration by RU, only to be shocked when then came out and waved off the goal.
Then the winning NW goal could not be challenged, and it looked like there were some issues with it, because RU had already used their challenge unsuccessfully.
On the winning goal waved off, it was NW that challenged the call right away. However, as others have noted, the announcers could not see where the infraction was and thought it took way too much time. The announcers seemed confident at first when the refs were talking to the ground team, as if preparing for the celebration by RU, only to be shocked when then came out and waved off the goal.
Then the winning NW goal could not be challenged, and it looked like there were some issues with it, because RU had already used their challenge unsuccessfully.
The video that I responded to was not the one where the announcers were totally aghast, it was the tweet from NW regarding them winning the championship which they didn’t.
Is there ANY video where you can see the whistle being blown (which is the rule, SEE ABOVE, and NOT when she starts her run/touches the ball)???
