Blue Division:
1. Arvada, Co (n/a)
2. Jefferson (56)
3. Roseville (13)
4. Spring Lake Park (47)
Gold Division:
1. Apple Valley (74)
2. Kennedy (54)
3. Marquette, MI (n/a)
4. Woodbury (10)
White Division:
1. Burnsville (5)
2. Eastview (43)
3. High Land Central (60)
4. Thunder Bay (n/a)
Silver Division:
1. Champlin Park (24)
2. Lakeville north (27)
3. Prior Lake\Savage (6)
4. Rosemount (2)
Top 8 teams move on to Championship Bracket:
http://www.bloomingtonhockey.com/page/s ... tournament
2010 Bloomington Midwest Holiday (PW A Tourney) 12/28-1/1/11
Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)
2010 Bloomington Midwest Holiday (PW A Tourney) 12/28-1/1/11
Last edited by MNHawker on Mon Dec 27, 2010 9:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
seek & destroy
- Posts: 328
- Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 2:38 pm
Re: 2010 Bloomington Midwest Holiday (PW A Tourney) 12/28-1/
MNHawker wrote:Blue Division:
1. Arvada, Co (n/a)
2. Jefferson (56)
3. Roseville (13)
4. Spring Lake Park (47)
Gold Division:
1. Apple Valley (74)
2. Kennedy (54)
3. Marquette, MI (n/a)
4. Woodbury (10)
White Division:
1. Burnsville (5)
2. Eastview (43)
3. High Land Central (60)
4. Thunder Bay (n/a)
Silver Division:
1. Champlin Park (24)
2. Lakeville north (27)
3. Prior Lake\Savage (6)
4. Rosemount (2)
Top 8 teams move on to Championship Bracket:
http://www.bloomingtonhockey.com/page/s ... tournament
Top 8 teams coming out of pool play:
1. Burnsville
2. Rosemount
3. Roseville
4. Woodbury
5. ThunderBay
6. Prior Lake/Savage
7. Arvada, Co.
8. Apple Valley
Quarters
Burnsville vs Apple Valley = Burnsville
Woodbury vs ThunderBay = Woodbury
Rosemount vs Arvada, Co. = Rosemount
Roseville vs Prior Lake = Prior Lake
Semis
Burnsville vs Woodbury = Burnsville
Rosemount vs Prior Lake = Rosemount
Final
Burnsville vs Rosemount = Burnsville in OT 5-4
-
hockeysmart
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 10:18 pm
Arvada is from CO. They have brought a team to this tournament for a number of years in a row. They are AA team and play mostly teams in WY and CO. This team has been competitive in their schedule. They rank as 56th in Tier 2 according to Myhockey website which is fairly accurate. Not a lot of info out there that I feel like finding. This should be a good team.
Thunder Bay has played well in northern tournaments. They have been competititve with traditional Minnesota powers. Overall, this team has played upwards of 33 or 34 games. They play in Ontario of course and sometimes play AA Bantam teams. The Kings have scored 142 goals and given up 112. They are led by #19 Belisle, he has 53 points and 32 penalty minutes. This team can score goals in bunches
Marquette is a AA team from the UP in Michigan. They have traveled to Minnesota 1 time and to Western WI once as well. They played Superior beating them 3-1, and Hermantown losing 8-2. This team should be a top 60 team in Minnesota. Marquette Sentinals are sponsored by City Insurance and have played 33 games, mostly against AA teams in WI and MI going 10-10-3. There is not much info on the player stats for this team. The dress 15 and 2. I expect this team to be competitive.
I would rank these teams Thunder Bay, Arvada and then Marquette. Thunder Bay should compete with Roseville for 1st in that division. Marqette and Apple Valley should combat for 2nd in that division. Arvada should compete with Spring Lake Park for 2nd in that division.
Thunder Bay has played well in northern tournaments. They have been competititve with traditional Minnesota powers. Overall, this team has played upwards of 33 or 34 games. They play in Ontario of course and sometimes play AA Bantam teams. The Kings have scored 142 goals and given up 112. They are led by #19 Belisle, he has 53 points and 32 penalty minutes. This team can score goals in bunches
Marquette is a AA team from the UP in Michigan. They have traveled to Minnesota 1 time and to Western WI once as well. They played Superior beating them 3-1, and Hermantown losing 8-2. This team should be a top 60 team in Minnesota. Marquette Sentinals are sponsored by City Insurance and have played 33 games, mostly against AA teams in WI and MI going 10-10-3. There is not much info on the player stats for this team. The dress 15 and 2. I expect this team to be competitive.
I would rank these teams Thunder Bay, Arvada and then Marquette. Thunder Bay should compete with Roseville for 1st in that division. Marqette and Apple Valley should combat for 2nd in that division. Arvada should compete with Spring Lake Park for 2nd in that division.
http://www.bloomingtonhockey.com/page/s ... tournamentold goalie85 wrote:Any scores yet???
-
frederick61
- Posts: 1039
- Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2007 1:54 pm
The Apple Valley/Marquette game ended in a 3-3 tie.
One interesting note about the Rosemount/Prior Lake game, the winning goal was scored with about two minutes left in the game. Prior Lake scored the goal just as coincidental Rosemount penalties ended. The Lakers had a 5 on 3 advantage.
The coincidental penalties were called late in the game. The first was the result of some contact between two players, the call going against Rosemount. The second however was called immediately after the first. A ref called the penalty against a few Rosemount fans in the stands who had been needling the refs with words like "keep it in your pocket".
After the ref made the first penalty call, he had heard enough. He skated over to the stands in front of the Rosemount fans and told them a penalty would be assessed, skated over to the Rosemount bench and got a player. The Rosemount fans said nothing after that.
I have never seen that happen personally in all the hockey games I have attended. I have seen refs throw fans out of the stands for being rowdy and abusive. So I am torn about the refs behavior.
I had sat next to the Rosemount fans the ref addressed all game. They were persistent in objections to the calls that went against their team, but not overly abusive (no swearing, no personal attacks on the refs, just things like keep it in your pocket). Am I missing something?
One interesting note about the Rosemount/Prior Lake game, the winning goal was scored with about two minutes left in the game. Prior Lake scored the goal just as coincidental Rosemount penalties ended. The Lakers had a 5 on 3 advantage.
The coincidental penalties were called late in the game. The first was the result of some contact between two players, the call going against Rosemount. The second however was called immediately after the first. A ref called the penalty against a few Rosemount fans in the stands who had been needling the refs with words like "keep it in your pocket".
After the ref made the first penalty call, he had heard enough. He skated over to the stands in front of the Rosemount fans and told them a penalty would be assessed, skated over to the Rosemount bench and got a player. The Rosemount fans said nothing after that.
I have never seen that happen personally in all the hockey games I have attended. I have seen refs throw fans out of the stands for being rowdy and abusive. So I am torn about the refs behavior.
I had sat next to the Rosemount fans the ref addressed all game. They were persistent in objections to the calls that went against their team, but not overly abusive (no swearing, no personal attacks on the refs, just things like keep it in your pocket). Am I missing something?
The penalty assessed for fan behavior should never have happened. There is no rule in USA hockey allowing for an on-ice penalty for fan behavior. The only recourse is asking the coach to quiet his fans or ejecting the fan. It's a shame that this very poor call by an official may have had an impact on the outcome of the game. And to all who will start talking about bad tripping calls, etc, those are judgement issues. This is purely a rule issue!!
-
thespellchecker
- Posts: 293
- Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 10:42 pm
RINK 2?frederick61 wrote:The Apple Valley/Marquette game ended in a 3-3 tie.
One interesting note about the Rosemount/Prior Lake game, the winning goal was scored with about two minutes left in the game. Prior Lake scored the goal just as coincidental Rosemount penalties ended. The Lakers had a 5 on 3 advantage.
The coincidental penalties were called late in the game. The first was the result of some contact between two players, the call going against Rosemount. The second however was called immediately after the first. A ref called the penalty against a few Rosemount fans in the stands who had been needling the refs with words like "keep it in your pocket".
After the ref made the first penalty call, he had heard enough. He skated over to the stands in front of the Rosemount fans and told them a penalty would be assessed, skated over to the Rosemount bench and got a player. The Rosemount fans said nothing after that.
I have never seen that happen personally in all the hockey games I have attended. I have seen refs throw fans out of the stands for being rowdy and abusive. So I am torn about the refs behavior.
I had sat next to the Rosemount fans the ref addressed all game. They were persistent in objections to the calls that went against their team, but not overly abusive (no swearing, no personal attacks on the refs, just things like keep it in your pocket). Am I missing something?
-
InigoMontoya
- Posts: 1716
- Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 12:36 pm
If the coach cannot quiet his fans a bench minor is assessed.woodley wrote:The penalty assessed for fan behavior should never have happened. There is no rule in USA hockey allowing for an on-ice penalty for fan behavior. The only recourse is asking the coach to quiet his fans or ejecting the fan. It's a shame that this very poor call by an official may have had an impact on the outcome of the game. And to all who will start talking about bad tripping calls, etc, those are judgement issues. This is purely a rule issue!!
woodley, there IS such a rule in place. If it's MN Hockey or USA Hockey, I don't know. A team can be assessed a bench minor if its spectators are deemed to be abusive.
The officiating yesterday was suspect to say the least. In one of the Bantam A games, two opposing players ran into each other "near" the puck and each player got an interference call. Literally, both players were skating at the puck and knocked each other and coincidental interference penalties were called.
The officiating yesterday was suspect to say the least. In one of the Bantam A games, two opposing players ran into each other "near" the puck and each player got an interference call. Literally, both players were skating at the puck and knocked each other and coincidental interference penalties were called.
-
old goalie85
- Posts: 3696
- Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 6:37 pm
Sorry guys but I think this is like the old, "he got the puck first so it's not tripping" folk lore. If there is a rule, all of my reffing clinics and exams have been mistaken. Please cite to the rule. I don't think it exists.
Just grabbed my USA hockey rule book. Here's what it says on page xxii of the preface under Zero Tolerance with the heading Parents/Spectators. " The game will be stopped by game officials when parents/spectators displaying inappropriate or disruptive behavior interfere with other spectators or the game. The game officials will identify violators to the coaches for the purpose of removing parents/spectators from the spectator's viewing and game area. Once removed, play will resume. Lost time will not be replaced and violators may be subject to further disciplinary action by the local governing body."
This section also allow the imposition of penalties to players or coaches for violating the zero tolerance policy.
Just grabbed my USA hockey rule book. Here's what it says on page xxii of the preface under Zero Tolerance with the heading Parents/Spectators. " The game will be stopped by game officials when parents/spectators displaying inappropriate or disruptive behavior interfere with other spectators or the game. The game officials will identify violators to the coaches for the purpose of removing parents/spectators from the spectator's viewing and game area. Once removed, play will resume. Lost time will not be replaced and violators may be subject to further disciplinary action by the local governing body."
This section also allow the imposition of penalties to players or coaches for violating the zero tolerance policy.
Last edited by woodley on Wed Dec 29, 2010 11:14 am, edited 2 times in total.
Page 37 of Youth Hockey Rule Book
XIV. CONDUCT A. Racial or ethnic slurs and/or harassing conduct of any kind will not be tolerated. B. Each team is responsible for the conduct of it's spectators. Coaches should advise their parents and other fans of the conduct rules. C. If spectator conduct becomes so abusive that, in the referee(s) opinion, it is distracting from the game or inciting the players, the referee(s) may stop play and: 1. Ask the coach(es) to control their spectators. 2. Ask the coach(es) to request specified individuals to leave the arena. 3. Disruptive use of artificial noise makers will be considered abusive conduct. 4. Possession of a device that could be deemed detrimental to the players or to the conduct of the game, such as laser pointers, will be considered abusive conduct and shall be reported to local law enforcement officials. During MH playoffs or invitational tournaments, the MH District Director, designated district personnel or the tournament director shall have the authority to take actions as necessary to control spectator conduct. D. Failure of a coach to cooperate with a referee's request within two (2) minutes will result in a bench minor penalty and a warning from the referee that after an additional two (2) minutes, the game will be suspended. The game suspension will be immediately reported to the Supervisor of Officials who will then inform the cognizant MH District Director. E. Spectators standing by the boards behind the goalkeeper are not allowed to deliberately distract the goal-keeper. The referee may request anyone in violation of this rule to move or leave the arena. In an appro-priate case, the referee may declare the game to be forfeited to the team of the goalkeeper being distracted
XIV. CONDUCT A. Racial or ethnic slurs and/or harassing conduct of any kind will not be tolerated. B. Each team is responsible for the conduct of it's spectators. Coaches should advise their parents and other fans of the conduct rules. C. If spectator conduct becomes so abusive that, in the referee(s) opinion, it is distracting from the game or inciting the players, the referee(s) may stop play and: 1. Ask the coach(es) to control their spectators. 2. Ask the coach(es) to request specified individuals to leave the arena. 3. Disruptive use of artificial noise makers will be considered abusive conduct. 4. Possession of a device that could be deemed detrimental to the players or to the conduct of the game, such as laser pointers, will be considered abusive conduct and shall be reported to local law enforcement officials. During MH playoffs or invitational tournaments, the MH District Director, designated district personnel or the tournament director shall have the authority to take actions as necessary to control spectator conduct. D. Failure of a coach to cooperate with a referee's request within two (2) minutes will result in a bench minor penalty and a warning from the referee that after an additional two (2) minutes, the game will be suspended. The game suspension will be immediately reported to the Supervisor of Officials who will then inform the cognizant MH District Director. E. Spectators standing by the boards behind the goalkeeper are not allowed to deliberately distract the goal-keeper. The referee may request anyone in violation of this rule to move or leave the arena. In an appro-priate case, the referee may declare the game to be forfeited to the team of the goalkeeper being distracted
I am actually way more familiar with the ref just giving the fan the hook!! I suppose you could allow the coach to leave the bench area to remove the fan, but in reality, what Frederick described is heard every day by lots of refs! If they are not abusive, I just ignore them, if they are out of line often the other parents/spectators from their own team will handle it!!
In the Eden Prairie tournament the Rosea coach was threatened with a bench minor if he didn't get the fans on the glass to have a seat and be quiet. They moved, no penalty.
Having just come from the PeeWee B tournament, and I truly hate to pick on refs, but worst overall job I have ever saw in a tournament.
Having just come from the PeeWee B tournament, and I truly hate to pick on refs, but worst overall job I have ever saw in a tournament.
-
kopernicus
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 8:52 pm