Cornell 2024

[Ezra White]

I have a question which maybe someone more knowledgeable than I can answer.

When a team has a player sitting out a nonreleasable penalty, obviously the team must play a man down. But in yesterday's Cornell-Denver game, this seemed to result in the additional penalty that the team also must have one fewer wing player on faceoffs during the penalty. Is this a rule?

In other words, when playing a man down, why not have three (2-way) midfielders and one fewer attacker? One midfielder would take the faceoff, and the other two would play the wings on the faceoff. This at least would not doubly disadvantage the team serving the penalty: a man-down AND 1/3 of its faceoff unit removed.

[NNELax]

NFHS 4.4.3 and NCAA 4.4.c (it's the exact same rule)

During the faceoff in all penalty situations, there must be four players in the defensive area and three players in the offensive area.

EXCEPTION: When a team has three players in the penalty area, a player may come out of his defensive area to take the faceoff but must remain onside. (See 4.10 SITUATION J).

[getitdone]

They changed the rule a few years ago so that the extra man team had an advantage on the face off. I think a smart and fair rule change.

[getitdone]

It was my understanding that Kirst got a 1 min unreleasable penalty and so did the coaches. That is why Cornell was down 2 as there was 2 penalties. Still I thought Cornell had the game and the momentum until that point. The Denver goalie stole a goal or two down the stretch. I did think the ref's played a part in this game and while the bigger calls went against Cornell, they missed others that should have gone Denver's way. Fun game to watch. Hope to see the Big Red as Ivy Champs this year. Firth or Long should have been handling the ball at the end of the game and setting Kirst up to shoot. Firth is REALLY impressive.

[getitdone]

It was my understanding that Kirst got a 1 min unreleasable penalty and so did the coaches. That is why Cornell was down 2 as there was 2 penalties. Still I thought Cornell had the game and the momentum until that point. The Denver goalie stole a goal or two down the stretch. I did think the ref's played a part in this game and while the bigger calls went against Cornell, they missed others that should have gone Denver's way. Fun game to watch. Hope to see the Big Red as Ivy Champs this year. Firth or Long should have been handling the ball at the end of the game and setting Kirst up to shoot. Firth is REALLY impressive.

[Laxfan1977]

Some of the oldest and most experienced referees continue long past their prime. Physical fitness was an issue, position, judgement on the non-releasable calls and protection of their egos on player dissent. But also it was the missed shot to Wirtheim’s head after a goal in the first half and an obvious hold by the neck on a fast break that added to players frustration. No one retires heavyweight champ. That was one of the poorest officiating performances I’ve seen since 1977.

[The Orfling]

As referenced in my post yesterday, I would like to know if "high hits" now translate to 2 minute unreleasble penalties. If this is the case, I'm sure its been sanctioned from "above," given the sensitivity to head/neck injuries.
In the past, you only saw the 2 minute on flagrant hits. Is this now the norm, or was yesterday a bit of an outlier (aka "screw job")? Unfortunately, given the lack of replays, I was unable to judge the severity of any of the Cornell hits in real time. I'll go back and watch.
What I do know is that I've watched several game this season and have not seen an across-the-board interpretation of what we saw yesterday.

Adding insult to injury to Cornell fans is the irony of sorts of having Kirst called on an unsportsmanlike call (resulting in the last of the 2 man down EMOs), after he's cross-checked on the crease circle.

We are dealing with a "new normal" here for sure -- I think there will be a ton of unreleasable penalties this year until players can adjust to how the game is being called. The major silver lining is the protection from concussive hits, but from a competitive standpoint it's really tough for athletes/defenders adjusting to the fact that hits that were either deemed legal or at worst releasable penalties in the past can be game-killing mistakes. We are not at the point the women's game was at in the 1980s when defenders could basically neither make body contact nor any stick contact legally and games were constantly decided by goals scored off free positions, but unfortunately I think we'll have a lot more "that game changed course due to an unreleasable penalty" narratives going forward.

As VeryRustyRed notes, in this case the general issue -- which all teams will have to adjust to -- was exacerbated by referees (a) missing a couple of extremely obvious calls against Denver (including the very late hit against Wirtheim after he scored for Cornell early in the game and an in-transition loose ball foul that cleared the way for Denver to score a key late-game goal); and (b) having "rabbit ears" and giving unsportsmanlike conduct penalties for complaints about at least arguably missed calls. As someone who officiated several sports back in the day, if you maybe missed the call, don't make it worse by flagging/giving a technical to a coach/player with a legitimate gripe. Nobody paid their money to watch you officiate -- don't make yourself the center of the action.

Anyway, lots to like about Cornell's performance and they'll be playing a lot of great lacrosse before this season goes into the books. A quick bounce-back opportunity against Hobart comes up on Tuesday and then they've got a stretch of four games against teams currently ranked in the top 20.

[wahoomurf]

Hate to be the bearer of bad news but Jack tore his left ACL in Thursday practice. Freak injury. Nothing out of the ordinary. Just plant, cut, boom. As you can imagine he’s gutted by it all.

Argh! So sorry to hear that! So tough on these young men who work so hard and then bad luck strikes. Best wishes to Jack for a full recovery as soon as possible.

Is his season over? Great athlete and a terrific young man.

Unfortunately yes.

Hope the two other FO guys from Long Island will step and fill the void.

[ChadCascadden]

Will Jack now get a medical Red shirt, and preserve another year of eligibility?

Gobigred
Joewillie78
[/quote]

Fair question. Not sure. Hadn’t really thought about it till now. I suppose technically he could but I’m not up to date on eligibility rules.

[VeryRustyRed]

A few excellent comments on prior posts...

-Orfling - yes, I'm afraid that yesterday's calls may portend the new normal, though I'd prefer to call them "the canary in the coalmine." Unfortunately, a 2 minute is bad enough, but in lacrosse, unlike football or hoops where the team scored on gets the ball, unreleasable penalties frequently lead to multiple goals. Even more so when you have to face off with only one wing (and yesterday, it was 0 wings on at least one occasion).
I think this is unduly harsh.
-Laxfan1997 - yes, you identified two of the three flagrant missed ref calls (i.e., Wirtheim hit to the head after his score, and the hold around the neck) - I'd throw in the failed cross check on Kirst that led to the last unreleasble in the first place. These three certainly exacerbated the reaction of Cornell fans.
-JoeWillie - there are not "medical redshirts" in the Ivy per se. Jack would have to go the route taken by a (growing) number of Cornelll players over the years - John Glynn and RP III being the most noteworthy. I think a Lombardi may have fallen into this category as well. Those guys took at least a semester off. I BELIEVE the process for Pannell was: he may have completed spring classes in the year he was injured, but did not fulfill grad requirements, by intent. He then applied to the Ivy League which has to give approval & used the Fall semester for some Cornell/Ivy League approved endeavor that he applied for, and rejoined the team in January of his final season.

*My sources tell me that Bozzi may have suffered a serious injury. I did not see him on the field in the 4th quarter.

[Chousnake]

I try to keep my heart out of it, but how do they throw the Big Red in for multiple non-releasables but miss Denver #2 literally cross check our goalie in the back? Denver fans can “claim” it didn’t happen, problem is some of us spent $8.95 to watch this and listen to Bill Tierney who is one of the biggest cry baby coaches in the sport. New actually posting here but will try and attach the screenshots,

And before you tell me that there is a lot going on….. this was a dead ball where #2 decided he was a little punk and to cross check our goalie in the back. Let him do it in a pick up game and see what happens. Especially since the refs decided they would miss it twice today?!?!?!?

Tierney was fine. The play-by-play guy was just horrible. Tierney gave equal praise to plays and players on both teams throughout the broadcast. Of course there's homerism, what would anyone expect as his team (just one year out) came back to steal a win.

The pbp dude gave no indication of what the numerous penalties were or why they were flagged. His lack of understanding the game led to a lot of dead air and as if he forgot he was doing radio and those listening could actually see what was happening.

So I'd be really curious to see clips of the game that show the controversial calls and non-calls.

It seems as though Big Red fans have a legit gripe?

11 years of being on Lax Power and Fan Lax, I've never seen Big Red fans seriously complaining about refs like this.

I've been watching Cornell lax since 1978 in person and online and have not missed many games since 2005. Yesterday was the biggest officiating travesty I have ever seen in all those years and it isn't even close. In some games there is a call or two that influences the game. Yesterday there was one egregious non-call on Cornell's first goal that would have been ok had the refs let them play all day. Then there were 7-8 calls in the second half that all went Denver's way that led directly to 7 or 8 Denver goals.

1. On Cornell's first goal by Wirtheim, he was hit 2-3 seconds late and high after scoring. It was blatant and the official was staring right at it. No call. If you're not going to make this obvious call early, why make the all the late calls vs Cornell and make them unreleasable penalties?

2. Cornell defenseman Malone got a 2 minute non-releasable penalty for unnecessary roughness early in the second half with Cornell up 11-8. I looked and looked on the streaming feed for the foul, but never saw anything that warranted such a severe penalty. Denver scored twice .

3. With three minutes left in the third quarter, Cornell led 14-10 with the ball. I watched this sequence over and over. Kirst was trying to get open off ball to the right of the crease. A DU defensemen cross checked him hard in the back sending him sprawling into the crease. The officials not only miss the cross check, but whistle Kirst for being in the crease. Kirst says something and gets flagged to unsportsmanlike conduct - 2 minutes non-releasable. When DU gets the ball, Cornell is down 2 men for 2 minutes. The box score says Cadigan got 2 minutes unreleasable also for unsportsmanlike conduct. I'm not sure if he said something or if the coaches did. I don't see Cadigan talking to the refs after the cross-check in the crease non call. I'm not sure what the officials were thinking here. Kirst was on the ground in the crease and didn't have the ball, so it wasn't a bang-bang dive/push play that is hard to call. Did they really think Kirst fell face first in the crease on his own? And neither official saw this? And I understand that Kirst may have said something pretty bad to get a penalty and I'm sure the coaches were pissed two, but to call two two minute unreleasable penalties after such a bad non-call is just inexcusable. Denver scored twice on these penalties to make it 14-12. So that's a non call on the cross check, a wrong call on the crease violation, and two ridiculously stringent penalties on Cornell.

4. Late in the 4th, Cornell up 15-14, Cornell gets a turnover and is clearing. While Cornell is bringing the ball upfield uncontested, a Cornell defender and a DU attack get their feet tangled. The SSDM was already past these two players . It was clearly inadvertent. Cornell loses possession for interference. Denver scores to tie the game.

5. Cornell is clearing late in the quarter and I think Davis is held and tripped and loses the ball. No call. Denver scores.

6. Late in the game, a DU player steps on Staub's stick and falls down. Staub gets called for tripping. Denver scores.

These penalties also forced Cornell to face off about 8 times with only one or no wings, making it easy for Denver to maintain possession.

Somebody else mentioned that Knust was cross checked once or twice with no calls as well.

That's a 7 goal swing. Great job. The face off rule makes lacrosse a huge momentum sport and these calls gave DU enormous momentum, over and over and over again. These officials should never ref another D1 game. They and the NCAA should issue an apology to Cornell (as if that would help). There is a reason, I think, that there are no quotes from Cornell coaches or players in any write ups. They must be beside themselves.

Think about it. Cornell travels across the country to play a top 10 team that has played three games already and is without its FOGO who won 75% of draws vs Lehigh. Cornell holds its own vs one of the best FOGOs in the country and is outplaying Denver and is in control with 17-18 minutes to go despite playing only its second game, despite the altitude. And then the officials make a series of 7 egregiously bad calls - one after another after another - that don't make any sense. And these calls give Denver 7 goals and Cornell loses by a single goal. It's just heart breaking and maddening.

[Lamotta]

There’s very little that can be done about poor officiating. But that was poor officiating. Im ok with swallowing the whistle occasionally, but to use it, and so obviously influence the game, is borderline shameful.

Real bummer. I suspect the Big Red have learned a valuable lesson.

[enterprise]

I try to keep my heart out of it, but how do they throw the Big Red in for multiple non-releasables but miss Denver #2 literally cross check our goalie in the back? Denver fans can “claim” it didn’t happen, problem is some of us spent $8.95 to watch this and listen to Bill Tierney who is one of the biggest cry baby coaches in the sport. New actually posting here but will try and attach the screenshots,

And before you tell me that there is a lot going on….. this was a dead ball where #2 decided he was a little punk and to cross check our goalie in the back. Let him do it in a pick up game and see what happens. Especially since the refs decided they would miss it twice today?!?!?!?

Tierney was fine. The play-by-play guy was just horrible. Tierney gave equal praise to plays and players on both teams throughout the broadcast. Of course there's homerism, what would anyone expect as his team (just one year out) came back to steal a win.

The pbp dude gave no indication of what the numerous penalties were or why they were flagged. His lack of understanding the game led to a lot of dead air and as if he forgot he was doing radio and those listening could actually see what was happening.

So I'd be really curious to see clips of the game that show the controversial calls and non-calls.

It seems as though Big Red fans have a legit gripe?

11 years of being on Lax Power and Fan Lax, I've never seen Big Red fans seriously complaining about refs like this.

I've been watching Cornell lax since 1978 in person and online and have not missed many games since 2005. Yesterday was the biggest officiating travesty I have ever seen in all those years and it isn't even close. In some games there is a call or two that influences the game. Yesterday there was one egregious non-call on Cornell's first goal that would have been ok had the refs let them play all day. Then there were 7-8 calls in the second half that all went Denver's way that led directly to 7 or 8 Denver goals.

1. On Cornell's first goal by Wirtheim, he was hit 2-3 seconds late and high after scoring. It was blatant and the official was staring right at it. No call. If you're not going to make this obvious call early, why make the all the late calls vs Cornell and make them unreleasable penalties?

2. Cornell defenseman Malone got a 2 minute non-releasable penalty for unnecessary roughness early in the second half with Cornell up 11-8. I looked and looked on the streaming feed for the foul, but never saw anything that warranted such a severe penalty. Denver scored twice .

3. With three minutes left in the third quarter, Cornell led 14-10 with the ball. I watched this sequence over and over. Kirst was trying to get open off ball to the right of the crease. A DU defensemen cross checked him hard in the back sending him sprawling into the crease. The officials not only miss the cross check, but whistle Kirst for being in the crease. Kirst says something and gets flagged to unsportsmanlike conduct - 2 minutes non-releasable. When DU gets the ball, Cornell is down 2 men for 2 minutes. The box score says Cadigan got 2 minutes unreleasable also for unsportsmanlike conduct. I'm not sure if he said something or if the coaches did. I don't see Cadigan talking to the refs after the cross-check in the crease non call. I'm not sure what the officials were thinking here. Kirst was on the ground in the crease and didn't have the ball, so it wasn't a bang-bang dive/push play that is hard to call. Did they really think Kirst fell face first in the crease on his own? And neither official saw this? And I understand that Kirst may have said something pretty bad to get a penalty and I'm sure the coaches were ticked two, but to call two two minute unreleasable penalties after such a bad non-call is just inexcusable. Denver scored twice on these penalties to make it 14-12. So that's a non call on the cross check, a wrong call on the crease violation, and two ridiculously stringent penalties on Cornell.

4. Late in the 4th, Cornell up 15-14, Cornell gets a turnover and is clearing. While Cornell is bringing the ball upfield uncontested, a Cornell defender and a DU attack get their feet tangled. The SSDM was already past these two players . It was clearly inadvertent. Cornell loses possession for interference. Denver scores to tie the game.

5. Cornell is clearing late in the quarter and I think Davis is held and tripped and loses the ball. No call. Denver scores.

6. Late in the game, a DU player steps on Staub's stick and falls down. Staub gets called for tripping. Denver scores.

These penalties also forced Cornell to face off about 8 times with only one or no wings, making it easy for Denver to maintain possession.

Somebody else mentioned that Knust was cross checked once or twice with no calls as well.

That's a 7 goal swing. Great job. The face off rule makes lacrosse a huge momentum sport and these calls gave DU enormous momentum, over and over and over again. These officials should never ref another D1 game. They and the NCAA should issue an apology to Cornell (as if that would help). There is a reason, I think, that there are no quotes from Cornell coaches or players in any write ups. They must be beside themselves.

Think about it. Cornell travels across the country to play a top 10 team that has played three games already and is without its FOGO who won 75% of draws vs Lehigh. Cornell holds its own vs one of the best FOGOs in the country and is outplaying Denver and is in control with 17-18 minutes to go despite playing only its second game, despite the altitude. And then the officials make a series of 7 egregiously bad calls - one after another after another - that don't make any sense. And these calls give Denver 7 goals and Cornell loses by a single goal. It's just heart breaking and maddening.

Well said, and I appreciate the explanation you provided for those who didn't see the game. I was there yesterday and wasn't about to pay $8.95 to watch that travesty again so I could share the sordid details. I arrived at Cornell the same year as Richie Moran and I agree 100%. Worst officiating I ever saw in a Cornell game.

[CU77]

It was my understanding that Kirst got a 1 min unreleasable penalty and so did the coaches.

If that's true (or even if the penalty was just on Kirst), it's quite ironic that it happened at the school where the former coach was known for screaming his head off at the refs throughout the game, every game, and never drawing a penalty for it.

[faircornell]

It was my understanding that Kirst got a 1 min unreleasable penalty and so did the coaches.

If that's true (or even if the penalty was just on Kirst), it's quite ironic that it happened at the school where the former coach was known for screaming his head off at the refs throughout the game, every game, and never drawing a penalty for it.

This will likely be my last post on this topic. I had two additional points:

1. I'm not sure that I know two more polite and respectful communicators than Connor Buck and CJ Kirst. While we'll never know, it's difficult to believe that anything that they said could have been outrageously offensive.

2. This game was not played in some converted cornfield in Kentucky with somebody's uncle refereeing. It was played in a city with two professional lacrosse teams in a beautiful purpose-built stadium, with NCAA qualified refs. This type of officiating behavior is simply bad for the game. Lacrosse is a growing sport, with all types of money being spent to expand the sport to under-represented US populations as well as new international markets. This type of official behavior reflects poorly on both the tradition of the game as well as its ongoing development.

[mfp]

Honest question: do you think this topic of discussion (bad/terrible/worst-in-decades officiating changing the result of this game) will get any traction outside of this forum?

I don't think it will. The story on Inside Lacrosse makes minimal mention of penalties (Confidence, Composure & Connell's Eventual Winner Lift Pios Past Cornell in Shootout Thriller >>>https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/ ... ller/62673). The title tells you all you need to know.

All of us think this is a big deal, but I am skeptical than many others will notice.

[Ezra White]

It was my understanding that Kirst got a 1 min unreleasable penalty and so did the coaches.

If that's true (or even if the penalty was just on Kirst), it's quite ironic that it happened at the school where the former coach was known for screaming his head off at the refs throughout the game, every game, and never drawing a penalty for it.

This will likely be my last post on this topic. I had two additional points:

1. I'm not sure that I know two more polite and respectful communicators than Connor Buck and CJ Kirst. While we'll never know, it's difficult to believe that anything that they said could have been outrageously offensive.

2. This game was not played in some converted cornfield in Kentucky with somebody's uncle refereeing. It was played in a city with two professional lacrosse teams in a beautiful purpose-built stadium, with NCAA qualified refs. This type of officiating behavior is simply bad for the game. Lacrosse is a growing sport, with all types of money being spent to expand the sport to under-represented US populations as well as new international markets. This type of official behavior reflects poorly on both the tradition of the game as well as its ongoing development.

Agree with what people have said about officiating, but I'll add this. In a field sport like lacrosse there's usually some judgement and discretion in officiating. Good officiating does not make itself the major factor in a game. I'm not saying don't call obvious fouls, but don't make legitimately questionable calls that very likely will determine the outcome of the game.

Also, yesterday provided two contrasting examples. In the Cornell v Denver game bad officiating stirred up angry reactions, which in turn led to penalties, which in turn likely resulted in the weaker team winning thanks to the officials' bad calls.

Now compare this to the Cornell v St. Lawrence hockey game last night. Trailing 2-0, Cornell pulled its goalie and scored 2 extra-man goals in the final 1.5 minutes of the game. Then in overtime St. Lawrence scored what appeared to be the game-winning goal. The St. Lawrence fans went wild. But Cornell's coach thumped the side of the rink with a hockey stick to get the referees' attention. There was no apparent cursing or arguing, much less an unreleasable penalty for bad sportsmanship. Instead, the coach and referees had a civil discussion. The coach explained that he thought SLU was offsides on the scored goal. The referees then agreed to review the play, and after a very short review of the video, they declared the formerly game-winning-goal to be a no-goal. Cornell would go on to win in the subsequent shootout. With the video evidence, neither Cornell nor SLU fans had much to complain about the officiating.

Which would you prefer?

Maybe it's time for lacrosse to enter the 21st century and make coaches challenges and instant replay an integral part of the game.

[Chousnake]

Honest question: do you think this topic of discussion (bad/terrible/worst-in-decades officiating changing the result of this game) will get any traction outside of this forum?

I don't think it will. The story on Inside Lacrosse makes minimal mention of penalties (Confidence, Composure & Connell's Eventual Winner Lift Pios Past Cornell in Shootout Thriller >>>https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/ ... ller/62673). The title tells you all you need to know.

All of us think this is a big deal, but I am skeptical than many others will notice.

I think you are right, but that's the way it is in lacrosse for most teams outside the pampered ACC/B10. When Hopkins lost a game a few years ago in Syracuse because of a goal waived off for being a dive, it was talked about for weeks. If Cornell beat Notre Dame this coming March 17 getting the same calls that DU got, we would never ever hear the end of it. For some reason, the Ivies get no respect in the lax world and the ACC and B10 are forever favored. I never heard whining and complaining about the NCAA Tournament selection like there was in 2022 and it was incessant and lasted more than a year.

Another thing adding to the silence is that lax is a niche sport and is not covered like other sports. My guess is Buczek and Stevens were and are livid, as was Kirst - a top 3-4 player in the sports, but there were no reporters running to interview them after the game to get their opinions. Do you think the Inside Lacrosse reporter who wrote that story - Kevin Brown - even saw the game? He also wrote the story on today's ND- Town game. Was he in Denver yesterday and South Bend today? doubtful. And if he was there and interviewed Buczek and/or Kirst it appears they weren't talking. There are no quotes from any Cornell representative in that story. And I don't think there are post game press conferences for regular season games. The only people who saw it and were upset were the Cornell fans at the game and the few diehards like me who shelled out the $8.95 to stream it. It's an internal Cornell gripe and when we bring it up again in May during the tournament selection process, we'll be told to shut up because a loss is a loss (unless you are in the ACC or the B10 and it's a "good loss" which means a loss to another ACC or B10 team). The ACC fanboys that cover the sport in more detail didn't see the game and will never see it and don't care because it was Big East vs Ivy and is just not that important to them.

[Chousnake]

It was my understanding that Kirst got a 1 min unreleasable penalty and so did the coaches.

If that's true (or even if the penalty was just on Kirst), it's quite ironic that it happened at the school where the former coach was known for screaming his head off at the refs throughout the game, every game, and never drawing a penalty for it.

This will likely be my last post on this topic. I had two additional points:

1. I'm not sure that I know two more polite and respectful communicators than Connor Buck and CJ Kirst. While we'll never know, it's difficult to believe that anything that they said could have been outrageously offensive.

2. This game was not played in some converted cornfield in Kentucky with somebody's uncle refereeing. It was played in a city with two professional lacrosse teams in a beautiful purpose-built stadium, with NCAA qualified refs. This type of officiating behavior is simply bad for the game. Lacrosse is a growing sport, with all types of money being spent to expand the sport to under-represented US populations as well as new international markets. This type of official behavior reflects poorly on both the tradition of the game as well as its ongoing development.

Agree with what people have said about officiating, but I'll add this. In a field sport like lacrosse there's usually some judgement and discretion in officiating. Good officiating does not make itself the major factor in a game. I'm not saying don't call obvious fouls, but don't make legitimately questionable calls that very likely will determine the outcome of the game.

Also, yesterday provided two contrasting examples. In the Cornell v Denver game bad officiating stirred up angry reactions, which in turn led to penalties, which in turn likely resulted in the weaker team winning thanks to the officials' bad calls.

Now compare this to the Cornell v St. Lawrence hockey game last night. Trailing 2-0, Cornell pulled its goalie and scored 2 extra-man goals in the final 1.5 minutes of the game. Then in overtime St. Lawrence scored what appeared to be the game-winning goal. The St. Lawrence fans went wild. But Cornell's coach thumped the side of the rink with a hockey stick to get the referees' attention. There was no apparent cursing or arguing, much less an unreleasable penalty for bad sportsmanship. Instead, the coach and referees had a civil discussion. The coach explained that he thought SLU was offsides on the scored goal. The referees then agreed to review the play, and after a very short review of the video, they declared the formerly game-winning-goal to be a no-goal. Cornell would go on to win in the subsequent shootout. With the video evidence, neither Cornell nor SLU fans had much to complain about the officiating.

Which would you prefer?

Maybe it's time for lacrosse to enter the 21st century and make coaches challenges and instant replay an integral part of the game.

All the refs had to do yesterday was warn Kirst that he was going to get a penalty and let their bad non-call and crease violation stand as a loss of possession. If that happens, Denver would have to earn the win rather than have it handed it to them. I can't believe that Kirst and Buczek said anything the Tierney didn't say dozens of times a game, and I know because I've the heard the things Tierney said to the officials numerous times without getting so much as an acknowledgment or warning let alone a game changing pair of penalties.......

[mfp]

Honest question: do you think this topic of discussion (bad/terrible/worst-in-decades officiating changing the result of this game) will get any traction outside of this forum?

I don't think it will. The story on Inside Lacrosse makes minimal mention of penalties (Confidence, Composure & Connell's Eventual Winner Lift Pios Past Cornell in Shootout Thriller >>>https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/ ... ller/62673). The title tells you all you need to know.

All of us think this is a big deal, but I am skeptical than many others will notice.

I think you are right, but that's the way it is in lacrosse for most teams outside the pampered ACC/B10. When Hopkins lost a game a few years ago in Syracuse because of a goal waived off for being a dive, it was talked about for weeks. If Cornell beat Notre Dame this coming March 17 getting the same calls that DU got, we would never ever hear the end of it. For some reason, the Ivies get no respect in the lax world and the ACC and B10 are forever favored. I never heard whining and complaining about the NCAA Tournament selection like there was in 2022 and it was incessant and lasted more than a year.

Another thing adding to the silence is that lax is a niche sport and is not covered like other sports. My guess is Buczek and Stevens were and are livid, as was Kirst - a top 3-4 player in the sports, but there were no reporters running to interview them after the game to get their opinions. Do you think the Inside Lacrosse reporter who wrote that story - Kevin Brown - even saw the game? He also wrote the story on today's ND- Town game. Was he in Denver yesterday and South Bend today? doubtful. And if he was there and interviewed Buczek and/or Kirst it appears they weren't talking. There are no quotes from any Cornell representative in that story. And I don't think there are post game press conferences for regular season games. The only people who saw it and were upset were the Cornell fans at the game and the few diehards like me who shelled out the $8.95 to stream it. It's an internal Cornell gripe and when we bring it up again in May during the tournament selection process, we'll be told to shut up because a loss is a loss (unless you are in the ACC or the B10 and it's a "good loss" which means a loss to another ACC or B10 team). The ACC fanboys that cover the sport in more detail didn't see the game and will never see it and don't care because it was Big East vs Ivy and is just not that important to them.

I'm sure you are correct that the story was written based on a box score and not based watching and analyzing the game.

I just saw that there is a USA Lacrosse story: PIONEERS POWER UP IN FOURTH QUARTER TO DEFEAT CORNELL https://www.usalacrosse.com/magazine/co ... at-cornell. Again, minimal mention of penalties. Instead, the credit goes to DU for being composed and making a great comeback. (To be clear, I'm actually a DU fan against any other opponent! ) At least this story includes a quote from Buczek:

Big Red coach Connor Buczek said his team maintained solid offensive intensity but needs to improve on discipline moving forward.

“Kudos to that Denver team,” Buczek said. “They’re well-coached, able to execute in a lot of situations and they fight. Every time we opened that gap they seemed to claw away at it. We need to get better at closing out some situations and maybe be a little more disciplined and stay out of the box. Obviously, that contributed at points to their run. Can’t take anything away from Denver because they’re a great team, but we need to keep getting better and hopefully this was a good learning moment for our team.”

Very diplomatic as you would expect. We can read between the lines. I do like the sense of ownership. The team and coaches can complain about the refs all day and all night, but they can't control how the game is officiated. (Maybe influence it a little.) They can control their own actions and reactions.