Badgers escape unscathed on penalty kill

first_imgSomething had to give.Michigan Tech and Wisconsin entered the weekend with the second and third-highest power play percentages in the nation. The Huskies were converting at a 37 percent rate, a big reason MTU was scoring 4.80 goals per game and were undefeated at 3-0-2.So of course, given nine opportunities with the man-advantage, Michigan Tech connected just once.MTU dropped all the way to a 30.6 percent conversion rate as a result and scored just three total goals in the two games. A power play based around getting shots on net and putting lots of big Husky bodies in front of the net was defeated by a Badger squad that tended to get in front of those shots before they could get on net.“We were just trying to focus on blocking shots, that was our number one thing,” junior defenseman Jake Gardiner said. “We were focusing on having our one D down low with those two guys and hoping shots don’t get through.”Friday night, UW goaltender Scott Gudmandson faced just two shots on goal from the MTU power play unit, with the Badgers blocking 19 shots. Brett Bennett started in goal for Wisconsin Saturday night and faced seven shots on goal, while UW blocked an impressive 23 shots.Junior winger Jordy Murray went down to the ice in both games after blocking a shot, hobbling to the bench each time. While the Fairbault, Minn. native didn’t register a point in either game, his blocked shots helped the Badgers attain their ultimate goal of getting WCHA points.Aside from the lone goal he gave up, Bennett played well, getting stick and blocker saves through traffic on the six power-plays Michigan Tech had.According to head coach Mike Eaves, the combination of the two factors led to the effective penalty killing.“A, we had our goaltender playing well. He’s got to be sometimes, your best penalty killer and he was that tonight,” Eaves said. “B, I thought our guys blocked a lot of shots and we worked pretty well in conjunction in trying to get in shooting lanes and block those shots.”UW even got a shorthanded goal courtesy of senior captain Sean Dolan. Dolan and MTU captain Brett Olson went to the box with matching unsportsmanlike conduct penalties at the end of the second period. Gardiner was called for holding early in the third period, giving the Huskies a short 4-on-3 power play.As the Dolan penalty expired, he came out of the box and faced a one-on-one situation, pulling a move he learned from former Badger Derek Stepan and scoring to put UW up 4-1.“I just came out of the penalty box and I was feeling good, I was ready to go, I had a good jump,” Dolan said. “I don’t know what their defenseman was doing, he was caught kind of flat-footed and I was able to poke it up to myself.”While the shorthanded goal was the exclamation point on a successful night of penalty killing, the Badgers didn’t need to put themselves in those situations in the first place. UW took three unsportsmanlike conduct penalties, two of them resulting in MTU power plays.UW senior Patrick Johnson was in and out of scrums with Huskies for much of the game. The most easily avoidable penalty came immediately following Dolan’s goal. Sophomore defenseman John Ramage came out of nowhere to deliver an unnecessary hit on Olson, and went to the box as a result.“I think it would start with me. It’s a Dutch uncle thing, coach gave me a lot of crap. I’ve got to stay out of the penalty box like that, stuff after the whistle, our team, we can’t afford that,” Johnson said. “We might have been playing with fire, but we got away with it, we’ve got a good PK and a lot of blocked shots tonight, which was good.”With a young team that’s already penalty-prone – Wisconsin is fifth in the nation in penalty minutes per game – Eaves was disappointed with some of the decisions his players made.“I’m disappointed in some of our penalties after the whistle,” Eaves said. “We talk about going whistle to whistle and not getting involved in that stuff after, and we’re still doing that.”last_img read more

Answers needed from Lowenfield about RLE

first_imgDear Editor,If one is to study the work plan from the 2011 elections, it reveals an important point. From July 18, 2011, when the Preliminary List of Electors (PLE) was extracted from the National Register of Registrants (NRR) to put the Claims and Objections (C&O) process into gear, until that process was completed on September 4, 2011, only 48 days (just over 6 weeks) were consumed. At the end of the C&O process, Guyana had a Revised List of Electors (RLE). The political parties were able to use this RLEto further help GECOM HQ USA make any last minute valid and verified modifications before they printed the Official List of Electors (actual voters’ list). Any person with an average mathematics competence will tell you that there was still 42 days for GECOM to exhaust the full 90 days or 3 months as prescribed by Article 106 of the Constitution.So why is there a school of thought coming out of GECOM that they can only produce a list by Christmas? It is a bogus position, full stop.Mr Keith Lowenfield, the Chief Elections Officer who is now in the middle of a major land controversy involving the former PNC-led Government, must be called to account. Is he deliberately not preparing for elections as some sort of payback for past favours granted by the PNC? We need answers from Mr Lowenfield as to why GECOM could not and did not update its RLE as an outcome of a C&O process from January 2019 to May 2019.The details from 2011 are below.Regards,Sasenarine SinghMarylandlast_img read more