Hockey: CCHA commissoner sympathetic to UNO, but can’t fix mistake

What’s done is done.

Apparently that’s the reality the UNO hockey team will have to live with following its disputed 4-3 CCHA shootout loss Friday night against Bowling Green.

The CCHA acknowledged on Saturday that the deciding goal came off the stick of a Falcons player who should not have been allowed to participate in the shootout. After the fact, however, the league told the University of Nebraska at Omaha that nothing can be done under NCAA rules to change the game’s outcome.

But if you think UNO’s Trev Alberts is the kind of athletic director who will accept the situation without raising some pointed questions, think again.

First, here’s the background:

During Friday’s CCHA opener between the Mavs and Bowling Green at Qwest Center Omaha, the Falcons won the best-of-3 shootout 1-0 — and earned an extra league point in the conference standings — on a goal by Jordan Samuels-Thomas.

But Samuels-Thomas, under NCAA rules, should not have been allowed to compete in the shootout because he was in the penalty box at the end of overtime. Referees Steve McInchak and Derek Berkebile failed to recognize that Samuels-Thomas was ineligible and allowed him to shoot. Bowling Green coach Dennis Williams said that he mistakenly used Samuels-Thomas and didn’t mean to do anything illegal. Nobody on UNO’s bench, apparently, was aware of the infraction until after the game.

CCHA Commissioner Tom Anastos admitted that McInchak and Berkebile made a “significant mistake.” In a statement released by the league Saturday, the conference stated that an “error in rules enforcement during the course of the game, while unfortunate, can only be corrected during the course of the game. Once the game is concluded, there are no further actions that can take place to correct the situation.”

According to CCHA Rule V.8, the league statement read, protests arising from decisions of game officials or from errors or misinterpretations of the rules will not be considered — and according to NCAA Rule 6-SECTION 39, protests are not recognized or allowed.

“Our league, as a conference, does not have authority to simply overturn misjudgments or inaccurate interpretations of the rules that occur during the course of a game,” Anastos said during a World-Herald phone interview Saturday night.

But the explanations UNO received on Saturday in dealing with the league failed to satisfy Alberts. The more he reflected on the situation, Alberts said, the more he became convinced that the CCHA has set a disturbing example.

“I think the simple question is, ‘Did an ineligible player participate in the game the other night?’” Alberts said. “You must ask that question first, and to me it’s clear cut.

“And when an ineligible player performs in a game, you have one of two choices: You either say that the team must forfeit that game and those points. Or you’re saying, essentially, that it’s OK for an ineligible player to participate as long as he doesn’t get caught within the timeframe of when the game is declared over. I think that’s a terrible precedent for a league, and I think the integrity of the league’s at stake when you make that sort of decision. I don’t know how else you look at it. You’re actually encouraging member institutions to cheat, as long as they don’t get caught before the game is declared over.”

The NCAA does have rules in place to govern shootouts — because host teams use them to determine outcomes at early-season and holiday tournaments. But the NCAA apparently does not have any established penalties for what happens when a shootout rule is broken.

Also, the CCHA is the only college hockey conference in the country that uses shootouts to break overtime ties. All CCHA shootouts still are recorded as ties for NCAA purposes. The new point system established this season by the CCHA awards three league points for a regulation or overtime win; two points for a shootout win; and one point for a shootout loss.

So the debate centers on Bowling Green getting that extra conference point while using an ineligible skater in the shootout.

And because the situation is entirely a league matter, Alberts said there is no recourse for UNO through the NCAA.

But, without question, one league point can make a significant difference in the final league standings, which are used to determine both home ice in the CCHA playoffs and first-round byes for the top-four teams.

In 2005-06, the Mavs would’ve earned a first-round bye had they secured one more league point. Last season, UNO came in eighth place by virtue of one point over ninth-place Ferris State. Had UNO finished ninth, it would’ve missed out on the chance to host two additional home games.

“‘This could have huge implications come the end of the season when you are playing for home ice or playing for the bye,” said Mike Kemp, UNO’s associate athletic director. “You look at those past circumstances, and say, ‘Wow, this one point, on the first night of the league season, could make an incredible difference — financially for our school; physically for our players — come March.”

But except for punishing Friday night’s officiating crew, Anastos said, there’s nothing else he can do. Anastos removed the crew led by McInchak and Berkebile and replaced them Saturday with a group led by referees Todd Lacina and Rodney Tocco. That was the “first step” Anastos said, in the process of evaluating the future of McInchak and Berkebile working conference games.

“‘Obviously (McInchak and Berkebile) made a mistake that’s unacceptable,” Anastos said. “We don’t feel good about it, and we’re very disappointed that we’re even dealing with this situation.”

Anastos said he understands UNO’s frustration, because as commissioner, he said he feels exactly the same way. And because the introduction of shootouts is such a new development in college hockey, he said, there was no past example he could find of a similar mix-up.

“It’s an unfortunate incident of human error that takes place in sports,” Anastos said. “It’s not something we directed, it’s not something we accept and it’s not something we desire. We don’t want it to have an impact on the season, but we can’t change what occurred. We can only try to take steps to make ourselves better, find corrective ways to deal with things like this — and hopefully head them off.”

What of Bowling Green’s role in the infraction? Should the Falcons make an effort to forfeit the extra point they earned while breaking a shootout rule?

“I’m not in a position right now to comment on that,” Williams said following Saturday’s series finale, which the Mavs won 3-1. “The league made the rule — they made the call — and that’s what we go by. We got the call this morning just like UNO did, so it’s a decision made by the conference, and that’s all I’m going to comment on.”

But even though Alberts said he’s disappointed by the “lack of leadership” shown on this issue, the A.D. said the bottom line was that the Mavs could’ve avoided the whole mess by winning a game that they clearly dominated.

“I’m not an excuse guy, and the fact we put ourselves in that position was our fault,” Alberts said. “But the point is, it happened. As the day went on, I couldn’t stop thinking about the fact that an ineligible player won the game. And that’s not what sports should be about.”

Contact the writer:

444-1207, chad.purcell@owh.com

« Mavs

Share