HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

Goal\No Goal talk(ALL SUCH TALK GOES HERE!!!)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-06-2004, 12:07 AM
  #301
Donnie D
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 727
vCash: 500
Was it a goal? I have no idea and neither does anyone else based upon the angles that were shown. The only one that would show was the overhead and that was clearly unclear. (Like that?). The ABC shot that is getting all the play is shot at an angle and could never be used by anyone, other than a fan to prove their point. Definately not kicked. Should the NHL be embarrased that they didn't take time to review the play? Yep, but what do you expect from a league that pulls refs who are doing their job? However, had it been reviewed, there would have been no goal anyway, because the overhead wasn't conclusive.

Donnie D is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 12:07 AM
  #302
DontCallPlayersStuds
It's weird and gross
 
DontCallPlayersStuds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 31,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by detredWINgs
``I haven't seen it,'' said Gelinas. ``They have so many cameras I'm sure they would have phoned down had it went in.''

The CBC quoted NHL vice-president and director of hockey operations Colin Campbell as saying that replays were inconclusive. He added that overhead and netcam replays didn't show the puck definitively going in.

``No, I don't think it's in,'' replied Cherry. ``I think (the puck) is up in the air though.''

The puck is in the air. Thus the evidence is inconclusive and this thread has entirely too many pages dedicated to it by hockey fans that are unwilling to accept the truth that there team lost without a conspiracy.

eh, sort of. this is the thread formerly known as "nieminen's suspension"

i'll just use it for whatever hot topic i want kept out of the GDTs

__________________
www.thepredatorial.com

DontCallPlayersStuds is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 12:08 AM
  #303
detredWINgs
Registered User
 
detredWINgs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 17,572
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomorekids
eh, sort of. this is the thread formerly known as "nieminen's suspension"

i'll just use it for whatever hot topic i want kept out of the GDTs
Ahh, I see. Sorry.

detredWINgs is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 12:08 AM
  #304
Des Louise
Formerly E=CH2
 
Des Louise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 20,037
vCash: 500
I haven't seen anyone say it's a conspiracy and truly mean it. But it's possible to hold the belief that it was a missed call and that the puck was indeed in. I personally think the puck was really really near the ice and that there's no way we saw white ice because it was in the air and not fully in. But it's really close and I could be wrong.

Got to wonder if the NHL would have allowed that goal if they had reviewed it in time though.

Des Louise is online now  
Old
06-06-2004, 12:11 AM
  #305
The Bob Cole
Ohhhh Baby.
 
The Bob Cole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Centre Ice
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,691
vCash: 500


That didn't go in! From that angle it looks like the puck is on the ice, and that it is past the red-line, but in fact the puck is in the air on top of the red line, not all of the puck was over which can only classify a goal. The angle just makes it seem like it was in the net. But I knew there would be people blaming that call because they lost.

The Bob Cole is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 12:13 AM
  #306
Knucklez
Registered User
 
Knucklez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Behind the bench!
Posts: 5,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by detredWINgs
What's the point of that article? It doesn't say anything we don't already know.

Knucklez is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 12:15 AM
  #307
The Frugal Gourmet
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York, New York
Posts: 2,532
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knucklez
What's the point of that article? It doesn't say anything we don't already know.
I thought it was interesting that the article referred to the controversial Hull goal as "not being reviewed" when the NHL claimed it was. I thought they would continue along with their wishy-washy "alleged-this" and "supposed-that" vein.

The Frugal Gourmet is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 12:17 AM
  #308
Beatnik
Registered User
 
Beatnik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Québec
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,691
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Beatnik
Quote:
Originally Posted by toddzilla44


That didn't go in! From that angle it looks like the puck is on the ice, and that it is past the red-line, but in fact the puck is in the air on top of the red line, not all of the puck was over which can only classify a goal. The angle just makes it seem like it was in the net. But I knew there would be people blaming that call because they lost.
Yes, it's clear that the puck is in the air. It would have been a mistake to give that goal.

Beatnik is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 12:18 AM
  #309
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 22,925
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by toddzilla44


That didn't go in! From that angle it looks like the puck is on the ice, and that it is past the red-line, but in fact the puck is in the air on top of the red line, not all of the puck was over which can only classify a goal. The angle just makes it seem like it was in the net. But I knew there would be people blaming that call because they lost.

If that is the absolute closest the puck came, then it looks like no goal.

me2 is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 12:23 AM
  #310
Hoek
#TomorrowSeason
 
Hoek's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tampa, FL
Country: Argentina
Posts: 2,305
vCash: 500
Heh sidenote about the article, ABC commentator Mike Emrick? LOL WTF..

That pic is too close to call. It's technically like one or two pixels past the red line, but the fact that it's on edge and in the air like that increases the error margin of that perspective. So it'd just be inconclusive like the overhead in that way..

Hoek is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 12:26 AM
  #311
Happy Gilmore
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 61
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=toddzilla44]
Thanks for posting this picture...

It amazes me how miserable this league has become.. in a championship game, this might be the best angle we have on a potential championship winning goal...

I bet women's bowling gets better coverage...

I love hockey, but hate the Bettman NHL.. the league is a disgrace if this is the best angle from which all the 'decisions' have been made...

Happy Gilmore is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 12:33 AM
  #312
Hoek
#TomorrowSeason
 
Hoek's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tampa, FL
Country: Argentina
Posts: 2,305
vCash: 500
What angle would have visualized it better? Another goal cam just inside the post? Last thing we need is another thing for the puck to careen off of and mask goals with. I dunno. I guess that is a possibility.

Hoek is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 12:35 AM
  #313
The Frugal Gourmet
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York, New York
Posts: 2,532
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoek
What angle would have visualized it better? Another goal cam just inside the post? Last thing we need is another thing for the puck to careen off of and mask goals with. I dunno. I guess that is a possibility.
Back and to the left.

Back and to the left.

The Frugal Gourmet is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 12:40 AM
  #314
SopelFan*
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Richard Park
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,422
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to SopelFan*
There is no way there is any conclusive evidence of the puck going in. The angle where it looks like it is in, it is on the line, in the air. The reason it looks in is because the white ice is in the background, because it is in the air.

SopelFan* is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 12:56 AM
  #315
SopelFan*
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Richard Park
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,422
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to SopelFan*
Round 1

Game 7

General Motors Place

2nd Period

Mike Keane appears to sneak a puck over the line before the whistle blows. It isn't reviewed.

Calgary goes on to win in OT.

Feel my pain!


SopelFan* is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 01:00 AM
  #316
X8oD
Registered User
 
X8oD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: 612 Warf Ave.
Country: United States
Posts: 7,300
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Frugal Gourmet
Back and to the left.

Back and to the left.
a clown...........

Elsware the infamous biodome is back in the news...

Viva los bio dome!

Hands down the Best "worst movie" movie of all time! Sadly i know that movie word for word.

X8oD is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 01:02 AM
  #317
Hiishawk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Out there somewhere
Posts: 1,188
vCash: 500
A few objective (I hope) comments about the no goal.

1. Yes it was in the net clearly and fully.
2. The goal judge (at Calgary's own rink) did not signal it in.
3. Calgary did NOT ask for a review- this is their responsibility and failure to do so is equivalent to admitting that it was not a goal.
4. The 'directing/kicking in" issue would still have been a factor.
5. Even if all the above conditions had been fulfilled- and the goal had stood, it does not necesarily mean that Calgary would have won the cup, as some have said. Tampa Bay would have gone on an all-out mission to score- and who can say what would have happened then?

Hiishawk is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 01:05 AM
  #318
ZombieMatt
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,242
vCash: 500
I have yet to see ANY evidence that conclusively says that it is a goal.

Until there is conclusive evidence, the ruling on the ice stands.

It's pretty straight-forward.

ZombieMatt is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 01:11 AM
  #319
The Bob Cole
Ohhhh Baby.
 
The Bob Cole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Centre Ice
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,691
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by steblick
A few objective (I hope) comments about the no goal.

1. Yes it was in the net clearly and fully.

http://img41.photobucket.com/albums/...06_TV3__2_.jpg


Look at that picture, the puck is not on the net, it only looks like it because of the camera angle, but the puck is upright in the air over the goal line, partly in, but the whole puck isn't past the goal line which classifies a goal.

The Bob Cole is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 01:12 AM
  #320
Hockeyfan02
Registered User
 
Hockeyfan02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Pistivity
Country: United States
Posts: 14,257
vCash: 500
My thoughts: As a Tampa fan, hell no that was not a goal.
Unbiased opinion: I dont think it was conclusive enough to be a goal. Even if they go upstairs(which was a joke they didnt), they have to be 100% sure it was a goal. Since everyone is arguing here, whos to say what views on the goal Colin Campbell and the goal judge would have had? Then theres the whole debate on the kicking motion which again there is a debate here. It sucks there has to be a controversial part to this great game 6. Thats the worse part.

Hockeyfan02 is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 01:14 AM
  #321
Burke's Evil Spirit
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 15,836
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by steblick
3. Calgary did NOT ask for a review- this is their responsibility and failure to do so is equivalent to admitting that it was not a goal.
What? Since when? You should familiarize yourself with how the league runs games. It's not the Flames jobs to make sure the video goal judge is paying attention when the puck is near Nikolai Khabibulin. Sheesh.

I'm going to chime in with the "The only angle wasn't conclusive...should've been more angles!"

Seriously, I want eleventy-billion cameras at the next game.

It's worth noting Darryl Sutter didn't think it was in.

Burke's Evil Spirit is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 01:34 AM
  #322
Bubbles
Tank for Tyler2016
 
Bubbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: BC Teams:Nucks,Juve
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SopelFan
Round 1

Game 7

General Motors Place

2nd Period

Mike Keane appears to sneak a puck over the line before the whistle blows. It isn't reviewed.

Calgary goes on to win in OT.

Feel my pain!

We wuz robbed!

Bubbles is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 02:12 AM
  #323
ceber
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Wyoming, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 3,500
vCash: 500
To me, when I look at both the overhead and the angled view, the puck doesn't cross the line. It's very close though. If you watch the overhead and compare the positon of the pad to when the puck hits it on the angled view, to me it looks like the pad would have to be at the line, preventing the puck from completely crossing the line. About as close as it gets, though.

ceber is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 02:22 AM
  #324
Randall Graves*
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 18,621
vCash: 500
Who cares, if it was a goal it should have been disallowed for being redirected by the skate like it was.

Randall Graves* is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 02:36 AM
  #325
cyrisweb
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Calgary ab
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,149
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snakeeye
We'll find out if Lecavalier dresses for game five.

Now that Niemenen is suspended, it would not be surprising if Vinny's "concussion like symptoms" suddenly go away.
He hasn't looked straight since the hit he still looks slow compared to before.
Even Cherry fully believes he has concusion and he's playing through it now. Talk about guts and heart.. and some people here have the balls to give him crap for not getting up fast enough.
How disgusting.

cyrisweb is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:12 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.