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, 02:52 AM
  #326
Phanuthier*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Murder capital (Edm)
Posts: 10,675
vCash: 500
It's definatly hard to tell, but you know what, I don't really care.

It's going to game 7. IMO the past 3 games, Calgary has totally outplayed Tampa, and Khabibulin had to stand on his head (and still gave up 3 goals in 2 games). Now Kiprusoff comes back huge after bad games (3+ games) and if the Flames can get on Khabibulin, and Kiprusoff bounces back big, then we've got game 7.

There isn't alot coming from Tampa that makes me think they'll show up

Phanuthier* is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 02:57 AM
  #327
Traitor8
Registered User
 
Traitor8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Iraq
Posts: 4,854
vCash: 500
Your allowed to put the puck in the net with ur skate,leg or wtv..your just not allowed to directly kick it and that's not what happend..he was just crashing the net..

If that was in..it would of counted but it wasn't so no goal..

Traitor8 is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 03:22 AM
  #328
Vinnythe[Le]Cavalier
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Down south, where the hockey ignorant live
Posts: 84
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splatman Phanutier
There isn't alot coming from Tampa that makes me think they'll show up
What is there supposed to be coming from them? What's coming from Calgary to make you think they'll show up. I don't understand.

Vinnythe[Le]Cavalier is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 03:45 AM
  #329
Legionnaire
Kill! Jeff, Kill!!!
 
Legionnaire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: LA-LA Land
Country: United States
Posts: 35,397
vCash: 500
Well the good thing about this is that Calgary still has a chance to make it all irrelevant.



Buffalo did not.

__________________
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." - Mark Twain
Legionnaire is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 04:28 AM
  #330
Padawan
Former *********
 
Padawan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Jyvaskyla, Finland
Country: Finland
Posts: 2,564
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockeyfan02
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.
I watched the game via Canal plus. They enhanced the image it was in but the refs didn't see it and thus didn't call it. End of story.

On to game 7. Go Bolts!

Padawan is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 05:03 AM
  #331
calgarylen13
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Roskilde
Country: San Marino
Posts: 1,016
vCash: 500
It was a goal

Cut this inconclusive trash, its not a freaking medical examination!!!
The NHL would've called it inconclusive if Iginla slapped one past Khabibulin to put us 3-2 up and for no obvious reason it was called a no goal.

The puck passed the line, it wasn't directly kicked in...its a goal!

There goes the cup, seems inevitable now that Game Seven will result in its fair share of "Calgary scored a no goal, we can't let Tampa lose" refereeing...
First Game four, now Game six, and so many of you guys are saying that its not set up...

We've been screwed, once again!

calgarylen13 is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 05:22 AM
  #332
BCCHL inactive
 
Join Date: May 2002
Country:
Posts: 10,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Padawan
They enhanced the image it was in but the refs didn't see it and thus didn't call it. End of story.
That's not the story at all.

No referee on earth can make a sure call on such a quick play. That's why play was not stopped.

The video judge reviewed the play immediately. The only camera angle that showed the puck was from a side angle. The puck was on edge and in the air. The side angle was completely inconclusive. Even the enhanced image proved nothing.



Quote:
Originally Posted by calgarylen13
Cut this inconclusive trash, its not a freaking medical examination!!!

We've been screwed, once again!
This is the NHL. The replays must show 100% conclusive evidence that the puck was in. It is in the rulebook. Unfortunately for Calgary, the camera angles could prove nothing.

Darryl Sutter, you know...the guy who coaches the Flames...even he said the replays were inconclusive and that there should not have been a goal awarded.

That alone should end this debate in its tracks.

BCCHL inactive is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 05:36 AM
  #333
Brad Tolliver
Terror Goes Into
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Overtime
Posts: 4,073
vCash: 500
You just have to wonder if Fraser/Walkom would have called that a goal. What goes around comes around.

Brad Tolliver is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 05:42 AM
  #334
SuperNintendoChalmrs
Registered User
 
SuperNintendoChalmrs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 3,499
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Legionnaire
Well the good thing about this is that Calgary still has a chance to make it all irrelevant.



Buffalo did not.
That is true CARTMAN.......daaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhh CARTMAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



:mad: :mad: :mad: :lol

SuperNintendoChalmrs is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 05:46 AM
  #335
Poignant Discussion
I tell it like it is
 
Poignant Discussion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Gatineau, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,757
vCash: 1400
Send a message via MSN to Poignant Discussion Send a message via Yahoo to Poignant Discussion
Quote:
Originally Posted by calgarylen13
Cut this inconclusive trash, its not a freaking medical examination!!!
The NHL would've called it inconclusive if Iginla slapped one past Khabibulin to put us 3-2 up and for no obvious reason it was called a no goal.

The puck passed the line, it wasn't directly kicked in...its a goal!

There goes the cup, seems inevitable now that Game Seven will result in its fair share of "Calgary scored a no goal, we can't let Tampa lose" refereeing...
First Game four, now Game six, and so many of you guys are saying that its not set up...

We've been screwed, once again!
Funny your coach said it was no goal too

Poignant Discussion is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 05:47 AM
  #336
golfmade
Go Preds Go
 
golfmade's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Taiwan
Country: Taiwan
Posts: 19,458
vCash: 500
Anyone get a HDTV version of this whole event?

golfmade is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 06:45 AM
  #337
BCCHL inactive
 
Join Date: May 2002
Country:
Posts: 10,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfmade
Anyone get a HDTV version of this whole event?
Actually, I did.

BCCHL inactive is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 08:28 AM
  #338
SpinTheBlackCircle
Global Moderator
boots and pants
 
SpinTheBlackCircle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 33,339
vCash: 500
"I looked at it, and that's got to be a conclusive play," Sutter said. "I looked at it from two different angles. And unless they have a different one, you can't say it's a goal. I mean it's so close, but the puck is like this [indicating up on edge] ... I am sure they looked at it."

I don't think anyone would question that if Sutter thought it was in, he would say so, and with passion.

SpinTheBlackCircle is online now  
Old
06-06-2004, 08:50 AM
  #339
Flycoon*
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 225
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfmade
Anyone get a HDTV version of this whole event?
No different. I thought it looked like it *may* have been a goal, my wife (a relative hockey newbie and an unabashed Lightning homer deluxe) was adamant it was not. HD made it a bit clearer but the perspective given the camera angle made it impossible for it to be conclusive.

Flycoon* is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 09:21 AM
  #340
Aarex
Registered User
 
Aarex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Regina, Saskatchewan
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,274
vCash: 500
The issue i have is that his pads were in the net, so for the puck to stay out it would have had to hit them which would mean a goal, however bulin was also kicking his pad out of the net...I broke it down frame by frame and to me it looked like he kicked after the fact but oh well. The games over here comes game 7!

Aarex is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 09:30 AM
  #341
Theoren Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 2,535
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Theoren Fan
Quote:
Originally Posted by calgarylen13
Cut this inconclusive trash, its not a freaking medical examination!!!
The NHL would've called it inconclusive if Iginla slapped one past Khabibulin to put us 3-2 up and for no obvious reason it was called a no goal.

The puck passed the line, it wasn't directly kicked in...its a goal!

There goes the cup, seems inevitable now that Game Seven will result in its fair share of "Calgary scored a no goal, we can't let Tampa lose" refereeing...
First Game four, now Game six, and so many of you guys are saying that its not set up...

We've been screwed, once again!


"set up"

Theoren Fan is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 09:34 AM
  #342
E = CH²
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 15,976
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild GM
"I looked at it, and that's got to be a conclusive play," Sutter said. "I looked at it from two different angles. And unless they have a different one, you can't say it's a goal. I mean it's so close, but the puck is like this [indicating up on edge] ... I am sure they looked at it."

I don't think anyone would question that if Sutter thought it was in, he would say so, and with passion.
Actually I doubt it. It's not a case of uniting his players against the evil NHL and the rest of the world here. You can't go out there and tell them, the series is over, you've won guys. He's got to keep them pissed for next game and I'm not sure telling them they should have won would achieve that result. Besides what good would it do to complain about it ? If I was Sutter I wouldn't even want to believe it was a goal.

E = CH² is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 09:39 AM
  #343
futurcorerock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Columbus, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 6,435
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to futurcorerock
Yeah i thought they were screwed in the highest order. I was wholly dissapointed being a nonpartisan hailing from neither biased city. Theres alot of question wether it was in the air when it went into the goal and the angle and such, but dont they have another angle of the goal, the normal TV-angle, and seeing that side of it the puck was not in the air, rather obstructed in view of Khabibulin's pad. If you do some geometric thinking, if the puck was in the confines of his pad, and his pad were in the net, which by the angle and video with some added physics and trajectory study, i think you could wholeheartedly see that it had went into the net.

My only question, does anyone have a video or animated gif? An even funnier video/gif could be made by a calgary fan with the words 'robbed' hovering over the alleged robbing of the cup in game 6

just a thought =D

futurcorerock is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 09:44 AM
  #344
ObeySteve
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Delaware County, PA
Posts: 3,552
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to ObeySteve
Tampa could go on to be the most controversial Cup winner in NHL history now.

Is it not funny how in the end, if Tampa wins, both teams from south of the Mason-Dixon Line (Dallas and Tampa) to have won the Cup had to have faulty officiating and poor NHL rules to help them pull through in the end.

ObeySteve is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 10:08 AM
  #345
Hiishawk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Out there somewhere
Posts: 1,178
vCash: 500
A lot of people seem to be implying that if the goal had been called, that Calgary would've won the cup. But it wasn't overtime! Who knows if Tampa would have re-grouped and got a goal to tie it again.

In short- it wasn't a decision (or non-decision) that determined the winner of the game!

Hiishawk is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 10:10 AM
  #346
Beakermania*
 
Beakermania*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Kingston or Hamilton
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,964
vCash: 500
I think it was a goal. I saw white between the redline and the puck on the zoomed in shot on CBC and on TSN sportscentre.

That said, don't count the flames out yet, they will take game 7!! Go Flames Go!!

Beakermania* is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 10:46 AM
  #347
MacDaddy TLC*
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Leafin La Vida Loca
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,478
vCash: 500
Few comments:

One thing for sure, that wasn't a kicking motion. Gelinas was breaking when it hit him, he was breaking before it was played in front.

Colin Campbell wouldn't say if it was in or not, he definitely was going to say inconclusive because the League has to save face.

What ABC showed us and from what J-D and Gary Thorne were saying, Calgary should have been awarded a goal last night and maybe they hold on for 5 minutes and win the cup.

MacDaddy TLC* is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 10:55 AM
  #348
Troy McClure
Registered User
 
Troy McClure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Win it for Robidas!
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 24,854
vCash: 500
The goal/no goal thread, eh?

I guess I'll throw my two cents in and say it was a goal. Hull clearly had posession.

Troy McClure is online now  
Old
06-06-2004, 11:21 AM
  #349
Punkie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Disgusta, Maine
Country: United States
Posts: 193
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Punkie Send a message via Yahoo to Punkie
I'm sure some one has said this before me but if it was a goal, how come no Flames player argued it? I personally don't think it was, but the puck was in the air so it is hard to tell. That's just my opinion.

Punkie is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 11:22 AM
  #350
ObeySteve
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Delaware County, PA
Posts: 3,552
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to ObeySteve
You could consider it inconclusive since it could simply look like it crossed the line by creating an optical illusion if it was in the air, but the puck wasn't very high at all.

ObeySteve 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 10:32 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.