I don't have a link because I just watched it. Dallas and Detroit go to a shootout and everybody keeps missing. It gets to Steve Ott of all people and he puts a simple wrist shot into Howard's pads. Howard slides backwards without totally stopping the puck until he gets his glove on it as the puck stops on top of the goal line. The review goes on forever and I'm wondering why because every replay shows the puck stop on the goal line. The replay also shows the ref in perfect position and emphatically waiving it off right away. Finally the ref makes the announcement but his mic is off, so nobody knows why it was called a goal...not yet anyway.

There were two replays from both front angles of the goal, and both showed the puck stop on the goal line. The game was in Detroit so I'm sure Toronto got all the angles. Detroit had one more shootout attempt and missed, so they didn't do anything to deserve the 2nd point. I'm just having one of those moments, having just seen it all myself very clearly, where up is down, left is right, and no goals are now goals. I can't wait to read the articles and reactions from both teams.

This could be just the next piece of evidence that the war room in Toronto is fucking it up big time, a lot. There's a lot of criticism (moreso than usual, I mean) this season at the league review office, and it's getting kind of ridiculous.

_________________
mechaphil

The other referee on the ice called it a goal. There was no camera angle to over rule the call on the ice.

Looked like it fell just short of completely crossing the goal line, though.

_________________
"I'll rap you with my cane; you pencil necked geek!!"

-Bowler, imitating Freddy Blassie, at the very first M & G.

The ref that was close and in position immediately waived no goal. The ref that trailed behind apparently thought it was a goal, but it wasn't his call. To the veiwer, the entire arena, and the announcers, and the Dallas Stars it appeared without question that the on ice call was no goal. What was said afterward...who knows. The ref making the announcement had his mic off so that made it even worse.

Anyone have a link to the video now?

_________________

just human error. the next course of events should be a better placed camera in the corners of the net on the "shelf" or a sensor in the puck and posts.

_________________

They need cameras in the crossbar looking down on the line.

They make them small enough, implement them.

_________________

The sensors idea is the very very best idea. An RFID tag in the puck and sensors mounted in both posts and in the back of the net. Best idea.

_________________
mechaphil

I'd like a camera under the goal net area pointing up. Nothing could ever block the view from under the ice. At least 95% of reviewed goals are with the puck on the ice, but under a body part or equipment. Take the camera from the back of the net and put it under the goal area, set it under the rear of the net and tilted up, facing the goal line. It would see everything, every time. It would always see if the puck crossed the line all the way or not.

http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/ice-rink4.htm

This link shows that the majority of ice is on top of the lines. We can see the lines clearly every game from above, so it shouldn't be hard for the camera to see the puck clearly from under almost an inch thick of ice. This means the skating surface, even though the goal area is hardly ever skated on, doesn't have to be messed with very much.

Seems to me that putting a camera under the goal area shouldn't mess with the ice and change the game at all, aside from seeing every goal scenario clearly and perfectly.

The only problem I see with your idea is that ice isn't always clear, take an ice cube for example, you see many air bubbles trapped inside of it. Unless it is perfectly clear, the camera wouldn't work.

To me they need to add a camera inside the crossbar, and add a camera at ice level in the posts, because then you will always have a camera at the line perfectly and close.

_________________

it could work. the ice isnt very thick, and its put on in layers, so it could work. the cameras in the crossbar would work, but only show a small area of the ice. A chip in the puck, with sensors in the goal posts could work. what about cameras in the boards, pointing towards the net, from both sides, at ice level, with super magnification.

also, move the camera on the roof above the net from slightly behind, to slightly above, from the slot.

_________________

Sky, hockey rink ice is different than normal ice. It's deionized in order to make it clear. Cloudiness wouldn't be a problem.

Oh...here's a video...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9pj2GNd_Zs

there were more ref fuck ups from saturday.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puck_d ... nhl,214054

_________________
Check out my website: http://www.artistzero.com

"That wasn't very nice...I do believe you killed my hat."

Driver of the FIRE LINDY RUFF Bandwagon since 2008.

1) Burrows seems like a whiny crybaby to me..
2) I think the puck was over the line, but the referee waved it off, and if there was such a iffyness to it, then keep it as is.
3) On the goalie throwing the stick, yeah... he did.. I laughed at that one

_________________

_________________

few problems though.

A. how long will the sensors last? remember foxtrax? the glowing puck? each puck only lasted about 10 minutes before it would die.



B. how would the sensors hold up to the freezing process?

C. how expensive would these mass produced chips, and now more extensively assembled pucks be? i think the best option is more then one camera in each net, and to move the overhead camera from slightly behind the net (where the view is obstructed by the net, slightly, to the slot.

_________________

Well, technology has significantly improved since then. The Foxtrax puck used infrared emitters that required a lot more 'stuff' in the puck. There are newer methods that would be easier to implement and more positionally accurate.

very true. if a puck with GPS, so to say, was to be used, i could say, maybe only for the playoffs, to effectively cut costs. but then the integrity of the sport is compromised.

_________________

Yea ten years is a huge and vast improvement in the technology used.

Look at computers from then to now?

I think they could easily make a "glowing" puck work for an entire game now, LED lights would last a good while. Some sort of sensor for GPS could last and use a microprocessor like in phones, with a simple small transmitter from a phone to a satellite for the GPS.

If phones can be dropped from 4 feet and work perfectly fine with only being covered in plastic and a bit of metal, hard rubber would make them almost invincible.

_________________

RFID chip in the puck and a wire buried under the goal line would be all that's needed.



Doesn't require a power source or a transmitter
Doesn't need to talk to a satellite
Practically indestructible

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...