Shannon states that the puck is an inch and a half off the ice.
He has absolutely NO evidence to support that, but takes it as fact.
If the puck WERE 1 1/2 inches above the ice, his argument would be valid. But what makes him assume such a thing? As far as I can tell, only a desire to prove the call right.
As CroFlames shows in post #8, the puck is on the ice. It definitely rolls at one point(or maybe wobbles is a better description), but there is no reason whatsoever - from any camera angle - to jump to the conclusion that it raises 1 1/2 inches off the ice.
I get that, due to the parallax argument, it is impossible to be sure that the puck is in - and therefore allowing the goal basically comes down to the call on the ice.
But for Shannon to claim it's in the air and therefore not in, simply shows that he is a complete moron who is willing to say anything to match his agenda.
|