Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 06-05-2019, 10:22 PM   #21
Winsor_Pilates
Franchise Player
 
Winsor_Pilates's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Van City - Main St.
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague View Post
At the risk of incurring said wrath of mods, after all this time, I'm still not totally convinced one way or the other myself. I mean, I want to believe, but it has always screamed "inconclusive" to me, given that the puck isn't on the ice.

So in honour of the anniversary and for the benefit of people like me and OOTC, how about we litigate this again? Convince me. I want to be convinced.
Same here.
As much as I want to join the "it was in" party, I've never felt it's conclusive enough that it would ever have counted, even with review.
Winsor_Pilates is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Winsor_Pilates For This Useful Post:
Old 06-05-2019, 10:31 PM   #22
Mr.Coffee
damn onions
 
Mr.Coffee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Exp:
Default

What the hell are you two talking about? Look at the puck. Look at the goal line. It was absolutely in the net. Yes yes, I know “angles” and whatnot.

In fact I recall Global news doing a mini experimental angle / puck physics test to see and I recall their outcome being it was in the net.

It was in. And quite frankly if you don’t think so- you’re a Lightning fan for life from now on in my eyes.
Mr.Coffee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2019, 11:08 PM   #23
AC
Resident Videologist
 
AC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee View Post
In fact I recall Global news doing a mini experimental angle / puck physics test to see and I recall their outcome being it was in the net
Do you mean this one for the Bennett no goal vs Anaheim?
https://globalnews.ca/video/1986743/...al-really-was/

The only simulations I've seen for the Gelinas 04 goal showed it was in the air and on the line at best.

Realistically, I think the puck did go past the line in 04, but the angles are all inconclusive enough there's no way the NHL would have ruled it a goal had they done an official review.
__________________
AC is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to AC For This Useful Post:
Old 06-05-2019, 11:10 PM   #24
DeluxeMoustache
 
DeluxeMoustache's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Exp:
Default

So I ran in to Marty one day. Here is our conversation, word for word

Me: “It was in”
Marty: “It was in”
DeluxeMoustache is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to DeluxeMoustache For This Useful Post:
Old 06-05-2019, 11:42 PM   #25
djsFlames
Franchise Player
 
djsFlames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Where opinions are fact
Exp:
Default

This whole Gelinas & Bennett putting pucks into the goalie's skate dragging behind the line thing is the worst. The same situation happened twice over a decade apart and each time a goal denied. Both are behind the line because the goalie's skate is at least a puck length behind the line in both cases before the puck makes contact with it, but the goalies kick out so fast both times that you simply don't have enough frames there on top of snow flying and the bad angle to see it "conclusively".

But when you tackle it from the standpoint of simple logic though, it's undeniable.
djsFlames is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to djsFlames For This Useful Post:
Old 06-05-2019, 11:59 PM   #26
DeluxeMoustache
 
DeluxeMoustache's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by djsFlames View Post
This whole Gelinas & Bennett putting pucks into the goalie's skate dragging behind the line thing is the worst. The same situation happened twice over a decade apart and each time a goal denied. Both are behind the line because the goalie's skate is at least a puck length behind the line in both cases before the puck makes contact with it, but the goalies kick out so fast both times that you simply don't have enough frames there on top of snow flying and the bad angle to see it "conclusively".

But when you tackle it from the standpoint of simple logic though, it's undeniable.

I am a fan of logic.
DeluxeMoustache is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to DeluxeMoustache For This Useful Post:
Old 06-06-2019, 12:15 AM   #27
djsFlames
Franchise Player
 
djsFlames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Where opinions are fact
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache View Post
I am a fan of logic.
I suspect there would be a significant reduction in BS if the league would employ it. Why does everything have to be able to be eyeballed from a couple specific angles in the arena in order to be decisive?

Sometimes it's necessary to read between the lines a little, when visual evidence is not available. Rather than just play dumb like they tend to do.

"Wellll.. we can't see the PUCK clearly, so it's safe to assume the goalie's skate used the force to repel the puck away before it crossed the line to make contact with his foot that we CAN see is over ankle deep in goal territory. Ayoo."

Last edited by djsFlames; 06-06-2019 at 12:21 AM.
djsFlames is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to djsFlames For This Useful Post:
Old 06-06-2019, 12:20 AM   #28
DeluxeMoustache
 
DeluxeMoustache's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by djsFlames View Post
I suspect there would be a significant reduction in BS if the league would employ it. Why does everything have to be able to be eyeballed from a couple specific angles in the arena in order to be decisive?

Sometimes it's necessary to read between the lines a little, when visual evidence is not available. Rather than just play dumb like they tend to do.
Agreed. It is a cowardly position to which they bizarrely elect to reflex.

Even with icing, they technically allow too many now. eg. Icing was a deterrent for relieving pressure, not barely missing a stretch pass that was a good idea
DeluxeMoustache is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2019, 01:20 AM   #29
Snuffleupagus
First Line Centre
 
Snuffleupagus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AC View Post

The only simulations I've seen for the Gelinas 04 goal showed it was in the air and on the line at best.

Realistically, I think the puck did go past the line in 04, but the angles are all inconclusive enough there's no way the NHL would have ruled it a goal had they done an official review.
Ignore the puck for a moment and look at the 5 or 6 inches the pad was inside the net, then realize he made the save while the pad was in the net and then kicked it out.

FF to about 50 secs



The best angle was the American TV camera but sadly they didn't use it so the official review was correct. but..it was in!
Snuffleupagus is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Snuffleupagus For This Useful Post:
Old 06-06-2019, 09:04 AM   #30
Bouw N Arrow
First Line Centre
 
Bouw N Arrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Exp:
Default

This + the lockout the next year + The Oilers in the final in 2006 was probably the worst too.

Thank christ Carolina won in 06...
Bouw N Arrow is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Bouw N Arrow For This Useful Post:
Old 06-06-2019, 12:15 PM   #31
Sainters7
Franchise Player
 
Sainters7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: back in the 403
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bouw N Arrow View Post
This + the lockout the next year + The Oilers in the final in 2006 was probably the worst too.

Thank christ Carolina won in 06...
That was my first year living in the Edmonton area and it was disgusting..I was almost as nervous for Edmonton/Carolina game 7 as I was for Calgary/Tampa game 7, that's how badly I didn't want to see the Oilers win the Cup and be subjected to that party...especially one season after what happened to us. God bless Brind'amour

I remember standing in my front driveway after the game in a very satisfyingly quiet street, and just feeling SO relieved and happy haha.
Sainters7 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Sainters7 For This Useful Post:
Old 06-06-2019, 01:57 PM   #32
Fire
Franchise Player
 
Fire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Calgary, AB
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus View Post
Ignore the puck for a moment and look at the 5 or 6 inches the pad was inside the net, then realize he made the save while the pad was in the net and then kicked it out.

FF to about 50 secs



The best angle was the American TV camera but sadly they didn't use it so the official review was correct. but..it was in!
Even with that angle you can't say for sure it was in. Still inconclusive.
__________________

Fire is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Fire For This Useful Post:
Old 06-06-2019, 02:15 PM   #33
Playfair
Scoring Winger
 
Playfair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fire View Post
Even with that angle you can't say for sure it was in. Still inconclusive.
When I saw this bumped, to be honest, I thought of all the times we make fun of Oilers fans bringing up their five cups. Here we are looking at something from years ago, hanging on to it like a blanket on a cold night.

But in truth, now that I watched this video, how can you deny it wasn't in? It simply was. Look at the puck at the foot of the pad that is in the net. It is open and shut. Sad but true reality of professional sports.
Playfair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2019, 02:20 PM   #34
OutOfTheCube
Franchise Player
 
OutOfTheCube's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Exp:
Default

Listen guys, as a fan of a team that has had similar Stanley Cup finals grievances...

You just gotta move on.
__________________
OutOfTheCube is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to OutOfTheCube For This Useful Post:
Old 06-06-2019, 03:26 PM   #35
Ped
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Ontario
Exp:
Default

IIRC no one on the Flames really thought it was in either, and didn't protest. If you didn't even think you scored, how can you be made if the NHL doesn't think so either?


I mean I get the frustration and anger, I really do, but if you didn't even think it was in at the time, or at least objected vociferously, it really is time to let it go.
Ped is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2019, 03:42 PM   #36
VANFLAMESFAN
Franchise Player
 
VANFLAMESFAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: North Vancouver, BC
Exp:
Default

Had they reviewed it and disallowed it, I would have been okay with it. It's extremely tight to call. I'm not convinced it was in either. I want to be though.

But they never reviewed it. They didn't stop play to have a look. No one saw it as being close and I get that's why they never reviewed it. Just a tough pill to swallow.

I've moved on, but from time to time, I'll think about it and for a few minutes, the lack of review will still bug me.
__________________


Special thanks to Dion for making my new sig.
VANFLAMESFAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2019, 09:55 PM   #37
Mr.Coffee
damn onions
 
Mr.Coffee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AC View Post
Do you mean this one for the Bennett no goal vs Anaheim?
https://globalnews.ca/video/1986743/...al-really-was/

The only simulations I've seen for the Gelinas 04 goal showed it was in the air and on the line at best.

Realistically, I think the puck did go past the line in 04, but the angles are all inconclusive enough there's no way the NHL would have ruled it a goal had they done an official review.
No there was a global one on this specific goal. They did it shortly after. It actually was pretty amusing to watch all these nerds trot around on the ice with string angles and pretend science to recreate it. But I’m a believer haha.

That was in.
Mr.Coffee is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Mr.Coffee For This Useful Post:
Old 06-06-2019, 10:41 PM   #38
Reggie Dunlop
All I can get
 
Reggie Dunlop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: The Aces
Exp:
Default

A commissioned LEGO diorama of the Gelinas goal would be a worthy commemoration of the anniversary.
__________________
Scouts?
Reggie Dunlop is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Reggie Dunlop For This Useful Post:
Old 06-06-2019, 11:04 PM   #39
Mr.Coffee
damn onions
 
Mr.Coffee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop View Post
A commissioned LEGO diorama of the Gelinas goal would be a worthy commemoration of the anniversary.
Well played
Mr.Coffee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2019, 07:39 AM   #40
McG
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: i,m on ur intarwebs...postin on ur thredz...
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed View Post
That non call bugs me more than the missed goal. That simply has to be a call, in any era, even if it’s game 6 OT.
I completely agree with this. The whiplash leg trip has to be called.

And then we get almost the exact same play last night for the blues second goal.
__________________
“We played awful, well” said Ken Hitchcock, twice.
McG is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
edmonton is no good

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:39 AM.

Calgary Flames
2017-18




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2016