Reviewed goal in Pens game

ref called it a no goal right away. The right call was made even though it appeared to be a goal. PIT is up 2-1 so it might not matter

Great goal by Richards. I love the fact he's going to be our Captain for years to come. Mr. Versatile.

It looked to me like a goal, but the right call was made according to the rules.

Hopefully the league will mandate clearer goal lines and multiple cameras in the net, such as mounted in the posts that looks across the goal line at ice level.

My worry is that the refs are relying too much on the replay instead of making a definite call on the ice.

NHL refs are the best in the world, I feel they are right far more often than wrong and more often than any broadcaster or fan. Just because instant replay overturns their calls, I feel they should go with their gut and make a call one way or another. If it gets overturned, so be it.

see I understand that the onus of proof is to prove that it was actually over the line and that makes it harder to call it a goal, I just didn't see anything in the replays that would indicate that that puck was not over the line, I thought it was pretty clear. Feel free to review it yourself and try and refute me but I say its a goal:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-W-GhiAKYA

(the last replay near the end of the clip is the most damning)

Also alot of posters have made a big deal of it being a 'no goal' call on the ice but all I saw was the ref blowing the play dead when Biron covered up the puck. I guess thats an 'implied' no-goal call but its certainly not a case where the ref made the wash out signal to indicate that it was no goal. I'd like to know the official league policy on this but it would appear that the distinction is irrelevant

Either way, it doesn't matter so much now. Pens are rolling and should win the next two to be nice and rested against the Wings.

agreed, my prediction is that the Flyers will steal one at home and the Pens will clinch it in game 5. I'm actually sorta surprised the Flyers were able to take out the Habs so quickly because they play a very similar game to the Pens...maybe its because the Flyers were able to knock the Habs off their game and force em to play theirs where the Pens are having nothing to do with that. That and Biron is looking human again

Since the views from above are sometimes blocked by a glove/crossbar/body I wonder if they will ever be able to put a line of tiny camera's under the ice behind the goal line to see from below and not have those obstructions.

I realize that this is probably too expensive to implement and also the logistics are a nightmare as these are multi-use facilities and the ice is always brought down.

That just kicked another idea in my head that may work better logistically. Put tiny cameras on the inside of each post as close to the bottom as possible to see under the gloves and such and get angles that can't be had right now. You can put heavy plexiglass over the camera that can be replaced when needed after pucks/sticks/skates hit it but give you enough of a view to see if the puck is over the line?

I like to muse on these types of ideas. Your thoughts?

With the technology nowadays how are we not able to monitor if a puck crosses the goal line. It baffels my mind. Put a small sensor inside the puck or something. A small chip would not effect the flight pattern of the puck

Crazynuck wrote:
With the technology nowadays how are we not able to monitor if a puck crosses the goal line. It baffels my mind. Put a small sensor inside the puck or something. A small chip would not effect the flight pattern of the puck

x20000 percent.

The one view, from the top of the net, was the best, but sadly, the resolution was too poor.

Get a damn high quality camera up there!!

About the solutions, there are tons. Right, now there, is only one camera in the net. Just adding another along the ice in the back of the net at an angle would have helped.