Jump to content

GDT: Buffalo at San Jose 11-05-13 at 10:30 PM EST

26CornerBlitz

By 26CornerBlitz
in The Aud Club

Recommended Posts

MattPie All Star

MattPie

Posted
Posted

Someone didn't watch the game last night.

 

I think it's in the highlight reel on youtube. @1:08

 

Goal Judge: I don't understand how the goal judge isn't just watching a monitor with the overhead cam for the entire game, and a big red button to turn the light on. That's probably *better* than sitting behind the net where players get in the way and perspective is non-ideal.

Eleven Hall of Famer

Eleven

Posted
Posted

Goal Judge: I don't understand how the goal judge isn't just watching a monitor with the overhead cam for the entire game, and a big red button to turn the light on. That's probably *better* than sitting behind the net where players get in the way and perspective is non-ideal.

 

That's a really good point. Every arena has those cameras now.

Stoner Hall of Famer

Stoner

Posted
Posted

Absolutely would have made a difference. Technically the ref has to defer to the goal judge.

 

I've never heard that. Source?

LGR4GM Hall of Famer

LGR4GM

Posted
Posted

I doubt it is real. No way 3 players skate that close in line during a game.

I double checked it just now on gamecenter. The two players aren't chasing the puck carrier they were going with the two guys to the net and then failed miserably to stop in time and are turning to get back in position at that moment in time.

post-2716-0-36725400-1383766875_thumb.png

Patty16 Third Liner

Patty16

Posted
Posted

Absolutely would have made a difference. Technically the ref has to defer to the goal judge.

 

No, goal judges are basically symbolic. There is a video judge and the ref does not have to defer to him if he deems a play dead.

26CornerBlitz First Liner

26CornerBlitz

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I think you could find a frame in there that looks like the French connection statue.

I smell a new statue for the plaza.

 

We have at least two for the committee. Please report your recommendations to Mr. Black.

LGR4GM Hall of Famer

LGR4GM

Posted
Posted

Here is the sequence leading up to the Sabrepede

post-2716-0-96409300-1383767172_thumb.png

at first they are covering players and collapsing to the net

 

post-2716-0-33941300-1383767221_thumb.png

still collapsing

 

post-2716-0-20930800-1383767248_thumb.png

now the puck begins to go around the net

 

post-2716-0-48587900-1383767271_thumb.png

The SJ forward stops and moulson at full speed starts to blow bye. Tallinder for unknown reasons shifts out towards the guy behind the net.

 

post-2716-0-94067700-1383767825_thumb.png

Tallinder slides all the way out, Moulson is still trying to stop, Myers has followed his player around the net as he should keeping him to the outside.

26CornerBlitz First Liner

26CornerBlitz

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Really NHL? Okay....Thanks for that. This better not cost the Sabres the #1 pick next year. :rolleyes:‏

 

@EyeOnHockey NHL says no-goal call in Sharks-Sabres right under 'intent to blow' http://cbsprt.co/17Ncz6Y

 

Sometimes it's OK to simply admit a call was missed. It happens so fast on the ice it's forgiveable every once in a while, because this reasoning just don't seem to fit the play here. While it would sting the Sharks, mistakes happen, the Sabres sure know a thing or two about that.

Stoner Hall of Famer

Stoner

Posted
Posted

We have at least two for the committee. Please report your recommendations to Mr. Black.

 

Sorry, russ. I hadn't seen your post. You da man/woman.

 

Really NHL? Okay....Thanks for that. This better not cost the Sabres the #1 pick next year. :rolleyes:‏

 

@EyeOnHockey NHL says no-goal call in Sharks-Sabres right under 'intent to blow' http://cbsprt.co/17Ncz6Y

 

Sometimes it's OK to simply admit a call was missed. It happens so fast on the ice it's forgiveable every once in a while, because this reasoning just don't seem to fit the play here. While it would sting the Sharks, mistakes happen, the Sabres sure know a thing or two about that.

 

A very strange situation. How much of a "cover" is intent to blow? Say a player shoots the puck between the goalie's legs, and the puck squirts through and goes into the net. The ref is watching the goalie's pads, doesn't see the puck emerge and intends to blow his whistle two seconds after the puck crosses the line. Still no goal? Here, it sounds like the ref told the league he saw the puck rebound under Miller and intended to blow the whistle then. Doesn't explain the delay in actually blowing it. Then again, maybe the ref was multitasking — first, waving off the initial shot that hit the post, mentally blowing the whistle, then actually blowing it.

Sabres Fan in NS Hall of Famer

Sabres Fan in NS

Posted
Posted

Really NHL? Okay....Thanks for that. This better not cost the Sabres the #1 pick next year. :rolleyes:‏

 

@EyeOnHockey NHL says no-goal call in Sharks-Sabres right under 'intent to blow' http://cbsprt.co/17Ncz6Y

 

Sometimes it's OK to simply admit a call was missed. It happens so fast on the ice it's forgiveable every once in a while, because this reasoning just don't seem to fit the play here. While it would sting the Sharks, mistakes happen, the Sabres sure know a thing or two about that.

 

Intent to blow and actually blowing are not the same thing.

 

Am I right, chz?

26CornerBlitz First Liner

26CornerBlitz

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Intent to blow and actually blowing are not the same thing.

 

Am I right, chz?

 

That's the difference between :rolleyes: road rage and a pleasant Sunday Drive.

 

BTW, shouldn't that be the #blueprint for this season? #intent-to-blow

Doohicksie Hall of Famer

Doohicksie

Posted
Posted

Intent to blow and actually blowing are not the same thing.

 

Am I right, chz?

 

For the rule, once the ref loses sight of the puck, he is supposed to blow the whistle. It's when he decides to blow the whistle that the play ends. He saw the puck come off the post and go under Miller. Play dead, decision made, whistle blown. The fact that it didn't get pinned under Miller and pinballed into the net is irrelevant under the rule; the ref thought the puck was covered and that was that, even if he was wrong.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...