GDT Sabres at Islanders 12/27/17 7PM MSG, GR

[Kevbeau]

The top down camera is just inside the crossbar, so a close overhead view can be inconclusive. Combined with the side shot however, I'm comfortable with them calling that a goal.

 

My issue with the process (same with the NFL) is the inconsistency. I can't speak to who's in the booth now, but when I used to work off-ice officiating it wasn't like they were employing folks with imaging science degrees. The folks in those jobs were nice enough but who you knew got you a lot farther then what you knew. I'm sure not much has changed. 

[Brawndo]

The puck looked like it crossed the line here

 

https://twitter.com/eyesonislesFS/status/946207258404417536?s=17

[SwampD]

The puck looked like it crossed the line here

https://twitter.com/eyesonislesFS/status/946207258404417536?s=17

The puck could be anywhere in that glove. The only time you see the puck fully, it is not across the line. That used to be the standard, or maybe just the stadard for other teams.

[Brawndo]

The puck could be anywhere in that glove. The only time you see the puck fully, it is not across the line. That used to be the standard, or maybe just the stadard for other teams.

The puck can be seen in the webbing of his glove, The path the puck takes into and out of his glove puts it over the goal line. I agree that the entire puck should be visible when it crosses the goal line, but the NHL didn't.

 

Had the Dallas Goalie been wearing White Socks rather than Black against the Sabres lastseason the referee would have seen the puck over the goal line on Reinhart's Shot

[Thorner]

The puck could be anywhere in that glove. The only time you see the puck fully, it is not across the line. That used to be the standard, or maybe just the stadard for other teams.

Ya, by the letter of the law I wouldn't be comfortable calling it a goal based on the in net cam view.

[Taro T]

It was new to me as well, but Billznut said it's a new thing this season.

It's a good modification to the procedure. If they are convinced a good goal was scored, all ensuing activity (excepting penalties) that happened after the non-called goal gets wiped out as the clock gets reset. Why take a chance on having another goal that will automatically get called back or having someone take a penalty that won't get called back, or having a game altering injury occur during a portion of play that will officially never have happened.

 

This is that rare NHL rule adjustment that does fix something that was (moderately) broken.

[Stoner]

It's a good modification to the procedure. If they are convinced a good goal was scored, all ensuing activity (excepting penalties) that happened after the non-called goal gets wiped out as the clock gets reset. Why take a chance on having another goal that will automatically get called back or having someone take a penalty that won't get called back, or having a game altering injury occur during a portion of play that will officially never have happened.

 

This is that rare NHL rule adjustment that does fix something that was (moderately) broken.

How is it possible they made that decision in well under a minute, when it normally would take two or three minutes or longer? I'm not 100% convinced they could do so or actually did so. Maybe the off-ice official blew the horn inadvertently, having been told to blow it at the next stoppage.

[Taro T]

How is it possible they made that decision in well under a minute, when it normally would take two or three minutes or longer? I'm not 100% convinced they could do so or actually did so. Maybe the off-ice official blew the horn inadvertently, having been told to blow it at the next stoppage.

If the 1st 2 angles they looked at were the 2 they showed in the post game show, they could've decided that in 20 seconds or less.

 

I'd expect they contacted the off-ice officials immediately upon making the decision. If somehow they'd screwed that review up (wouldn't be the 1st time that's happened ;)) they'd just call it an "inadvertant play stoppage" and drop the puck w/ however much time was left when the horn blew. (It also wouldn't be the 1st time that's ever happened. ;))

[Stoner]

Well, if this review procedure change was made, it wasn't put in the rule book (wouldn't be the first time haha). I also can't find any preseason article that talks about this change. It remains kind of a mystery to me.

 

---

 

78.6 Video Review – Any potential goal requiring video review must be
reviewed prior to or during the next stoppage of play.

When a team scores an apparent goal that is not seen by the onice
officials and play continues, the play shall be reviewed by the
Video Goal Judge at the next stoppage of play.

38. Video Goal Judge — When the Video Goal Judge observes an incident involving a
potential goal that was undetected by the on-ice officials he will
contact the Referee at the first stoppage of play and inform him that a
review of the play is in progress.

[Iron Crotch]

I watched the game on delay. The Sabres have played with a lot of effort the past several games and seem to be passing the puck much better than they were earlier in the season. To me that is evidence that they're growing into the new system. IMHO, it is glaringly obvious that the problem with this team is simply a lack of top-end talent. When you compare this roster man-for-man against any of the better teams, we just don't stack up. I agree with the assessment up-thread that poor drafting has been a killer for this organization.

 

On another note, the Isles announcers are fantastic. Really enjoyed watching the away feed for this one.