PDA

View Full Version : NCAA West Regional - 3/25, 3/26 - BC, Michigan, UNO, CC



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

slurpees
03-25-2011, 08:12 PM
In the 2005 NC game, DU goalie Peter Mannino saved a puck in the net with his glove. It was obviously in the net, but since you couldn't see the puck it was called no goal. This was a terrible call.

difference between the two is that the puck is visible in this instance and apparently not in that instance. so if the puck is obviously over the line, and visible even for a split second, but the goalie's pad obscures the goal line, it's automatically no goal?

The Rube
03-25-2011, 08:12 PM
I did not see a view that showed that. If they have that, it will come out and then we can all be happy that they got it right.

AND it is what angles the ref are ALLOWED to see.

"Probably" and "common sense says" have no business in making a call on replay. It's conclusive visual evidence.

Zim
03-25-2011, 08:13 PM
What a shame for the game to end on such an inconclusive call. Sorry UNO fans.

slurpees
03-25-2011, 08:14 PM
I sure hope to see a view that shows the puck completely across the line because I haven't seen one yet. I'm watching ESPNU right now and they looked at all the replays and said it wasn't a goal. I don't know how you make that call.

the in game announcers seemed to believe after seeing everything that they could see the puck.

Gurtholfin
03-25-2011, 08:15 PM
It "appeared" that way, but like you said the cross par and pad obscured the view and you couldn't see it. If you apply the rule as it is directly written, then you can't over turn the "No goal" call on the ice because there was no conclusive evidence to say it was in the net. Common sense and probability are not enough to warrant conclusive evidence.

I'm not even sure of that based on the fact that the puck must be all the way over the line. If even a 16th of an inch is breaking the plane of the goal line, it's not in.

With no clear view of this, I don't know how this could be an overrule.

I agree that there's circumstantial evidence, but that shouldn't be enough in a tourney game.

MichFan
03-25-2011, 08:19 PM
Here's the rule:


SECTION 60. The use of video replay is permissible in any game using either of the following procedures:
a. NCAA Championship Procedures.
1. In order to reverse an on-ice ruling, the replay must include conclusive video evidence. One of the following criteria must be met for replay to be used:
a. A puck crossing the goal line;

What does "conclusive" mean? It's not defined, nor does the word appear anywhere else in the rule book. It's not a legal term. Lawyers talk in terms of "preponderance of the evidence," "clear and convincing evidence," or "beyond a reasonable doubt."

I'm biased, but I thought it was in. The overhead replay was not conclusive by itself. I think that the straight-on front shot shows it over the line; the overhead replay simply confirms that the straight-on shot did not distort the angle.

ESPN did a good job with the replay during the game, but rehashing it during the overtime intermission in Yale-Air Force, they were only showing the overhead shot, which, again, was not the best shot in my mind. I wonder if they're fanning controversy, which would be typical for them.

There would have been controversy either way. I wouldn't want to be in the ref's shoes.

Great game, and hats off to UNO. In fact, all three games have been good so far.

UMICH
03-25-2011, 08:19 PM
Not sure what replay you are watching but there is no replay I saw where you can physically see the puck across the goal line. The ref called it a no goal, if you are going to over turn that you need some pretty good evidence. The overhead goal line cam was not it. You can not see a thing. On a call like this, you also can't assume that just because it did this and that, that it had to have been behind the goal line.

On the down ice-replay you could clearly see the puck on WHITE ice, not blue, not red. WHITE!

slurpees
03-25-2011, 08:22 PM
On the down ice-replay you could clearly see the puck on WHITE ice, not blue, not red. WHITE!

yes, but what you couldn't see on the overhead was white to the left of the puck because it was obscured by the pad.

Gurtholfin
03-25-2011, 08:23 PM
On the down ice-replay you could clearly see the puck on WHITE ice, not blue, not red. WHITE!

As soon as we actually SEE this replay, the "controversy" will end.

The Rube
03-25-2011, 08:23 PM
On the down ice-replay you could clearly see the puck on WHITE ice, not blue, not red. WHITE!

But were the refs allowed to see that angle?

IIRC, in the WCHA, only the overhead shot is allowed.

And this overhead shot was not conclusive to overturn the on-ice call. Period.

chickod
03-25-2011, 08:24 PM
That was horrid. You can't theorize where the puck is. I don't care who won that game, but MI got a huge break that was incorrect, IMO.

It was defininely in. I think everyone is looking behind the line, but the defenseman is in the way. Right before the puck comes out of the net (and that's the key) - before the defenseman swept it out, you can see the goalie kicking out his left pad and right behind his skate is the puck. You can see it "following" right behind the pad on its way out. And before you say I'm "assuming" it must have been there, what I'm saying is that you can't look right AT the goalie's pad...if you look BEHIND the pad when it's on its way forward you can see the puck just under his skate - it is absolutely completely behind the goal line.

Gurtholfin
03-25-2011, 08:26 PM
Oh yeah, GO CC!

Zim
03-25-2011, 08:26 PM
As soon as we actually SEE this replay, the "controversy" will end.

Just watch it with your Maize & Blue glasses and it becomes Crystal Clear.

Dirty
03-25-2011, 08:27 PM
difference between the two is that the puck is visible in this instance and apparently not in that instance. so if the puck is obviously over the line, and visible even for a split second, but the goalie's pad obscures the goal line, it's automatically no goal?

Yes. You have to see the puck over the line. You can't just say it was obviously over the line. You have to actually see the puck going over the line. That was never visible in the replays the refs are allowed to use.

slurpees
03-25-2011, 08:31 PM
Yes. You have to see the puck over the line. You can't just say it was obviously over the line. You have to actually see the puck going over the line. That was never visible in the replays the refs are allowed to use.

see chickod's post, he says what i was trying to say, and what i saw more clearly. you CAN see the actual puck.

The Rube
03-25-2011, 08:31 PM
It was defininely in. I think everyone is looking behind the line, but the defenseman is in the way. Right before the puck comes out of the net (and that's the key) - before the defenseman swept it out, you can see the goalie kicking out his left pad and right behind his skate is the puck. You can see it "following" right behind the pad on its way out. And before you say I'm "assuming" it must have been there, what I'm saying is that you can't look right AT the goalie's pad...if you look BEHIND the pad when it's on its way forward you can see the puck just under his skate - it is absolutely completely behind the goal line.

I've probably seen a dozen replays of the shot already (as I'm sure all of you have too) and I have yet to see the puck behind the line, much less clearly enough to overturn the on-ice call.

slurpees
03-25-2011, 08:38 PM
I've probably seen a dozen replays of the shot already (as I'm sure all of you have too) and I have yet to see the puck behind the line, much less clearly enough to overturn the on-ice call.

is there anything online? i havent found any replay other than what was on tv at the time.

The Rube
03-25-2011, 08:41 PM
is there anything online? i havent found any replay other than what was on tv at the time.

And unless it's different in the playoffs, that is the only replay you need, since that is the only one the refs can see.

slurpees
03-25-2011, 08:46 PM
And unless it's different in the playoffs, that is the only replay you need, since that is the only one the refs can see.

no i mean a copy of the one that was on tv. i just want to see it again on my computer and not on tv.

kjaskolski
03-25-2011, 08:47 PM
And unless it's different in the playoffs, that is the only replay you need, since that is the only one the refs can see.

The referees were able to use ALL the replay angles for this review, they showed them watching all the different angles while reviewing it in the box. I am a Michigan fan and while i think it was in, i would not have ruled it a goal, i never saw a truly 100 % conclusive angle that showed it in. However, after last year, while this is not fair to UNO, they were "due" for a break.