GDT: HFBoards GDT | 11/17/2023 | 2 regular Games

[CrazyDuck4u]

NHL refs sticking it to the ducks.. do this bullshit

 

[Ratsreign]

It was an optical delusion

 

[Ugene Magic]

The only thing I can say is they concentrated on the blurry top view. But the stick putting it in has the puck over the line because the stick crossed. IMHO.

 

[CrazyDuck4u]

I didn't think it fully crossed tbh, and was vindicated. Not all the way over .

Wtf you talking about. There is clear picture of the puck over the line

 

[McRpro]

Looked like it was clearly in to me at first but then I saw the stick....

Tough call either way.

 

[WaitingForThatCab]

I think that was probably a goal, but much like the 5 minute review the other night to determine that light from venus reflecting off of swamp gas caused the play to be offside on a Sam Bennett goal, the NHL just sucks at these things.

 

[Pukboy5kroner]

NHL refs sticking it to the ducks.. do this bullshit

I don't think it's the Ducks that's the target. They've been pretty bad all night, including that one.

 

[Atoyot]

Right call. Nothing showed it was entirely over the goal line.

 

[Panthers Propaganda]

Wtf you talking about. There is clear picture of the puck over the line

Apparently not.

 

[Tw1ster]

Looked inconclusive to me

 

[ijuka]

I didn't think it fully crossed tbh, and was vindicated. Not all the way over .

Was easily all the way over, not even close. And that's with the puck being in the air, and the angle being from behind. So it was an even clearer goal than it actually looked.

 

[000x000]

That no goal call was crazy. Cut and dry goal.

 

[ohcomeonref]

Apparently not.

Appeal to authority arguments are shaky at best

 

[ijuka]

If they're just gonna default to "call on the ice" on all these reviews no matter how they actually look, even with clear video evidence, then they should just remove these reviews and stop wasting time.

 

[Panthers Propaganda]

Appeal to authority arguments are shaky at best

Ok. It did not look conclusive enough to over turn.

 

[ijuka]

Ok. It did not look conclusive enough to over turn.

It did, though. It was extremely conclusive, not even close. You could place the red line on the video and then move it frame by frame and there's at least one frame where it's clearly over that red line.

 

[Panthers Propaganda]

It did, though. It was extremely conclusive, not even close. You could place the red line on the video and then move it frame by frame and there's at least one frame where it's clearly over that red line.

Alrighty bud, they took an eon reviewing it so idk what to tell ya.

 

[000x000]

I'd love to hear the rationale on that no goal call.

 

[frankiess]

It did, though. It was extremely conclusive, not even close. You could place the red line on the video and then move it frame by frame and there's at least one frame where it's clearly over that red line.

He's listening to the game on the radio.

 

[ijuka]

Alrighty bud, they took an eon reviewing it so idk what to tell ya.

Luckily, I have eyes and there's video evidence. They even had a close-up.

 

[Panthers Propaganda]

Luckily, I have eyes and there's video evidence. They even had a close-up.

Ok.

 

[Pukboy5kroner]

I'd love to hear the rationale on that no goal call.

Same rationale as the Stenglund interference call. I've got a whistle.

 

[John Mandalorian]

So its appropriate for Carlsson to have a career ending injury then?

 

[ijuka]

This one, right? Dunno where you guys think the red line is but there's almost a puck's width there.

 

[Pukboy5kroner]

So its appropriate for Carlsson to have a career ending injury then?

Is this the right thread?