No goal call on San Jose V. Ottawa

[HamiltonNHL]

Goal for sure.

You can clearly see white between the puck and the goal line.

Spoiler: Goal ?

I do think it was a goal

 

[Drytoast]

That was clearly a goal

 

[Drytoast]

Honestly I don't see clear evidence that the puck had crossed the line, and especially considering that the call on the ice was a no goal, I do not believe there was conclusive evidence to over turn it.

If you cant see white between the puck and the red line you need your eyes checked

 

[Craig Button]

Its a good goal.
But I'm not surprised.
A ref is basically Helen Keller on skates

 

[Beville]

That’s a good hockey goal...

Not that it would’ve made a difference for us.

 

[maacoshark]

From that angle, it looked like it never crossed the line.

Take another look. Just before the player got his stick on the puck you can see a bite of white between the puck and the goal line. At first I didn't think it crossed either but after a second look I think it vwas a goal.

 

[BruinLVGA]

Good goal.

 

[Drytoast]

Let's end this shall we.

Here for all those that have eye problems.

If by now, you can't clearly see WHITE between the puck and the red line I really can't help you.

 

[jbeck5]

Let's end this shall we.

Here for all those that have eye problems.

If by now, you can't clearly see WHITE between the puck and the red line I really can't help you.

That's pretty damn conclusive. I also don't see red beyond the flashing red line which shows the flashing red line is accurately placed.

 

[WolfgangPuck]

Looks like a goal.
Whoever is making the final call is likely the ones looking at the offsides calls.
Clearly doesn’t have all the camera views we have.

 

[The Macho King]

Yeah that looks in.

 

[Helistin]

Looked like a goal to me. Maybe the call on the ice stood because of something else?

 

[joe dirte]

hard to tell on that replay but ive seen photos that show it was a goal.

 

[TheSituation]

Let's end this shall we.

Here for all those that have eye problems.

If by now, you can't clearly see WHITE between the puck and the red line I really can't help you.

Yeah, that's conclusive. Toronto got this wrong.

 

[shaner8989]

Who cares it was a total domination all night

Meaningless call either way

 

[SladeWilson23]

Take another look. Just before the player got his stick on the puck you can see a bite of white between the puck and the goal line. At first I didn't think it crossed either but after a second look I think it vwas a goal.

Yes I see it better with the closeup angle.

 

[hohosaregood]

I'm not seeing enough to overturn the call on the ice.

 

[joe dirte]

really who cares?

 

[Quid Pro Clowe]

Think they got it wrong here, just like they got it wrong not giving Dzingel an instigator and not giving Burrows a match penalty.

 

[thedustman]

it doesn't help that the red goal line has soft edges.

 

[Battle Lin]

the red goal line is too faded, especially when you zoom really close

you know the video officials looking at it needs to be 100 percent sure, no question, no doubt about it to be a goal, like a goal cant have any debate, and all the video officials probably couldn't conclude, some probably say yes some no

 

[Alwalys]

Certainly would not have argued if it were called good, but the Sharks had one almost identical called back this season so eh. At least it wasn't a one-goal game here.
The argument I could see here is the puck is not on the ice at that point but the overhead camera should make that irrelevant.

What I do like is the call on the ice being the standard that has to be overruled by clear evidence. Several times earlier this season against the Sharks I thought the refs were not respecting that standard.

 

[rent free]

its a goal but who cares the sens are sucking rn

 

[PunkRockLocke]

Good call to uphold the refs call on the ice. No evidence it crossed the line 100%. This is the right call.

 

[Paris in Flames]

Good call to uphold the refs call on the ice. No evidence it crossed the line 100%. This is the right call.

Except all the evidence.