Goal or no Goal? You make the call

that puck is clearly all the way across the line

being a b’s fan, i have to unfortunatley say that this looks like a goal to me. here’s to a good series. go b’s

Looking from the oblique angle last night it appeared to me the puck bounced off the net inside the pipe. I didn’t hear the pipe ring, either. GOAL!

Keep Playing Carolina And Bring The Cup Back To Raleigh.

It was absolutely a goal. Take notice the overhead camera is not directly over the blue line (and hence the crossbar) The camera is located directly above an area behind the crossbar, therefore creating an error of parallax. This is a conservative error in that a puck (on edge or in the air) might project an image over the goal line even if it has completely crossed the goal line. The overhead HD view CLEARLY indicated white space between the puck and the goal line, hence it was absolutely a goal. You can draw two possible conclusions from this:

1. A deliberate attempt to slant the game towards the Bruins.
2. The people staffing the “war room” in Toronto are untrained and unqualified.

Given the NHL’s nepotistic practice of hiring ex-NHLer’s instead of perhaps the most qualified personnel I’m inclined to believe it is a little bit of both. My suggestion is to hire people that have not played in the NHL, hence, less likely to care about the outcome, and, to train these people in the correct way to interpret the visual data available to them.

You can’t blame Cane’s fans for being upset as this isn’t the first Canes playoff goal that has been disallowed.

This is what a No Goal looks like:

http://www.boston.com/sports/hockey/bruins/extras/bruins_blog/2009/05/hurricanes_vs_b_1.html#comments

Here is another example of a no goal:

http://www.boston.com/sports/hockey/bruins/extras/bruins_blog/2009/05/carolina_scouti.html#comments