GDT: #69 - 03/16/14 | San Jose Sharks @ New York Rangers | 4:00 - MSG

[AlternateSideParking]

Again, the goal cam would have shown it. We had the technology in 1994 and 1997 but not in 2014?

 

[OverTheCap]

Yet another game where I am dazzled by the dominance of Nash and MSL.

It actually seems like our scoring woes have gotten even worse since the acquisition of MSL. Only in Rangerstown...

 

[*Bob Richards*]

Where was the goal cam?

They never do seem to use that do they?

 

[Holocene]

You can't infer that the puck is in the net. It's the right call.

Where else would it be? Just magically disappeared after it crossed the line and goes out of view?

Smith gets a puck stuck in his equipment and falls into the the net and that gets called a goal yet they couldn't see actually see it.

 

[clmetsfan]

I don't have to. You're the one who should provide proof to overturn the call on the ice. The onus is on you, not me.

What kind of logic is that? The puck came out of the net. Therefore, the puck was in the net. This isn't rocket science.

 

[I Am Chariot]

https://vine.co/v/MhmP17ixT2U

Toronto can't make the right call off this?

 

[Riverdale]

I did prove it. It's physically impossible for the puck to be behind the post and not over the line.

End of story.

Ya but... **** the Rangers.

No goal. Easy call.

 

[Stasis]

Gonna be real upsetting if we lose by a goal. Need all the points we can get now. Not that I'm ever at all surprised by this BS from the NHL. I've seen it happen to a lot of other teams, just not to us in a while. Sucks every time it happens because I hate seeing incompetence or illogical process, but it sucks even more when it's a team I love.

Oh well. At least I can be proud of the fact that I haven't given a cent to the NHL this year. Yay!

 

[nevesis]

The puck escaped into the bermuda triangle, obvs.

The puck is currently on Malaysian Airlines 370 in an airport hanger on Pago Pago.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

Sorry, but that's not proof. Just because it looks over the line because it was behind the post doesn't mean it's behind the line. Just like an overhead camera of the goal line, it's possible it's an illusion.

Maybe it's not proof on some other planet where the NHL uses flexible pucks where it is actually possible for the puck to be behind the post and not across the line. Or physics just doesn't exist on that planet.

I assume that this planet also denies goals when the puck is in the goalie's equipment and the goalie has slid into the net (since, you know, the NHL has awarded goals in that scenario numerous times).

 

[ajdj10]

If some other team did that it would've taken half the time to review that and it would've been called a good goal.
No joke.

 

[Zucc36]

If the rules state that they have to see the puck and the goal line to have conclusive evidence, why did they review it in the first place? And why did it take so long?

 

[Bardof425*]

Absolutely. But it's still amusing to me that they actually said there wasn't conclusive evidence. If we don't score, we absolutely cannot point to that review and blame our loss on that. We need to put a puck in the net without a lucky call and actually win this game, but sheesh, I just figured they could come up with a better crock of bull than "not conclusive".

Here's the thing, if that was Hank's pad it's called a goal. Toronto has screwed us all year on virtually every call. **** Toronto!!!

 

[BarbaraAlphanse]

Have we had 1 call go our way this entire season, in terms of goals reviewed by Toronto?

Just 1?

 

[AlternateSideParking]

Yet another game where I am dazzled by the dominance of Nash and MSL.

It actually seems like our scoring woes have gotten even worse since the acquisition of MSL. Only in Rangerstown...

And you cant use the competition excuse because he dropped 4 on this same team.

Hope hes enjoying Greenwich. Seems like thats all he cares about right now.

 

[Machinehead]

Where else would it be? Just magically disappeared after it crossed the line and goes out of view?

Which is why the conclusive video evidence rule sucks, but it's the rule.

Smith gets a puck stuck in his equipment and falls into the the net and that gets called a goal yet they couldn't see actually see it.

Yes they could actually see it.

 

[Giacomin]

The Rangers need a big 3rd period!

 

[NCRanger]

Isn't the puck coming OUT of the goal on the MSG replay conclusive evidence that the puck had to be IN the goal?

How many is that now? 4 or 5 goals taken from the Rangers this season by replay.

 

[Clausewitz]

Well, in all fairness, Niemi did shake his head.

 

[Glennsoe]

It's time's like this I miss Torts...

AV is too calm...too calm...

 

[Hunter Gathers]

https://vine.co/v/MhmP17ixT2U

Toronto can't make the right call off this?

Clearly the crazy, whacky physics allowed for that puck to not have crossed the line.

Physics doesn't apply in Toranna.

#TorannaPhysics

 

[Killem Dafoe]

It doesn't matter. It can't be based on an assumption. They have to have visual confirmation on the puck itself.

It was the right call.

Sad thing was, it was the right call. But that's like watching someone get into their car and unless you physically see them in their car you can't prove that's where they were despite the fact that you watched them open the door and climb in.

 

[iamitter]

https://vine.co/v/MhmP17ixT2U

I mean, it's clearly in. It has to be. No camera angle actually "shows" it in, though. It's the right call based on the rules, but all that shows is the rules should change.

 

[AlternateSideParking]

The ENTIRE puck has to be over the goal line.

 

[nevesis]

TRONNA. End of the story.