GDT: Gold Medal Game: Canada Vs Russia | 1:00PM EST 7PM CET

[Seachd]

He's a "scrub". He's been respectful through this whole charade, all he wants is this so called proof that teams were informed that the camera was part of the arena structure.

But since they were not informed proof will never come will it??

They “were not informed” because you say so? It doesn’t matter what everyone else says, just “wacko2” from HFBoards?

 

[wacko2]

How often does referees or organizations admit they were wrong? It almost never happens unless it's so clear that they have to. Now they had this rule that is there to make sure the there's no penalty in the unlikely event that the puck hits the rafters or the loudspeekers to bail them out, so they can say that a cmera is a structural part of the rink. Newsflash: it's not.

I've already posted pictures that with 100% certainty shows that the camera was outside the ice when the puck hit it.

Yep, it's an obvious cover your butt explanation for a huge screwup.

 

[Godzilla]

For the third time, this link was in this thread. Put there by a Finnish poster, who explained everything. You’re very welcome to read it. It’s right there.

You keep asking for proof, when everything is pointing right to it. From a person working with TSN, to a a quote from a member of the IIHF Officiating Committee, to the fact that a penalty wasn’t called.

How much more clear does it need to be? And in the face of all this evidence, why is your default reaction to deny it all? What are you basing it on? Where’s your proof that none of this matters and a penalty should have been called?

I think he is waiting for a personal phone call from Jyri Rönn himself to confirm it. Not sure what else will convince him.

 

[penalty reviver]

After watching parts of the game the second time, the only bad piece of refereeing to me was the Voronkov crosscheck penalty. Clear as day embellishment (Delandrea?), WWF-style.

 

[Jussi]

How often does referees or organizations admit they were wrong? It almost never happens unless it's so clear that they have to. Now they had this rule that is there to make sure the there's no penalty in the unlikely event that the puck hits the rafters or the loudspeekers to bail them out, so they can say that a cmera is a structural part of the rink. Newsflash: it's not.

I've already posted pictures that with 100% certainty shows that the camera was outside the ice when the puck hit it.

It doesn't matter, if it's been determined before the tournament that cameras fall in to structural elements of the rink, which it was so it wasn't.

 

[ItWasJustified]

It doesn't matter, if it's been determined before the tournament that cameras fall in to structural elements of the rink, which it was so it wasn't.

It it's been determined before the tournament why didn't the linesman who signaled for penalty know about that?

 

[Czechboy]

You agree with everything he wrote. I agree with everything the head official wrote about it being the right call. The guy that has officiated world championships or Czechboy... who do you think has the better grasp on how this rule is supposed to be applied?

Also, youre posting a picture that literally shows parts of the camera hanging over the ice which means it was the right call by the wording in the rulebook

Bury your head in the sand some more though because a couple other posters also have their head buried with you

First of all... he's the head official of the Finnish Liiga... in Finland. He wasn't at the tourney. He's not the head official of the WJC's.

Second of all... he didn't talk to the officials after the game and write the article to my knowledge of reading this article. I'm using Google Translate here so maybe I missed something which is entirely possible.

Third of all... absolute, a guy who reffed the world championships would know more than me. Of course. But he's an outside party just like me. He wasn't a part of this tournament or that decision. He wrote his opinion. He has no more inside information than you or I do.

For instance, if the head official of the KHL comes out and says its a bad call.. then what? People will say he is bias because he is Russian. Right? This is a Finn ref backing up the FInn refs. What is Kerry Fraser says it was a bad call? Is it relevant?

Uutta: MM-finaalin visainen tilanne ei ollut suomalaistuomarien virhe – Kanadalaiskamera torjui kiekon ja pelasti Kanadan

Here is what I read in Google Translate since I don't read Finnish:

Tonight's final of the Under-20 Men's Ice Hockey World Cup saw a strange coincidence when a Canadian player lifted a puck from his defensive area but did not end up in the audience but hit a television camera above the plexus. If the puck had not hit the camera, the legal consequence would have been a two-minute penalty for delaying the game.
- In the International Hockey League IIHF tournaments, there will be no penalty if the puck hits the structures above the field in such situations. Such structures may include cameras and microphones, says Jyri Rönn , the referee of the League .
He says that when the puck hits, it doesn't matter whether the structure is inside or outside the airspace of the field. There is no similar rule in Finland.
- That's IIHF rule in tournaments. There are no such structures in league matches, Rönn says.
The World Cup finals were judged by Finns Lassi Heikkinen and Kristian Vikman . The decision not to punish the Canadian for a hit was theirs, as the line judge closest to the situation immediately displayed a two-minute penalty. The decision sparked a lot of protest in the Russian camp.
This situation happened at the end of the match. Canada led the match 4-3. Russia was already playing with one man's lead and would have been able to claim a two man lead if the game had been delayed.
No more goals were scored and Canada won the World Cup gold.
The camera that rejected the reel above the plexiglass was the equipment of the Canadian media company TSN.

My takeaways:

Not an official from this tournament
Never talked to the refs
No inside info at all
Watched the game from home like you and I did

 

[Czechboy]

It it's been determined before the tournament why didn't the linesman who signaled for penalty know about that?

What an excellent question.

 

[wacko2]

It it's been determined before the tournament why didn't the linesman who signaled for penalty know about that?

Lol, they all know that it's a cover your butt excuse but are unable to truthfully respond.
Blown call without doubt. Would Russia have scored on the 6 on 3?? We'll never know.

 

[Jussi]

It it's been determined before the tournament why didn't the linesman who signaled for penalty know about that?

Maybe he didn't see it hit the camera or forgot about it? Maybe you should ask him?

 

[Jussi]

Lol, they all know that it's a cover your butt excuse but are unable to truthfully respond.
Blown call without doubt. Would Russia have scored on the 6 on 3?? We'll never know.

Nope. And based on their previous powerplay efforts in the game, no, they wouldn't have scored.

 

[ItWasJustified]

Maybe he didn't see it hit the camera or forgot about it? Maybe you should ask him?

He didn't see it while having his eyes on the puck the whole way? Sure.

 

[Czechboy]

For the third time, this link was in this thread. Put there by a Finnish poster, who explained everything. You’re very welcome to read it. It’s right there.

You keep asking for proof, when everything is pointing right to it. From a person working with TSN, to a a quote from a member of the IIHF Officiating Committee, to the fact that a penalty wasn’t called.

How much more clear does it need to be? And in the face of all this evidence, why is your default reaction to deny it all? What are you basing it on? Where’s your proof that none of this matters and a penalty should have been called?

I gotta ask.. do you read Finnish? I obviously don't.

Who is the person working from TSN? Link? In English please. (I've already referenced Ferrera and McKenzie)
Rony is not a member of the IIHF officiating comittee at this tournament... he was not a ref here. Not in the country. Works in Finland. Doesn't sound like he'll be reffing at the upcoming world's either. It sounds like he works for Finland.

 

[Jussi]

First of all... he's the head official of the Finnish Liiga... in Finland. He wasn't at the tourney. He's not the head official of the WJC's.

Second of all... he didn't talk to the officials after the game and write the article to my knowledge of reading this article. I'm using Google Translate here so maybe I missed something which is entirely possible.

Third of all... absolute, a guy who reffed the world championships would know more than me. Of course. But he's an outside party just like me. He wasn't a part of this tournament or that decision. He wrote his opinion. He has no more inside information than you or I do.

For instance, if the head official of the KHL comes out and says its a bad call.. then what? People will say he is bias because he is Russian. Right? This is a Finn ref backing up the FInn refs. What is Kerry Fraser says it was a bad call? Is it relevant?

Uutta: MM-finaalin visainen tilanne ei ollut suomalaistuomarien virhe – Kanadalaiskamera torjui kiekon ja pelasti Kanadan

Here is what I read in Google Translate since I don't read Finnish:

Tonight's final of the Under-20 Men's Ice Hockey World Cup saw a strange coincidence when a Canadian player lifted a puck from his defensive area but did not end up in the audience but hit a television camera above the plexus. If the puck had not hit the camera, the legal consequence would have been a two-minute penalty for delaying the game.
- In the International Hockey League IIHF tournaments, there will be no penalty if the puck hits the structures above the field in such situations. Such structures may include cameras and microphones, says Jyri Rönn , the referee of the League .
He says that when the puck hits, it doesn't matter whether the structure is inside or outside the airspace of the field. There is no similar rule in Finland.
- That's IIHF rule in tournaments. There are no such structures in league matches, Rönn says.
The World Cup finals were judged by Finns Lassi Heikkinen and Kristian Vikman . The decision not to punish the Canadian for a hit was theirs, as the line judge closest to the situation immediately displayed a two-minute penalty. The decision sparked a lot of protest in the Russian camp.
This situation happened at the end of the match. Canada led the match 4-3. Russia was already playing with one man's lead and would have been able to claim a two man lead if the game had been delayed.
No more goals were scored and Canada won the World Cup gold.
The camera that rejected the reel above the plexiglass was the equipment of the Canadian media company TSN.

My takeaways:

Not an official from this tournament
Never talked to the refs
No inside info at all
Watched the game from home like you and I did

GDT: - Gold Medal Game: Canada Vs Russia | 1:00PM EST 7PM CET

 

[McGuillicuddy]

What an excellent question.

Who cares? Calls are blown every game and in this particular game the Hayton penalty (resulting in Russia's first goal) and the TSNCamera fiasco pretty much make it a wash. In fact you could say that Russia came out ahead because the blown call in their favour actually resulted in a goal. The Camera non-call only resulted in a missed opportunity which may not have actually resulted in a goal at all. It could just have easily occured that Canada wins the faceoff and fires the puck down for an empty net goal.

Fair victory for Canada.

 

[Jussi]

He didn't see it while having his eyes on the puck the whole way? Sure.View attachment 303597

They're looking at the camera after it had gone out. Can you not see that????

 

[Seachd]

It it's been determined before the tournament why didn't the linesman who signaled for penalty know about that?

Wait, if you think the officials are perfect, why are you so quick to jump on them for what you think, in the face of all the evidence, is a blown call?

 

[Seachd]

I gotta ask.. do you read Finnish? I obviously don't.

Who is the person working from TSN? Link? In English please. (I've already referenced Ferrera and McKenzie)
Rony is not a member of the IIHF officiating comittee at this tournament... he was not a ref here. Not in the country. Works in Finland. Doesn't sound like he'll be reffing at the upcoming world's either. It sounds like he works for Finland.

Rönn is a member of the IIHF Officiating Committee. Period. They don’t rearrange the whole organization for one tournament.

The mental gymnastics to try to get around this are astounding.

 

[Bonham]

The incessant whining in these threads makes these wins more enjoyable.

Russia had a two goal lead with a little over ten minutes to go in the game. They proceeded to give up three goals to Canada in like six and a half minutes to lose the game.

Blame the refs all you want but they deserved to lose.

 

[Fatass]

He didn't see it while having his eyes on the puck the whole way? Sure.View attachment 303597

Clearly it was a terrible call. We won though, so I’m happy. Russian cheated lots in doping scandals recently (banned from coming Olympics) so could this be revenge, and something we are going to see more?

 

[Seachd]

They're looking at the camera after it had gone out. Can you not see that????

“He didn't see it while having his eyes on the puck the whole way?”

posts picture with no puck

Not to mention the fact that whether he saw it or not is irrelevant. We all know the puck hit the camera. The exact spot it hit the camera was never an issue.

 

[blindpass]

And no confirmation of supposed discussion of course. Because it didn't happen.
Not all of us Canadians are blind my friend.

Tell us what you think happened, if not that the refs applied the rule (which exists and wasn't made up on the spot). You think they were deliberately biased, moments after making a penalty call that they could have easily ignored? They made the call THEY thought was right, and lo and behold there is a rule that describes the situation (that none of us knew about). Yet you think you know the rules better. So what happened, as you see it?

 

[ItWasJustified]

They're looking at the camera after it had gone out. Can you not see that????

The linesman's eyes are following to puck the whole way as you can see here.

 

[wacko2]

Tell us what you think happened, if not that the refs applied the rule (which exists and wasn't made up on the spot). You think they were deliberately biased, moments after making a penalty call that they could have easily ignored? They made the call THEY thought was right, and lo and behold there is a rule that describes the situation (that none of us knew about). Yet you think you know the rules better. So what happened, as you see it?

It isn't complicated, refs screwed up as they do, even in the NHL, then spewed out the bogus excuse afterwards.
Reply upstairs in the future would be a wonderful idea.

 

[Peiskos]