Stars99Lobo37
Registered User
Caught the tail ending of the US Canada women showdown this morning, and good God those refs were an embarrassment. Definitely not why the US lost even if the refs gave Canada a free goal, but they were terribad.
Caught the tail ending of the US Canada women showdown this morning, and good God those refs were an embarrassment. Definitely not why the US lost even if the refs gave Canada a free goal, but they were terribad.
Hopefully Nuke will get some playing time tomorrow!
Isn't the problem that any chip would be centrally placed within a puck while the rule is that the entire puck has to cross the line? If the puck always remained flat it would still work because you could compensate but since the distance to the outer edge is smaller when it's up on end or fluttering... you'd need like a multi-axis accelerometer in there as well. Then multiply that by the number of pucks that get used each game.
Isn't the problem that any chip would be centrally placed within a puck while the rule is that the entire puck has to cross the line?
And I'm not sure why men's games need 2 refs but women only need 1....whatever.
That would be a question of economics, no?
Make it in the same vain as FoxTrax glow puck. Obviously leave out glow technology but RFID sensors in each location of current lights. If all RFID sensors go off then good goal, or something like that
http://www.slate.com/articles/sport...orst_blunder_in_tv_sports_history_or_was.html
In the Olympics? They need to cut cost to make that happen? I would say that's a pretty weak excuse.
That could work for some NCAA women's game.
Val scores!!!!
I didn't realize the Olympics operated outside the sphere of money.