fightingsioux4life Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 It also reminded me of this: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yzerman19 Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 35 minutes ago, homer said: He wasn't called offsides on the ice. In real time and the best angle straight down the line. I believe that the play was onside. I am trying to move on... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fightingsioux4life Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 4 minutes ago, yzerman19 said: I believe that the play was onside. I am trying to move on... I have moved on. I just think something like this needs to be talked about and needs to be looked at by the rules committee so this doesn't happen to another team. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geaux_sioux Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 Pretty simple fix. Blue line cams. These days small HD cameras don't cost all that much. 4 per rink and peace of mind for all. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ringneck28 Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 2 minutes ago, geaux_sioux said: Pretty simple fix. Blue line cams. These days small HD cameras don't cost all that much. 4 per rink and peace of mind for all. Not only that, but I am thinking that they need to have a central location for replays like NHL does. This on ice BS is killing the game with long delays and overturning based on what they think and not having the actual view needed. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
franchise Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 7 minutes ago, homer said: He wasn't called offsides on the ice. In real time and the best angle straight down the line. Agreed. Just because they eventually called offsides, doesn't mean it's true. Gage got called for hooking on a breakaway too, but that doesn't mean it really happened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
franchise Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 16 minutes ago, yzerman19 said: I believe that the play was onside. I am trying to move on... How do we move on before October? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 9 hours ago, fightingsioux4life said: It also reminded me of this: ZOMG YES! The ref that had obviously thrown down $1000 on the Buckeyes to win! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxman Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 On 3/27/2017 at 0:49 AM, BigGreyAnt41 said: Parallax has nothing to do with Hoff being over the line. The only way for him to have been not across the line but still appear across the line would be if his skate was lifted up. Still offsides. Parallax would definitely have something to do with it, but the question is whether it is enough to cover the supposed gap. The line is under the ice while the skate is on top of the ice. From that kind of angle the white gap would appear to be larger than just the thickness of the ice. Having said that, it is unknown whether that would be sufficient to cover what appears to be white between the line and Hoff's skate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big A HG Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 Not that it matters and I'm [mostly] over it...but there is absolutely nothing conclusive about what you see in that one photograph posted. Maybe they had a better angle to view...who knows. I haven't seen any video of it since I was at the game, but nothing I've seen so far shows anything conclusive to overturn it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 2 minutes ago, Big A HG said: Not that it matters and I'm [mostly] over it...but there is absolutely nothing conclusive about what you see in that one photograph posted. Maybe they had a better angle to view...who knows. I haven't seen any video of it since I was at the game, but nothing I've seen so far shows anything conclusive to overturn it. You're on the wrong site then because over on "that other fan site," the grainy image we have seen over and over again is considered the Lee Harvey Oswald smoking gun of offsides! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big A HG Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 2 minutes ago, MafiaMan said: You're on the wrong site then because over on "that other fan site," the grainy image we have seen over and over again is considered the Lee Harvey Oswald smoking gun of offsides! I think you misunderstood. There is no evidence to overturn the original call, not the reviewed call. Either way, on to 2017-18. UND was far and away the better team on Friday, but their inconsistency this year didn't leave me too disappointed in the end. If we had a powerhouse roster like last year with us being one of the favorites to win it all, I'd be more disappointed. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 I didn't mis-understand that at all. A good chunk of that fan base feels the evidence overwhelmingly supported overturning the original call (or no-call, as the case was). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big A HG Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 1 minute ago, MafiaMan said: I didn't mis-understand that at all. A good chunk of that fan base feels the evidence overwhelmingly supported overturning the original call (or no-call, as the case was). And we would easily return the favor if the roles were reverse. I was confused by your statement of me being on the wrong site. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 7 minutes ago, Big A HG said: And we would easily return the favor if the roles were reverse. I was confused by your statement of me being on the wrong site. I'm referring to the company line on GPL. One poster suggested that we're whining about a rule change only because a call went against UND. Who was the biggest proponent of the 1996-1997 rule change making the Mike Legg lacrosse-type goal illegal? Hmnnnn...I wonder... 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tnt Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 10 minutes ago, MafiaMan said: I'm referring to the company line on GPL. One poster suggested that we're whining about a rule change only because a call went against UND. Who was the biggest proponent of the 1996-1997 rule change making the Mike Legg lacrosse-type goal illegal? Hmnnnn...I wonder... I still remember Woog's response to that goal, "At what point can you put the puck on your head and carry it down the rink?". I know this is news to you Doug, but checking is allowed in men's hockey! Funny, we haven't had to worry about Doug's concern, although no doubt Evan Trupp was probably contemplating that as an encore for his Final Five beauty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GDPritch Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 On 3/27/2017 at 4:57 PM, Siouxphan27 said: If Hoff had black skate blades, who knows we might be heading to the frozen four. That's "conclusive"?! What the H is going on out there?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GDPritch Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 On 3/25/2017 at 8:20 AM, OgieOgilthorpe said: Between the miserable Michigan loss in 2011, the heart breaker against Minn in 2014, and the BU loss 2 years ago...can you imagine if UND wouldn't have won it all last year? Is this how Denver fans felt last year when they lost? I think Denver was the better team in that game but UND found a way to win...afterwards I felt like UND stole that one. It seems like that's the way BU should be feeling if not worse, but for some reason they all seem to think they were the better team and deserved to win??? Dave Starman said "I think BU was much better at getting pucks to the net" yet they were outshot by over THIRTY David Starman also said " I think BU was the better team and deserved to win. UND had 6 powerplays and didn't score once" BU gamewinning goal scorer "you can look at the shots or whatever, but we obviously came out on top" I understand the PP comment a little bit, but saying BU was the better team and deserved to win?? Did he not see the shots or watch any of the game? It was extremely lopsided in my eyes. BU certainly didn't deserve to win, however they were indeed fortunate to win--I'll grant that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GDPritch Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 On 3/25/2017 at 10:07 AM, OgieOgilthorpe said: They saw a better view than this though right??? I hope?? My God, they had better seen something more conclusive cus this certainly ain't enough to overturn it. If so, we wuz robbed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GDPritch Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 On 3/25/2017 at 0:12 PM, yzerman19 said: Seems like the "burden of proof" was flipped on this. Like they needed to prove it was onside irrefutably. The other issue, brought up here, that is also clear on the screen shot: BU had 3 guys back! Offside by a millisecond did nothing to impact the play or outcome. Great point, well stated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SIOUXFAN97 Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 11 hours ago, geaux_sioux said: Pretty simple fix. Blue line cams. These days small HD cameras don't cost all that much. 4 per rink and peace of mind for all. or just let the refs do their jobs...this instant replay/review stuff is garbage. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GDPritch Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 On 3/24/2017 at 7:20 PM, fsioux said: Sort of been the story of our year. Sure seemed that way this season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJHovey Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 10 hours ago, Siouxman said: Parallax would definitely have something to do with it, but the question is whether it is enough to cover the supposed gap. The line is under the ice while the skate is on top of the ice. From that kind of angle the white gap would appear to be larger than just the thickness of the ice. Having said that, it is unknown whether that would be sufficient to cover what appears to be white between the line and Hoff's skate. The Parallax video that was linked here is certainly very interesting, and goes to show the importance of having cameras right on the line, either on the side or above. However, when I was watching that video one thing that did occur to me is that wouldn't the Parallax effect apply to both Hoff's skate and the puck on Olson's stick? In other words, if the actual location of Hoff's skate relative to the blue line was distorted due to the Parallax effect, wouldn't the actual location of the puck be similarly distorted? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxphan27 Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 49 minutes ago, SJHovey said: The Parallax video that was linked here is certainly very interesting, and goes to show the importance of having cameras right on the line, either on the side or above. However, when I was watching that video one thing that did occur to me is that wouldn't the Parallax effect apply to both Hoff's skate and the puck on Olson's stick? In other words, if the actual location of Hoff's skate relative to the blue line was distorted due to the Parallax effect, wouldn't the actual location of the puck be similarly distorted? I believe the difference is the puck is on the ice. Hoff's boot is up off the ice a few inches. Video from that far away doesn't allow us to see his skate blade, so they're comparing his boot to the puck. Which is inaccurate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snova4 Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 25 minutes ago, Siouxphan27 said: I believe the difference is the puck is on the ice. Hoff's boot is up off the ice a few inches. Video from that far away doesn't allow us to see his skate blade, so they're comparing his boot to the puck. Which is inaccurate. I'm over this call, but how exactly is the comparison inaccurate? The skate at that distance is non-existent, giving the illusion that Hoff's skate is higher, which would correlate pretty closely to what the video is discussing. The boot is likely appearing at least 3 inches more towards offsides than what it truly should be. Meanwhile, the puck is directly on the ice, giving the appearance that Hoff is that much more ahead of the puck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.