Taro T Posted April 24, 2006 Report Share Posted April 24, 2006 Just reading the latest THN before running to get my kids and saw an interesting article about video replay. The league is stating that a goal by Edmonton in Minnesota that was obviously a goal but was ruled no goal on replay occurred because of the cheap equipment used in the in-rink video replay booth. Apparently, the digital recorder that is used in the replay booth saves too few frames / second for the overhead angle (which showed the puck in the net) to have shown the puck in the net. Also, the "war room" in Toronto ONLY GETS THE NETWORK FEEDS THAT YOU OR I WOULD HAVE IN OUR HOUSE! They don't get any of the back feeds. They did not have the overhead angle for that one because the network didn't want to pay to show the overhead feeds! Apparently there was a side angle shot that the broadcasters aired AFTER play resumed that showed the puck was in the net, but the guys in TO didn't see that (obviously) until after the play continued. Is anyone else going "holy sh*t" right now? This league is playing with fire and bound and determined to set themselves up with another "No Goal" quality controversy. Unbelievable. On an unrelated note, the league won't be launching the new "form fitting" unis until at least the '07-'08 season due to player complaints about them being too tight. Hopefully that doesn't delay the Sabres relaunch of blue and gold. Has anyone heard whether that will or won't delay blue and gold? PTS? Bueller? Anybody? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevbeau Posted April 24, 2006 Report Share Posted April 24, 2006 Definitely appears to paint the NHL as "bush league." The intent of replay is to eliminate doubt and error and instead of eliminating variables, they've thrown a few more in. As for the for the form fitting jerseys. I hope they never go to them. I don't think your average hockey fan wants go to the game, have a couple of brews, dogs, maybe nachos and sit there in his form fitting sweater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haseoke Posted April 24, 2006 Report Share Posted April 24, 2006 so we can see these guys impressive shoulder pads more clearly? which is better? aesthetics, or having guys able to wind up and take a decent shot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePolishSabre Posted April 24, 2006 Report Share Posted April 24, 2006 Also, the "war room" in Toronto ONLY GETS THE NETWORK FEEDS THAT YOU OR I WOULD HAVE IN OUR HOUSE! They don't get any of the back feeds. They did not have the overhead angle for that one because the network didn't want to pay to show the overhead feeds! Not that i don't believe you... but how do you know that??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted April 24, 2006 Author Report Share Posted April 24, 2006 Not that i don't believe you... but how do you know that??? As I stated, it was in THN. THN Vol 59, Issue 31, Pg 12 2) The war room in Toronto does not have access to the in-rink overhead camera. The war room relies entirely on footage and camera angles aired by the networks covering the game. It does not have the authority to call into production trucks to order specific replays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.