#NHLVideos: You Make The Call: Did this puck cross the line?
December 5, 2022
During the 2nd period, Matt Martin’s shot goes under the pad of Arvid Soderblom and goes under review.
38 comments
thats an easy goal .. Matt Martin scores
it's been in since 2004.
Pretty sure that's in.
Yes
100% a goal.
1:06–1:14 someone give the commentator a drink of water before he passes out
I was shocked they counted this, not because I didn’t think it was in, but because the situation room had to apply common sense rather than evidence for the call. baby steps for them, but i’m proud nonetheless
That's 100% a goal, you couldn't see it, if it was on the line wouldn't it be beside the pole and not behind it
I have last year's flashbacks of palms goals refs said didn't count. I'm glad they got it right this time.
I’m my opinion that’s in
Goalolololol
I think this was “probably” a goal. But the fact that there’s no way to say that for certain means it shouldn’t have been overturned. I think the refs came to the same conclusion, it’s probably a good goal. But I have yet to see any evidence that it certainly is. The fact the league posts a video “what do you think?” Seems clear that it’s not definitive. If it’s not definitive then it shouldn’t be overturned. The goal ended up not impacting the result of the game but still we can’t set a precedent of overturning unconfirmable goals
Goal
That's a goal.
For sure it crossed the line.
Kung-Fu-Move from the Referee 🙆🤩💪🏼
idk how you could even think it isnt a goal
That is a good goal.
Logic shows it's a goal, but there's no proof it crossed the line. According to the NHL rule this should not be a goal.
This is why the puck needs a sensor inside it when it crosses the goal line but hey almost 2023 and still watching and wondering if the puck went in.
I was there. It didn’t look like it went in to me.
After further review, we have a good goal
In European leagues they have a second line that’s approximately the same distance from the goal line and if it touches that line it’s a goal
The NHL should have this
In
That's a goal
1:07 – 1:08 its clearly over the line you can see it come out when the skate gets out of the way
Even though you can't see the puck, you can see the goal line and the ice beyond it, and it is literally impossible to explain why you can't see the puck unless it's completely in the net. That's conclusive evidence. Good goal.
And this video title is clickbait. They know it was in.
that's a goal!
That's interesting. I agree that it was a goal. Yet there is not one single frame that shows the puck behind the line. What's the exact wording of the rule?
goaaaallllllll
Yup.
Behind the net view plus the frontal def confirms goal
Now if we could get a replay for the Portland/Everett game
38 comments
thats an easy goal .. Matt Martin scores
it's been in since 2004.
Pretty sure that's in.
Yes
100% a goal.
1:06–1:14 someone give the commentator a drink of water before he passes out
I was shocked they counted this, not because I didn’t think it was in, but because the situation room had to apply common sense rather than evidence for the call. baby steps for them, but i’m proud nonetheless
That's 100% a goal, you couldn't see it, if it was on the line wouldn't it be beside the pole and not behind it
I have last year's flashbacks of palms goals refs said didn't count. I'm glad they got it right this time.
I’m my opinion that’s in
Goalolololol
I think this was “probably” a goal. But the fact that there’s no way to say that for certain means it shouldn’t have been overturned. I think the refs came to the same conclusion, it’s probably a good goal. But I have yet to see any evidence that it certainly is. The fact the league posts a video “what do you think?” Seems clear that it’s not definitive. If it’s not definitive then it shouldn’t be overturned. The goal ended up not impacting the result of the game but still we can’t set a precedent of overturning unconfirmable goals
Goal
That's a goal.
For sure it crossed the line.
Kung-Fu-Move from the Referee 🙆🤩💪🏼
idk how you could even think it isnt a goal
That is a good goal.
Logic shows it's a goal, but there's no proof it crossed the line. According to the NHL rule this should not be a goal.
This is why the puck needs a sensor inside it when it crosses the goal line but hey almost 2023 and still watching and wondering if the puck went in.
I was there. It didn’t look like it went in to me.
After further review, we have a good goal
In European leagues they have a second line that’s approximately the same distance from the goal line and if it touches that line it’s a goal
The NHL should have this
In
That's a goal
1:07 – 1:08 its clearly over the line you can see it come out when the skate gets out of the way
Even though you can't see the puck, you can see the goal line and the ice beyond it, and it is literally impossible to explain why you can't see the puck unless it's completely in the net. That's conclusive evidence. Good goal.
And this video title is clickbait. They know it was in.
that's a goal!
That's interesting. I agree that it was a goal. Yet there is not one single frame that shows the puck behind the line. What's the exact wording of the rule?
goaaaallllllll
Yup.
Behind the net view plus the frontal def confirms goal
Now if we could get a replay for the Portland/Everett game
That dust mat martin finally got one eh
Definetly was in.
Yep, it's in
Yep
go isles go 😀