Was it in??

[alex91161]

i found the goalie...now lets find the puck

[Terminus92]

what pixel is the puck in

[rsacc4sale1]

@Terminus92 I think either the first one or the second one... not sure though.

[leudacrisspeed]

that's what she said.

[FCDonkeyKong]

was this recorded with a jar of mayonnaise ?

[tristo59]

@FCDonkeyKong no a pickle jar mayo is black and white

[Chiefsplayr17]

"For a change the sabres are involved in a controversial goal call." lol he has no idea

[oozzyy454131]

is that the puck at 0:12 ?

[MrWhyme16]

good goal

[realgraff16]

how the fuck am i suppose to tell LOL

[ChidoriFreak23]

dude shitty quality

[Marcus4president]

this video was posted by the taliban

[kylepduck]

Even with the crappy video quality I could tell it was in

[bigalrocks22]

the video graphics suck

[wschmrdr]

On the line. NO GOAL.

[DJfinsk]

yah... it was definatley in. whole puck.

[TheEaston91]

In the net no question about it.

[gdavies4]

that was clearly in....CLEARLY!!!

[ornakola]

I CAN SEE 4 PIXELS

[Parizeau21]

was it in HD?

[Rayven10]

It all depended on the refs call on the ice. There was no goal signal from the ref at the time, so it would need conclusive evidence of a goal. Physics would attest to it being a valid goal, but the video evidence just isn't there.

I'm waiting for the NHL to use technology: have pucks with transmitters and the goal lines with sensors. If the puck crosses, the goal light automatically comes on. No more guessing, and no more goalie antics of pulling it out of the net.

[ShawnB252524backup1]

That's What She Said

[DustyDinkleman26]

NO GOAL

[georgemrns08]

@DustyDinkleman26 the buffal0 sp0rts fans' fav0rite sp0rts line...its alm0st reached cliche status if y0u say N0 G0AL in buffal0...p00r sabres, seemed like this kind 0f c0ntr0versy happened t0 them every year in the late 90's/early 2000's and they always g0t the sh0rt end 0f the stick.

[seandog619]

you see this all the time. yea its a goal but if you cant see the puck across the line they dont call it. even if the glove is on the line like this

still a stop like that deserves the save anyway. and im a flyers fan.

[skipperrox99]

i'm sure the ref is the better judge of whether or not the goal was in.... this quality is shit, and the review one is prolly close to HD ... i'm gonna go with the call....

[TheMasterKroth]

wow! they didn't count it as a goal? they always used to when it wasn't a goal, glad they finally got over that.

[powerman923]

It looked in, but its kinda blury.

[Danfrombackhome]

Of course its not a goal cause it was the flyers. They have been screwed so bad over the years its pathetic. C'mon NHL we see what your doing.

[jblgti146]

Im suprised they did'nt just give it to em, like the John Leclair goal through the side of the net

[Phifly130]

can't tell with the crappy quality of this vid...

[coltino99]

if that was a goal the referee would have pointed towards centre ice

[richardsiscannon18]

thats only a goal in Pittsburgh,

according to Bettman anyway ;)

[georgemrns08]

@richardsiscannon18 and 0nly if Cr0sby sc0red it.

[ratkiller1]

Thats what she said :)

[a7xfan208]

omg. i was thinking that when i clicked the link to see the video. lol

[Hiei2k7]

The problem in the 90s is that the camera was positioned looking down from in front of the net, creating the Optical Illusion Angle. If it hits the white crevice, in realtime it could be on the goal line for sure.

In the early 2000s I think it is now mandatory the cameras are directly over the pipe making it a real "Conclusive, beyond the shadow of a doubt evidence" that it is a goal.

[thegab1223]

you cant see anything...

[SABRESownU]

if on this video you can tell, your biased theres no way to tell with the quality of this video, so you have to go with what was called in the game.

[kman192]

yea it was in look at 0:13 like 2 seconds after that it fully crosses the line

[ChainGangSoldiersJC]

that's a hard angle to look at...no goal

[coltino99]

you cant tell from that angle dude, you need the angle where the cross bar is directly on top of the goal line.

[SouthP17CD]

So weird, the camera angle is awkward so you can't tell for sure, but the overhead makes it look more like a goal but like I said the angle of the camera is fucked up

[antonioaquila]

it wasnt in, his glove was in the net, but he pulled it out and made a nice save right on the line, pause it at 0:16, it was right on the line

[ChuckTerlizzi]

Yes u can see maybe not clearley but u can see that puck crosses the line. good goal.

[Bobbyjoe64]

honestly, with this quality video, how could anyone tell?

[NHLfan96]

@Bobbyjoe64 ROFL

[DickMcPenis]

LOL the ref fucked up pretty bad

[BoshBargnani]

The ref is such an idiot. He doesn't realize that he's going to confuse people? Holy moly what an idiot. Wave the goal off. Dumbass.

[H0ck3ykid12]

It did go in i think... but u dont no were the puck is in his glove wen the glove goes in the net. Therofr it is inconclusive.

[cowboyzsuk81]

nhl refs are so stupid..all the time. its a goal retard

[dartheth87]

stupid refs that was totally in

[cooldan1]

the camara veiw on the first shot wasent directly above the net... since its not line his glove up with the line its straght above, so it never went in...

[glaxko]

It went in for sure, but since there is not indisputable evidence, the goal does not count.

cant they put a fucking homing device in those pucks? wont that make much more sense??? like how the lights and bells and whistles go off when you steal something from wal-mart. something like that, only in a hockey puck.

[bettrgoaliethanRoy33]

dude ill work on that im good with electronics

and if you think im being sarcastic, im not

[glaxko]

cool man, power to you.

i would do it myself, but im too fucking lazy.

[goPre16]

no goal,

ref didnt show goal, no light went on, and they cant 100% prove it was a goal.....right call

[crazykillller]

WTF that guy who shot the goal is in the goalies area so it doest matter if the puck was in the goal or not its obviously no goal

[Joona28j]

GOAL!?!???!?!!?

[Subber978]

the only four letters are used to describe this video:G,O,A,L(it was a goal)

[control0alt0delete]

its a goal. no question

[Mynamesbob8]

no goal lol

[heatran15]

It is really hard to see the puck of it passed but i saw it pass the line almost the whole just a litte left out

[goleafsgo0293]

youre 100% correct, pause at :14.. and you see like , and eighth of the puck on the line,no goal

[boome73]

KoivuTheHab i agree on the rules but i think it's in, but really really really hard to tell glad it wasn't me to make the decision

[Hasiuk94]

no! it was right on the line, but the rules the puck has to be 3/4s over the line for it to be called a goal. not just the end of the puck

[Foltz13]

no it has to be all the way over

[MYNHLNETWORK]

no no no

[DaveandTyler]

thats a goal for sure

[DChappelle27]

ya man for sure..whats with the angled overhead view?? keep it straight, if there's one thing i have leanred, it's that angles mess with everything...

[hockeyGoD1339]

just look like its in from the angle...better angle shows... NO GOAL

[comedyandhasekrule39]

it was not in. go hasek =) :)

[Blahgada22]

That Was IN!!!..u could see it just before he covered the puck with his pad...just keep watching the puck on the overhead view...u may have to watch it a few times cause u can only see it over the line for about 1 or 2 sec

[handicappedonkey]

fuck off lets go buffalo!

[hgoaly37]

it was defintely a goal witht the new rules you dont have to see it cross the line as long as you know it did as if a goalie were to catch the puck and it his glove goes across the line at any time before whistles blows its a goal

[Ross29]

The puck didnt go into the glove...it hit the padding on the wrist and stayed out.

You cant see it from this video, but I saw it live on tv.

[Sens4cup08]

u idiot..... the whole puck has to cross the line and needs to be able to be determined in or regardless its out

[rockinandrollin444]

I dont think so it was on the line it could of gone eaither way.

[davBIGHOUSE]

i ont think it was cause the overview camera wasnt exactly on top it was at an angle so its actually on the line in my opinion

[DChappelle27]

ya man for sure..whats with the angled overhead view?? keep it straight, if there's one thing i have leanred, it's that angles mess with everything...

[Ovechkin8rulz]

im a buffalo fan but i have 2 admit that that was a goal.

[dyskietka71]

I think it's a goal because the puck just crosses the line before the goalie had complete possesion of the puck. IMO

[heckman26]

go you guys you go

[islanderspwn]

that was a hard call

[Blackout436]

that was a total goal, GO FLYERS!

[jmiller006]

i hate the flyers, but this is a goal.

[Alienxfb14]

After all the times the NHL has fucked us over the years, its about time something goes Buffalo's way!

[hockeyGoD1339]

no goal because when it was a hair past the line it was already a save because it was in his gloves dumb asses

[usarok85]

It doesn't matter if it is in his glove when it passes the line. If it passes the line before a whistle it's a goal even if the goalie has possession.

[EvX03]

It was a goal. Hence why it was ruled a goal. you Buffalo idiots just need to stop your crying. Hull's goal was a goal and so was this. your hockey club's trash, get over it.

[Dannisaurous]

no it was not back then u were not allowed to have your foot in the crease

[KingXanthar]

lol this is not a goal... puck as to pass completely the line.. it s only another hasek steal

[Limper31]

Yea the guy is right. Brett Hull's was atleast close, this wasn't. No goal. Can't be in the crease whatsoever.

[Lacroix8819]

Both Dann and King make valid arguments, but the ruling stands so its time to let this die.

[heckman26]

uoughuio huihiuhiohohouihuiohouihiohioh­ihih

[hephron11]

i completly agree

[kemosabi4]

i like buff. but it was in

[allhockey]

goal

[devonthepure]

gaol goal

[goPre16]

no goal

[nevrendingcrcle8]

goal

[koston12]

Watch closely the puckly didnt completely cross the line

[dihiddy]

Listen everyone!!! NO GOAL! The overhead view of he save was looking from IN FRONT of the goal. This means haseks glove LOOKED like it was over FROM THE ANGLE it was on.

[AjRhCp]

No goal. Camera comment proves it. If the camera had been exactly above the line you wouldn't be able to see Hasek's glove anyway because the bar would obscure it. No goal.

[dihiddy]

shit we should have had the final desicion in the vid to know if it went in. I think it didn't, that was line

[sixerfan19]

Plain Goal...great attempt by hasek but it did go over the line

[DetIzRed]

You people are blind Hasek had it in his glove yes but his glove went completely over the line it was a goal.

[dagroovydude116]

read the comment about the camera's position, buddy. It LOOKS like it went over the line, because the camera was not directly above the goal line, it was closer to center ice. No Goal, good call, and for once, in Buffalo's favor.

[DetIzRed]

yeah you have a point there and whoever put the camera comment on too. That was very smart to catch that I sure didn't.

[DisposableHero19]

But the Puck didn't

[DetIzRed]

the puck was in Hasek's glove and if the glove went over the line the puck went over the line.

[frirules]

thats bull no goal

[Hiei2k7]

Twas Not a Goal is correct-the video from above is decieving, because at the time at Core States Center, the camera was not above the bar, it was above and in front of the bar, closer to the center of the ice, so it could not be proven/disproven, so the call stayed as No Goal.

[kekeruusperi88]

it was a goal.

[mrmartinez97]

what shit editing

[Frozintoe]

Twas Not a Goal

[trumpetman0608]

twasn't a goal... according to the review.

[Fabra1]

it wasn´t goal Hasek is god !!

[spizzle2209]

stop the video at 00:13 thats the last time u can clearly see the puck and obviously not completly in....

no goal

[sabrefan101]

at 00:14 you see it never went in

[collectivegooblossom]

That was definately a goal. When you look at the replay, you can tell that the puck completely crossed the line before Hasek got his glove on it. But the real story is how stupid the referee is. If it isn't a goal, he has to make a signal like what the backjudges do when a fieldgoal is missed in football.

[FX39]

it wasn't a goal

[maladred]

youre blind,lol

[DetIzRed]

It was a goal Hasek got it but he put his glove behind the net!!

[asdffghjkl]

twas a goal

[don696969]

Shouldnt of been a goal, it was a save, if you've seen the fluery cam later on after the game then you would of seen it wasnt a goal, plus both linesmens said it wasnt a goal, which would of made the goal undecided resulting in a penelty shot.

[maladred]

youre blind too!

[imluvinyourmum]

ur an idiot, they dont go to a penalty shot if a goal is undecided that is what the video judge is for dumb ass