Chad Larose Canes goal disallowed with 2 secs left in 2nd period of Game 2!
Top Comments
All Comments (40)
-
@POPNDOUGH heres the link to this vid /watch?v=0ljCJuHPRaU&feature=r
elated just dont put in Youtube.com and copy/paste the rest
people know what to do if they see it
-
What people arent putting into their thought is this, The camera is at an angle, however slight, it makes a difference. the ref on the ice didnt see it go in, so he said no goal. But that angle puts the puck accualy in the net, when its not.
Its an illusion and the guys in Toronto know it
-
BULL SHITT CALL
-
You know what should ultimately be used to decide close calls like that?
3-D Radar.
-
what if... the war room wasnt run by a bunch of high school dropouts... what if
-
This is not a goal because the puck was on its side but it was on the eage of the puck. Look at the high angle shot again. It looks like it is but the puck in still on the line. The puck is on the eage of the red line if you look at it there is no ice between the puck and the line. They say it is in but all the see is the net. Also it is inconclusive because the net is in the way and you can't get a closer zoom in on the puck like video games.
-
Beauty goal!! Bar down all day.
-
ur right it was in my parents were mad when they called it no goal. sub me pls.
-
This is annoying as hell. Is there any way to post a link to a pic in these comments?
Wow must be a bunch of morons here in the comment section. Yes, it should have been a goal. I agree that it looked across and that they missed a tough call. However, it was the replay booth in Toronto. The refs on the ice DO NOT make that call. All goals, especially in the playoffs, are reviewed by NHL HQ.
giffer44 2 years ago 4
There has to be a better way of being sure that the puck is all the way in.
We thought video replay was the answer, but most replays end up being declared "inconclusive" and therefore useless.
avsfan331940 2 years ago 2