Heist at Braemar. Edina vs Jefferson

[scorekeeper]

Start at picture number 212 - The sequence tells you just how difficult it was to make the call.

http://www.finleyfoto.com/Jefferson-Hig ... &k=c34bNQG

Goal or no goal??

Seems like a pretty clear case of no-goal. Puck was on the goal line the whole way. Of course, that's easy to say in hindsight with this type of photographic evidence. Tougher to make that call in live action, and I can see how it would look like a goal to the goal judge.

[slyer]

great pics, no goal

[elliott70]

great pictures

[orm1210]

even though the pictures are great and give an idea of how close it was...i dont know how you can 100% justify that it was no goal IMO. Do the photos show the puck cross the line? no. but what the photos also dont show is where the goalies blocker was when he knocked down the puck and also where the puck was under his glove when covered...who knows if it crossed the line when he put his glove in it sprawling at full speed. Again, very close but pictures IMO do not provide conclusive evidence of no goal.

Would be interesting to know the goal judges logic behind calling it a goal. Not to bash his opinion, just curious how he saw it.

[Shinbone_News]

Maybe a really thorough ref could tell us the answer to this interesting question: Puck is on its side, resting point entirely over the goal line, but overlapping the line above. Goal? or No goal? There must be something in the rule book about this -- extending the plane of the goal line up (as you do if a goalie catches the puck in the air behind the line), maybe the puck isn't completely over-- and therefore no goal???

Cuz that's almost the scenario we're looking at here.

This is a great photo, and the only one with a better view is probably the goalie, and he ain't talking!

[celly93]

I think the problem is that the goal judge is most likely some dad doing his first game, trying to get volunteer hours for his kid in youth hockey (I don't know that for sure, but I know that's how it works for the people in the scorers box). The net was so wide open that the natural reaction is to think "goal" before it even happens. I know that was my thought when I watched it online. I bet it would help to have goal judges during the regular season so things like this don't happen when the stakes are highest.

[Bluewhitefan]

I stood very near the goal judge, although not at a proper angle to fully see the puck. He seemed very confident of his ruling and didn't appear to be an inexperienced dad looking for volunteer hours. The problem with the pictures is that in one frame the puck is on it's side on the goal line, but in the next the goalie's hand was on top of it. Need a frame in between the two. Did the puck roll across the line before he covered it? Or did his covering push it across the line? Can't tell from the pictures. The goalie did plenty of "talikng" on his way to the locker room. Also exchanged pleasntries with the goal judge, both during and after the game. In any event, not nearly as conclusive as scorekeeper or slyer would suggest.

[Doc Holliday]

I think the problem is that the goal judge is most likely some dad doing his first game, trying to get volunteer hours for his kid in youth hockey (I don't know that for sure, but I know that's how it works for the people in the scorers box). The net was so wide open that the natural reaction is to think "goal" before it even happens. I know that was my thought when I watched it online. I bet it would help to have goal judges during the regular season so things like this don't happen when the stakes are highest.

I'm pretty sure the goal judges are referees. Definitely not some dad, volunteer or employee of the arena.

[The51]

picture 216 looks like there is a little line of white just infront of the puck to me

[outside_observer]

Heresay is when someone tells me of something they saw and then I tell someone else. in this case, it's direct evidence: I saw the photograph on the Jefferson parent's digital camera, as did several other BJ parents. The puck was across the line.

Again, what I say I saw cannot be heresay. Now, if you go and tell someone else what I say I saw, then what you say is heresay.


See what I'm saying?

Yes, so when you tell us about it, it's heresay

Unverified information heard or received from another: rumor

And those pics while Good pics, prove nothing. You can't say it went in, and you can't say that right before the goalie covered it, that it didn't go in.

[celly93]

I think the problem is that the goal judge is most likely some dad doing his first game, trying to get volunteer hours for his kid in youth hockey (I don't know that for sure, but I know that's how it works for the people in the scorers box). The net was so wide open that the natural reaction is to think "goal" before it even happens. I know that was my thought when I watched it online. I bet it would help to have goal judges during the regular season so things like this don't happen when the stakes are highest.

I'm pretty sure the goal judges are referees. Definitely not some dad, volunteer or employee of the arena.

Oh, well then never mind. Thanks for clearing that up.

[inthestands]

Point 1 The puck has to be completely across the line. The entire puck.
Point 2 No one has a better look than the goal judge and referee.
Point 3 Goal judges are hired game officals.
Point 4 None of those pictures show when a whistle is blown
Point 5 As long as there are close games, referees are gonna take heat

[starmvp]

Can someone get link for video????

[Greeny]

I think this photo should clear up all controversy. The puck clearly went in. The photo of it resting on the goal line was from it bouncing out of the net. It was a good goal, and the goal judge obviously had the best angle, and made the right call. Edina deserved to win, that's the bottom line.

http://cdn1.ngin.com/attachments/photo/ ... _large.jpg

[BlueLineSpecial]

I think this photo should clear up all controversy. The puck clearly went in. The photo of it resting on the goal line was from it bouncing out of the net. It was a good goal, and the goal judge obviously had the best angle, and made the right call. Edina deserved to win, that's the bottom line.

http://cdn1.ngin.com/attachments/photo/ ... _large.jpg

While I can't say for certain if it was a goal or not, even from all the photos I've seen, how can you say that this photo would clear this up? Mind you I have no dog in this fight. That puck is obviously still in the air and the angle of the photo does nothing to settle it crossing the goal line. Again, I don't care one way or another, but that is in no way a clear photo.

[green4]

Great photos. What I don't understand is how a puck can do that lying on its side right up against the post/bottom frame of the net. Did the goalie hit it and then the puck went right against it?

Seeing those, I defeinitely wouldn't call it a heist. A heist is Duluth East vs. Apple Valley in OT when a puck is clearly in the net & it's not called a goal. I still defer to the goal judge, who was in the best position to what he saw.

Amazing photos though; thanks for sharing.

he hit it with his stick out of mid air.

As for the location of the puck i think its a save at first but when he goes to cover at the end he maybe pushes the puck into his own net?

[Wildcats hockey]

There's no way that that was a goal but I can see how a ref would call that a good goal.....feel bad for the Jefferson kids though knowing that they got robbed

[slyer]

greeny that photo even supports no goal even more

[puckhead13]

greeny that photo even supports no goal even more

There was one person in the whole rink with a better view than the goal judge, it was #19 for Edina. Have you ever seen a kid not get excited if he just watched his team score the tying goal with 4 minutes left in front of 3000 fans? Look at the sequence of photos in pictures up to picture #219. No Goal. Still No Goal.

[Finley Foto]

I am the person with the 18" long lens that someone mistakenly identified my as a parent. When I got home and viewed my pictures on the computer, I was able to confirm that the puck did NOT go in. You can see the pictures for yourself at www.finleyfoto.com. You might want to look at Edina's first goal and see where #10 was when he received the puck. He was completely (both skates) in side the crease and had to reach back outside the crease to get the puck. I also have pictures of the "so called" in the crease on the Jefferson goal that was disallowed only they don't appear to have anyone in the crease??? Look at the pictures and judge for yourself. www.finleyfoto.com

[inthestands]

Finley, those are great photo's!

Just a point of clarification. The crease rule has changed over time.

This year a player can be in the crease, but can't "interfere" physically with the goalie, or block the direct line of sight to the puck while in the crease.

You are a talented photographer, with out a doubt.

[Finley Foto]

I wasn't sure about the crease rule. I recently added a picture to better show that the puck did not go in. It shows the puck dropping from the goalies blocker and you can clearly see that the puck falls to the ice before crossing the red line. Since the goalie immediately put his glove over the puck, the goal judge would not have been able to see the puck after my last picture of it. Since my pictures shows that it hadn't cross the line at that point, it doesn't seem plausible that he would have been able to see the puck beyond that point. I also think it is worth noting that the referee who was very close to the net waived it off immediately.

[Ogie]

Outstanding pix....You're a talented guy.

Even so, the officials present had to make a call without the benefit of such crack photography and instant replay.....Without such, it's no surprise that one got called a goal.

I have no envy for the guys in the striped shirts.

[Finley Foto]

I would agree with you if the referee hadn't called it a "no goal" and play initially continued. You can clearly see that he blows the whistle and doesn't point to the net. I didn't get a picture, but he immediately waived it off. I don't know enough about hockey, but in football, the call on the field stands.

[Ogie]

The red light went on immediately.

Apparently, what the goal judge saw was good enough for the on-ice officials.

Were there instant replay, the call may have well been different.

This one was clearly closer than the "foul ball" that Mauer hit in the '09 playoffs....And those guys are the pros.