HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Because of the popularity of my pictures, I just received a phone call from someone that had a conversation with the referee and goal judge. The referee said that the goal judge said he saw the puck hit the webbing of the net. He said that the water bottle bounced. Neither my pictures or the video reviewed so far show any movement of the water bottle or any movement of any of the webbing on the net. The goal judge did not see the puck roll across the crease as many might have thought from my pictures.

Finley Foto has photos #123 -#126 of the disallowed Jefferson goal. Lost in drama of Edina's phantom goal was the fact that the ref called "in the crease" and disallowed this Jefferson goal.

The51 wrote:I was at the game, the "man in the crease" was blatant goalie interference and there was no way they didn't call that goal off. Also the goal to tie I couldn't see because I was on the other end but he had a wide open net so I find it very hard to believe he didn't score and lastly the penalty was definitely interference although I'm not sure it's one you would call in a tied game with 1 min left.

Either way, Edina was clearly the better team all game and deserved to win it's just too bad it happened in a way that can leave certain people claiming they got some sort of home ice, or "Edina", or whatever you want to call it, advantage.

Your "blatant" illustration is clear for all to judge on the Finely Foto sequence #123 - #126....

GOAL GOAL GOAL ALL THE WAY !!!!!! Puck was In and rolling out as the pictures show !!!! Great Goal Great game by both teams !!!!!!!!

Finley Foto wrote: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

When the commenter above showed the back of his camera to me and other Jefferson supporters, there was an image of the puck undoubtedly behind the goal line. I don't know where that image went, but the conversation among the everyone there on the Jeffeson side acknowledged that the puck crossed the goal line and then shifted to other reasons why it might not be a goal -- net off its pegs, and the like. It was a polite and back and forth, with everyone interested in knowing the truth. That's not an opinion of mine about the interaction with the photographer. That's a dispassionate recounting of what happened based on what the camera showed in the minute or so after the ruling was a goal was scored.

Unfortunately, you are not looking at the pictures in chronological order. They are time stamped and go in the opposite order you described.

Rudy,

When I showed you the picture, which didn't disappear, it's number 221 on my website, it appeared that the puck was in the net, but when I got home and looked at the pictures just prior to that picture, it is clear that I was wrong at the rink. You can't see the detail on a camera screen that you can see on a computer screen. This is a mute point because the goal judge said the puck hit the webbing on the net and the water bottle moved, not that it rolled over the line. I'm not saying he is wrong, but the videos reviewed don't show the puck hitting the net or the water bottle moving???

Finley Foto wrote:Rudy,

When I showed you the picture, which didn't disappear, it's number 221 on my website, it appeared that the puck was in the net, but when I got home and looked at the pictures just prior to that picture, it is clear that I was wrong at the rink. You can't see the detail on a camera screen that you can see on a computer screen. This is a mute point because the goal judge said the puck hit the webbing on the net and the water bottle moved, not that it rolled over the line. I'm not saying he is wrong, but the videos reviewed don't show the puck hitting the net or the water bottle moving???

I didn't say the puck rolled over the goal line, only that the photo on your camera showed it crossed the goal line. I didn't assign an altitude to it. And if the sanctioned official saw twine and the bottle move, why is there any debate?

also, what videos are you talking about, rather than still photos that don't show whether a puck is entering the net or leaving the net?

As for the wrong rink. I have no idea what that means, Mr. Stone. I've wasted enough on what is moot point (there's been nothing mute about this).


Good night. Drive safely, everybody. You've been a wonderful audience.

Picture 220 shows the goalie pulling the puck out of the goal Good Goal ! Moving on !

I know there's video out there. Prep 45 did the game and there are surely at least a few more tapes.... Please post!

One of the top Prep45 guys told me that night there was no video. some kind of screwup.

rudy wrote:One of the top Prep45 guys told me that night there was no video. some kind of screwup.

thought you went home?

puckhead13 wrote:Finley Foto has photos #123 -#126 of the disallowed Jefferson goal. Lost in drama of Edina's phantom goal was the fact that the ref called "in the crease" and disallowed this Jefferson goal.

Agreed. This one stinks.

The photos are pretty clear and decisive. The Jefferson goal is clearly a goal and the Edina goal is clearly not. Should have been 5-3 Jefferson with 7 minutes remaining.

It's unfortunate but nothing can be done about it now. The rich get richer.

Too bad for Jefferson, as they had Burnsville's number down the stretch and would have a had a decent shot at getting to State had the game been called accurately

Finley Foto wrote:Because of the popularity of my pictures, I just received a phone call from someone that had a conversation with the referee and goal judge. The referee said that the goal judge said he saw the puck hit the webbing of the net. He said that the water bottle bounced. Neither my pictures or the video reviewed so far show any movement of the water bottle or any movement of any of the webbing on the net. The goal judge did not see the puck roll across the crease as many might have thought from my pictures.

Picture 213 looks like the end of the goalies stick hit the back of the net. Maybe that was what the goal judge saw hitting the net, and not the puck.

As for Prep45. I was watching the game on that website and just as the puck approached the goal line, the ref skated into the camera view thus not letting us fans see where the puck ended up. Thus their response that nothing was seen.

scorekeeper wrote:

puckhead13 wrote:Finley Foto has photos #123 -#126 of the disallowed Jefferson goal. Lost in drama of Edina's phantom goal was the fact that the ref called "in the crease" and disallowed this Jefferson goal.

Agreed. This one stinks.

The photos are pretty clear and decisive. The Jefferson goal is clearly a goal and the Edina goal is clearly not. Should have been 5-3 Jefferson with 7 minutes remaining.

It's unfortunate but nothing can be done about it now. The rich get richer.

Too bad for Jefferson, as they had Burnsville's number down the stretch and would have a had a decent shot at getting to State had the game been called accurately

yes taking away a goal in the first 2 min for edina would have assured a win for jefferson
you can argue about the jefferson in the crease all you want but then the edina goal counts as there both in the crease that is clear but neither interferes with the goaltender so you can't say one counts and one dosen't. looking at it now i would call it a jefferson goal for the in the crease but i can see why it was not a goal. while jordahls goal that was in the crease if you look at pictures 15-17 you can see he is being basically mauled by #3 so im sure that played effected in not calling that goal off.

Finally, i feel like most people are forgetting edina scored another goal with 45 seconds left and if not for another amazing save by the goalie they would have scored with 20 seconds left. If jefferson wanted to win this game they should have stepped up at the end because it was as one sided 6 min as i ever saw to end that game. Jefferson didn't know how to close.

now scorekeeper go have a nice night and keep drinking your SSC kool-aid

I was there on the grassy knoll with my 8mm. Film being developed at National Camera. Stay tuned...

Should we get the FBI involved, maybe they have the answers. If not, lets at least call stabler from Law and Order, or Jack Bauer to get some answers on this topic.

scorekeeper wrote:
The photos are pretty clear and decisive. The Jefferson goal is clearly a goal and the Edina goal is clearly not. Should have been 5-3 Jefferson with 7 minutes remaining.

It's unfortunate but nothing can be done about it now. The rich get richer.

Too bad for Jefferson, as they had Burnsville's number down the stretch and would have a had a decent shot at getting to State had the game been called accurately

Well, I'm so glad we cleared that up by looking at some pictures. If Edina had any class they would concede right now based on the "clear and decisive" evidence. I used to actually think Scorekeeper was rational - how wrong I was.

Bluewhitefan wrote:

scorekeeper wrote:
The photos are pretty clear and decisive. The Jefferson goal is clearly a goal and the Edina goal is clearly not. Should have been 5-3 Jefferson with 7 minutes remaining.

It's unfortunate but nothing can be done about it now. The rich get richer.

Too bad for Jefferson, as they had Burnsville's number down the stretch and would have a had a decent shot at getting to State had the game been called accurately

Well, I'm so glad we cleared that up by looking at some pictures. If Edina had any class they would concede right now based on the "clear and decisive" evidence. I used to actually think Scorekeeper was rational - how wrong I was.

Those darn referees!!

Let's just get rid of the current crop of them, and pick a selection committee from this forum to go out and find the "right" people to work games from here on out!!!

That would solve everything..

Ill volunteer to referee! Now i know that when i have a debatable goal, i can go find the guy from this board to show me his pictures and make the correct call

Yes, as I said;

scorekeeper wrote:It's unfortunate but nothing can be done about it now.

I'm so irrational

Well, irrational would be -

The photos are pretty clear and decisive.

The Jefferson goal is clearly a goal and the Edina goal is clearly not

The rich get richer.

Should have been 5-3 Jefferson

The photos are pretty clear and decisive. They are

The Jefferson goal is clearly a goal and the Edina goal is clearly not It is and its is.

The rich get richer. They do.

Should have been 5-3 Jefferson ... at the seven minute mark

It's unfortunate but nothing can be done about it now.

Rational

If you look at picture 219 and then picture 221... It has to be a goal... Just look at it.

starmvp wrote:If you look at picture 219 and then picture 221... It has to be a goal... Just look at it.

In picture 219 the puck is resting on its side ON THE GOAL LINE (not over the goal line) and up against the goal post.

In picture 221 the goaltender freezes it there.

No goal. Clear and decisive from the pictures.

I am not saying it was clear and decisive for the referees. It wasn't. That was obvious from the shmozzle. He initially correctly called no-goal and then they talked themselves into it being a goal.

I agree they couldn't have known better and realize they didn't have access to this freeze frame evidence, but it doesn't change the fact that it was not a goal and it was counted as one. That's unfortunate for Jefferson that it was called incorrectly.

No slam on the refs. Just an incorrect call. Happens all the time. Unfortunate, but we move on.

The far stinkier call, IMO, is the no-goal on Jefferson. That one is more typical of the homer officiating for Edina teams at Braemar.