| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Trevman12 |
Posted - 01/16/2007 : 14:32:35
After the Chicago-Minnesota shootout, where the puck had clearly crossed the line after Fernandez had thought he stopped it, the NHL reviewed the play, and reversed the call. Meanwhile, Minnesota fans, and many others are wondering what the heck is going on at the main office, the answer was pretty simple. We had viewed the goal on HD cameras, and they and not. Should the NHL invest in HD cameras? A simple yes or no will do. |
| 9 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Ripley |
Posted - 01/17/2007 : 12:42:51
[quote]Originally posted by Beans15
I agree that the HD system would be better than today. I am just saying the ultimate system would be to determine if the puck was across the line regardless of the visibility of the puck. That was my point. [/quote
Fer sure. If it can be done then they should do it. I was just pointing out reasons why it hasn't been done yet. I think we're on the same page.
Maybe IHC should take his bsc degree and hook up with an engineering student and 'get 'er done!' Then he would have something valuable to contribute to hockey for a change. haha. just kidding buddy. |
| slapshot |
Posted - 01/17/2007 : 10:55:11
I have to go with IHC on this. Call me old skool, but adding a tracking device to the puck is too high tech for me. Why dont we add a sensor to every players stick and then have robots call penalties so we dont miss a hooking infraction.
|
| Beans15 |
Posted - 01/17/2007 : 07:45:53
There have also be games where the puck was in a goalies glove in the net with the goal called off. How would an HD camera handle that??
The cost would not be an issue if the pucks that went over the board were recovered.
I agree that the HD system would be better than today. I am just saying the ultimate system would be to determine if the puck was across the line regardless of the visibility of the puck. That was my point.
PS-IHC, I know what the Sc stands for. We "rednecks" in Alberta have these some of the best universities in the world. I guess the difference is that in Alberta, you have to be able to spell to get a degree. |
| Ripley |
Posted - 01/16/2007 : 20:50:43
A few reasons why that wireless puck is a bad idea. 1) as IHC said, it would be hard to replicate the correct flight if the puck had something in it. 2) Cost is a factor too, but if it worked they would do it. 3) But the real issue is that the pucks couldn't stand up to the beating. Not only would the device fail, but the puck itself wouldn't last if the center of it had some foreign object in it.
High-speed HD cams would be great for reviews. They would have to be high speed because the frame rate of the ordinary cams is too low and that's why you see blurring. |
| I HATE CROSBY |
Posted - 01/16/2007 : 19:50:22
hahahahah...the Sc stands for science, so I don't really care about my spelling.....I probably wouldn't care that much, I mean, no one took the cup away from dallas did they?
I HATE CROSBY |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 01/16/2007 : 19:05:18
A goal is a goal, regardless of it being in the back of the net or just over the line. Regardless of the near save the goalie made or not. And I would like for you to say the same thing if a questionable goal cost your Leafs the Cup. Would you say the same thing then??
PS-For a guy with a BSc and taking his masters, your spelling is "rediculus." And ridicule me if you wish on my spelling. I am one of those uncultured "Rednecks" from Alberta. Would you expect anything more from me??
|
| I HATE CROSBY |
Posted - 01/16/2007 : 15:42:50
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
I say this, the league should employ the use of a puck with a tracking device in it. If there was a system where the centre of the puck is a disc that extends all the way through, then you could set up a system that will tell you immediately if the puck was all the way in the net or not. It could be a wireless connection to the red light and as soon as the puck completely passed the goal line, the light flashes. You might still want to review some goals in the case where the technology may fail, but it would be more decisive.
I have heard rumors that the NHL has already done this but the cost of the pucks are too expensive. I say, make the teams pay for them. When the go over the boards, then a rink gumby can take them a normal puck with the team logo. Same as the NFL(as I understand) if a ball goes into the crowd, the person is expected to give the ball back.
That would solve soooooo many issues with goal reviews.
That's rediculus!!!!!!!!!!!, if you put stuff into a puck it affects the feel and performance...Ever heard of the fox puck? the players hated using it during that allstar game..It can't go as fast, and it's flight would be affected (very minor, but still........)...Not to mention, I hate when a puck just barely crosses the line (I mean BARELY, say b/c the goalie made a huge diving glove save) and it's called a goal...wow that's a goal to be proud of!!!! The game has gotten WAY too technical, they didn't have garbage like that in the good old days.
I HATE CROSBY |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 01/16/2007 : 15:13:18
I say this, the league should employ the use of a puck with a tracking device in it. If there was a system where the centre of the puck is a disc that extends all the way through, then you could set up a system that will tell you immediately if the puck was all the way in the net or not. It could be a wireless connection to the red light and as soon as the puck completely passed the goal line, the light flashes. You might still want to review some goals in the case where the technology may fail, but it would be more decisive.
I have heard rumors that the NHL has already done this but the cost of the pucks are too expensive. I say, make the teams pay for them. When the go over the boards, then a rink gumby can take them a normal puck with the team logo. Same as the NFL(as I understand) if a ball goes into the crowd, the person is expected to give the ball back.
That would solve soooooo many issues with goal reviews. |
| Ryan Harper |
Posted - 01/16/2007 : 14:35:45
Is it the NHL that needs the HD or is it the networks? HD cameras (and trucks) in each building would be great. Each team could help pay for them.
The Canucks for example, could use them for their Canucks TV PPV.
If the NHL wants to sell the game, having EVERY game in HD would be a step in the right direction.
And to use it for reviewing goals, sure.
"Some people skate to the puck. I skate to where the puck is going to be."
~Wayne Gretzky
|
