Houston Aeros 1994-2013: Thank you for all the great memories and two decades of great hockey and entertainment.

Tuesday, December 29, 2009

It was a goal after all ... and Monday night replays.

My first reaction to the waived-off goal Monday against Syracuse was that is never fully crossed the line. Even when they showed two replays, I stuck by that. Because the Aeros won, the goal did not ultimately matter ... and when KC did not bring it up in the post-game interview, I just let it go. I did not have enough space to write about it anyway.

But, today, thanks to AHLlive, I got the chance to review the play, and it was indeed a goal. Sifers made a great centering pass to a wide open Robbie Earl, but Robbie blew the shot high over the cross bar.

As LaCosta turned around to look for the puck, it his his stick, bounced toward the goal and rolled along the line where it hit the near post. It still had never crossed the goal line, but as it trickled toward the back of the net, it did eventually (for a split second) go all the way over before David Liffiton swooped it away.

Let me apologize for the poor quality of the attached image, but this was the best I could do.
Full zoom on the computer screen coupled with a camera phone. Ouch. But at least it does show white, which is generally the tell-tale sign that it was in.

My opinion, based on where Banfield was, the play just happened to quickly for him to see the puck go all the way over. And as for the goal judge, I kept wondering how he missed it. After watching it a few times, it became easy to see that Liffiton's stick blade was between him and the goal, so there is a good chance that he did not see the puck fully cross the line.

I have never sat where the goal judge sits, so I don't know if he was high enough to see "over" the stick blade. So I can't hose the guy too much for missing that call. I do know the goal judge on that end (not completely sure if it is always the same person) has seen goals that the ref missed and I know the judge there has missed goals (at least one this year) that he should have seen. As they say, it all evens out.

Another issue that bugged me last night was the fact that replays of the Aeros first two goals were not shown on the Jumbotron last night. At first I was thinking that we reverted to the first six seasons at Toyota Center, where replayed were not in the budget for games not being played on Friday or Saturday.

But, as it turned out, poor camera work turned out to be the reason why there were no replays.
You know how Forecheck is always talking about how they need a zoom lens in Cedar Park? Well, the guy working the lens last night was "zoom happy" so to speak and got these spectacular shots of the first assists.

So, have no fear ... so long as the Aeros don't score any pretty goals against Abbotsford next Sunday, fans will be able to see a full instant replay.

(If you want to see the goals, go to AHLlive.com and click on highlights. Amazingly, they are already there from the game Monday, and there must have been a secondary angle they used to get the highlight.)

Have a good Tuesday.

10 comments:

AiH said...

If the puck is on edge I suppose you could see white ice from a low angle but a view from above the net could still show the puck on the line. I wonder how that would be judged in a thorough video review?

Josh said...

Or above the net view could show it was in barely. I like the above the net shot. That is the only reason why I like MTS center they have it. Wish we could get that for our replays but no Les alexander doesn't want to spend that money. Thats why winnepeg might get a NHL team soon

John Royal said...

Josh, Les Alexander would have no problem at all putting that camera in at Toyota Center. As long as the Aeros want to pay for it. Why should he pick up the expenses for something that will be rarely used?

And I don't understand how this ties into Winnepeg getting a team. Bettman would put a team in Hamilton just to spite Jim Balsille, but he's got no reason to allow a team to go to Winnipeg.

Josh said...

Yeah it might rarely be used but it is a good angle its ususually 99% conclusive. I do think if the AHL wants to be like the NHL then the AHL needs to use the IRR Istant Replay Review. The only part you can't see with the angle is what is under the water bottle

Forecheck said...

As I said, there was no way this could have been called a goal given Banford's position and a blocked view of the goal judge.

Shouldn't they hang the goal judge by the ankles from the rafters above the goal? And not just when he makes a mistake?

Word verification: "inifili". Is this a female horse with a normal looking belly button?

ICEVET said...

This is an excellent piece of blog journalism by Mr. Ferraro.

However, it is noteworthy that past, present and future "NO GOAL" discussions will continue to have significance only to goal-bereft and offense-starved teams like the 2009-10 edition of the Aeros.

I do not see why Jamie Spencer (Executive VP) would not accept a proper inquiry, from an organized fan group, into "above-the-net camera" matter; it is probable that this digital device could be moved with the Team, should the Aeros ever leave the friendly venue of Toyota Center.

Go Aeros!

John Royal said...

What is this fascination you people have with this stupid camera? There is no replay review in the AHL, so why are you so gung-ho on wasting the Wild's money for something that is so damn useless.

And why bug Spencer over this? Really? Why? Don't you have something else to bitch about? If there were replay review, you might have a point, BUT THERE IS NO REPLAY REVIEW IN THE AHL so get over it already.

John Royal said...

And ICEVET, the camera wouldn't be the Aeros property to take with them, it would be the Rockets property because everything in TC belongs to the Rockets and is leased out.

So maybe you should bug Les Alexander instead.

Josh said...

JOHN david andrews & your favorite baseball owner of ALL TIME Drayton Mclane have something in common they say something they Expect you to believe just because its coming out of thre mouths. Drayton says he WANTS to be a champion but won't spend the money wisely enough to get it. Then David Andrews says he Wants the AHL to be like the NHL in terms of game experience. But the NHL has Instant Replay review in its game experience. It just proves that Drayton and David are Cheapskates.
Plus should we have had that camera then The refs if they miss a goal it would be there fault.

John Royal said...

Josh, you do realize that the AHL is a minor league, right? You do realize that the reason that tickets are so cheap when compared to all major league sports is that they keep costs contained.

If you want to pay the price of an NHL ticket to see an AHL game so you can have an overhead camera, then I'm sure David Andrews and the rest of the league would be very happy to accomodate you. Otherwise, it's not going to happen because the NHL is not going to pay the costs for the extra refs and cameras that you are demanding.