Union No-Goal

[CowbellGuy]

If you look real hard, you can see a UFO...

Actually, I took the shot the moment the puck hit the net. I'm 99% sure it's completely obscured because it's behind the crossbar in the top-right corner.


Here's the corner at full size:

[Chris 02]

Wow, what a picture!  I assume the puck is on-edge compared to where the picture is coming from.  

How did it pop back out after it was in the location in the picture?

[CowbellGuy]

I watched it happen through the viewfinder so I have no idea, but a few milliseconds earlier or later and I'm sure it would be visible. *grr*

Age resumes drooling over Nikon D2H...

[RedAR]

Any who frequents and keeps up with the discussion at USCHO, did any of the Union fans have anything to say about the (non)goal?

In my mind, I thought I clearly saw it go in and pop right back out, and by the time Dunn caught up with the play, the puck was sitting outside the net.  I say that "I thought I clearly saw it" because of course, my bias might have influenced what I thought I witnessed.  I wonder if any Union fan can objectively say what s/he saw.

Mike Schafer did not make a fuss about the (non)goal, but he didn't exactly have the best angle to see the play.  I'm surprised Adam didn't mention anything on air.

Regardless, we lost the game.  I guess there's no point crying over spilled milk.

[CowbellGuy]

Do unbiased Union fans exist? Schafer and Wodon would have seen it from roughly the same bad angle, and Adam was even further away. I think we certainly had the best view.

[Ben Doyle 03]

i think the best veiw has to be that of Mr Hynes ... did he make any noise during/after the play? i mean he was only 9'-10' away from the goal... ::screwy::

[froboymitch]

I think you should send that to the ECAC. I am sure Buttafuoco would love to see what a great job his ref's are doing this season. ::help::

[Killer]

I had pretty much the same angle as you did for this shot (great job, BTW), only I was closer, in the front row.  The puck went into the upper corner, bulged the net behind the bars (without hitting any metal, or it would have made a clanging sound), and was thrown back out in front of the goal.  There was no question that it had gone in.

I was surprised to see the ref waive it off immediately.  What did he think he'd just seen?  But I was more surprised to see that our guys on the ice didn't make a bigger stink about it.  Maybe they didn't really have the right view or maybe they just knew they wouldn't get anywhere and didn't want to risk anything with the officials.

Nevertheless, look at Mayotte.  What do you think HE's looking at?  If the puck can't be seen in the picture, and we sure as heck know it didn't go past the goal, the only place it can be is behind the bars: 1-0 Cornell...and the whole complexion of the game, and maybe the standings is changed.

[Keith K \'93]

[Q]I think you should send that to the ECAC. I am sure Buttafuoco would love to see what a great job his ref's are doing this season.[/Q]Oh come on.  I wasn't at the game but this kind of thing can be a difficult call.  Refs will miss goal calls now and again - that's part of being human.  How the guy calls the game, what infractions he calls or lets go, when he swallows the whistle are much bigger concerns, because those are much more subjective.

[calgARI \'07]

Dunn did not waive it off immediately.  He hesitated for a maybe two seconds because he didn't see the shot and then waived it off.  He waived it off because he heard metal and guessed.

Regardless, Cornell lost this game.  They didn't play well.  Very disappointing effort.

[Killer]

<"Dunn did not waive it off immediately. He hesitated for a maybe two seconds because he didn't see the shot and then waived it off. He waived it off because he heard metal and guessed.

Regardless, Cornell lost this game. They didn't play well. Very disappointing effort.">

Dunn waived it off as soon as the puck was visible in front of the goal.  Two seconds?  One second?  Who knows?  It was quick.

Cornell did indeed lose because they did not play a strong game, and admittedly, not entirely because of this call.  Yes, the tide shifted in the second period, but Cornell never really took control of the game.  And for all the tough defense they play, they still need to score some goals.  As much as I love the smothering defense, I have to admit that I also liked watching us frequently score 5 or 6 goals (or more) when I was there in the 70s.  There is something comforting about a 4-goal lead, late in the game - one slip-up can't turn it around on you.

BTW, don't you wish we could get inside Mayotte's head?  There's the one guy who knows without any doubt where that puck went...but I'll bet he's not telling.

[Keith K \'93]

[Q]Dunn did not waive it off immediately. He hesitated for a maybe two seconds because he didn't see the shot and then waived it off. He waived it off because he heard metal and guessed.[/Q]Based on this description Dunn made the proper call, even if it wasn't the right call. If the goal light doesn't go on and the ref doesn't see the puck go in the net he can't call it a goal.  Sucks, but it happens.

[CowbellGuy]

I think the reason so many people are pissed is because it was so obviously a goal from the side we were on, and the fact that the ref, goal judge, and I guess assistant refs (if they saw it, I'm sure they could tell the ref) missed it is pretty sub-par.

[RedAR]

[Q] call. If the goal light doesn't go on and the ref doesn't see the puck go in the net he can't call it a goal. Sucks, but it happens.[/Q]

Which begs the question, why didn't the goal light go on?  Was the goal judge sleeping?  Was he being a homer and hoping it would be a no-goal?  Did the puck really not go in?

I'm not assuming that the goal judge cheated us from a goal, but he really did have the best angle to see what really happened.  Like Mayotte, I bet he won't be spilling his beans either.



Post Edited (02-23-04 17:40)

[Josh '99]

Killer wrote:
BTW, don't you wish we could get inside Mayotte's head?  There's the one guy who knows without any doubt where that puck went...but I'll bet he's not telling.

I dunno...  I mean, realistically, it was directly behind him one way or another, so he probably didn't have the best view.  B-]