Union No-Goal

[upperdeck]

you can even see the left side of the net move as the puck hit it on  the way down..

[RedAR]

John's right.  If you keep your eye on left side of the goal, the netting pops out right after the puck "disappears."

[marty]

RedAR wrote:

John's right.  If you keep your eye on left side of the goal, the netting pops out right after the puck "disappears."

In the video or in Age's stills?

[RedAR]

In the video.

[Killer]

That was my contention as well, watching it live.  There was this sudden, albeit slight, bulging of the net behind the pipes, just where I believed I'd seen the puck go in.  Oh well.

Go Dartmouth!  (LOL.  That would just be tonight against Brown, BTW.  Just trying to clear out the number 2 spot for us.  For that matter, Go Knights!)

[atb9]

I saw it!  I saw it!  Stage left, your right.

[Cornell Fan]

Don't strain your eyes too hard trying to see the puck under the netting in the upper corner.  After studying the photograph and comparing it to the video footage, I have come to the conclusion that the puck has already ricocheted out and is behind Mayotte's body in the picture.  If you view the clip frame by frame, the instant the puck goes under the bar, Mayotte's glove is too low in the air (~1/2 the height of the post and still below the level of his head) to match up with his pose in the photo (~2/3 the post height and above the level of his head).  If you then advance the clip a couple more frames until his body configuration in the video frame approximately matches up with the picture, the puck has already streaked down and to the left, which indicates that the puck has to be behind his body in the picture, since it is not visible.  So unfortunately, there is no way the puck could be under that upper right corner when the photograph was taken, since the timeframe of the video tells us otherwise.

[Killer]

Cornell Fan wrote:

Don't strain your eyes too hard trying to see the puck under the netting in the upper corner.  After studying the photograph and comparing it to the video footage, I have come to the conclusion that the puck has already ricocheted out and is behind Mayotte's body in the picture.  If you view the clip frame by frame, the instant the puck goes under the bar, Mayotte's glove is too low in the air (~1/2 the height of the post and still below the level of his head) to match up with his pose in the photo (~2/3 the post height and above the level of his head).  If you then advance the clip a couple more frames until his body configuration in the video frame approximately matches up with the picture, the puck has already streaked down and to the left, which indicates that the puck has to be behind his body in the picture, since it is not visible.  So unfortunately, there is no way the puck could be under that upper right corner when the photograph was taken, since the timeframe of the video tells us otherwise.

So what you're saying is that Mayotte is actually slower than we all gave him credit for and was beaten even worse than the photo would indicate.

[marty]

RedAR wrote:

In the video.

Well as Age noted and I agree there are two interesting frames in the video.  The one that occurs just before the puck hits whatever it hit and the one after that.  In the second frame the puck can be seen as a blur in its downward trajectory behind Mayotte's back.  So that is where I assume you are seeing the difference in the net.

I am still trying to find the time to transfer just those two frames to still images for posting.  It's been a bit busy and the VCR to PC thing is a major time imposition.

The video was in S-VHS & EP (6 hour) mode.  Too bad I wasn't recording in SP.



Post Edited (02-27-04 14:23)

[CowbellGuy]

Marty'74 wrote:
The video was in S-VHS & EP (6 hour) mode.

Good lord. I thought I was the only person with an S-VHS VCR :-)

[Al DeFlorio]

Cowbell Guy wrote:

Marty'74 wrote:
The video was in S-VHS & EP (6 hour) mode.

Good lord. I thought I was the only person with an S-VHS VCR :-)

Makes three.;-)

[RedAR]

Upon reviewing all the evidence (primarily, the video), I am more convinced that Don Zimmer, even in his old age, saw the goal (he had to have seen the net bulge from his point of view) but was being a homer.

[john foggy]

is there a picture from the exact opposite angle? if there was that is something to complain about.

[jeh25]

Marty'74 wrote:


The video was in S-VHS & EP (6 hour) mode.  Too bad I wasn't recording in SP.

Sounds like a perfect reason to ask your wife for a Tivo....

"But honey if I had Tivo,  I could *prove* Cornell scored."

::banana::

[marty]

Actually I want a combo TIVO and DVD recorder but the one I want hasn't been invented and/or is too expensive.

The Pioneer at a grand almost fits but is too expensive for me.  What I like about the Panasonic models is that they record to DVD RAM in addition to other DVD media.  DVD RAM allows you to watch a show on demand (skipping commercials and pausing) and record that same show at the same time you are watching.  But the Panasonic combination players have hard drive recorders which are not TIVO's.  The least I have seen the Panasonic models for is $530.

My wife has already given me a lifetime license to buy whatever I want!:-)

And here is an edit.  DVDs are already obsolete.  High definition DVDs will be here within a year or so.  The short cycle on these gadgets is unbelievable.



Post Edited (02-28-04 13:36)