SENShobo
Next entry: Balsillie: There May Be No One To Stop Him This Time
Previous entry: Do Or Die, But Keep Overtime The Same
Canes’ No Goal Points Out NHL’s Tech Gap
by SENShobo on 05/05/09 at 10:32 AM ET
Comments (7)
Stop me if you’ve heard this one before, but word on the street, or out of the NHL’s head office at least, is that the National Hockey League has the most tech savvy fans of any major league sport.
I know it’s been two days now since Carolina evened their series in Boston, but yesterday’s cause was defending 5-on-5 overtime. Those who watched the game appeared to be treated to the Canes taking a 3-0 lead not once, but twice.
You can’t help but find a hint of something there between those two statements, whether you label it irony, contradiction, or just some kind of philosophical mismatch, and certainly one that needs attention.
There were only a couple seconds left in the period when Carolina’s Chad LaRose put a nifty puck behind Boston’s Tim Thomas. In case you missed it…
In the end, after long review, the original on ice call would stand, and the Canes would have to wait until the third to go up 3-0 in the game. Yes, it was the end of the second, and yes, Carolina had and successfully held onto the lead, but this just doesn’t go along with that ‘tech savvy’ image the NHL wants to promote. In any game, let alone when all the chips are on the post-season table, there should never be questions on matters this important. It’s not even all that rare for things to come down to such minute details, as this year’s Super Bowl came down to just such a call.
Even with the choppy quality of YouTube, without switching on the high quality video, I can still catch glimpses of Santonio Holmes shoelaces, let alone whether he properly dragged his feet on the back corner catch. If I was really desperate, I could probably fool around with the levels of the feed to find the exact outline of those same shoelaces to see if they were also in order on the play.
No bodies, no skates, no sticks, there was nothing at all to really obstruct the view of the puck, and yet the infamous video reviews couldn’t pick out the puck. This from the same League that proudly broadcasts in HD, showing me the sweat beading down every players’ face.
Should it really be so hard to get a few minor technical advances to work for us? Yes, there would be cost involved in getting a proper video setup in all 30 rinks over both nets, but it would not take too much to get as detailed a view as you could want. If they can catch the tiny glory of that cute duckling’s feathers on Disney Nature’s Earth (and they wouldn’t have been planted a foot from the action either), they can most definitely determine whether a puck of known size has crossed a plane of known location based on input from fixed cameras. Heck, they could use a few of them and create a 3D compilation to give you some really outstanding replays, but that’s above and beyond.
In this case, it’s the world’s oldest, most famous, and hardest trophy to earn that’s on the line every night, and that’s more than worth the cost. Had it been the last game of the season, and a similar goal could have put Florida into the playoffs rather than Montreal, do you think they or their fans (yes, there are fans of the Florida Panthers) would think it a small thing that the correct call could be made? To their fans, pride on the line, and indeed to the club those juicy, long-absent playoff revenues as well. If you’re going to spend hundreds of thousands on elaborate humidity controls to create better ice, you owe it to the game to be sure of what’s happening in that same sleek rink.
It was indeed these same Canes who knocked the outstanding New Jersey Devils out of the playoffs, one of their critical victories coming thanks to a goal with 0.2 seconds left. It was only two years ago that those same Devils scored with fractions of a second left against the Ottawa Senators, debate over time losses between whistle blows and digital time stops ensuring the goal stood. The momentum of that goal was perhaps exactly what allowed the Devils to hold onto their lone victory in that series, even as there should be little difficulty in coming up with a system integrated seamlessly with the referees whistles that ensures the clock stops when the referee intends it to, regardless of any delay in the blowing of the whistle or the current time stop that occurs immediately thereafter.
Is it mundane, minute, and a picking of nits? Perhaps that is how it seems today, but someday you just might find yourself on the wrong side of a situation that currently unused technologies like these and others may well have been able to prevent. The desire to take advantage and enjoy the fruits of technology shouldn’t just be on one side of the television (or computer) screen, after all.
Filed in: NHL General, NHL Rules | SENShobo | Permalink
Comments
Why can’t hockey implement a system such as what tennis has in place to judge whether the ball is in or out? They have a nifty little animated video to show whether the ball ended up on the line, or outside the line whenever a player challenges. It seems to work just fine and I’m sure there’s a margin of error.
But seriously, Fox put a chip in the puck to make it glow in the 90s. Can no one figure out how to put a chip in the puck now to make the goal line turn green on TV if the puck crosses it? I think it’s probably easier than the NHL admits and it’s probably some crap about the refs feeling like their jobs are on the line.
Posted by EE from Durham-NC on 05/05/09 at 10:08 AM ET
By the way, it was definitely a goal. Boston shouldn’t have been standing around waiting for the horn to sound anyway. Is that what makes a champion?
Posted by EE from Durham-NC on 05/05/09 at 10:10 AM ET
I can’t say whether it was a goal or not, but the technology is there to truly all but eliminate those ‘inconclusive’ video reviews.
Chips or other intrusive technologies are not needed, and such modifications to the puck could well impact its play characteristics in a negative manner. The technology used in tennis could work, or think of how the down lines are artificially placed onto your television screen during NFL games. Similar techniques should be available for video review, however simple or thorough you want it to be.
Posted by SENShobo from Waterloo, ON on 05/05/09 at 10:18 AM ET
I have been thinking about a solution for this sort of situation even before this play happened. For years now , ESPN & Fox & NBC have been putting those cameras in the back of the net that give a nice panoramic shot out of the net, but are useless for determining if a goal is in. The simple solution is this :
Technology has allowed cameras to be made very small. What is to prevent the placment of 2 small cameras inside the tubeing of the cross-bar? The cameras could be mounted so that they are on the backside of the crossbar and be “looking “ straight down. The cameras could be pinhole type nothing big and clunky. This would not compromise the integerity of the cross-bar, and the cameras could be wireless with a reciever placed on the inside of the boards just behind the net. This position of cameras in this spot would provide much CLEARER replays, certainly better than the cameras hanging from the rafter which have to shoot through the net.
I’m convinced this is doable and at a resonable cost. For petes sake at least give it a shot. It’s no craiser than those awful reshaped nets they were purposing during the lockout.
Posted by dbcooper from parts unknown on 05/05/09 at 02:16 PM ET
Well it was definitely a goal as was announced by numerous hockey announcer and analysts (looked conclusive to me) so the question remains...if I can see it on my TV and in a still photo...as a goal how can a room full of
“experts” not? It is either they are incompetent and give them the benefit of the doubt and say they just blew it or they did it on purpose.
And why would you need inconclusive evidence in order to overturn a ref who is a normal human being and had to make the call in a few seconds? Isn’t that why we go to “review” so we can get the “truth” of what happened? What ...we are worried about embarrassing a referee instead of having the truth? The folks in the warroom should be held accountable for their mistake...instead of sweeping it under the rug because the Canes won the game.
The hows and the whys should be fully investigated or it might happen in say the Pittsburg-Washington series...God forbid!
Posted by gwolf on 05/05/09 at 02:42 PM ET
Here we have a chance to improve and we get a guy who will play a couple games and never be heard from again. Just like the guy we got for Williams… WHO IS HE AGAIN don ?
Posted by hayden on 07/08/09 at 04:25 AM ET
Add a Comment
Please limit embedded image or media size to 575 pixels wide.
Add your own avatar by joining Kukla's Korner, or logging in and uploading one in your member control panel.
Captchas bug you? Join KK or log in and you won't have to bother.
Most Recent Blog Posts
Karlsson Down, Kuba In For Sens
Personnel, Power Play Struggles For Sens
Who is SENShobo?
Fully addicted to hockey, Andrew Dodds finds it safe to live in the alleys, considering his allegiance to the Ottawa Senators in the middle of Leaf County. He tries to bring you as many worthwhile Sens stories as he can find, along with his musings on the team and the NHL in general; musings indeed since he is but a humble hockey hobo.
If you have any general comments, questions, suggestions, or concerns about myself or my blog and its content, you can post them publicly here, or drop me an email.
Email:
SENShobo Recommends
The Professionals
I don’t have a problem with 5 on 5 first OT and then 4 on 4.....As for the goal...NO WAY can you say it was a absolutely goal unless you have cameras in the goal posts. So the official call stands....It would have been a cheap azz goal anyway as the Bruins were all standing around assuming the period was over
Posted by Kevin from boston on 05/05/09 at 10:01 AM ET