rollercoasterman325
617 posts


@rollercoast325 @iioxzy @HickeyDMatthew @MikeBartner Yes you need conclusive evidence if called no goal on ice to overturn it, and because the skate is covering the line you can’t see if it’s actually a goal even though everyone knows it is
English

@iioxzy @HickeyDMatthew @MikeBartner you have to visibly see that a straight red line goes straight when you can't see a part of the straight line?
English

@rollercoast325 @HickeyDMatthew @MikeBartner no it wouldnt you cant use drawn lines that go through an object as proof to overturn of goal you have to visibly see it
English

@HickeyDMatthew @MikeBartner even if they called it no goal on the ice they would have looked at it and came to the same conclusion
English

@rollercoast325 @MikeBartner That's not the problem the problem was the call it a goal on ice. But you've never watched more than 5 hockey games in your life so yeah
English

Initial review angle:
B/R Open Ice@BR_OpenIce
THIS WAS CALLED GOOD ON THE ICE IN OT, THEY ARE REVIEWING NOW!!!! 😱🚨
English



@DailyFaceoff EDM got screwed. The ref never pointed signifying a goal and never blew the whistle because he lost sight of the puck. So shouldn't it be one or the other? Therefore it should've been called no goal on the ice and then reviewed. And they would've stuck with the call of no goal.
English

CHAOS IN ANAHEIM‼️
• There was NO initial call on the ice when the play was live
• The officials discussed, RULED IT A GOAL on the ice
• THEN there was a video review, NO video angle shows the puck completely across the goal line
• Situation room confirms a GOOD GOAL
ANAHEIM TAKES A 3-1 SERIES LEAD. INSANE. 🫨
English
























