Follow @james_tanner123

The other night in Calgary, the Flames were denied a goal due to the technicality of there being no "definitive" evidence to overturn the call on the ice.

Though most people seem to be able to look at the play and use common sense, the NHL disagreed and, in a face-saving move, released a video so filled with technical jargon as to be impenetrable to most people.

When you start talking about parallaxes most people are just going to say 'whatever,' and move on.

This isn't to say they don't have a point, or that they are even wrong - but again, since the vast majority of people have no clue what a parallax is, it's pretty hard to argue their basic point: the puck was in the air, so you can't really tell whether it was over the line or not.

Now, technically, this is true. But the puck appears to cross the line and the argument is heavily predicated on the fact that you need definitive evidence to overturn the call on the ice. This means all the NHL needs to do is raise the specter or reasonable doubt, and they have done that.

Not a big deal anyways, since the Flames won, but it does bring to light an interesting problem: even with technology being where it is, bad calls can still be made.

Ultimately, we're arguing about whether less than 1% of the puck failed to cross the line. As I said yesterday, since video can't always tell us the answer, why not just let people make a judgement call based on common sense?

I propose the NHL do away with the rule that says incontrovertible proof needs to be there for the on-ice call to be overturned. I say, let the ref view the video in the penalty box and make the final call based on his judgement, just like he does with 50 other plays every night.

If he gets some wrong, who cares, since the video review is bound to also get some wrong anyways.

But I also have a far more radical idea:

Get rid of the rule that the entire puck has to cross the goal-line and instead, adopt the NFL's rule for touchdowns where the ball only has to 'break the plane.' If any part of the puck crosses the line, it's a goal. It seems like it'd be easy enough to then equip the nets with infrared cameras that create a visual field from the back edge of the goal-line to the top of the net. A simple view of the camera could then show if the plane was in fact broken.

This would have three main benefits:

a) It would be much easier to make accurate calls and we wouldn't be beholden to the "Parallax Effect."

b) There would be a slight up-tick in scoring. There were zero 100 points scorers and one fifty goal scorer, so there is almost no downside to having more goals.

c) It would be a slight counter-action to the increase in size and quality of goalie equipment.

In the end, the job of goal-judges would be made easier, there would be more offense and less blown calls.

What's not to like?

Thanks for reading.

Join the Discussion: » 93 Comments » Post New Comment

» I am Just Curious If This Works

» NHL At Least Tries to do the Right Thing

» The NHL Cannot Remain Apolitical and Must Show Leadership

» Time for a New Coach to Go Along with the New G.M

» Coyotes Eliminated Following Severe Beating