kilgore Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 John Shannon of Sports Net explains why Bennett's goal was inconclusive. http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/how-geometry-created-the-illusion-of-a-flames-goal/ I have to say, I was utterly convinced that Calgary got shafted. They still might have, but I can now see the inconclusive part. I assumed that the puck was on the ice surface or close to it. And when I heard excuses like there was snow in front of it that was simply stupid. The line was still visible, so that would mean somehow a sliver of snow, an inch or more in height followed the puck in, and there was no snow puff when it was kicked out. But, it does make sense to see that gap if the puck was above the surface by a few inches when it went in (or didn't). And I'm still not convinced that it was high enough to cause this illusion, but at least there is some explanation. I just wish the NHL would have done a better job at explaining this at the time. It would have been a Red Mile Riot if the Flames had lost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.