Steve Dangle, Adam Wylde et Jesse Blake discutent du vainqueur en prolongation marqué par les Ducks d’Anaheim contre les Oilers d’Edmonton. Ce but aurait-il dû compter ? A-t-il complètement franchi la ligne ? Comment les arbitres pourraient-ils qualifier cela de but sur la glace ? Regardez l’épisode complet ici : https://youtu.be/79-N7hnoJ1Q Regardez le hockey avec nous ! En direct sur YouTube : https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLLk7FZfwCEifCTX0vkKEaGg9otrW4Zl2k Achetez des produits SDP https://sdpnshop.ca/ Consultez https://sdpn.ca/events pour voir le podcast Steve Dangle en direct ! Abonnez-vous à la chaîne YouTube sdpn : https://www.youtube.com/@sdpn?sub_confirmation=1Rejoignez SDP VIP : YouTube : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0a0z05HiddEn7k6OGnDprg/join Apple Podcasts : https://apple.co/thestevedanglepodcast Spotify : https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/sdpvip/subscribe – Suivre nous sur Twitter : @Steve_Dangle, @AdamWylde et @JesseBlake Suivez-nous sur Instagram : @SteveDangle, @AdamWylde et @Jesse.Blake Rejoignez-nous sur Discord : https://discord.com/invite/MtTmw9rrz7 Pour toute demande générale, envoyez un courriel : info@sdpn.ca Contactez-nous à https://www.sdpn.ca/sales pour entrer en contact avec notre équipe de vente et discuter de la possibilité d’intégrer votre marque au sein de notre contenu !
@Ducks d'Anaheim
29 Comments
They have to call something on the ice, I don't think you can do an ambiguous call. Regardless video evidence shows its a goal.
That’s why they review every goal
They think it’s a goal or you don’t think it’s a goal it doesn’t matter
haha guess you are late all the other grifting channel already did that pathetic attempt to get traffic and drama.
Goal was good.Oilers sucks and Anaheim should already be out of 1st round 4-0.
There is no controversy, it’s a goal, there was no need for this video. Thumbs down 👎
15:38 Not like Nurse pushed him into Talbot or anything
I think it's a goal but damn refs don't have to call it a goal from 40' away I didn't even see goal light go on. They should of just called a video replay to it not just presume it was
The "Soilers" are done ….McJesus is wearing a L.A. jersey very, very soon…. maybe even next year ….it was a good goal without a doubt ……the majority of this team despise Conner …..he is a sniveling whiner ….who thinks he is so much better than his teammates ……he still does not understand this is a team sport …..and this team has dismal defense ….sketchy goaltending and two prima donna's who believe they are entitled to win a Stanley Cup…..Crybaby Conner pissed off the Hockey Gods when he snubbed the Conn Smythe trophy and his career as the "greatest" player ever was over before it ever began ….he will learn one day the " Crybaby snub" was a huge mistake ….the God's never forget
The argument that I hate is the one that unless it was an egg shaped puck. Based on what I’ve seen online this puck crossed the line by 3 mm. I’m not sure how a puck transforms into an egg when it’s 3 mm wide wider.
my goodness this conversation is so silly
As an Oilers fan. I loved how the ref activated his go go Gadget glasses to see that the puck was in from 40 feet away. Or, just took his cue from the crowd.
Sidenote: The Oilers need to roll with Jarry tonight. He played really well.
lol it was a damn goal don’t matter what the call was on the ice it would of been overturned
Why are people so upset about the call on the ice? It's going to get reviewed, no matter what. The review confirmed the call, not determined inconclusive.
I think it's easy enough to have someone in the decision room draw with a straight line tool to superimpose a line across the back of the goal line in the pic and a circle tool over the image to show it would have to be across the line without question or guessing, at least.
Every goal should be looked at whether it was called a goal or no goal and be determined by video evidence in the end!
The only controversy here is the fact that the Oilers and their fans can't seem to let it go and accept reality. The goal itself is not controversial.
always celebrate like you scored if you arnt sure if its in or not. because if its in and the ref didnt see it, now they have to check up on it. thats what I learned, because no f-ing way did the ref or the player see a "goal" from those angles.
I'll entertain the idea that the refs erroneously called a good goal on the ice because they couldn't see it, but there is conclusive video evidence and it should have been overturned to good goal had the call been otherwise.
About the refs making it up as they go, I think the high stick call on Kapanen is another proof. It ended up being the right call, but not for the right reason. The ref missed the actual high stick, play kept going, another stick close to the face but no contact, the Tampa players fakes being hit and then the ref makes the call. I'm a Habs fan btw but it's not clouding my judgment. As I said, it was the right call, but for the wrong reasons. Similar to Kucherovs dive. You end up having half a game in powerplay and it completly breaks the rythm and shifts the opportunity left and right.
No goal
A camera pit under the full net, focused on the full goal line, covered with plexiglass. The same with cameras under the ice along the blue lines to help determine off-sides. And in this situation, when SHOULD the refs have blown the whistle?? When did they loose sight of it? Should they have waited to determine if it would eventually show up again?
If this was scored by edmonton it would not chave been called a goal because they are a canadian team
Linus ullmark or swayman would've looked good in an Edmonton sweater and draisytl would've looked good in a bruins sweater.
so add these goal refs behind the goalie again. who signal to the ref when they see the puck over the line.
To me, it seems like the argument here is "if the refs had called it no goal then it would stand as no goal" since you cant see 100% of the puck cross the line. Thats just being a rules lawyer instead of looking at the puck and saying "yeah, its a goal" and moving on.
Canadian NHL fans once again demonstrating low IQ. No matter the sequence of events, the goal would stand. Call on the ice and a review confirming it. A no-goal call, review/challenge, overturning the call, good goal. No call, review, confirming goal. The fact remains the puck crossed the line and a goal was scored. It doesn't matter how you spin the narrative leading up to the fact. Canadian hockey fans have really shown how pathetic they are with this "controversy" and the whining over the Olympics. Canada doesn't deserve a Canadian team to win the Cup. Canadian fans are embarrassing at this point.
There are 7 cameras in the net, 3 of them are at ice level. Search for "Stanley Cup Final has all angles covered with in-goal cameras". It's an NHL article from 2019. Toronto has conclusive angles.
Every overtime goal is reviewed by Toronto, so it doesn't matter what the refs called on the ice. They should have only said, "The play is under review" but, in the end, people are bitching that they watched replay, got the call right, and then it went to Toronto.
Again, there are 7 cameras in the net. They could see under Jarry's skate. We could not.
But what if they called it no goal ducks would be pissed af and they reviewed it and everyone can see it is a goal.. this is annoying
There is actually no controversy. This is Rashomon effect, i.e., different people provide significantly different accounts of the same event.
In this case, however, there is the video which conclusively shows that the puck completely crossed the line.
The second like doesn’t change the refs POV or the refs call. It’s just for reviewing goals at that point…