CanucksCorner.com Forums

vic wrote: wanted to put an image in here, but it was too big - here's a link
http://i.imgur.com/fdKz8oA.png

That pic from 2004 is so pixelated you can't determine fuck all. Inconclusive!

The one from last night shows just how far off the ice the puck actually was when it hit Anderson's pad, making that view a terrible one to determine whether or not the puck was completely across the line. Look at the distance between the goal line and the beginning of Anderson's pad right along the ice. Doesn't really look as though it's more than a puck length! Inconclusive.

The league has admitted that that is a terrible angle to view whether or not the puck crosses the line. They rarely use it for a reason.

Otto kicked it in anyways....

rats19 wrote:Otto kicked it in anyways....

Which is why the Flamers will NEVER get the benefit of the doubt from this Canucks fan.

Aaronp18 wrote: The one from last night shows just how far off the ice the puck actually was when it hit Anderson's pad, making that view a terrible one to determine whether or not the puck was completely across the line. Look at the distance between the goal line and the beginning of Anderson's pad right along the ice. Doesn't really look as though it's more than a puck length! Inconclusive.

The league has admitted that that is a terrible angle to view whether or not the puck crosses the line. They rarely use it for a reason.

Yup.

Vic, imagine a puck resting on the surface of the ice, touching the goal line, no white showing in between.

Now elevate that puck a few inches in the air.

From the angle in your pic, you would now see white between the puck and the goal line

.... even though it is hovering directly over the spot where it was touching the goal line.

NO GOAL, the puck must cross the line completely.

Good luck explaining that to Caltards though.

Here's a great look at how angles can skew perception!

http://www.thehockeynews.com/blog/if-yo ... -this-out/

Aaronp18 wrote:

rats19 wrote:Otto kicked it in anyways....

Which is why the Flamers will NEVER get the benefit of the doubt from this Canucks fan.

Yep, it's an ottomatic.

rats19 wrote:Otto kicked it in anyways....

He always does.

The loss was all about stringing Allison Redford up by the balls and pruning the turncoat exWildRose.

The NDP is a factional mess and every special interest group will be creeping from cracks in the floor demanding their share. I doubt if there is money to do that, but if the commie bus bomber Mayor in Cowturdville gets rolling grab your Koran and run. He may have a greater profile the new Premier and I have little doubt he'll start using it.

I hope that once the new government gets a look at the books and realizes the shithole they are in they keep their greenie weenie paws of the industrial development that pays the bills.

I think we'll see them try to attack urban development, real estate speculation and urban sprawl.

Just think if Trudeau defeats Harper and brings back a National Energy Policy with the aid of Alberta's NDP. LOL

Aaronp18 wrote:

vic wrote: wanted to put an image in here, but it was too big - here's a link
http://i.imgur.com/fdKz8oA.png

That pic from 2004 is so pixelated you can't determine fuck all. Inconclusive!

The one from last night shows just how far off the ice the puck actually was when it hit Anderson's pad, making that view a terrible one to determine whether or not the puck was completely across the line. Look at the distance between the goal line and the beginning of Anderson's pad right along the ice. Doesn't really look as though it's more than a puck length! Inconclusive.

The league has admitted that that is a terrible angle to view whether or not the puck crosses the line. They rarely use it for a reason.

If it were 2 calls like that against the Canucks, we'd be all over it...

rats19 wrote:Otto kicked it in anyways....

Check this out Vic:

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/how- ... ames-goal/

Strangelove wrote:Check this out Vic:

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/how- ... ames-goal/

That was cool - thanks for sharing it....

Visiting the shithole that is Calgarypuck is good for a depressed Canucks fan because even though the Flames are a decent young team on the rise and Ignitowski is hamstringing the Canucks, 95 % of that board are retards.

Thank you for the laughs D'Arcy and Jiri and keep up all the inbreeding. Even though my hockey team stinks , I can always count on you idiots to make me feel better .

Flames fans upset Byron picked up on waivers by Montreal. I guess we are not the only team that gambled on waivers.

They now have a new thread about what is wrong with the team.

5 - 6 games in and they are already want massive changes etc, amazing what 1 loss to Edmonton does to the fans. I couldn't be happier for it to happen to the fans at that site, not the team, or the city or the other fans, but that site deserves everything they get.

Also I love how no matter what other fans do, nothing compares to the baby eating, devil worshipping, lamb whoreing fans called Canuck fans.

In the "she said no" flyers thread bountiful elder Jiri is angry at one of the posters for taking an " unprovoked swipe " at the mongtard farm as if they post as one collective voice . Uhhhhh Jiri they do and if they don't you and Father D'Arcy will banish them from the mongtard farm .Funny shit over there .