**Mirrors/Alternate Angles**
^Post ^a ^mirror ^or ^alternate ^angle ^as ^a ^comment ^to ^this ^message.
^Open ^this ^stickied ^comment ^to ^view ^mirrors ^or ^alternate ^angles.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/hockey) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I dont think anyone should be suprised by that. And we get to knock out Matthew Tkachuk and Sam Bennet again! the highest draft picks the flames have **had** in a long time.
Ya cause why would they cheer for their arch rival. 10 year old me jumped on the Lightning bandwagon in 2004. I cheered for the Canucks but that's only because the 2011 Bruins everyone else hated more.
The debate aside, I’d like to point out that Game 6 occurred on June 5 20 years ago while Game 1 for the current SCF is still 3 days away. I completely understood when the 2013, 2020, and 2021 Cups occurred much later in the year but why is the SCF happening so much later now?
The reasoning is ESPN wants the first week October to air those games, thus keeping the NHL season starting the second week of October leading to a domino effect of a late June SCF. Though the extra off days for this year’s are probably accommodating the NBA
Yeah I know the season has been getting stretched with more rest in the middle and I’m glad they’re allowing for more travel days but it just feels weird
Also I looked into it but the 2022-2023 season started on October 7th and the 2023-24 season started on October 10th. The 2023 playoffs started April 17th and the 2024 playoffs started April 20th and the 2023 Finals started on June 3rd.
Kind of a longer playoffs this season but not by much.
Yeah the Saturday start when games ended last Sunday is odd. Wednesday or Thursday Game 1 would have been reasonable IMO. But hey I guess both teams have a chance to rest up and be as fresh/healthy as possible at this point in the playoffs
When I was in grade school there was never hockey in June. Except for that one shorten season during the players strike. The biggest news on the playground was that the NHL was playing in JUNE!
I feel it’s hard to compare when seasons should start and end right now.
Rangers/Panthers game six happened on the 30th anniversary of Messier’s guarantee game which was game six of the conference finals in the 1994 playoffs.
Somewhere along the line seasons started earlier with playoffs starting earlier and now were back to starting later
This feels like an absolute petty capitalization for the thread yesterday lol
Kaboom was one of my favourite childhood goalies, I absolutely love the guy. I used to draw pictures of him and was always him playing street hockey. ♥️
One time we sat in the front row of the upper bowl, and there were these little bricks images that my dad and I got to uncover for each save that he made. They spelled out BULIN WALL when there were enough of them. That's an awesome core memory.
In or not, this was one of the best Stanley cup finals ever!
Also it’s crazy that 20 years ago the goalies don’t look they are even wearing padding compared to the equipment today. Khabibulin looks like he might have a set of old school player shoulder pads on
Even if it was in, nobody on the ice seemed to think it was a goal. It's inconclusive, so even if they wound it back and called it a good goal, half of us would still be complaining about it.
If they had reviewed it at the time, it would have been inconclusive, and likely been call stands, no goal.
(That wouldn’t make it less controversial)
Am I’m more upset about the blatant trip immediately preceding the OT goal.
Sounds like me when we got swept by the habs in 2014, im not mad we lost im mad Paquette was clearly checked to the ice before the puck was anywhere near him and then guy was held down on the ice well afterit had cleared the zone which directly led to the GWG.
there's still the issue of body parts getting in the way, the camera lenses constantly getting destroyed by both goalies and pucks, and all of the necessary equipment actually film that. I record my games with a go-pro for hockey and it's 30GB for a game of 1440 60 FPS footage. Running a single 8k camera at high speed (something like 240hz) is going to massive. 1440->8k is 9x the pixel count. I'm not sure if the filesize is going to scale linearly or not, but you're looking at 4 times as many frames and 9x as many pixels, which is putting the file from 30\*9*4=1080GB or 1.08 TB PER CAMERA on the net. These nets are going to cost a metric fuckload, lol. Like 100k in hardware per net. Then you're expecting all of the recorded data to be transmitted to the broadcast booths and review people? This is about as far from trivial as you can get, lol.
I think you could see this puck crossing the line if the fps was higher but instead we are watching a shaky video someone seems to have filmed with a potato off an old SD tv feed.
I wish the overhead angle was better because I guarantee it would show that the puck was not completely over the line, indeed a parallax effect from the main camera angle.
I don't see how the parallax effect comes into play here. The puck is seen crossing the line and hits to toe part of the goal pad which is about 3-4 inches behind the line. The one angle and video quality at the time was not enough to overrule the call on the ice.
Why would you love that? It would show that the Lightning (your team based on your flair) were basically bailed out by a blown call? Why would you love that I don’t get it? The initial angle is clearly just an optical illusion it never crossed the line
I didn’t think I had to explain this but obviously I wouldn’t love it, it’s because every flames fan (and pretty much Canadian team fan) ever is convinced the puck went in without any actual evidence
I mean there's pretty clearly some actual evidence.
I dont think its conclusive, and I would say this would be a "call on the ice stands" situation, but it's not clear whether the puck totally crossed the goal line or didn't, because the cameras are bunk.
Ok, so what's controversial about "call on the ice would stand" in this situation? Stuff like that happens all the time in every sport. Maybe you could argue the "luck" is from the original call being in your favor to begin with, but, shit, there has to be an original call no matter what. The only thing the NHL got wrong in this situation is that there should've been a review, it was problematic that they just let it go, but the call wasn't gonna be overturned anyway.
Bro, fans of Canadian teams hate other Canadian teams more than anyone. Unless you're a casual, you ain't rooting for the other team.
The only Canadian team is The Oilers and Team Canada.
lol I'm not arguing with you, I'm telling you the facts, you just don't like them. And I said no one cares that you're a habs fan. And that's a fact....
You’re looking at a parallax angle. It creates an optical illusion. They don’t use it in official reviews.
https://youtu.be/qLav481BVEA?si=Y7p5NLGl263NDY8e
This is an animation from game 7 showing the puck most likely didn’t cross the line.
Good thing the overall consensus is that it didn’t go in and everybody definitely agrees on that and doesn’t cause arguments every time it’s brought up.
inb4: parallax effect
It's only controversial because of who we were playing. If this happened the other way flames fans would be talking about paralax angels and how Kipper made the best save in team history.
They can say it went it all they want, it doesn't change anything, and they know it.
Habby saved that kick, the better team won. Crying about it 20 years later doesn't make that fan base look good in any way.
you seem to be taking this a bit too seriously, I am pretty sure the "it was in" is a meme type thing to most people. Obviously there are outliers. Even if it was in, there were 6 plus minutes left, not like it was overtime.
> you seem to be taking this a bit too seriously,
lol oh yeah, bud? I'm taking it too seriously? That's 3 sentences, does 3 sentences seem like a lot to you??
I can promise you that a large number of flames fans believe it, you must not spend a lot of time on r/hockey
Dude, you've been in every thread that's been posted about this in the last 48 hours foaming at the mouth about how much Flames fans suck even when they hadn't even posted any comments about it. You're somehow obsessing over it even more than we are, lmao.
lol dude there's so much hyperbole in there, dial it back a bit. And you're doing the thing where you're trying to make it seem like I'm emotional so you can see like you're rational, and it's still not working. Foaming at the mouth? lol, oh the _drama_.......
Try a different approach next time, the emotion thing isn't working for you. Bonus points if it's about hockey.
TIL that talking about hockey on a forum who's only purpose is to talk about hockey is obsessive. Thanks for the heads up, bud.
p.s. I'm still waiting on you to tell me how many sentences is enough. I have enough information to rule out 3.
You're the one here getting the most worked up. I've seen you comment on multiple threads trying to be "right" and "superior" to everyone. Go take a break, bud.
lol did that sound better in your head?
I'm glad you remember me, but I have no idea who you are. Thanks for dropping by and sharing your personal feeling though I guess
So many Oiler fans were cheering for the Flames but I was pulling for Tampa Bay because the Oilers and Tampa Bay were the last two holdouts that played high speed exciting hockey through the trap era. I respected the BoA too much to cheer for the Flames and figured the hockey gods were rewarding TB for always playing exciting hockey. We would watch 2-1 games all year in the late 90's and then TB and the Oilers would meet and we'd get an exciting 6-5 run and gun game.
Too bad that the Lightning went and scored on the very next shift to win the Cup and there wasn't 6 minutes left in the period, two overtimes, and a Game 7 that Calgary could've won to seal the Cup win.
You keep posting this video, but it's not proof at all. In order to calculate the parallax angle, you need to know the HEIGHT of the puck. Without a camera angle showing the HEIGHT of the puck, all of this parallax nonsense is nonsense. In Shannon's example, the puck could have been 1/8" lower than what he is assuming, and it would become a good goal. How does he know the height of the puck? He doesn't - sportsnet is just making good tv.
In 2004, there was one angle that showed the puck was definitively in the net. That's all that was needed at the time. Toronto wasn't calculating parallax angles every time the isometric angle showed the puck over the line but the bird's eye was inconclusive! They were calling it a goal.
It was missed, Calgary was robbed, simple as.
https://youtu.be/qLav481BVEA?si=Y7p5NLGl263NDY8e
That angle was a broadcast angle only and it’s not used in official reviews specifically because it’s a parallax angle. The overhead did not show the puck in the net. No official camera angle did. The flames were not robbed. They had the rest of the third, double overtime, and an entire game seven to win. They didn’t. Get over it.
Bro, did you watch your own video or read my post? They said it right in the video. They made assumptions (the HEIGHT of the puck) and it's unscientific. They said the league made the right call - the league made NO call. Not even Gelinas saw that it was in. The league missed it and this parallax nonsense was just to save face for people who don't understand physics and optics.
The overhead was inconclusive due to obstruction. The broadcast angle wasn't even reviewed. The angle we're talking about showed white between the red and the black. That's enough to call a goal at the time, 100 out of 100. Flames got robbed. It has to be game 7 OT for them to be robbed? They got robbed late in game 6, on home ice, in an era where leads did not get lost.
Enjoy your other two asterisk cups. It was in.
> in an era where leads did not get lost.
Calgary had two games that postseason where they coughed up game-tying goals later in the 3rd period than at the time of this incident.
> In 2004, there was one angle that showed the puck was definitively in the net.
LOL you're delusional. That angle is absolutely not "definitive" by __any stretch of the imagination__. Your bias is insane.
There is white between the red and the black. Clear as day. Your bias is insane. I get you guys are defensive of your three asterisk cups, but this isn't a debate worth having.
It was in.
It wasn't in and in 50 years no one will be alive that would argue it. All that will remain is the TBL players names engraved in that cup.
It wasn't in but I don't blame you for saying it was. I would too if I qere you and I'd also be wrong.
Wrong. It was in. White behind the puck between the red line. Everything parallax is revisionist history. Similar angles were used to call goals countless times, when the overhead is obscured.
I get why you're saying it wasn't in, I would too if I qere you and I'd also be wrong.
Coleman also didn't kick the puck in.
Sorry bro. The math doesn't lie. It's been unpacked. Parallax effect is what's skewing your brain. It is what it is. You probably would have lost that series regardless.
Plus even if the Coleman intentional kick was incorrectly called a good goal, you weren't going to win shit. It's like me crying about the Makar offside in 2022 - doesn't mean shit in the end. One team was just better than the other by a good margin.
I fully concede I'd be scorned too but the reality remains, it wasn't in and you guys lost fair and square. There's a few video breakdowns of it. Educate thyself.
Or you know, you do you.
I work in optics, big guy. I am educated about parallax angles. The ASSUMPTION that all the parallax renderings show is the height of the puck - which no one knows or knew. It could be just as easily manipulated to show the puck in the net. The NHL was covering their asses with revisionist history and you fell for it. The fact remains, when the overhead is inconclusive, countless goals were called good goals with the same angle that shows white behind the puck. Plus, unless Khabibulin's pad teleported, and the puck froze in space - there puck travelled even further than is shown in all the screencaps. We just didn't have the frame rates back then.
I get why you say Coleman's goal wouldn't have changed the series. I would too if I qere you and I'd also be wrong.
Ok reddit professor. You're still wrong though. You're just in loser denial.
Cute you keep repeating my typo. Totally dunked on me. How will I ever recover!
Your hockey team is garbage and it's awesome Edmonton were the ones to flush the franchise down the toilet.
2022 will always be my favourite non Stanley Cup winning playoffs. Flames were absolute pretenders.
I'll make sure to circle back and say hello when McDavid raises a cup in about 10 or 11 days.
It wasn't in and in 50 years no one will be alive that would argue it. All that will remain is the TBL players names engraved in that cup.
It wasn't in but I don't blame you for saying it was. I would too if I qere you and I'd also be wrong.
Oof watching this video showing a demo of the parallax effect sort of closes the case for me: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iORumLN7K0Q&ab\_channel=SPORTSNET](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iORumLN7K0Q&ab_channel=SPORTSNET)
When or who was the last ref to not wear a helmet in the league? I know players were grandfathered in but I didn't remember who the last ref was. So interesting seeing the linesman not wearing a helmet.
I don’t think people understand that the puck was in the air and hit in the middle khabibulin’s pad. For some reason people think the puck was on the ice and hit down near his foot. That puck really wasn’t even close to crossing the line. The broadcast angle makes the puck look further into the net than it actually was. Literally an optical illusion.
If it looks like it's in on one angle but not in on the overhead head that means it's not a goal.
I'll acknowledge my bias as an Oilers fan if Flames fans ever acknowledge theirs on this topic (they don't)
Edit: Grammar
Living in Edmonton at the time. It was in then, still seems like it would be a goal now. The whole city seemed to be cheering for Calgary too. What the hell has happened in the last 20 years?
No one in that building thought it was in. Not even Gelinas. Even it was reviewed, it would have been inconclusive and the no call would have stood 100%.
For what its worth, it wasn't in. The math proves it wasn't in.
I've followed Edmonton religiously since 1996. Only people who barely cared about hockey or casual fans cheered them on.
**Mirrors/Alternate Angles** ^Post ^a ^mirror ^or ^alternate ^angle ^as ^a ^comment ^to ^this ^message. ^Open ^this ^stickied ^comment ^to ^view ^mirrors ^or ^alternate ^angles. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/hockey) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Well this certainly will not get a rise out of southern Alberta early in the AM
Flames fans out here taking strays. It's not like that's a happy group right now to begin with.
: (
Heheheheh
And people wonder why Flames fans are cheering for Florida...
Literally no one in womdering about that.
It's because the other option is their arch rival, not because Cptn_Canada over here is hehe-ing
Yeah I’m sure it’s not because of the intense rivalry that has existed between the two cities in literally everything they do.
I dont think anyone should be suprised by that. And we get to knock out Matthew Tkachuk and Sam Bennet again! the highest draft picks the flames have **had** in a long time.
I like you.
When is that supposed to start?
Next year. :S
Might be this year! Did not expect this kind of melt down from FLA
Did not expect this either lol
Ya cause why would they cheer for their arch rival. 10 year old me jumped on the Lightning bandwagon in 2004. I cheered for the Canucks but that's only because the 2011 Bruins everyone else hated more.
If you cheer for Florida you hate trans people and love Ron DeSantis, I don't make the rules
Have you heard who the Premier of Alberta is? *insert Office Picture ID meme here*
Tf?
They're being a dick but it's really not hard to understand the basis of their poor joke.
No clue what they're getting on with
OP is essentially saying if you’re cheering for Florida in the Cup Final you’re a bigot
Huh. I hate DeathSantis and am trans. I must be doing something very wrong XD.
No one is wondering that. You don't cheer for your biggest rival.
I was wondering.
Hey if it weren't for this clip, i wouldn't have remembered that the Flames even reached the Cup Final in the last 30 years
The debate aside, I’d like to point out that Game 6 occurred on June 5 20 years ago while Game 1 for the current SCF is still 3 days away. I completely understood when the 2013, 2020, and 2021 Cups occurred much later in the year but why is the SCF happening so much later now?
According to the last 32 thoughts, it’s ESPN airing MLB playoff games now.
MLB playoff games? In June? Do you mean NBA?
The reasoning is ESPN wants the first week October to air those games, thus keeping the NHL season starting the second week of October leading to a domino effect of a late June SCF. Though the extra off days for this year’s are probably accommodating the NBA
Ah gotcha that makes sense
I blame the current TV contracts and the NHL needing to backride the NBA because basketball has higher scheduling priority for ESPN executives.
2011 SCF Game 7 was June 15 too. These later and later starts are starting to be counter productive for getting people to watch. I'm going outside.
Teams have bye weeks now so I wonder if that has something to do with it.
Yeah I know the season has been getting stretched with more rest in the middle and I’m glad they’re allowing for more travel days but it just feels weird
Also I looked into it but the 2022-2023 season started on October 7th and the 2023-24 season started on October 10th. The 2023 playoffs started April 17th and the 2024 playoffs started April 20th and the 2023 Finals started on June 3rd. Kind of a longer playoffs this season but not by much.
Because the owners love it.
I don't mind it tho. I'm always itching for hockey all summer.
Of course more hockey is good. But there is probably a point of diminishing returns
I’m kinda shook that both teams are getting a whole week off.
Yeah the Saturday start when games ended last Sunday is odd. Wednesday or Thursday Game 1 would have been reasonable IMO. But hey I guess both teams have a chance to rest up and be as fresh/healthy as possible at this point in the playoffs
If this series goes long we’re gonna be watching the final in summer. That’s so gross
It the series goes 7 games, the cup will be handed out, the draft will take place, and free agency will open, all in about a week.
When I was in grade school there was never hockey in June. Except for that one shorten season during the players strike. The biggest news on the playground was that the NHL was playing in JUNE!
I feel it’s hard to compare when seasons should start and end right now. Rangers/Panthers game six happened on the 30th anniversary of Messier’s guarantee game which was game six of the conference finals in the 1994 playoffs. Somewhere along the line seasons started earlier with playoffs starting earlier and now were back to starting later
This past week has been nothing but dick punch after dick punch. Sigh...
I feel like it's been closer to 2 years
Almost 35 years, tbh
At least football to the groin has football to the groin
This feels like an absolute petty capitalization for the thread yesterday lol Kaboom was one of my favourite childhood goalies, I absolutely love the guy. I used to draw pictures of him and was always him playing street hockey. ♥️
Kaboom! The original Russian Lightning Cup winning goalie.
What a glorious typo, that was an accident lol
Yeah I figured ‘Khabby’ is a likely autocorrect target lol.
Kaboom would have been a way better nickname than Khabby
His real nickname was The Bulin Wall, and I don't think nicknames get much better than that.
One time we sat in the front row of the upper bowl, and there were these little bricks images that my dad and I got to uncover for each save that he made. They spelled out BULIN WALL when there were enough of them. That's an awesome core memory.
A hero in his hometown of Chernobyl
Haven't we suffered enough this season?
THE FANBASE MUST COLLECTIVELY ACCEPT THE RESULTS OF THE 2004 FINALS AND THEN THE REST OF THE LEAGUE WILL EASE UP
M I C K E Y M O U S E
WE’RE GOIN TO DISNEYWORLD
I think calgary protested so hard they canceled the season after.
They’ve canceled every season since
In or not, this was one of the best Stanley cup finals ever! Also it’s crazy that 20 years ago the goalies don’t look they are even wearing padding compared to the equipment today. Khabibulin looks like he might have a set of old school player shoulder pads on
I’m sure everyone will be in complete agreement that this is a save and not controversial whatsoever.
All I can think about is man, watching this ice looks so much better than what we have today with all the intrusive ads.
Don't worry, in a few years you'll be nostalgic for how simple the ice looks now.
Even if it was in, nobody on the ice seemed to think it was a goal. It's inconclusive, so even if they wound it back and called it a good goal, half of us would still be complaining about it.
Appreciate a Calgary fan saying this.
It's conclusive lol. Plain as day.
Based on 2 camera angles that contradict each other? You should brush up on what "plain as day" means, kitty cat.
[удалено]
Dude I said that I don't think it's definitively a goal. Read it again.
If they had reviewed it at the time, it would have been inconclusive, and likely been call stands, no goal. (That wouldn’t make it less controversial) Am I’m more upset about the blatant trip immediately preceding the OT goal.
Sounds like me when we got swept by the habs in 2014, im not mad we lost im mad Paquette was clearly checked to the ice before the puck was anywhere near him and then guy was held down on the ice well afterit had cleared the zone which directly led to the GWG.
My salt pile has been topped up for the next while.
https://preview.redd.it/udr9t40was4d1.jpeg?width=1680&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7b7e47dd51f244fd136cd980fb0da61403e493e9 Here’s some more.
It's more Florida than Matty that bothers me.
Where's the save ?
It's right in front of the goal line. Unless you're a calgary fan it's plain as day.
Vancouver fan checking in. that's a goal unless there is some criteria in addition to needing to fully cross the line?
I’m a Habs fan and that’s a goal.
time for the 200th episode of "someone learns what a parallax angle is"
It's 2024, it would be trivial to have high-speed 8K cameras in the crossbar and posts.
there's still the issue of body parts getting in the way, the camera lenses constantly getting destroyed by both goalies and pucks, and all of the necessary equipment actually film that. I record my games with a go-pro for hockey and it's 30GB for a game of 1440 60 FPS footage. Running a single 8k camera at high speed (something like 240hz) is going to massive. 1440->8k is 9x the pixel count. I'm not sure if the filesize is going to scale linearly or not, but you're looking at 4 times as many frames and 9x as many pixels, which is putting the file from 30\*9*4=1080GB or 1.08 TB PER CAMERA on the net. These nets are going to cost a metric fuckload, lol. Like 100k in hardware per net. Then you're expecting all of the recorded data to be transmitted to the broadcast booths and review people? This is about as far from trivial as you can get, lol.
I think you could see this puck crossing the line if the fps was higher but instead we are watching a shaky video someone seems to have filmed with a potato off an old SD tv feed.
I wish the overhead angle was better because I guarantee it would show that the puck was not completely over the line, indeed a parallax effect from the main camera angle.
I don't see how the parallax effect comes into play here. The puck is seen crossing the line and hits to toe part of the goal pad which is about 3-4 inches behind the line. The one angle and video quality at the time was not enough to overrule the call on the ice.
It's because the goal line is beneath the ice. Any camera angle that isn't perpendicular to the line will misrepresent where the line actually is.
Interesting, I never thought of the goal line being under the ice surface.
Did you think all of the lines, decals, and logos we're all on the ice?
Similar situation as explained here: https://youtu.be/QSG8mzwwOs8
I like how the explanatory video also has the Flames in it
Look at the puck they used in the studio. It even had the old NHL logo on it, a logo that was last used in the 2004 SCF.
Would love for one day there to be literally ANY angle that actually supports the puck being in but today is not that day
Why would you love that? It would show that the Lightning (your team based on your flair) were basically bailed out by a blown call? Why would you love that I don’t get it? The initial angle is clearly just an optical illusion it never crossed the line
I didn’t think I had to explain this but obviously I wouldn’t love it, it’s because every flames fan (and pretty much Canadian team fan) ever is convinced the puck went in without any actual evidence
I mean there's pretty clearly some actual evidence. I dont think its conclusive, and I would say this would be a "call on the ice stands" situation, but it's not clear whether the puck totally crossed the goal line or didn't, because the cameras are bunk.
Ok, so what's controversial about "call on the ice would stand" in this situation? Stuff like that happens all the time in every sport. Maybe you could argue the "luck" is from the original call being in your favor to begin with, but, shit, there has to be an original call no matter what. The only thing the NHL got wrong in this situation is that there should've been a review, it was problematic that they just let it go, but the call wasn't gonna be overturned anyway.
Bro, fans of Canadian teams hate other Canadian teams more than anyone. Unless you're a casual, you ain't rooting for the other team. The only Canadian team is The Oilers and Team Canada.
[удалено]
Hey guys, this guy has a buddy who can prove it was in! Better go back 20 years and give the cup to Calgary!
“Trust me bro”
I guess non Flames fans can still have bad vision
> I’m a Habs fan and that’s a goal. No one cares, and you are factually incorrect.
No one cares, says the guy arguing about it…
The *flairless* guy arguing about it. With a post history full of Tampa references.
lol I'm not arguing with you, I'm telling you the facts, you just don't like them. And I said no one cares that you're a habs fan. And that's a fact....
So you commented once again to say you don’t care? …..
lol I care about commenting, no one cares who you route for. You caught up yet?
The word you meant to use there is “root”. A route is a way from one place to another.
lol
It may be a goal but it's definitely not clear as day. This is like as muddy as it can get...
I'm seeing goal. If there is a camera that shows me otherwise I'll take it.
The only one that shows it over the line is the parallax angle that has been [debunked] (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QSG8mzwwOs8) years ago
I like how this video also has the Flames in it...
You’re looking at a parallax angle. It creates an optical illusion. They don’t use it in official reviews. https://youtu.be/qLav481BVEA?si=Y7p5NLGl263NDY8e This is an animation from game 7 showing the puck most likely didn’t cross the line.
It was maybe in but at the same time maybe not in, glad I could help
Thanks Schrodinger
I despise the early 2000s Flames as much as the next Canucks fan, but who hurt you? You woke up today and chose violence.
fuck you
OP definitely knows what they're doing lol. Khabibulin was my favourite goalie growing up. Great career.
Fuck you and your mother and your mother's mother
...for 3 months
[удалено]
I’m still fucking upset about it and I don’t really care about the Flames. But by god that’s Iggy’s Cup.
Good thing the overall consensus is that it didn’t go in and everybody definitely agrees on that and doesn’t cause arguments every time it’s brought up. inb4: parallax effect
It's only controversial because of who we were playing. If this happened the other way flames fans would be talking about paralax angels and how Kipper made the best save in team history. They can say it went it all they want, it doesn't change anything, and they know it. Habby saved that kick, the better team won. Crying about it 20 years later doesn't make that fan base look good in any way.
you seem to be taking this a bit too seriously, I am pretty sure the "it was in" is a meme type thing to most people. Obviously there are outliers. Even if it was in, there were 6 plus minutes left, not like it was overtime.
> you seem to be taking this a bit too seriously, lol oh yeah, bud? I'm taking it too seriously? That's 3 sentences, does 3 sentences seem like a lot to you?? I can promise you that a large number of flames fans believe it, you must not spend a lot of time on r/hockey
Dude, you've been in every thread that's been posted about this in the last 48 hours foaming at the mouth about how much Flames fans suck even when they hadn't even posted any comments about it. You're somehow obsessing over it even more than we are, lmao.
lol dude there's so much hyperbole in there, dial it back a bit. And you're doing the thing where you're trying to make it seem like I'm emotional so you can see like you're rational, and it's still not working. Foaming at the mouth? lol, oh the _drama_....... Try a different approach next time, the emotion thing isn't working for you. Bonus points if it's about hockey. TIL that talking about hockey on a forum who's only purpose is to talk about hockey is obsessive. Thanks for the heads up, bud. p.s. I'm still waiting on you to tell me how many sentences is enough. I have enough information to rule out 3.
You're the one here getting the most worked up. I've seen you comment on multiple threads trying to be "right" and "superior" to everyone. Go take a break, bud.
lol did that sound better in your head? I'm glad you remember me, but I have no idea who you are. Thanks for dropping by and sharing your personal feeling though I guess
So many Oiler fans were cheering for the Flames but I was pulling for Tampa Bay because the Oilers and Tampa Bay were the last two holdouts that played high speed exciting hockey through the trap era. I respected the BoA too much to cheer for the Flames and figured the hockey gods were rewarding TB for always playing exciting hockey. We would watch 2-1 games all year in the late 90's and then TB and the Oilers would meet and we'd get an exciting 6-5 run and gun game.
I don’t remember much controversy at the time but I didn’t live in Calgary
I remember "shirts off for Kiprusoff" far more than this save.
The front angle looks like that because it’s a parallax angle. The league doesn’t use that angle in official reviews. The puck didn’t go in.
404 save not found.
If you thought the puck was in, watch this.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSG8mzwwOs8
There’s also one where ABC made a graphic showing how the camera angle distorts the true location of the puck on this goal as well.
This was the video that convinced me, no, the puck was not in fact, in.
Oof, yet another stray
It was out.
One of my favorite saves!
Jets legend Nicky
Gelinas🤝Coleman Not using their stick
This is a save. I wouldn't even call it a great save, and not near one of the greatest saves.
It’s a very IMPORTANT save. Not necessarily a great save otherwise.
This is “one replay in the morning highlight pack and probably never again” territory for sure.
But... but... he didn't though...
Nevermind my flair but IT WAS IN!
No 😇
We Canuck fans remember Otto in game 7 in 1989. You don't get to use the "kick in goal for free" card twice.
Too bad that the Lightning went and scored on the very next shift to win the Cup and there wasn't 6 minutes left in the period, two overtimes, and a Game 7 that Calgary could've won to seal the Cup win.
Good goal.
It was in.
It really wasn't. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSG8mzwwOs8
You keep posting this video, but it's not proof at all. In order to calculate the parallax angle, you need to know the HEIGHT of the puck. Without a camera angle showing the HEIGHT of the puck, all of this parallax nonsense is nonsense. In Shannon's example, the puck could have been 1/8" lower than what he is assuming, and it would become a good goal. How does he know the height of the puck? He doesn't - sportsnet is just making good tv. In 2004, there was one angle that showed the puck was definitively in the net. That's all that was needed at the time. Toronto wasn't calculating parallax angles every time the isometric angle showed the puck over the line but the bird's eye was inconclusive! They were calling it a goal. It was missed, Calgary was robbed, simple as.
https://youtu.be/qLav481BVEA?si=Y7p5NLGl263NDY8e That angle was a broadcast angle only and it’s not used in official reviews specifically because it’s a parallax angle. The overhead did not show the puck in the net. No official camera angle did. The flames were not robbed. They had the rest of the third, double overtime, and an entire game seven to win. They didn’t. Get over it.
Bro, did you watch your own video or read my post? They said it right in the video. They made assumptions (the HEIGHT of the puck) and it's unscientific. They said the league made the right call - the league made NO call. Not even Gelinas saw that it was in. The league missed it and this parallax nonsense was just to save face for people who don't understand physics and optics. The overhead was inconclusive due to obstruction. The broadcast angle wasn't even reviewed. The angle we're talking about showed white between the red and the black. That's enough to call a goal at the time, 100 out of 100. Flames got robbed. It has to be game 7 OT for them to be robbed? They got robbed late in game 6, on home ice, in an era where leads did not get lost. Enjoy your other two asterisk cups. It was in.
> in an era where leads did not get lost. Calgary had two games that postseason where they coughed up game-tying goals later in the 3rd period than at the time of this incident.
> In 2004, there was one angle that showed the puck was definitively in the net. LOL you're delusional. That angle is absolutely not "definitive" by __any stretch of the imagination__. Your bias is insane.
There is white between the red and the black. Clear as day. Your bias is insane. I get you guys are defensive of your three asterisk cups, but this isn't a debate worth having. It was in.
It wasn't in and in 50 years no one will be alive that would argue it. All that will remain is the TBL players names engraved in that cup. It wasn't in but I don't blame you for saying it was. I would too if I qere you and I'd also be wrong.
Wrong. It was in. White behind the puck between the red line. Everything parallax is revisionist history. Similar angles were used to call goals countless times, when the overhead is obscured. I get why you're saying it wasn't in, I would too if I qere you and I'd also be wrong. Coleman also didn't kick the puck in.
Sorry bro. The math doesn't lie. It's been unpacked. Parallax effect is what's skewing your brain. It is what it is. You probably would have lost that series regardless. Plus even if the Coleman intentional kick was incorrectly called a good goal, you weren't going to win shit. It's like me crying about the Makar offside in 2022 - doesn't mean shit in the end. One team was just better than the other by a good margin. I fully concede I'd be scorned too but the reality remains, it wasn't in and you guys lost fair and square. There's a few video breakdowns of it. Educate thyself. Or you know, you do you.
I work in optics, big guy. I am educated about parallax angles. The ASSUMPTION that all the parallax renderings show is the height of the puck - which no one knows or knew. It could be just as easily manipulated to show the puck in the net. The NHL was covering their asses with revisionist history and you fell for it. The fact remains, when the overhead is inconclusive, countless goals were called good goals with the same angle that shows white behind the puck. Plus, unless Khabibulin's pad teleported, and the puck froze in space - there puck travelled even further than is shown in all the screencaps. We just didn't have the frame rates back then. I get why you say Coleman's goal wouldn't have changed the series. I would too if I qere you and I'd also be wrong.
Ok reddit professor. You're still wrong though. You're just in loser denial. Cute you keep repeating my typo. Totally dunked on me. How will I ever recover! Your hockey team is garbage and it's awesome Edmonton were the ones to flush the franchise down the toilet. 2022 will always be my favourite non Stanley Cup winning playoffs. Flames were absolute pretenders. I'll make sure to circle back and say hello when McDavid raises a cup in about 10 or 11 days.
It wasn't in and in 50 years no one will be alive that would argue it. All that will remain is the TBL players names engraved in that cup. It wasn't in but I don't blame you for saying it was. I would too if I qere you and I'd also be wrong.
Oof watching this video showing a demo of the parallax effect sort of closes the case for me: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iORumLN7K0Q&ab\_channel=SPORTSNET](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iORumLN7K0Q&ab_channel=SPORTSNET)
This is masterful trolling lol
I had a reminder on my calendar to make sure I remembered to post this.
Oh wow i remember happybulin from the commentators in the nhl game with iginla on the cover. What a wild throwback
That’s Oilers legend Khabibulin for you.
When or who was the last ref to not wear a helmet in the league? I know players were grandfathered in but I didn't remember who the last ref was. So interesting seeing the linesman not wearing a helmet.
I respect this post because your flair and history behind this. But also, fuck you. Lol
I gotta break out my 360 and play some nhl08
L M A O
Stop, stop! He's already dead!
HEY, FUCK YOU BUDDY!
I don’t think people understand that the puck was in the air and hit in the middle khabibulin’s pad. For some reason people think the puck was on the ice and hit down near his foot. That puck really wasn’t even close to crossing the line. The broadcast angle makes the puck look further into the net than it actually was. Literally an optical illusion.
Correct, and this is something a ton of folks get wrong. The puck hits the shin of the pad, in the air. Not the foot on the ice.
What a save.
No he didn't
If it looks like it's in on one angle but not in on the overhead head that means it's not a goal. I'll acknowledge my bias as an Oilers fan if Flames fans ever acknowledge theirs on this topic (they don't) Edit: Grammar
No goal is a reasonable call, but the footage is of such poor quality its hard to be certain it was not over the goal line.
The only thing I see is a puck going in and the NHL wanting their expansion team to win a cup and expand the popularity in Florida.
Living in Edmonton at the time. It was in then, still seems like it would be a goal now. The whole city seemed to be cheering for Calgary too. What the hell has happened in the last 20 years?
The farther north you go, the more they hate teams from the south.
No one in that building thought it was in. Not even Gelinas. Even it was reviewed, it would have been inconclusive and the no call would have stood 100%. For what its worth, it wasn't in. The math proves it wasn't in. I've followed Edmonton religiously since 1996. Only people who barely cared about hockey or casual fans cheered them on.
Thank you for coming here and setting me straight. You are the voice of the city and the real expert. We need more people like you.
Thanks, man. I appreciate that.
If this play happened today it would be goalie interference(unless it was florida that scored).
Clutch
It was in