One thing that’s been really odd about Sunday’s incident between Elmira Enforcers owner Robbie Nichols and a Federal Hockey League referee, is that there has been zero video of the incident itself.
Well, we still don’t have video of what happened between Nichols of and the ref, and we may never end up having anything, but we do now have video of the goal that set off the dispute in the first place. Below is Thunderbirds coach Andre Niec tipping the shot past Elmira goalie Troy Passingham.
At regular speed, it’s hard to see the puck go in, because it does appear like the puck hit the crossbar and then falls back down into the crease, where a mad scramble and then cover ensues. The net never moves at all, so I can certainly see how fans, and even the goal judge or referees might miss this one on the ice in real time.
But when the video is slowed down, you can clearly see the puck go over the left pad of Passingham, and then you can see the puck through the top part of the netting, then disappear when it appears to hit the back bar inside the net, before popping right back out into the crease.
My thoughts: Had the puck hit the cross bar, you would have seen the puck drop through the top netting area on its way back down to the crease, and you never see that happen in the above video, which leads me to believe it hit that back bar inside the net, then dropped and shot back out into the crease.
I know it’s not a 100 percent definitive angle, but it’s all we have to work with, and I have to say this appears to be correctly called as a goal by the officials working the game.
But, as we all know, the FHL doesn’t have replay review on goals, but had they, this might have helped avoid what ensued at the end of the first period.
Your thoughts, goal or no goal?
Bus League Hockey 
From the video, it appears that it hit the back bar inside the net. Good goal.
LikeLike
There was a better angle shown on the Jumbotron at the arena. From what I could see, there was clearly white ice between the puck and the goal line. Notice how none of the Carolina players react at the point where you say the puck hit the vertical bar? They don’t even react until several seconds later when the goaltender covers the puck. It wasn’t a goal.
LikeLike
I am a Thunderbirds fan, I am not sure if it was a goal or not. But, the speed at which the puck game off the goalie’s skate or pad; i mean, it is coming at a particular speed. The next time you really see the puck, there is ice between the puck and the line. This is simple physics. The puck doesn’t go one speed one way and end up (without being touched) the opposite direction bouncing off goalie pads. That doesn’t mean it went in, that is saying that this doesn’t make sense. I’d love to see the other view.
Players are not always in an angle to see a goal. Niec obviously celebrates. Salak wasn’t in position to see (no one else is in frame).
LikeLike
As I have been saying all along with this video I don’t have any indication that it was a goal but if I was a replay official I would have to go with the call on the ice because I cannot definitely say that the puck didn’t go in either. There is no clear indication either way in this video. To make any claim from it is just wrong. I don’t agree with the person that wrote this article that there is any indication at any point (like the cliche “the water bottle moved”) in this view.
LikeLike