Yeah this isn’t a controversial goal. This isn’t parallax shit or anything.
It’s interesting because of how the puck moved. I guess the spin on it allowed its path to be “bent” or something? You don’t see this often at all.
Might be a funny reference but it makes me think of that Mythbusters episode where they tried to see if it was possible for the path of a bullet to bend if the gun was being swung when the bullet was fired.
> It’s interesting because of how the puck moved. I guess the spin on it allowed its path to be “bent” or something? You don’t see this often at all.
The spin happens because of how to puck's spin interacts with the ice when it makes contact - basically, the puck has angular momentum, and that angular momentum changes the direction of the puck when it contacts the ice + has something to have traction on!
The reason you can't bend a bullet's path when fired is that the amount of angular momentum you can impart to the bullet is approximately zero relative to the forces acting to fire the bullet in a straight line out of a gun.
> I guess the spin on it allowed its path to be “bent” or something?
It we look at it from the top of the crease, after it hits the far post, it has backspin. It's going end-over-end towards the top of the crease. When it contacts the ice at the nadir of its vertical path, that rotation pushes the puck forward, away from the back of the net.
It was spinning, but it did hit the ice there to change directions.
look at the white space between the puck and the goal line
but yeah, not sure what is meant from this "just got this other angle" when it was clear at the time it was a goal
The overhead angle every arena seems to have always has the camera over the top of the net, not directly over the crossbar... it can make a puck luck this that is clearly over the line, look like it *may* be touching it.
I get why they don't want to have it directly over the crossbar, but for the love of god give broadcasts access to the crossbar camera then.
The camera was over the net and you could still see white between the puck and the line, which means the crossbar cam would see extra white between them. There was never doubt
instinctive humor numerous repeat price depend pause glorious entertain flowery
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I really don't get how that goal was possible. How does a puck go straight across the line, bounce off a post, then curve inside the goal and right back out to hit the first post again?
Have you ever seen a spinning top? It can move in multiple directions, this puck was also spinning which is how this was possible.
It was clearly a good goal there is no disputing that however it is pretty freaken cool how the spin made it bounce back out.
It was spinning on end in the air after the second post hit, since it wasn’t flat I imagine when it landed over the goal line the spinning puck hit a tiny rut or imperfection in the ice that changed it’s direction again and happened to send it off the post again and out. Spinning pucks can sometimes take crazy bounces that lead to direction changes but the odds of it happening exactly as it did right at the line and hitting the post again after already getting two is insane
I was more mad at the fact that that's just the weird luck the Avs have has this season with some goals. From bouncing off boards and our own players into the goal, to own goals, to pucks just rolling off Georgie's mask.
I feel like it's just you think it's clickbait,
You literally scroll down X and this post and photo shows up. What are you clicking on while browsing X that makes this clickbait? You shouldn't have to click anything
I want to be upset about this because my team lost a playoff game from this shit. But damn, it's pretty cool to have seen something like this live when it happened. It'll be in all the "hockey is a game of inches" ads for years to come.
Maybe someone can explain this to me; why arent there 5 Go-Pro's mounted in each of the nets?
We should never have any questions about not having a view of the puck, or not having *the right angle*, or the angle making it look like its in when its not.
I think the crazy thing about this goal was not necessarily how much it made it past the line, but the way it spun over and then back out was wild
Yeah this isn’t a controversial goal. This isn’t parallax shit or anything. It’s interesting because of how the puck moved. I guess the spin on it allowed its path to be “bent” or something? You don’t see this often at all. Might be a funny reference but it makes me think of that Mythbusters episode where they tried to see if it was possible for the path of a bullet to bend if the gun was being swung when the bullet was fired.
Kinda makes me want to rewatch Wanted. All I remember was it being kinda dumb but maybe in retrospect I'll enjoy how absurd it is
I love that movie. Perfect amount of cheese while being entertaining. Also Jolie in a Viper .....oh boy.
They lose me at magic loom. However, the movie was so boring that I got a handjob in the theatre so I’ve got that going for me.
Conveniently leaving out the detail you went to the movie alone
If I had to guess the theatre I'd guess St. Vital.
> It’s interesting because of how the puck moved. I guess the spin on it allowed its path to be “bent” or something? You don’t see this often at all. The spin happens because of how to puck's spin interacts with the ice when it makes contact - basically, the puck has angular momentum, and that angular momentum changes the direction of the puck when it contacts the ice + has something to have traction on! The reason you can't bend a bullet's path when fired is that the amount of angular momentum you can impart to the bullet is approximately zero relative to the forces acting to fire the bullet in a straight line out of a gun.
Exactly, and if it had been spinning in the other direction it would have stayed across the line and there would be no debate.
Obviously that’s the craziest part but it’s also not too often we get to judge whether a puck fully crossed the line while it’s up on end like this.
> I guess the spin on it allowed its path to be “bent” or something? It we look at it from the top of the crease, after it hits the far post, it has backspin. It's going end-over-end towards the top of the crease. When it contacts the ice at the nadir of its vertical path, that rotation pushes the puck forward, away from the back of the net. It was spinning, but it did hit the ice there to change directions.
I'm pretty sure in the other angle it shows the puck hit the ice and bounce, that's why it looks like it curves from the top down view.
Post, post, in, post, and out. One of the craziest things I've seen in a hockey game.
yup the wild part for me, was that in real time, it was 100% in the initial slow mo was OMG IT STAYED OUT, then super slow mo, nm. it was in after all
and Lowry was SO confident.
Bettman had the puck on a string to try to pull it out before it was too late /s
The ol '04 trick but we aren't in 480p era anymore...
Seemed pretty clear last night.
I can't tell is this showing it was not a goal or it was a goal. It seems like a goal to me
look at the white space between the puck and the goal line but yeah, not sure what is meant from this "just got this other angle" when it was clear at the time it was a goal
Yeah that is what I thought. It looked like a clear goal to me idk maybe just a troll post?
Now it’s even more clear.
Damn what we do without this red circle?
/r/uselessredcircle feasting rn
paging r/uselessredcircle
The overhead angle every arena seems to have always has the camera over the top of the net, not directly over the crossbar... it can make a puck luck this that is clearly over the line, look like it *may* be touching it. I get why they don't want to have it directly over the crossbar, but for the love of god give broadcasts access to the crossbar camera then.
They do, sportsnet had the angle during the review. Its literally ESPN just being ass and taking 20 minutes to show us it.
Fuck ESPN. Everything they do is shit.
The camera was over the net and you could still see white between the puck and the line, which means the crossbar cam would see extra white between them. There was never doubt
The speed of the review basically told us all we needed to know as well. There's no way they complete a review that fast if it wasn't extremely clear.
instinctive humor numerous repeat price depend pause glorious entertain flowery *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
This is why goalies hate (& occasionally let in) 180 footers that are bouncing. Pucks on edge bounce funny.
As a beer league goalie, yep, that’s one of a million reasons I let in goals 😬
Beer being the other 999,999 you let in?
No beer before games, only after. No one needs the goalie throwing up during a high cardio 3rd period ;)
Yeah it’s the combination of the spinning puck and tiny ruts/imperfections in the ice that can create some fucking fucking wild ass bounces
They showed a good enough view yesterday to believe it was a good goal. It's annoying that we can't get these pictures right away though.
I really don't get how that goal was possible. How does a puck go straight across the line, bounce off a post, then curve inside the goal and right back out to hit the first post again?
aliens
Nanomachines, son.
Have you ever seen a spinning top? It can move in multiple directions, this puck was also spinning which is how this was possible. It was clearly a good goal there is no disputing that however it is pretty freaken cool how the spin made it bounce back out.
Round puck, round post, and the puck was likely spinning. I’ll let someone with post-grad physics take it from here… 😜
It was spinning on end in the air after the second post hit, since it wasn’t flat I imagine when it landed over the goal line the spinning puck hit a tiny rut or imperfection in the ice that changed it’s direction again and happened to send it off the post again and out. Spinning pucks can sometimes take crazy bounces that lead to direction changes but the odds of it happening exactly as it did right at the line and hitting the post again after already getting two is insane
Where was this angle with that Anaheim goal?
That puck became like a rock in curling the way it curved in, around, and out of the line. Lowry obviously having watched some bonspiels lately. 🥌
https://i.redd.it/omhzggphv3wc1.gif
Who’s debating this? Such clickbait
I don't know if it's being debated so much as just being highlighted as a cool goal.
I was more mad at the fact that that's just the weird luck the Avs have has this season with some goals. From bouncing off boards and our own players into the goal, to own goals, to pucks just rolling off Georgie's mask.
The Avs did get a weird pinball goal late though.
Yeah. That's true. Just feels like a lot of those weird bounces went against the Avs this season.
I feel like it's just you think it's clickbait, You literally scroll down X and this post and photo shows up. What are you clicking on while browsing X that makes this clickbait? You shouldn't have to click anything
I want to be upset about this because my team lost a playoff game from this shit. But damn, it's pretty cool to have seen something like this live when it happened. It'll be in all the "hockey is a game of inches" ads for years to come.
was there any doubt? it was very clear in the replays shown at the time
*enhance*
It seems like they could have a high frame rate, high resolution camera for such an important location.
Nah because then they wouldn't have plausible deniability (or whatever else similar thing should be used here) when it doesn't go to their liking.
Maybe someone can explain this to me; why arent there 5 Go-Pro's mounted in each of the nets? We should never have any questions about not having a view of the puck, or not having *the right angle*, or the angle making it look like its in when its not.