Kings 4, Blues 1

How blind are they in Toronto, Paddock's goal was easily hit with a high stick. It was at his shoulder and the cross bar is the measuring stick. Is this guy smaller than Moller? The cross bar would have been at his chest. They blew that call big time.

"What?!? Come on!"

That was beyond lame. The reason Ersberg was standing up is because the puck was sailing. Stick was at head height.

Blues' announcers eat dung: "You want to allow that goal because we want to see scoring in this league." Referring to the decision by the ref on the ice to allow the goal in the first place.

How sick was Brown's goal? Tip between the legs...unreal!!!

he's clearly of martin st. louis's height....thats the only way this goal counts...

Surprised the rafters didn't get in the way of that tip. Blame fox for not having enough cameras on the ice to get enough evidence that puck was probably going out of play over the glass...

This is great kings hockey!

So it looks like these new lines have ignited brownie and kopi, I wonder who will complain abot TM now.

Ersberg gives up 2 goals a game, except for the occassional blowout that's still going to happen with this team. but for one of them on this night to be a weak call like that, is just stupid.

I forgot to mention because I just thought of this, you know how they have those lines on the field in the NFL that show where the first down marker or line of scrimmage is, the 1st & 10 arrow, all of those? and the swimmer's country & flag and split times in the Olympics? why not one that shows a red line on a replay where the crossbar is. in a way it's a bit simpler than those other ones I described, and if it's accurate enough, the officials could even use it for replays to take all of the guesswork out of it. I won't call it simple, but it could be done. the camera or some device nearby/attached would have to calculate the player's distance from the camera to figure out how high off the ice is the bottom of the crossbar (4' high). then they just need to project a red line, overlay image of a goal, what have you onto that player's body with the line running parallel to the line created by his stick, and voila you have an instant "good goal, bad goal" device.

there's one company in particular I have heard about that specializes in all these cutting edge, crazy sports technologies. apparently they designed the original glowpuck for Fox (ugh). not one of their better highlights, but blame the wacky concept on Fox and for pushing it, and you gotta admit it was ahead of it's time. but they are also the ones that invented the football ones, and it seems like some of this could be applied to hockey. but it's almost like the NHL isn't even trying.

for a league that supposedly embraces technology, the lack of ideas like this coming into play or number of HD games available is just shameful. they just finally updated their website this year, which was about 2-3 years behind the curve and is now more in line with the norm.

brianguy - What a concept. How is it the NHL doesn't have the "hawk eye" system in place yet for these types of calls, not to mention plays on the goal line? It's an easy fix, they put sensors in the puck and it's a 100% accurate call, even if you can't see the puck with a camera, whether the puck is in the net ( or in this case above the crossbar).

The NHL is too slow. How do we change it?

If you've not heard of this system, it's what they use in Tennis and a few other sports to determine things the human eye isn't capable of deciding.