Release from 05.11.2018

Statement regarding apparent goal in Villach

Short text 224 CharactersPlain text

Lyle Seitz, Director of Hockey Operations, and the Erste Bank Eishockey Liga take a stand regarding the apparent goal during the penalty shoot out at the game EC Panaceo VSV against HC TWK Innsbruck on November the 4th 2018.

Press release 3319 CharactersPlain text

The apparent goal scored in penalty shoot out in the game EC Panaceo VSV against HC TWK Innsbruck on 11/04/2018 has been under review by the EBEL. The investigation is still on going. The facts that can be presented at this time are as follows:
 
  • The puck going through the net is not a normal situation. The puck going through the net created a high amount of confusion to start, when it was immediately deemed there was no hole in the net or any probable reason why the puck could or should go through a net. Especially considering the puck was shot at a normal snap shot speed (was not an excessive amount of speed that can be created through a slap shot). This is not normal.
  • The officials had ‘no goal’ at the time of the shot, which means no goal on the ice and the use of the VGJ must prove ‘conclusively’ that the puck was in the net (VGJ at time did not prove conclusively)
  • VGJ system was working partially. Hoewever, there was a technical error that presented the following issue: When a goal is scored, the goal must be clipped for the VGJ iPad to be used properly. The goal could not be clipped by the responsible VSV – VGJ representative. The lack of the clip meant the only possibility was to look on the multi-view perspective (meaning all 6 cameras were visible on the iPad at 1 time-creating a series of very small pictures to review). The possibility of viewing 1 camera angle on the entire iPad screen was not possible, plus it eliminated the possibility on full screen to slow down or review the clip in frame by frame status.
  •  The old system, one could make an educated guess or assumption and say the puck went through the net.  But the IIHF rule states, “In the case where video review is inconclusive, the referee’s original call will stand”.  ‘Conclusive’ VGJ evidence means the officials can prove and see the puck in the net.  This was not possible. On the 3 staging frames of the VGJ system at time of review – stage 1 showed puck in the crease – stage 2 the puck is not visible – stage 3 the puck can be seen going up and to the right
  •  The VGJ rule and procedure has been done in the best version based on many leagues, many situations and as the IIHF Rule Book as the main frame of the rule.  A puck being visible within the net is mandatory.  As a different example, when a goalie has his catcher glove over the puck and the catchers clove goes in behind the goal line.  It is conclusive that the puck is under the goalie’s glove, but the puck not been seen makes the VGJ review inconclusive.  This is what happened in the VSV situation – the puck could not be seen at any point on the VGJ ‘in the net’ (based on the EBEL VGJ system)
  •  The situation room (which I was personally on the game), has standard definition quality (not HD).  I could not tell conclusively if the puck went through the net.  Until we downloaded the clip to high definition and had the ability to use zoom-in and slow motion, could I or we determine the status of the goal.  This procedure took over 10 minutes, which is far too long to be of any help.
In conclusion, the on-ice decision of the officials (no goal) stands as the VGJ system was not able to provide a ‘conclusive’ answer to over rule the on-ice decision.
 
LYLE SEITZ, Director of Hockey Operations
 
Print page Send link