Ah, the glow puck, I remember that. Us Canadians had a good laugh at you Americans who needed a glow puck to be able to follow game better. At least that is what we all thought it was introduced for. Do you think there would have been longer reveiws if this were a more important game? I was shocked when they called it a goal because you could see right away that his whole body was behind the line. Do they blow a whistle during a shootout?

That was one of those truly bizarre “never seen it before, never would’ve imagined it” scenarios. From the aerial above-the-net angle, there was a (brief) moment where everything but Sabourin’s skate and the ankle section of his pad was over the line. So by that logic, I’d bet my estate that that puck was “behind the line” at some point.

But like you said — still couldn’t “see” the puck, so it’s inconclusive, and the call stands. I’m fine with that. Them’s the breaks. In my book, the beauty of the replay system is that the on-ice call still rules: the burden of proof is always on conclusively overturning the on-ice call, so even in this situation, the right ruling is pretty straightforward. Definitely don’t want to ever allow replay officials to project or interpret where an unseen puck is — that’d be a hornet’s nest.