Tennity Ice Pavilion may not be wrought with technological advancements, but it gained five replay cameras to meet a new College Hockey America rule this season.

The conference mandates one camera pointing down at each goal and a third facing the scoreboard. Syracuse — which lost 6-2 at Cornell on Tuesday — chose to add two cameras mounted on the roof near center ice facing into each zone.

The CHA’s goal is to make sure referees make the correct calls on goals, and Syracuse’s  (4-8-7, 3-2-3 CHA) and other coaches in the conference are generally happy with the new rule.

“We’re all about helping our players get better and the more teaching tools we have available, the better,” SU assistant coach Brendon Knight said about the extra expense required to purchase additional cameras.

Knight led Syracuse’s effort to find a camera system and understand the technology better than anyone else on the coaching staff. CHA head coaches unanimously voted for the replay system during a league meeting in the spring.

Programs had many options, and Syracuse opted for a more expensive package that included the mandated replay system along with two ceiling cameras that give players and coaches improved views of practice and games.

“There’s nothing more frustrating than losing a call, losing a game because of a bad call,” Knight said, “especially when goals are so tough to come by in our sport.”

Rochester Institute of Technology head coach Scott McDonald said in early November that the school’s cameras were utilized in almost every home game up to that point, and that they worked well.

Since many of RIT’s games are televised, McDonald said, he didn’t feel the need for the coaches cameras on top of the replay system.

“Whether it goes your way or not, you have no leg to stand on,” McDonald said of the positive influence of cameras.

As for the financial expense, RIT was in the process of building a new arena when the rule was implemented, making it easy to add on the cost of cameras.

Though Mercyhurst head coach Michael Sisti wasn’t involved in the purchasing of his team’s cameras, he said it was “clearly a big expense for all the schools.” He said the cameras cost anywhere from $7,000 to $20,000.

“It’s worked well,” Sisti said. “I think the people that have looked at it say it was pretty clear if goals were in or out, and even for the officials, I think it’s good to clearly see.”

For Syracuse, the home cameras got off to a rough start.

Against Providence on Oct. 18, SU thought it had a goal after a second period scrum, as multiple shots look to cross the line. Officials spent eight minutes reviewing the play but the camera above the Providence net malfunctioned.

The teams would go on to tie, 3-3.

“We spent $20,000 on a review system that didn’t work,” SU head coach Paul Flanagan said after the game. “We had somebody here, a parent, that videotaped it. The goal was in, the players all said it was in, so we lose a hockey game because of technology.”

On Nov. 22, the replay system proved fruitful for the Orange.

On the road against Robert Morris, cameras aided the Orange when officials used replay to negate an RMU goal for goalie interference. Syracuse and the Colonials tied 1-1.

Despite the one malfunction, Flanagan said he’s happy with the cameras. Knight also praised the additional cameras for their improvement in the film room.

Said Knight: “The referees are human, they make mistakes, so if we have the technology to correct those mistakes, why not use it?”

Published on December 3, 2014 at 12:07 am