I saw the fire puck in use once during a 30-second clip about it on TV a
year or so ago.  It did show up rather well.  I guess this would be okay
for those who don't watch much hockey, but anybody who watches a lot and
understands the game can follow it pretty easily.  Usually you can tell
where the puck is without even looking for it.  Just watch what the
players do and you know where the puck is.  Regular use of the fire puck
might eliminate the "it's too hard to follow" excuse we hear so much.  In
any case, if it increases the interest in hockey by making it more
followable for the television viewer, I'm all for it.
 
One problem I can think of is that the fire puck will stand out so much
that the viewer will get caught watching just the puck and miss
everything else that's happening on the ice.  Just watching the puck
doesn't allow you to see plays develop very well.  Sometimes it's more
fun to watch the guys who don't have the puck.
 
-Brian Sprague
 
 
On Thu, 13 Oct 1994, M. David
wrote:
 
> This not about college hockey per say but is of genral hockey intrest.
>
> Last night ESPN 2  showed the IHL game between Atlanta and Minnesota.  In
> the game they used a "fire puck".  This puck was equiped with special
> refelective tape that made it glow on TV but appeared normal to those in
> the stands.  The purpose of it was to make the game more telengenic
> because the puck will be easier to see.  I personally found little
> difference in my abilty to follow the puck.  I was wondering if anybody
> else saw the game and what they thaught of the puck and if college hockey
> should try something like this for the games that are shown on TV.
>
> David
>