Not only was it a (blue) glowing puck, but it would also make a red-orange streak on screen when there was a slapshot (er... "one-timer").

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FoxTrax

I remember how unpopular it was when it came out. It made a lot of sense to try; not being able to follow the puck around really was a common complaint about hockey, and the NHL, as ever, was trying to expand its base. But if you watch even a fair amount of the sport, following the puck (even when it's out of sight against the boards) is really easy, so for the majority of the actual audience, it was distracting and unhelpful. To add to it, the implementation itself was corny and overstated. So part of it was problem was that it traded power users' comfort for new user friendliness, and part of it was execution. Compare to the yellow line in football, which is both helpful to everyone regardless of football watching experience, as well as simple and clean.

The thing is that most of the time the exact position of the puck isn't really the most important thing. Where the players are and where they're going to/from seems more important. Emphasizing the puck just distracts from the actual game. I don't think it even helps newbies very much for that reason.

In terms of helping novices understand the game better, maybe visual indications of the zone the puck is in could be interesting, or direction of play so it's easier to understand off side and icing calls would be more helpful.

> Where the players are and where they're going to/from seems more important.

Another way to put that is that you can tell where the puck is based on the behavior of the players, and that's what you're actually watching. I'm only a casual fan, but I think I'd know where the puck is even if it was actually invisible.

The adoption of HDTV has also negated the reason for the glowing puck. When I watch hockey on a non-HD feed I wonder how I ever did it.

It just makes so much sense. Of /course/ the puck should be instrumented, what century are we living in?

The posters below who say it was a terrible invention are missing the point. The technology needs to be more advanced, not less: visual effects on the puck should be at the option of the viewer.

This was a terrible invention.

it was a terrible invention. thankfully it didn't survive long.

Never seen hockey before and had a look on youtube.

The blue glowy bit is ok I think but that red tail comet is atrocious, it is completely distracting, covers up waaay to much of the screen.

Would you have been happy with just the blue glowy affect?

Before HD tvs it might have helped a lot, seeing a puck on an old screen is very difficult. But on the newer HD tvs, you can see the puck clearly enough I wouldn't want it, it probably isn't necessary.

> Would you have been happy with just the blue glowy affect?

nope, agree with the other follow up - HD is good enough that any "enhancements" are now a distraction.