| Author |
 Topic  |
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
 Posted - 01/12/2010 : 05:46:16
|
So Burrows goes out and scores a hattrick in back to back games, and two games later has two goals going into the third, and starts looking at yet another hattrick straight in the eye.
Then Burrows gets penalised in the third period for:
diving (2 min) 3:26
interference (2 min) 15:15
and after the Preds score on their 5 on 3 with Henrik also in the box, Burrows gets
unsportsmanlike conduct - 2 min
misconduct - 10 min
. . . with 4 second left in the game.
To top off that already contraversial ending, Burrows then makes these statements after the game (from AP):
“It was personal,” Burrows said. “It started in warm up before the anthem. The ref came over to me and said I made him look bad in Nashville on the Smithson hit. He said he was going to get me back tonight and he did his job in the third.”
“He called me on a diving call. I didn’t think was diving, he got me on an interference call. I have no idea how he could call that and it changed the game,” Burrows said, adding his teammates “are battling hard for 60 minutes to win a hockey game because every two points are so huge, so important, and because of a guy’s ego it just blows everything out of proportion and they’re making bad calls and the fans are paying for it and we’re paying for it.”
“After my second penalty I skated by him and he said `If you say a word I am going to kick you out,’ so I didn’t say a word because I still thought we could come back and win the game,” Burrows said. “But with 3 seconds left and the faceoff outside the zone I thought I could tell him what I thought about him.”
Auger and the officiating crew declined to comment when approached by The Associated Press as they were leaving the arena.
Thoughts? Comments?
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
|
Edited by - n/a on 01/13/2010 07:11:56
|
|
|
Guest6198
( )
|
Posted - 01/12/2010 : 06:52:00
|
Sounds honest to me. I'd side with Burrows. Just casually checking the stats of last night I was like WTF over Vancouver's excessive penalization in the third of that game. Doesn't seem like something a team tied/down by one would do, especially when you've been on a scoring tear recently. And it was all top-line players: Henrik, Alexandre.
Thanks for posting that. It's interesting. Hopefully we'll see further discussion on it. |
 |
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 01/12/2010 : 07:04:15
|
It's hard to make a judgement without seeing the penalties. Is there any link to the story including video of the apparent bad calls??
One thing I can see is that Burrows is far from a Saint. He is 3rd on the team in PIM's and has had seasons of 180 and 150 PIM's. Not a goon by any stretch, but this isn't like Nick Lidstrom or Scott Neidermayer getting an unsportsmanlike misconduct.
I would like to see the video, if anyone has the link. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 01/12/2010 : 07:49:32
|
NHL.com may have the vids in their highlight package but i don't have time to check right now? Being that they're penalty calls, they may not have them though as usually it's just highlights they show of goals and scoring chances and maybe a big hit?
While i didn't get to see the game last night, i did see the replays later on Sportsnet. I didn't see the dive or the unsportsmanlike calls but i did see the interference call. It was absolutely brutal. I can't even begin to explain it but i'll use a line that one of the writers in todays paper said...."there was about the same contact as a dandelion seed hitting a newly cut lawn". To be honest, when i first saw the replay, i thought he was getting called for the slight contact he made with the dman, not the goalie? I still don't know which it was actually but there was hardly any contact with either! You really have to see this to understand just how bad this was.
It's going to be interesting to see what comes of this if anything as the league really does have to look into Burrows comments about the ref telling him he'd "get him back tonight" in the pregame skate! That sort of thing just can't happen. Agreed, Burrows does have a bit of a reputation and is def no saint, but that kind of stuff from a ref, if he did in fact say that, really takes away from the integrety of the game!
BTW Slozo, not sure if you were implying the attempt at back to back to back hatty's or not but if you were, i thought i'd point out that the Canucks played the Flames on Saturday night and he missed his chance at that there.  Unless it was three in four games you were referring to? EIther way, a nice little run and seeing him get one last night would have been cool. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 01/12/2010 : 08:46:09
|
ha ha, I totally forgot about the Calgary game, of course he missed the back to back to back there, my bad. Yeah, I was referencing that.
I am work and can't get utube or anything like that, will have to take a look at home later tonight. But I have heard commentary from sportscasters who did see the calls, and heard the same descriptions: brutal, terrible call, etc.
Burrows is not a saint, but it does go to explain how he might have gotten under a ref's skin, and it also explains the series of bad calls against Vancouver and specifically Burrows. If what Burrows says is actually true - wow, that'll be a scandal and automatic dismissal I'd have to think.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Guest2106
( )
|
Posted - 01/12/2010 : 09:27:41
|
tsn.ca Highlight pack on the righthand side shows all of the penalties.
Mackenzie also has a good article on the incident. |
|
|
|
Guest4339
( )
|
Posted - 01/12/2010 : 09:36:23
|
| Just a correction: Burrows had two hat tricks in a row, that's true, but the follwing game he only had one pass. He scored two goals the next game. In other words, he didn't come close to having three hat tricks in a row ("only" three in four games...). |
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 01/12/2010 : 09:54:16
|
I actually find the whole thing amusing...
Live by the sword and all that. Burrows has no problem taking the odd dive and getting away with indiscretions, thereby negating the oppositions, "battling hard for 60 minutes to win a hockey game because every two points are so huge', but when it's time to pay the piper, he whines about someone else's ego?
Did he make the ref look bad in a previous game? Did he get away with fast one? Suck it up! You got caught! 
To go on and talk about how the fans and they(his team), are 'paying' for it, just smells of petulance. Who's hurting who when you play on that edge of sportsmanship?
While I agree that the refs should be remaining non-partisan, in their calling of the game, they all know who is going to be playing and who is going to be causing/has caused them grief. How often have they called the 'even up' penalty in a game to keep consistency? This is more of the same methinks.. |
|
|
|
Guest6478
( )
|
Posted - 01/12/2010 : 10:08:35
|
It doesn't matter what sport we are talking about the the refs, umpires can be brutal ....... the game to the bad egg ref means their calls dictate the outcome of the game and not the play on the field ...... you see all thru sports, line judges in tennis (serena) soccer, baseball, basketball and hockey. It's like their mindset says .... "even though I'm not on the field of play I'll make this game my own, I'm the boss and I'll show everybody who's the real boss " Those dopes should be weeded out at the lowest levels so they never get up. It's bad for the game, who wants to pay to see garbage like that? The leagues should do some house cleaning. |
|
|
|
Canucks Man
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1547 Posts |
Posted - 01/12/2010 : 10:15:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by fat_elvis_rocked
I actually find the whole thing amusing...
Live by the sword and all that. Burrows has no problem taking the odd dive and getting away with indiscretions, thereby negating the oppositions, "battling hard for 60 minutes to win a hockey game because every two points are so huge', but when it's time to pay the piper, he whines about someone else's ego?
Did he make the ref look bad in a previous game? Did he get away with fast one? Suck it up! You got caught!
To go on and talk about how the fans and they(his team), are 'paying' for it, just smells of petulance. Who's hurting who when you play on that edge of sportsmanship?
While I agree that the refs should be remaining non-partisan, in their calling of the game, they all know who is going to be playing and who is going to be causing/has caused them grief. How often have they called the 'even up' penalty in a game to keep consistency? This is more of the same methinks..
Sure he may have made the ref look bad, but that happened A MONTH AGO! and if the ref wants to him to pay, call a crappy interference call in the first period or something, not in the final 5 minutes of a tie game. Honestly, I thought it was a good game going into the third, but then the ref ruined it, there was 5 penalties through 40 minutes then 7 in the thrid, it didnt matter what the final score was. Also this ref, Auger, has a history of being a jackass, it was him that was a the head of the Shane Doan incident a couple years ago. This guy shouldn't be allowed to ref if he is going to turn the game personal, its not about him, the black and white stripes are supposed to mean he's nuetral.
CANUCKS RULE!!!
|
|
|
|
Guest9836
( )
|
Posted - 01/12/2010 : 11:39:17
|
Fat_Elvis... This isn't about Burrows. It doesn't matter if he whines, dives, gets under refs skin or not.
The main point of contention here (if true) is that a referee went into a game with the a bias. He took a personal conflict and let it affect the outcome the game. That is as serious as match fixing, throwing a game, whatever. If this turns out to be true then the ref should be immediately fired and Vancouver could make a case to replay some part of or the whole game.
A refs job is to call the game in fairness in accordance with the rules. No more no less. If he didn't call the game that way then it would be a black mark on the season.
|
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 01/12/2010 : 11:53:14
|
I think Fat Elvis has a very valid point here. It's no different than Shawn Every complaining about the calls that he gets. Like it or not, players get a certain reputation to everyone. Fans, other players, and even ref.
Burrow has always been that play on the edge kind of player and I have a ton of respect for that. But don't complain when that edge bites you in the junk. It's not like he goes in front of the media and talks about the penalties that could have been called but weren't which helped his team.
Now, don't get me wrong. If this ref has a history of this type of behavior the league needs to deal with that. But let's call a spade a spade. Some players get the benefit of the doubt while others don't. As I said, Burrows is no Saint. |
|
|
|
Guest4052
( )
|
Posted - 01/12/2010 : 12:45:27
|
The league should nail them both for being unprofessional. Burrows could have went through the proper channels. Burrows does have the reputation, and apparently so does the ref.
Conduct an investigation, and if what Burrows is saying is true (I can't see him not lying because he's opening a can of worms just for one reg. season game) nail them both and send a message to the league that unprofessionalism will not be tolerated. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 01/12/2010 : 13:26:11
|
Bob MacKenzie has an pretty good snap shot of this situation.
http://tsn.ca/blogs/?id=305809
This is definately a situations where if there is smoke, there is fire. Everything leans towards what Burrows was saying as true, as far as the comment this ref made to him and he made to the ref.
However, I do find more validity to Fat Elvis's point here when this Ref originally assessed a Game Misconduct to Jerred Smithson but the NHL recided the penalty based on the video evidence which shows Burrows embelishing the call.
The one things I completely agree with MacKenzie on here is that this is going to get messy. |
|
|
|
Guest9836
( )
|
Posted - 01/12/2010 : 13:37:50
|
Messy Indeed...
I still think though the ref is in the most trouble in this situation, like McKenzie says, the ref can't go out there and say "I'm going to make you pay" and then actually affect the game. He should have just made a call early if he wanted to make a point and get be done with it.
But the game's fair outcome now is in doubt and therein lies the problem. This guy can never be assigned to a Vancouver game again, and that's probably the easy part.
Burrrows on the other hand has made enemies with Zebras for life.
|
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 01/12/2010 : 13:43:03
|
It's prob hard for me to come off on here and not sound biased as a Canucks fan, but i'll try. Here's the thing, i completely agree with the "live by the sword...." theory/motto. I know he plays on the edge, has a reputation, etc, and have no problem with a bad call here and there, even in the third period (*side note, the interference call was so brutal that i'm really not okay with that one at ANY point of a game).
Here's what most seem to be missing. If the ref wants to be a jackass and "get back at" Burrows, he's going against the values of his profession. So be it, we're all human, and even though he overstepped his boundaries to do this, that's not the part i have the problem with. The fact (or is it alleged accusation) that he went out of his way to tell Burrows he was gonna "get him back tonight" is the part that i find completely reprehnsive and unprofessional. He got made to look bad, go get him back, i can live with that. BUT, to come out and warn the guy you're gonna do that and then to carry out your warning with a ridiculous call is simply beyond comprehension.
Burrows, Avery, Ruutu, Cooke, etc, i don't care who it is. There's no way a ref can act this way and consider himself a professional!
(notice 3 of the 4 agitators i listed are or have been 'Nucks ) |
|
|
|
Guest7281
( )
|
Posted - 01/12/2010 : 14:20:19
|
| I saw the game replays on tsn.ca, including the horrible penalty calls. Burrows does go down too easy on the "diving " call but it should not have been called diving. The interference call is a total joke. There is only incidental contact with the defender as Burrows goes to the net. Should not have been called. It looks like Burrows has a legitimate beef with Auger. If Auger is found to be "guilty" of wrong doing, he should atleast have his playoff games pulled, and at most, be kicked out of the NHLOA. What a jackass Auger is. |
|
|
|
Guest9198
( )
|
Posted - 01/12/2010 : 15:28:50
|
| Having seen the replays, it is pretty bad... but it's not anywhere close to the type of abuse that was done by the refs in the Canada-US women's gold medal game a few years back. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 01/12/2010 : 18:11:38
|
I just watched the replayed for the first time.
Diving - Absolutely, and I wish that call was made significantly more. The league changed the rules to allow less obstruction and more room for the skills guys, not for hockey player to become wimps on skates.
Interference - Total ghost call. I see the point there.
During the Oilers Connected Pregame where were interviews from Craig Conroy, Robin Regher, Adam Pardy, and Sidney Crosby. They all said that they though Burrows was a litle less than professional by going to the media and that if there was a beef there, taking it to the NHL through the proper channels is the right way to do it. Conroy said something along the line as you live by the sword you die by the sword. Regher said that as a professional you have to play through that kind of thing.
Not sure if other NHL players feel the same way, but it looks like Burrows might have lost a few friends. |
|
|
|
Thrasher
Rookie
Canada
155 Posts |
Posted - 01/12/2010 : 19:11:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
It's prob hard for me to come off on here and not sound biased as a Canucks fan, but i'll try. Here's the thing, i completely agree with the "live by the sword...." theory/motto. I know he plays on the edge, has a reputation, etc, and have no problem with a bad call here and there, even in the third period (*side note, the interference call was so brutal that i'm really not okay with that one at ANY point of a game).
Here's what most seem to be missing. If the ref wants to be a jackass and "get back at" Burrows, he's going against the values of his profession. So be it, we're all human, and even though he overstepped his boundaries to do this, that's not the part i have the problem with. The fact (or is it alleged accusation) that he went out of his way to tell Burrows he was gonna "get him back tonight" is the part that i find completely reprehnsive and unprofessional. He got made to look bad, go get him back, i can live with that. BUT, to come out and warn the guy you're gonna do that and then to carry out your warning with a ridiculous call is simply beyond comprehension.
Burrows, Avery, Ruutu, Cooke, etc, i don't care who it is. There's no way a ref can act this way and consider himself a professional!
(notice 3 of the 4 agitators i listed are or have been 'Nucks)
Aha!
The players are also Proffesionals correct? If Shawn Avery were too complain about this, I would so be on the ref's side. As much as personal officiating can ruin the game, diving is an equal crime. If Iginla were complaining about this, I would actually care. He's a respected member of the hockey community. After Burrows diving, looking up to see if a ref saw him faking injured and then sprawling on the ice like that, all credibility is gone. He is also a proffesional. He can whine and complain about the ref ruining his teams chance and giving the game to the other team, but when you dive and dont get caught, essentially you are doing the same thing.
If i were Colin Cambell, I look at Alex Burrows and tell him to shove it. However, since im sure many people think that what Burrows is complaining about is justified. I just see Burrows as a thief who just got something stolen and then goes to the cops to fix it. And as someone who already has a less than admirable reputation around the league, I cant see him getting much sympathy. After watching the interviews on TSN, none of the players or coach's they asked seemed to care about what he was saying. I agree with Fat Elvis and the "live by the sword" strangely accurate. You cheated the system, the system got revenge. If your not going to play with pride and act like a proffesional, don't be expected to be treated by one. And I hope by bias of hate for Vancouver isnt affecting my judgement.
I Promise I didn't give her the STD, I'm not a sharing person. |
|
|
|
redneck76ca
Rookie
186 Posts |
Posted - 01/12/2010 : 20:16:06
|
Being a Canucks fan, I know where you guys are coming from when you talk about Burrows' style of play. He does dive, he does embelish, he does throw some dirty hits and I do believe he was acused of biting someone last season. What goes around comes around in sports, right? For the most part I agree. If Burrows hooks someone and that player dives resulting in a penalty, then Burrows got whats coming. If Burrows takes a hit from Smithson, and Smithson embelishes then Burrows is getting what is coming. The problem here is that an individual that is supposed to be completely neutral and unbiased, the referee Auger, was not. And his bias affected the outcome of a game. Not only this, but the evidence suggests (albeit circumstantial) that the referee was premeditated in his actions. And he did it, because Burrows made him look bad. Wow. The ego on this ref!
No matter what kind of player Burrows is, no player deserves to have an official let their personal feelings affect the outcome of a game.
Someone compared Burrows' actions to a theif going to the cops when his stuff gets stolen by another theif. The problem with this analogy is that the referees are supposed to be the "cops". In this case a corrupt "cop" went after the villain, not for the "justice" of the game, but because of his own personal agenda. Personally I expect referees to be neutral, unbiased cops of the game. It is their duty to put feelings aside and call the game so that no one team can cheat, lie or steal themselves to an advantage in the game. Auger did not do this. I find this far more reprehensible than Burrows' actions.
On another note, the fine that Burrows received was totally warranted. The NHL has a strict policy regarding players, coaches and management calling out referees in the media. I have no problem with the fine, I just hope that the league further investigates the allegations. I'm sure that it will only result in a minor censure of Auger. |
|
|
|
Thrasher
Rookie
Canada
155 Posts |
Posted - 01/12/2010 : 20:49:40
|
quote:
Someone compared Burrows' actions to a theif going to the cops when his stuff gets stolen by another theif. The problem with this analogy is that the referees are supposed to be the "cops". In this case a corrupt "cop" went after the villain, not for the "justice" of the game, but because of his own personal agenda. Personally I expect referees to be neutral, unbiased cops of the game. It is their duty to put feelings aside and call the game so that no one team can cheat, lie or steal themselves to an advantage in the game. Auger did not do this. I find this far more reprehensible than Burrows' actions.
While indeed a nice thought, refs are human. Of course personal feeling is going to come of that. Burrows made the ref look like a donkey. Revenge is natural. Is that right? Absolutley not. Its old school justice that only Pacino and de Niro can pull off in over the hill cop movies. What i'm saying is that it may not be seen as right to put the law into your own hands, Burrows got exactly what he deserved and I dont care if the ref had to break the rules to get there. Diving is something the game needs far less of. I will be fairly upset if Auger gets suspended for any significant time.
I'm not sure what you do for a living, but perhaps a better anology this time. Say your a customs agent at the border, and a trucker (Burrows) smuggles something illegal into the country. You don't really look, and let the guy go through. Your superiors find out (NHL VP) and blame you for it. The next time a guy driving a truck for that company tries to go through, regardless of how "emotionless" you are supposed to be, your embarressed and will very likely take out some frusteration on the guy.
Not sure if that works like I thought it would, but the point im making is that as long as the game is not reffed by robots, personal grudges and other things will be apart of hockey. Sean Avery is easily not a ref favorite, and going into games, you can bet the refs take an extra look at him when hes on the ice. Auger (if allegations are true) took it too far, but being a ref is far harder than being a player. Every penalty is complained, every non call is complained, so many goals are scrutinized. If Burrows is going to make their jobs harder by diving, my thinking is he got exactly what he deserved.
I Promise I didn't give her the STD, I'm not a sharing person. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 01/12/2010 : 22:11:42
|
Like i said before, the only part i have a serious problem with is the fact he went to Burrows and TOLD HIM he was gonna "get him back"!!! Man, he may as well have taken an ad out in the local paper to announce his intentions. Maybe next time he can get the PA guy to tell the crowd what he's gonna do.
While i don't think it's right (the "getting him back"), i understand this sort of thing prob happens much more than we realize! The difference here is, the other refs doing so are not making a point of announcing their intentions.
Here's the other thing. The diving call was warranted. I don't think it was as bad as some say, and quite honestly was one of those dives that could have been seen as a trip or a dive, but being who it was (Burrows) and who made the call (Auger) it was obviously gonna go that way. The interference call on the other hand? C'mon.....that was pretty obvious what the ref's intentions were. I'd be shocked if Auger isn't diciplined in some sort of way! |
|
|
|
redneck76ca
Rookie
186 Posts |
Posted - 01/13/2010 : 00:17:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
Like i said before, the only part i have a serious problem with is the fact he went to Burrows and TOLD HIM he was gonna "get him back"!!! Man, he may as well have taken an ad out in the local paper to announce his intentions. Maybe next time he can get the PA guy to tell the crowd what he's gonna do.
While i don't think it's right (the "getting him back"), i understand this sort of thing prob happens much more than we realize! The difference here is, the other refs doing so are not making a point of announcing their intentions.
Here's the other thing. The diving call was warranted. I don't think it was as bad as some say, and quite honestly was one of those dives that could have been seen as a trip or a dive, but being who it was (Burrows) and who made the call (Auger) it was obviously gonna go that way. The interference call on the other hand? C'mon.....that was pretty obvious what the ref's intentions were. I'd be shocked if Auger isn't diciplined in some sort of way!
No discipline for Auger. TSN reporting. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 01/13/2010 : 04:43:33
|
It seems like the argument is centering around the concept of "what goes around, comes around" . . . and "live by the sword, die by the sword". The inference is, that since Burrows has in the past been what can be called a 'dirty player', and has made some dives/embellishments, that any misconduct directed towards him is deserved and somehow just.
What. Utter. Poppycock.
Conflating issues like this (a player who dives, and a referee who practices gross miconduct and is utterly unprofessional) is what will get you in trouble quickly. The rules are the rules, and you must follow them as a referee - period. If you are contraveneing the rules, you should be punished - period.
From what I have seen so far . . . this ref not only held a grudge, with ample proof to support such an allegation; but he compounded it by voicing his vendetta to the player himself! What an idiot on top of it all!
And, just like gross transgressions made on small-time perps by the police, it will all be covered up with the thinking that they need to keep the respect for the refs high. They don't want a scandal, and they don't want the refs under ANY kind of microscope, because goodness knows they commit all kinds of crap like this and everyone knows it.
That's not called being human . . . that's called supporting a corrupt system. Yes, to err is human . . . but you should get punished for those errors, and people wise up to it and improve, knowing there are checks and balances - otherwise you end up with exactly the scene we have here.
For those saying "what goes around comes around" . . . did the Vancouver Canucks deserve to lose as a result of a ref's vendetta? Did the Pred deserve to benefit as a result of a ref's vendetta? No.
You try and make the right calls as a ref, and sometimes you miss one. The best way to rectify that is to try your hardest from then on to MAKE THE RIGHT CALL, not to "even it up". Because, in the end, trying to even things up . . . always makes things less fair, not more.
This ref should be suspended, if not fired.
Burrows did the right thing by speaking out . . . if he didn't, we wouldn't know about the systemic problems happening, it would be covered up once again.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 01/13/2010 : 06:01:54
|
UPDATE:
Burrows fined the max for speaking out against the reffing ($2,500), and the matter is declared "over" by the NHL, meaning, no disciplinary action against Stephane Auger.
In fact, I have yet to hear that an investigation was even opened on this matter . . . incredible, but true. There is only a short blurb that the NHL talked to both parties, meaning that they talked to Auger as well. If that is the extent of the NHL looking into such sever allegations, affecting the integrity of the game, and with such compelling evidence to substantiate it? Shame on them.
What a whitewash.
Yet another black mark on a long resume of black marks for Gary Bettman and the league mangement team.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 01/13/2010 : 07:36:52
|
While i'm only mildly shocked by the fact Auger is not being diciplined at all, i can't let myself be overly surprised, only because it's clear the NHL wants this incident to disappear ASAP. This is wrong on so many levels IMO and it could come back to bite them in the azz!
Slozo, i couldn't agree with you more here on your thoughts and words. It's nice to see an anbiased fan have these thoughts, especially when it's regarding a player who is considered by many to be a hated pest on an apposing team. It's likely difficult for others to believe me when i claim i'd agree on this even if it were another teams player such as Avery. In truth, i can't stand Avery, but would still be mad as could be if a ref did something similar to him. It simply cannot take place in the game without compromising the games integrity.
The only part i slightly disagree with is the make up calls. I know these happen and it may not be right, but in some instances, i can see it. However, to hold a grudge for over a month and get back at a guy in another game, is just ridiculous. I won't bother ranting any longer as i'll just be repeating myself but i think you get what i'm saying.
It's gonna be very interesting to see just how long it is untill Auger is officiating a Canucks game?
|
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 01/13/2010 : 08:32:20
|
I think that many, many people on here did not read the Bob MacKenzie blog on this because he brings a ton of insight into this.
The deal is, weather you like it or not, the NHL is still a somewhat self-policed league. That includes Refs. That is the reason why the Jerome Iginla's and Scott Neidermayer's of the NHL NEVER get a diving call while the Sean Avery's and the Alex Burrows (aka Sean Avery Lite) ALWAYS get the diving calls. The players know it, the fans know it, and I think it's "utter poppycock" that Burrows plays that style and then complains about it.
The only thing that happened here that was wrong was the the ref told Burrows what he was doing. If that Ref doesn't say anything, this is not even a news story.
Now, before you complete attack me, please understand that IF this impacted the game the Canucks have every right to be pissy. But they also don't complain at all when Burrows draws that garbage call and they capitalize on it. For every bad call, there is a good call and for every bad call for one team there is a bad call for the other. Maybe not in that game, but over a season it all averages out.
Don't you guy remember your coach telling you to play through the call?? The refs only change the game when you let them.
And something else that completely confuses me is that from what I read, the PP game winning goal was when Henrik Sedin was in the box for tripping which was apparently a dead right call. No one is saying anything about that??
Maybe a little bit bias, but if a guy like Burrows is making comments like "If we miss the playoffs by one point, people could look back on this game and say it was because of this." We'll I have a piece of advise. Don't play like a complete D-Bag for 81 games and complain about the one game that came back and bit you in the junk. I also like what Bob MacKenzie said about this.
And while the Canucks can be outraged, and rightfully so at how last night's game went down, it wouldn't be a bad idea for someone from management or another veteran player on the team to take Burrows aside and explain that refs are only human and if you rub their nose in it, you're going to get it back.
Here is a little snip from the Bob MacKenzie blog that I think sums it up the best.
In the 2002 Olympics, for example, a player had an on-ice run-in with an NHL official in Salt Lake City. In the first NHL regular season game involving that player and that referee after the Olympics, the ref called two minors and a misconduct on the player. The player gave the surrender sign, apologized to the ref and that was the end of it. That sort of thing happens more than we know. In a perfect world, it doesn't. In a perfect world, the players never show up the refs and if they do, the refs ignore it and never let it affect them because they are totally impartial and above any human feelings of revenge. That's in a perfect world.
If you have not read the entire thing, take the 5 minutes. It a really good and what I consider and impartial opinion about it.
http://tsn.ca/blogs/bob_mckenzie/?id=305809
|
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 01/13/2010 : 09:32:51
|
Beans, i'm assuming i'm one of those that your post is directed at? I did in fact read Mackenzie's article and i too thought it was excellent.
As far as your post goes, i pretty much agree with it entirely. I don't know if i came off differently but i completely agree that calls go both ways and that for every dive a guy like Burrows sucks a ref in on, another actual trip gets missed. These things do even out. I have no problem with that.
FWIW, here's how the penalties went down in the second half of the third period:
Nashville hooking - 2 min 15:11, R. Jones
Vancouver interference - 2 min 15:15, A. Burrows
Vancouver tripping - 2 min 15:33, H. Sedin
Vancouver unsportsmanlike conduct - 2 min 19:56, A. Burrows
Vancouver misconduct - 10 min 19:56, A. Burrows
So, it looks as though Vancouver was on the pp with a chance to take a late lead with under 5mins left. 4 seconds later, the phantom call on Burrows for interference. **Please, before anyone comments, don't do so unless you've seen the video on this call** Anyway, this takes the Canucks off the pp. Now, at 4 on 4, H. Sedin gets called for a trip. This has been described by some as a call that at that point of the game, could be let slide, however, it was not a "bad" call, it was a trip. Not sure which ref called this but if i'm reffing, and i've made a brutal call on the Burrows one or my partner has, i might let it slide at a crucial point like this? Regardless, it was called and not only put the Preds on the pp, it put them on the even more dangerous 4 on 3! Game over! Small consolation for me, i have Weber in my pool .
All i can say is what's been said before. The best ref's in any sport are the ones you don't notice. Well, Mr. Auger failed miserably on Monday night!
As for Burrows, i guess he's that Ken Linsman / Claude Lemieux kind of guy? You love him if he's on your team, you hate to play against him? I think calling a guy a d-bag or anything like that for a dive here and there is a little strong, but that's just my opinion. I don't care what anyone says about him, i have nothing but respect for the guy and his perseverence in getting to the NHL. Not many guys have a better story than he does and a more unlikely rate of success considering the teams and leagues he fought through to get to this level. What he's doing is exactly what got him here. Every player dives now and then, it's just some have more respect with the officials and therefore earn a pass. Those, whose game usually includes some yapping to throw others off their games, prob frustrate the crap outta refs and therefore earn a pass of their own. A free pass to the penalty box! |
|
|
|
Guest4803
( )
|
Posted - 01/13/2010 : 09:40:08
|
| Hopefully auger refs the gold medal game at the olympics and has some beef with some russian or sweedish players. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 01/13/2010 : 10:15:25
|
Actually, Alex my post was not directly towards anyone specifically. It was just my opinion. You could say that the "Utter Poppycock" comment was directly back at Slozo because I literally laughed outloud at the words, not the opinion. I haven't heard the word "Poppycock" since my Grandmother slammed her finger in a car door! It was meant as a respectful acknowledgement of the words. That was awesome.
Anyway, I don't think it's out of line in the least to say that Burrow's plays like a D-Bag. Never said he was a D-bag. Actually, the opposite. I have a ton of respect for an undrafted player who works his butt off in the ECHL to get his shot and makes the most of it. Tons of props for that. But in my opinion, you are a classy player(a la Nick Lidstrom) or a D-Bag player (a la Alex Burrows). Classy players don't take dives. Classy players don't bag on the refs when you lose. Classy players don't complain. They play the game.
And to your point, 'every players dives now and then," I have to disagree because I have watched a ton of hockey in my nearly 32 years and there are classy player out there that I have never watched take a dive or embelish a call. Why?? Because they are too busy trying to win rather than spending time trying to get a stupid edge and making a ref, his opponent, his organization, his team mates, or the game look stupid by getting way with something.
I have ZERO tolerance for players who take a dive or embelish calls and that includes players from my home team. Esa Tikkanen, for example was one of the games best every super pest and I cursed every time I watched him take a dive. It sucks. It's embarrassing. It tells me that the player isn't good enough to beat his opponent straight up.
Call it what you will, but I call it cheating. And Karma is a B&*^&%. What goes around comes around and it just hit Burrows square in the teeth. It's just too bad that the ref had to open his big mouth about it and that the actual classy players on the Canucks squad had to get impacted by their versions f Sean Avery.
Now, on a final note, let's not confuse a super pest to a diver. Sometimes that kind of player does both, but I love the super pest. I like the player who can goad the other team into taking a stupid penalty, as Burrow or Avery or Cooke often do. That's the part of the player you love on your team but hate to play against. That is significantly different than the diver. At least in my opinion it is. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 01/13/2010 : 10:56:52
|
S'all good Beans, i see your points. Personally, i don't consider it cheating but that's okay. I see it the way you explained it. He plays on the edge, crosses the line sometimes and has developed a reputation that in the end, prob hurts him and his team more than it helps. I'd venture to say, guys like this who develop a reputation for diving will get called for diving more often than they get the call in their favor if it's at all questionable? Same goes for the more classy guys such as Iginla. He goes down, very seldom will he be called for diving unless it's absolutely blatant!
The dives which bother me the most are the ones you see guys taking when hooked, especially the guys who flop when a guy simply touches him with a stick (sometimes with only one hand on it). Let's face it, anyone who's played hockey knows that a hook, while it can impede/slow you down, has to be pretty severe to actually cause you to fall down! And yes, i know Burrows is guilty of this at times. Personally, i think the dive should come with either an extra 2 mins or a 10 min misconduct on top of the 2. Maybe this would further deter guys from trying to gain that edge?
I used to hate when they called a hook and a dive on the same play as it seemed like a cop out. Now, i'm okay with it. I see times where a guy has def been hooked, but dives to embelish it. In those instances, it ought to be a double call.
Back to the actual Burrows incident, it was noted on the radio today that likely the reason Auger escaped punishment is that there was no proof of what he said to Burrows. If he simply said something along the lines of "you made me look bad, i'll be keeping an eye on you closely tonght", that's acceptable i suppose? If he said what Burrows claims (and we may never know) that "i'll get you" or "i'll get you back tonight", then that's completely unaccepable. We may never know the truth i guess???
On a side note with that Van/Nash game, John Shorthouse (the Canucks play by play guy), said that the Nashville PBP guys left that night saying it was the worst officiated game they'd ever witnessed! They weren't just referring to the Burrows calls, apparently there were other bad calls which went against both teams? I hope the league at least had a look at this and had a chat with the officials, all of them! |
|
|
|
Guest4803
( )
|
Posted - 01/13/2010 : 11:39:48
|
| ya the calls were questionable all game towards both teams, you dont see a game to often where a ref calls 5 penalties in the first 2 periods and 6 in the 3rd unless there is some kind of a line brawl. Bettman let this one slide under the rug quite quickly which is probably a smart move, doesnt wanna look bad like the nba a couple years back with that donahue guy. |
|
|
|
Guest0965
( )
|
Posted - 01/13/2010 : 11:46:50
|
BULL f***ING s*** CALL BY THAT TOOL OF A REF.
IMO he shouldnt be able to Ref in an NHL Game, ever, harsh? But I think it's necessary. If Auger never takes another player, any player personally, then he gets to still Refan NHL Game, if he does, he should be out of the NHL for GOOD! We do not need ONE bad apple, they spoil the BUNCH!!
f***ING END OF MY f***ING RANT, f***IN BULLSIT!!!! |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 01/13/2010 : 11:52:51
|
There is nothing that can be done about that game now, only changes moving forward.
I wonder if it was simply coincidence that in last night's Oilers/Preds game the first penalty was called at 13:02 of the 3rd period. To that point, there was no penalties called through 2 period, then 4 called(3 on Nashville and 1 on Edmonton) in the final 7 minutes of the game. I watched the game(as painful as it was) and I don't recall anything really missed on either side of the puck through the first 2 periods.
Is it that crazy of a notion that 98% of the time the refs do their job very well and that the NHL has literally no issues with the vast majority of the officials??
Now, if this Auger dude didn't get slapped around publicly for this, I can understand why without any evidence. The NHL has to protect themselves in this as well and if they punish based on a he said/she said thing, there could be legal repercussions as well. Burrows gets fined based on an established rule. However, trust that this reg is now under a microscope and don't be surprised if this guy gets little or no playoff games. That hurts in the pocket book. Let's not kid ourselves, the NHL doesn't want the bad publicity nor the assumption that the ref did something wrong. But we all know that for everything the media tells us something else is going on in the background.
I am confident that this ref did not get off free and clear. Regardless, dragging him through the media doesn't do anything positive other than sastify the witch-hunters. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 01/13/2010 : 14:57:36
|
If Burrows plays "dirty" or dives . . . it is the responsibility of the referees in that game to make the call. It is also their responsibility to ensure they make the right call, whether it's using your linesmen or instant replay when necessary.
If Burrows, or any other player for that matter, is allowed to do illegal plays and get away with it, guess who's responsibility that falls under?!?
1) The referee
2) The 2nd ref, linesmen in the game
3) Colin Campbell, and ultimately Gary Bettman
So, what you're saying Beans is . . . Auger didn't do his job, and in fact most refs don't do their job, and now because of that the ref that screwed up in the first place should be able to grossly step over the rules and make a mockery of the sport?!? Make a mockery of the integrity of the game?!?
If any young kid thought there was still some justice left in the NHL, all doubt has been now erased. There is zero accountability for the star players as we already know, and there is now zero accountability for the refs.
And really, to take the position that the ref should have been smart and kept his mouth shut as if that were an actual practical solution is ludicrous and immoral. Commit a gross injustice, but make sure no one knows and you don't get caught, right?
Balderdash.
yes, that was for Beans 
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 01/13/2010 : 15:51:29
|
Now I realize I probably shouldn't be tossing gasoline onto a smoldering fire.....but...
I went and watched the replays and here is my take, right or wrong, I'm sure someone will let me know....
The diving penalty, questionable perhaps, but Burrows brought that one on himself with his track record as Beans mentioned, others have even said acceptable call. Burrows sets the tone for the rest of his night with the little tantrum he throws on the way to the penalty box, I'm sure the refs were happy with that.
The call in question, as far as i can tell is the interference call, I found a clip and watched it ,and thought something very ineteresting, starting at the 0:48 second mark, Burrows lines up against the number 29 forward for Nashville. The puck is dropped, Burrows hooks legs with 29 and trips him up on the way to the front of the net...even more clearly seen at the 1:10 and on mark of the clip.
Keep in mind, Vancouver is on the power play and his contact with the forward interfered with the forward from getting out to the point which is where the play was going. That usually mitigates a penalty, even in normal ciircumstances.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3Q4D1fIFBw
Could that not have been construed as a legitimate interference call? I think it certainly could have if you watch that sequence instead of assuming he contacted the defeceman or goaltender. Does the call then seem a lot more in line of a referee making a borderline call, rather than this vendetta?
The subsequent Sedin call, is not only clearly tripping, as he loses his stick in the guys skates, but the call is made by the other ref.
Burrows should have been blaming Sedin for taking a bad penalty at a crucial part of the game, instead of flapping his gums about the ref's crusade against him. Oh that's right, he was too busy enjoying his camera time to think that far through.
We don't know what was actually said, it's heresay, inadmissable in real courts much less the court of public opinion.
The real travesty is that this is causing the stir it is, it's a game, it still has all it's integrity, the refs actually are human, they make questionable calls like some of us make questionable decisions.
Lighten up people. Calling for heads to roll, like a village mob just seems to take too much energy over something like this and I'm way too old to run with a mob.. |
Edited by - fat_elvis_rocked on 01/13/2010 15:59:06 |
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 01/13/2010 : 16:05:52
|
And oh yeah.....
Auger isn't doing his job?
Baldercock ! Poppydash ! whichever..... |
Edited by - fat_elvis_rocked on 01/13/2010 16:06:43 |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 01/13/2010 : 16:12:44
|
| Fat_Elvis....don't be afraid to chime in and toss some petrol on the fire! That's what gets these debates going to begin with. Great find on the youtube video! I was hoping to see another view of it because originally i thought the call was on the contact with the other defensman or the goalie, neither of which really existed. There was one view i saw a slight bit of the contact with #29 that you pointed out but it wasn't enough to pass judgement. After having seen it, here's my take. First, it seemed like Auger took a little longer to call it than maybe he should have? By the time he called it, Burrows had planted himself in front of the net. Tough to say, but it seemed a little late, not to mention 29 (Joel Ward) seems to lose balance rather easily? Kinda funny, although i agree that the Sedin one was a trip, that too was Ward! Not saying anything, just saying..... Although it's a trip, that's one of those frustrating ones as Henrik immediately realized that his stick was between Wards legs and let it go! Again, the guy goes down pretty easily but credit to him, in my opinion, he was trying to draw a penalty which i call helping your team, others call it cheating. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 01/13/2010 : 16:15:13
|
| BTW, the first penalty to Burrows (the dive) was absolutely correctly called. From what i see in the youtube clip, Burrows gets up off the ice after having fallen, Hamhuis's stick is at his side near where a lot of brutal hooking calls are made and Burrows pinches it to his body with his arm and goes down to make it look like a hook! Prob could have been called holding the stick too really but it doesn't matter. Auger got that one right for sure! |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 01/13/2010 : 16:22:58
|
Well I guess a player taking dives and embelish calls is more so "a gross injustice" than a ref giving a make up call. Because in the end, that is EXACTLY what this was. A make up call. It happens every single game in the NHL every single night. But because this make up call came a month later makes it different?? Because the ref actually said his intentions makes it different??
What was that word?? Balderdash??
More so, when looking at the video that Fat Elvis so graciously provided, by definition of the rules of the NHL, both calls were penalties. The media highlights definately does not show Burrows locking knees with the Predator forward while the guy was trying to skate to the point.
Whatever. I'm done with this. I've already spent far too much time discussing a complete non-issue that will turn out to be completely irrelevant in the end. Especially when the player in questions is a dive artist like Alex Burrows.
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Alex Burrows: one goal short, ref's revenge? 
