Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

Kerry Fraser @AV's bench minor


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
68 replies to this topic

#1 agm89

agm89

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 176 posts
  • Joined: 13-January 10

Posted 04 March 2013 - 03:34 PM

Usually I like to read Kerry's column, though this one not so much. None of his examples come close to what we saw last night.




http://www.tsn.ca/bl...aser/?id=417373
  • 0


Haddy, on 12 March 2010 - 04:29 PM, said:

i highly doubt the sedins are capable of hitting 90 points, let alone 100.


#2 Heretic

Heretic

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,534 posts
  • Joined: 08-April 07

Posted 04 March 2013 - 03:40 PM

*
POPULAR

As a Canucks fan I'm fine with the call on AV - glad he showed some emotion for a change. What I'm not fine with is Hartley did the same earlier - even called the ref "an amateur" and swore and got nothing. Consistency is all I want to see.
  • 46

McCoy: We were speculating. Is God really out there?
Kirk: Maybe he's not out there, Bones. Maybe he's right here. [points to his heart]

Posted Image


#3 Riviera82

Riviera82

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,562 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 11

Posted 04 March 2013 - 03:44 PM

Go ahead and call the bench minor, refs. Just make sure you do it to every coach whenever they say something. Dont be selective.
  • 4

#4 Jester13

Jester13

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,815 posts
  • Joined: 30-August 09

Posted 04 March 2013 - 03:44 PM

*
POPULAR

As a Canucks fan I'm fine with the call on AV - glad he showed some emotion for a change. What I'm not fine with is Hartley did the same earlier - even called the ref "an amateur" and swore and got nothing. Consistency is all I want to see.


Exactly. Whether the calls are for or against us, it's the lack of consistency that is so frustrating.
  • 13

"Education is the inoculator for ignorance."


#5 coyotecanuck

coyotecanuck

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,665 posts
  • Joined: 03-March 08

Posted 04 March 2013 - 03:46 PM

*
POPULAR

Pure propaganda from the NHL spin zone.

How could there be a 40 paragraph explanation and justification without at least mentioning the antics of Hartley in the same bloody game? Why, because there simply is no other explanation other than game management and bias.

AV is the closest thing to a mute you will ever find in an NHL coach.
  • 16


"Who knows, the center ice ref might have had a better view than the ref 5 feet away."

#6 Pineapples

Pineapples

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,954 posts
  • Joined: 15-June 10

Posted 04 March 2013 - 03:50 PM

Typical, he doesn't want to admit that the ref screwed that up, so he instead defends him because he doesn't want to get fined.
  • 1

Pineapple_jumps.gifPineapple_jumps.gif

 


#7 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,467 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 04 March 2013 - 03:51 PM

Well, that's about as much BS as the call itself....
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#8 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,730 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 04 March 2013 - 03:57 PM

I hated Fraser when he reffed.
  • 0

#9 BedBeats™2.0

BedBeats™2.0

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,310 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 04 March 2013 - 03:58 PM

Yep.

Absolutely confirmed that refs base calls on forged relationships.

Id like to know why Torts is never called for the same.

He is the absolute worst offender.
  • 4

Posted Image

Henrik breaking records.Kes approving.


#10 WL Canuck Fan

WL Canuck Fan

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,700 posts
  • Joined: 21-June 09

Posted 04 March 2013 - 03:59 PM

Pure propaganda from the NHL spin zone.

How could there be a 40 paragraph explanation and justification without at least mentioning the antics of Hartley in the same bloody game? Why, because there simply is no other explanation other than game management and bias.

AV is the closest thing to a mute you will ever find in an NHL coach.


Agreed. And I conclude Fraser carries the same bias.

Welcome to the new WWE.
  • 1
Sig too big.

#11 Kass9

Kass9

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,847 posts
  • Joined: 02-April 07

Posted 04 March 2013 - 04:03 PM

Lol Kerry Fraser, never liked him, wasn't he also anti-Canucks?

Stupid brotherhood of blind men (what an insult to actual blind men).
  • 0

#12 Aladeen

Aladeen

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,312 posts
  • Joined: 22-September 07

Posted 04 March 2013 - 04:05 PM

Each game situation is unique, as are the personalities of the individuals involved. Working relationships are forged over time between every referee and coach; some are positive while others are just tolerable. The specific manner with which a coach voices or displays his displeasure for a referee's decision, combined with an official's tolerance level, will dictate the response and eventual outcome.

Its interesting Kerry talks about the working relationship between a ref and a coach being positive or just tolerable... to me that speaks volumes about where reffing is presently.
  • 2
Posted Image

#13 î мцšт вяздк чфµ

î мцšт вяздк чфµ

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,464 posts
  • Joined: 02-September 09

Posted 04 March 2013 - 04:08 PM

*
POPULAR

Posted Image
  • 20

KIM JONG UN'S FAVORITE HOCKEY TEAM ARE THE KELOWNA ROCKETS.

JOHN SHORTHOUSE'S VOICE REMINDS ME OF KERMIT THE FROG.


#14 Down by the River

Down by the River

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,469 posts
  • Joined: 29-March 09

Posted 04 March 2013 - 04:13 PM

Kerry Fraser's column is one of my favourite on TSN. He doesn't always side with the refs. He says what he thinks, and I like that. I simply disagree with Fraser on this one though. Consistency is the hot word of the day when it comes to describing refs. In this case, the refs weren't even consistent within one game. Hartley is swearing directly at the refs and there is no penalty, not even a warning.
  • 2

OMG we could've had McKeown!

I think Virtanen was a terrible pick given that he's out for 6 months which will hinder his development. You don't pick someone at #6 under that circumstance, along with the fact that he was given a 3/5 IQ (aka he's dumb). 

God dammit Benning. WHY VIRTANEN? Terrible move.

Down by the River - Crosby, Stills, Nash, and Young.


#15 WL Canuck Fan

WL Canuck Fan

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,700 posts
  • Joined: 21-June 09

Posted 04 March 2013 - 04:18 PM

Yep.

Absolutely confirmed that refs base calls on forged relationships.

Id like to know why Torts is never called for the same.

He is the absolute worst offender.


One of two reasons. He effectively bribes the refs, now, I am not saying he is blatant about it, but now I wonder what goes on behind the scenes. We may as well say Fraser as much as said so.
  • 0
Sig too big.

#16 qwijibo

qwijibo

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,167 posts
  • Joined: 10-January 09

Posted 04 March 2013 - 04:20 PM

Typical, he doesn't want to admit that the ref screwed that up, so he instead defends him because he doesn't want to get fined.


LOL, Nice conspiracy theory. Just one problem. Who do you think is going to fine him? Fraser works for TSN, not the NHL. He's simply commenting on bench minors from his point of view as a FORMER ref. He has called out current refs calls as wrong numerous times this year. Just because he supports this call against Vancouver he suddenly has no credibility in your eyes? Get over it.
  • 0

#17 Pineapples

Pineapples

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,954 posts
  • Joined: 15-June 10

Posted 04 March 2013 - 04:26 PM

LOL, Nice conspiracy theory. Just one problem. Who do you think is going to fine him? Fraser works for TSN, not the NHL. He's simply commenting on bench minors from his point of view as a FORMER ref. He has called out current refs calls as wrong numerous times this year. Just because he supports this call against Vancouver he suddenly has no credibility in your eyes? Get over it.


When did I say he has no credibility? And I'm pretty sure he can still get in trouble. Notice how no sports analyst ever calls out the refs blatantly.
  • 0

Pineapple_jumps.gifPineapple_jumps.gif

 


#18 coyotecanuck

coyotecanuck

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,665 posts
  • Joined: 03-March 08

Posted 04 March 2013 - 04:26 PM

LOL, Nice conspiracy theory. Just one problem. Who do you think is going to fine him? Fraser works for TSN, not the NHL. He's simply commenting on bench minors from his point of view as a FORMER ref. He has called out current refs calls as wrong numerous times this year. Just because he supports this call against Vancouver he suddenly has no credibility in your eyes? Get over it.


He has no credibility in this column because he is writing for a greater audience than those in Vancouver and Calgary, the vast majority of whom did not watch the game and see Hartley's spazout earlier in the game. The fact he wrote such a long article and failed to mention the obvious leaves him without a leg to stand on.

Edited by coyotecanuck, 04 March 2013 - 04:30 PM.

  • 3


"Who knows, the center ice ref might have had a better view than the ref 5 feet away."

#19 qwijibo

qwijibo

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,167 posts
  • Joined: 10-January 09

Posted 04 March 2013 - 04:31 PM

When did I say he has no credibility? And I'm pretty sure he can still get in trouble. Notice how no sports analyst ever calls out the refs blatantly.


Seriously? Who do you expect to fine him? Once again, he works for TSN, and he's called out the refs on bad calls repeatedly all season. Go back and read his columns. If he thinks a bad call has been made he says so.

Edited by qwijibo, 04 March 2013 - 04:33 PM.

  • 0

#20 coyotecanuck

coyotecanuck

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,665 posts
  • Joined: 03-March 08

Posted 04 March 2013 - 04:36 PM

Seriously? Who do you expect to fine him? Once again, he works for TS, and he's called out the refs on bad call repeatedly all season. Go back and read his columns. If he thinks a bad call has been made he says so.


This is true he does argue against specific calls, however, there is the issue about the credibility of the ref who made this particular call that Fraser is dancing around. Very different to discuss plays made at full speed and errors in judgement as opposed to the absurdity of this call. Why was this call made and not the one on Hartley? Why no warning with the game on the line?

Fraser hinted that it was because Sutherland doesn't like AV. If that's the case Sutherland should be fired right now.
  • 3


"Who knows, the center ice ref might have had a better view than the ref 5 feet away."

#21 khay

khay

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 542 posts
  • Joined: 18-September 03

Posted 04 March 2013 - 04:40 PM

As a Canucks fan I'm fine with the call on AV - glad he showed some emotion for a change. What I'm not fine with is Hartley did the same earlier - even called the ref "an amateur" and swore and got nothing. Consistency is all I want to see.


Totally agree. NHL referring has always lacked consistency and that brings the entertainment value down by a whole lot.

Just to bent some frustration that I have been accumulating for over 15 years... In my opinion, NHL is the only one of the four major sports in North America where a referee is not just an observer but a big factor that must be taken into consideration. A referee's decision can have as much impact on the outcome of a game as the plays made by the players. NHL will never win fans in the US unless it brings the level of officiating on par with other sports. However, seeing as that Bettman is concerned about the "economics" more so than improving the quality of the game, I don't see it happening any time soon.
  • 0

#22 khay

khay

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 542 posts
  • Joined: 18-September 03

Posted 04 March 2013 - 04:42 PM

Its interesting Kerry talks about the working relationship between a ref and a coach being positive or just tolerable... to me that speaks volumes about where reffing is presently.


Kerry is basically admitting that the referees in the NHL are deciding whether to make calls or not based on personal relationships...? Pathetic.
  • 1

#23 clutesi

clutesi

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,591 posts
  • Joined: 29-August 05

Posted 04 March 2013 - 04:42 PM

I seen a lot of coaches get away with way worse. With ten mins left in a tie game that's a brutal call.
  • 1

#24 HorseGem2007

HorseGem2007

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 476 posts
  • Joined: 12-February 12

Posted 04 March 2013 - 04:44 PM

Fraser's article made me boiled when I read it.
ONLY thing fans want is a fair game being played.
Meaning that what is called for on team, the same infraction should be called to the other team as well.
FAIRNESS.
I am getting totally frustrated with NHL games because of the referring and this is not only for the Canucks games.
Referrees should also be accountable to the league for bad calls.

But ..... I can only hope

GO CanuckS GO
  • 0
" OnceUgotItUpKeepItUp "

Burr Kes Higgy
#14 #17 #20

YOU CAN PLAY ... Gay athletes. Straight allies. Teaming up for respect: http://youcanplayproject.org/

#25 qwijibo

qwijibo

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,167 posts
  • Joined: 10-January 09

Posted 04 March 2013 - 04:47 PM

This is true he does argue against specific calls, however, there is the issue about the credibility of the ref who made this particular call that Fraser is dancing around. Very different to discuss plays made at full speed and errors in judgement as opposed to the absurdity of this call. Why was this call made and not the one on Hartley? Why no warning with the game on the line?

Fraser hinted that it was because Sutherland doesn't like AV. If that's the case Sutherland should be fired right now.


We're talking about 2 different things here. The other poster suggested the only reason Fraser supported the call was because he was afriad of admiting a mistake or being fined by the league. Both arguments are ludicrous considering Fraser is not affiliated with the league and has nothing to gain by protecting the ref. He also said analysts never call out the refs on bad calls which is even more inaccurate. The media is constantly second guessing refs. Your point about there being bias was actually addressed in his column too. He said relationships run from good to tolerable. The problem with expecting consistancy on a subjective call like abuse of an official is that is is entirely at that ref's discretion. Some things may not bother 1 ref that would be totally unacceptable to another. It's a flawed setup at its core but im not sure how you can get around it. You're dealing with numerous personalities (*coaches and refs) clash's are bound to happen
  • 0

#26 coyotecanuck

coyotecanuck

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,665 posts
  • Joined: 03-March 08

Posted 04 March 2013 - 04:55 PM

We're talking about 2 different things here. The other poster suggested the only reason Fraser supported the call was because he was afriad of admiting a mistake or being fined by the league. Both arguments are ludicrous considering Fraser is not affiliated with the league and has nothing to gain by protecting the ref. He also said analysts never call out the refs on bad calls which is even more inaccurate. The media is constantly second guessing refs. Your point about there being bias was actually addressed in his column too. He said relationships run from good to tolerable. The problem with expecting consistancy on a subjective call like abuse of an official is that is is entirely at that ref's discretion. Some things may not bother 1 ref that would be totally unacceptable to another. It's a flawed setup at its core but im not sure how you can get around it. You're dealing with numerous personalities (*coaches and refs) clash's are bound to happen


You said if he thinks a bad call has been made he says so. I say he left out the Hartley rant because it didn't fit in with his narrative. And in this particular article I think it damages his credibility and is part and parcel with him circling the wagons for the ref fraternity.

By bringing up Hartley he would have had to address the question of why one and not the other? There would have been no way around it. And honestly it was a question he could not answer so he dodged it.

Edited by coyotecanuck, 04 March 2013 - 09:55 PM.

  • 1


"Who knows, the center ice ref might have had a better view than the ref 5 feet away."

#27 qwijibo

qwijibo

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,167 posts
  • Joined: 10-January 09

Posted 04 March 2013 - 05:03 PM

You said if he thinks a bad call has been made he says so. I say he left out the Hartley rant because it didn't fit in with his narrative. And in this particular article I think it damages his credibility and is part and parcel with him circling the wagons for the ref fraternity.

By bringing up Hartley he would have had to address the question of why one and not the other? There would have been no way around it. And honestly it wasn't a question he could not answer so he dodged it.


He didn't dodge anything. Go back and re-read the column. The reader asked specifically about the AV bench minor, and asked for examples from Frasers career. He didn't ask Fraser to address why Hartley wasn't penalized
  • 0

#28 coyotecanuck

coyotecanuck

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,665 posts
  • Joined: 03-March 08

Posted 04 March 2013 - 05:09 PM

He didn't dodge anything. Go back and re-read the column. The reader asked specifically about the AV bench minor, and asked for examples from Frasers career. He didn't ask Fraser to address why Hartley wasn't penalized


Do you think there were other e-mails that were more specific about the call that he could have chosen to answer?

Regardless, he called AV "overzealous and theatrical" and made a case that the call was therefore deserved. I don't think it shows any integrity to make that claim and not address the more overt transgressions of Hartley in the very same game.
  • 1


"Who knows, the center ice ref might have had a better view than the ref 5 feet away."

#29 37yrsncounting

37yrsncounting

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 251 posts
  • Joined: 08-May 10

Posted 04 March 2013 - 05:13 PM

*
POPULAR

Taken from Fraser's column

"Respect must be earned—not demanded"

Why must coaches and players earn respect from the referees? Refs are paid huge money to officiate each game with an unbaised objective point of view. So is Fraser trying to point out that bias clearly exist in the NHL when it comes to officiating. Aside from that, hasn't AV won the division 5 times, the president trophy twice and also the Jack Adams trophy? That should be enough respect earned right there. Did AV as a coach ever fake a penalty or embarassed a ref? How bout Henrik when he was hammered by Mcgratton way late and absolutely no call on the play? Henrik, art ross and hart winner doesn't deserve respect?

How do you earn respect? Daniel gets treated like punching bag and the respect he gets is a diving call a few games ago?

Referees are there to maintain the rules and the integrity of the game and not to interject personal bias and clearly understands how to influence the outcome of a game, that clearly defeats the spirit of what a referee should be. Obviously Fraser doesn't see it that way but he clearly understands the power and influence referees hold as he concludes his column by lecturing AV

"Take a lesson Alain. Bench penalties can sometimes be game changers"

Just these two sentences alone tells you that the refs have certain bias towards certain teams and players. This type of culture is why its so frustrating to watch a NHL game at the moment. Burrows was right to speak out against the refs and so too was AV. This biased culture of current referees must change before any type of improvement can be found in the officiating of the NHL

So basically Fraser is saying, yeah, we refs are bullies, either join the club, shut up or we'll make you pay!

By the way, wheres Stephan Auger?

Edited by 36yrsncounting, 04 March 2013 - 05:24 PM.

  • 8

#30 WL Canuck Fan

WL Canuck Fan

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,700 posts
  • Joined: 21-June 09

Posted 04 March 2013 - 05:23 PM

Taken from Fraser's column

"Respect must be earned—not demanded"

Why must coaches and players earn respect from the referees? Refs are paid huge money to officiate each game with an unbaised objective point of view. So is Fraser trying to point out that bias clearly exist in the NHL when it comes to officiating. Aside from that, hasn't AV won the division 5 times, the president trophy twice and also the Jack Adams trophy? That should be enough respect earned right there. Did AV as a coach ever fake a penalty or embarassed a ref? How bout Henrik when he was hammered by Mcgratton way late and absolutely no call on the play? Henrik, art ross and hart winner doesn't deserve respect?

How do you earn respect? Daniel gets treated like punching bag and the respect he gets is a diving call a few games ago?

Referees are there to maintain the rules and the integrity of the game and not to interject personal bias to influence the outcome of a game, that clearly defeats the spirit of what a referee should be. Obviously Fraser doesn't see it that way but he clearly understands the power and influence referees hold as he concludes his column by lecturing AV

"Take a lesson Alain. Bench penalties can sometimes be game changers"

Just these two sentences alone tells you that the refs have certain bias towards certain teams and players. This type of culture is why its so frustrating to watch a NHL game at the moment. Burrows was right to speak out against the refs and so too was AV. This biased culture of current referees must change before any type of improvement can be found in the officiating of the NHL


Your seeing what I saw. Fraser has the same bias as the other refs, which is something I find totally unprofessional.

I know what sports entertainment is, http://en.wikipedia....s_entertainment, see the article.

Low brow, pre-determined outcome. Or, it is not sports entertainment, and is a competition sport.

Which one did the league say it was again?
  • 0
Sig too big.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.