(This original post, with video, can be found here at Canuck Puck).

In the end, the <b>Alex Burrows</b> - <b>Stephane Auger</b> <a href="http://canuckpuck.com/2010/01/12/burrows-claims-ref-is-out-to-get-him/">incident</a> doesn't seem to have amounted to much. Burrows was <a href="http://canuckshockeyblog.com/?p=2614">fined $2,500 but not suspended</a>, and Auger <a href="http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puck_daddy/post/NHL-Burrows-claims-against-ref-Auger-cannot-be?urn=nhl,213491">escaped punishment</a> thanks to NHL discipline czar <b>Colin Campbell</b>'s conclusion that Burrows' claims couldn't be verified. However, many of the key issues the incident brought up still haven't been resolved.

On the bright side for the Canucks, Burrows wasn't suspended and has continued to play a key role for the team, scoring in their <a href="http://www.nucksmisconduct.com/2010/1/13/1250514/canucks-fail-i-mean-fall-5-2-to">5-2 loss</a> to the Wild Wednesday. That's an awfully thin silver lining, though. The NHL's lack of response to the incident has to be concerning, not just for Canucks fans but also for fans of the league, and that point is being missed by many.

For example, consider <a href="http://www.thestar.com/sports/hockey/nhl/article/750557--cox-canuck-s-claims-simply-excuses-and-whining">this piece</a> by <b>Damian Cox</b> of the <i>Toronto Star</i>. You can get the general thrust of the column from the title, which is "Canuck's claims simply excuses and whining". Cox is far from the only one to make this accusation, but his claims are perhaps the most exaggerated.

There's a strange kernel of truth in Cox's bloviating, though. He starts the column by complaining that Canadian hockey fans see everything in terms of their teams and players. Ironically enough, that's the same problem he seems to suffer from; the complaint comes from a player who hasn't always stuck to the "hockey code" and a team that's dared to question the league from time to time, virtues Cox doesn't frequently espouse, so he throws out the entire issue because it's raised by someone he doesn't like. That's exactly the approach many fans take when a poor call is made against a player they hate.

Unfortunately, this kind of bias is prevalent throughout society. We don't trust the <i>National Enquirer</i> (generally with good reason), so the <b>Tiger Woods</b> story would have gone nowhere if their exposé hadn't been <a href="http://gawker.com/5421795/the-tiger-woods-saga-a-definitive-timeline">followed by his car crash</a>. We don't trust <i>The New York Post</i>, so the <b>Gilbert Arenas</b> scandal didn't go far until more legitimate sources <a href="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dcsportsbog/2010/01/arenas_gun_story_kicks_off_201.html">investigated it further</a>. On a more serious level, the police often disregard certain cases because of the credibility of the witnesses involved; the problem here is that it's generally people without a lot of credibility who witness serious crimes. A case in point is found in <i>GQ</i>'s excellent <a href="http://www.gq.com/sports/profiles/201002/marvin-harrison">story</a> on the shootings former NFL receiver <b>Marvin Harrison</b> was supposedly involved in, where it's revealed that prosecutors decided not to lay charges largely because of the credibility of the witnesses involved, despite a surprising collection of evidence (The FBI is now <a href="http://deadspin.com/5448656/so-about-that-marvin-harrison-story">reviewing the case</a>).

As in these cases, Burrows is anything but the perfect witness. However, his reputation as a player who sometimes takes dives and doesn't fall into line with the rest of the hockey world actually is a big part of the reason why this story came out in the first place. If you buy Burrows' claim that Auger threatened to get him, it's highly unlikely a ref would ever say that to a well-liked superstar like <b>Nick Lidstrom</b>. It's possible they'd say that to a grinder like <b>Derek Boogard</b> or <b>George Laraque</b>, but those guys are adherents to the code and would never repeat such a message to the public. Thus, the only way a story like this could ever come out is if a threat was made against a player like Burrows.

Another interesting element of this came from the columnists who wrote that this isn't as unusual as we might think. If you haven't seen it yet, read <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/the-nhls-worst-nightmare/article1428783/">this piece</a> by <i>The Globe and Mail</i>'s <b>Eric Duhatschek</b>. Here are the key parts:

<i>

"From a purely optical position, this is the NHL's worst nightmare. Worse than head shots. Worse than concussions. Worse than bankruptcies in unsuitable non-traditional markets. Worse, dare we say, even than Jim Balsillie's unwanted overtures to join the lodge.

When Alex Burrows opened his mouth Tuesday night in the aftermath of a 3-2 Vancouver Canucks' loss to the Nashville Predators to complain about the work of referee Stephane Auger, he said what a lot of people have been thinking for a lot of years:

That NHL referees do hold grudges; they do carry out vendettas; and they can affect the outcome of games with their calls."</i>

TSN's <b>Bob McKenzie</b> made a similar point in <a href="http://tsn.ca/blogs/bob_mckenzie/?id=305809">his first piece</a> on the matter. He talked about the severity of the accusation, but said the big difference in this case was just that the player came forward about it:

<i>"The NHL has, to some extent, always been a self-policing league. It happens on the ice between players and it happens on the ice between refs and players and it always has and likely always will, to varying degrees. ... 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."</i>

The amazing thing is that no one seems shocked by this. The <i>Globe</i>'s <b>David Shoalts</b> even <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/retired-referee-scolds-burrows-for-going-to-media/article1430442/">talked to</a> a former NHL and WHA ref, <b>Paul Stewart</b>, who admitted that there's "a long tradition in hockey of referees evening scores with players" (Shoalts' words).

Stewart said this wasn't personal, but was done to try and get players to adjust their behaviour; regardless, that's still incredibly disturbing. When you consider that games frequently turn on penalties and power-play goals, it's possible that playoff berths, playoff games and even the Stanley Cup have been affected by referees who were out to "even scores".

That's why it will be hard for hockey fans to simply accept <b>Colin Campbell</b>'s <a href="http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puck_daddy/post/Campbell-explains-Burrows-fine-no-suspension-fo?urn=nhl,213626">explanations</a> of <a href="http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puck_daddy/post/NHL-Burrows-claims-against-ref-Auger-cannot-be?urn=nhl,213491">the lack of punishment</a> given to Auger. Just <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/burrows-incident-lingers-for-nhl/article1433493/">telling us</a> "Our job, and our officials' job, is to be impartial. We're not going to bend over backwards trying to defend the fact that we have integrity," isn't anywhere near enough.

In fact, that statement's troubling on its own. As I wrote back during the NBA's investigation of <b>Tim Donaghy</b>'s claims, even the perception of impropriety from officials <a href="http://www.sportingmadness.ca/2008/06/donaghys-new-allegations-speak-to.html">can sully a league beyond repair</a>. Competitive integrity is at the heart of sports; that's what makes them so compelling. The NBA gets that; that's why they <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/06/sports/basketball/06nba.html?_r=1">hired</a> Maj. General <b>Ronald Johnson</b> to lead a highly-publicized investigation of the league's refs. Baseball gets that; that's why they hired former senator <b>George Mitchell</b> to produce an extensive report on the steroid era, which I wrote about <a href="http://www.sportingmadness.ca/2007/12/mitchells-silver-hammer.html">here</a>.

Neither of those investigations perhaps went far enough, but at least they made it look like the leagues were taking these accusations seriously. By contrast, the NHL is shocked -- shocked! -- that anyone would dare to question its integrity, and is content to <a href="http://www.nationalpost.com/sports/story.html?id=2438542">shovel the accusations</a> <a href="http://tsn.ca/blogs/bob_mckenzie/?id=305937">under the rug</a> within 24 hours and <a href="http://tsn.ca/blogs/darren_dreger/?id=305888">declare the matter closed</a>. That's not good enough. This isn't an <b>Alex Burrows</b> issue, or a Canucks issue; it's a league issue, and it needs to be addressed. NHL fans must demand better from our league and our officials. We're not going to take it any more.