"Diving/Embellishment" discussion

[thema]

I beleive the real reason the refs can't stand us , is the whole burrows incident ,, he called the ref out publicly ...and now no matter what ref the canucks get ,will make sure to screw with us ... I guess there is a code , and the zebras feel it was broken ...

Remember, the whole Burrows/Auger soap opera started with a blatant dive by Alex that fooled a ref and gave us a power play that handed us the game...

[TimberWolf]

Last season a few players were accusing Dorsett of diving. Not epidemic but saw it a few times.

[IbanezRG]

The Sharks are the best in the league because of their powerplay. They get their powerplays by embellishing.

Embellishing works and the players know it.

I don't know how the Skarks are getting away with it after last years playoffs though. Surely the refs watched the tapes.

Agreed, however, when we were ontop of the league, our powerplay decimated and we got alot of them from some pretty favorable calls also.

wow just realized you made that post 2 years ago

[King Heffy]

Remember, the whole Burrows/Auger soap opera started with a blatant dive by Alex that fooled a ref and gave us a power play that handed us the game...

And was perpetuated by a ref displaying some of the most disgraceful conduct ever seen by an NHL official. He should have been fired on the spot, yet was permitted to not only keep his job, but assigned to one of OUR games. This isn't a Coppola movie; players need to feel safe in calling out corruption without fear of being blackballed if the NHL is to ever have any hope of cleaning up its act.

As for the diving, real simple. You get the only penalty. Faking an injury to draw 5 is a major and a game misconduct. However, this needs to be challenge-able in order to ensure the refs don't take any more liberties.

[mephnick]

People give me crap about watching soccer because of the diving, in a sport where possession is so much more important than hockey. 90% of the time this is used to draw attention to a legitimate foul. Soccer players get called weak.

Yet embellishment in hockey gets a "man that was a smart play to flick his head like that, draw attention to the foul. Anything to get the win."

It's such BS hypocrisy.

[etsen3]

People give me crap about watching soccer because of the diving, in a sport where possession is so much more important than hockey. 90% of the time this is used to draw attention to a legitimate foul. Soccer players get called weak.

Yet embellishment in hockey gets a "man that was a smart play to flick his head like that, draw attention to the foul. Anything to get the win."

It's such BS hypocrisy.

I haven't heard much of this, maybe a couple times on TV, but I think the vast majority of hockey people absolutely hate embellishment and have expressed as such.

[thema]

And was perpetuated by a ref displaying some of the most disgraceful conduct ever seen by an NHL official. He should have been fired on the spot, yet was permitted to not only keep his job, but assigned to one of OUR games. This isn't a Coppola movie; players need to feel safe in calling out corruption without fear of being blackballed if the NHL is to ever have any hope of cleaning up its act.

As for the diving, real simple. You get the only penalty. Faking an injury to draw 5 is a major and a game misconduct. However, this needs to be challenge-able in order to ensure the refs don't take any more liberties.

Your wording confuses me; are you saying that Burrows' dive was "perpetuated" by some actions or another by Auger? Do you even know what the word "perpetuated" means?

[King Heffy]

Your wording confuses me; are you saying that Burrows' dive was "perpetuated" by some actions or another by Auger? Do you even know what the word "perpetuated" means?

I'm saying that Auger could have done the bare minimum his job description required him to do and act like an adult. Instead, his gross unprofessionalism created a media circus, with the NHL implicitly saying that what Auger did was acceptable by not firing him immediately.

We should stop blaming Burrows for the NHL being unable or unwilling to clean up their act.

[MayRayDown]

People give me crap about watching soccer because of the diving, in a sport where possession is so much more important than hockey. 90% of the time this is used to draw attention to a legitimate foul. Soccer players get called weak.

Yet embellishment in hockey gets a "man that was a smart play to flick his head like that, draw attention to the foul. Anything to get the win."

It's such BS hypocrisy.

Like how a player grabbed an opponent's hand and slapped his own face with it? You can't even compare the 2 sports

[HC20.0]

I'm saying that Auger could have done the bare minimum his job description required him to do and act like an adult. Instead, his gross unprofessionalism created a media circus, with the NHL implicitly saying that what Auger did was acceptable by not firing him immediately.

We should stop blaming Burrows for the NHL being unable or unwilling to clean up their act.

Agreed. The fact that Auger got off free for his blatant unprofessionalism that cost us a game was an absolute joke. Should Burrows have dived in the first place? No, he should not have. But that is no excuse for what Auger did, and the fact that the league didn't discipline him was just endorsing his actions to other refs. People can blame Burrows all they want, but it was the NHL that dropped the ball. Karma came back for Auger at least, as he was fired a couple years later.

[falcon45ca]

The NHL needs to be more consistent in making calls. If they do that I believe that the diving will stop because players will understand what is a penalty and what isn't. Now, a penalty on one night would be ignored on another night. In this case, players will feel inclined to embellish because they aren't sure if the refs will make the call....might as well try to help the team get a powerplay

Is there a pro-sport league that you'd point to as an example of consistency when calling penalties? I follow a few sports, not a lot, & this seems to be unanimous among pro-leagues.

Eh, diving is what it is...some players are more inclined to do it, sometimes the coach may be giving a nudge...either way it'll never disappear from hockey. Personally I think boarding, elbows, slew-footing & head-shots are far more damaging to hockey than embellishment.

[Mr. Ambien]

This is the problem with sports leagues now. In the name of safety and nannyism, they've dramatically increased the scope of penalties, giving even more discretion of the referees to dictate the game. So guess what, unless you want penalties on every play, they have to deliberately decide to overlook penalties. There really is no point of having a rule if one is going to, at their own discretion, ignore it. This likens to the clutch and grab era where hooking, holding, and interference were simply not called. After dealing with that **** for so many years, there's no way I'd stick around as a fan for a league where this type of officiating was the norm.

Year by year, this is less about sports and athleticism, and more about sports entertainment slowly turning these leagues into the WWE, and it's been chasing me away.

[thema]

I'm saying that Auger could have done the bare minimum his job description required him to do and act like an adult. Instead, his gross unprofessionalism created a media circus, with the NHL implicitly saying that what Auger did was acceptable by not firing him immediately.

We should stop blaming Burrows for the NHL being unable or unwilling to clean up their act.

So are you saying that Auger's "unprofessionalism" caused Burrows to fake an injury in the Nashville game where the whole Burrows/ Auger affair started? Certainly we can all agree that Auger was a lousy ref but without Burrows' dive nobody here would have ever heard of him. The dive started the whole thing.

[thema]

Agreed. The fact that Auger got off free for his blatant unprofessionalism that cost us a game was an absolute joke. Should Burrows have dived in the first place? No, he should not have. But that is no excuse for what Auger did, and the fact that the league didn't discipline him was just endorsing his actions to other refs. People can blame Burrows all they want, but it was the NHL that dropped the ball. Karma came back for Auger at least, as he was fired a couple years later.

What exactly did Auger do? Apparently he told Burrows that he would be watching him closely, understandable considering their previous meeting. Burrows claims otherwise but has no proof but what he claims Auger said makes no sense; no ref would ever feel the need to say something as blatant as "I'm going to get you" when "I'll be watching you" says exactly the same thing. With that in mind I find Burrows' story hard to believe and apparently so did the NHL brass; maybe the fact that Burrows was such a play actor factored into it or maybe small details like the fact that it took a whole week for the important detail that their whole conversation took place in French made the powers that be skeptical. How seriously are you going to take a guy who fakes an injury to get a call?

[HC20.0]

What exactly did Auger do? Apparently he told Burrows that he would be watching him closely, understandable considering their previous meeting. Burrows claims otherwise but has no proof but what he claims Auger said makes no sense; no ref would ever feel the need to say something as blatant as "I'm going to get you" when "I'll be watching you" says exactly the same thing. With that in mind I find Burrows' story hard to believe and apparently so did the NHL brass; maybe the fact that Burrows was such a play actor factored into it or maybe small details like the fact that it took a whole week for the important detail that their whole conversation took place in French made the powers that be skeptical. How seriously are you going to take a guy who fakes an injury to get a call?

You didn't watch the game did you? Burrows clearly had a case against Auger. Score was 2-2, 3rd period, and we were starting to really take it to Nashville. Auger then proceedes to call four penalties on Burrows in the third, including two calls which were absolute BS. The worst one, Burrows skated to the front of the net, touched nobody, and got called for interference, and thanks to that absolute BS call, Nashville scored. It was worse then watching Kelly Sutherland ref, and that itself says a lot. Normally I don't read much into players versus ref arguments, but Burrows had a good case there. The calls Auger made against him were worse than awful, and it cost us a very valuable two points. Auger was out to get Burrows and made it be known in his on ice actions. The fact that he eventually got fired from the NHL tells you how good of a ref he really was. Auger single handedly cost us a game because of his own personal bias. That's what made it a huge story, because Auger's actions on ice backed up Burrows claims. Even non Canuck fans thought the reffing was a disgrace.

[thema]

You didn't watch the game did you? Burrows clearly had a case against Auger. Score was 2-2, 3rd period, and we were starting to really take it to Nashville. Auger then proceedes to call four penalties on Burrows in the third, including two calls which were absolute BS. The worst one, Burrows skated to the front of the net, touched nobody, and got called for interference, and thanks to that absolute BS call, Nashville scored. It was worse then watching Kelly Sutherland ref, and that itself says a lot. Normally I don't read much into players versus ref arguments, but Burrows had a good case there. The calls Auger made against him were worse than awful, and it cost us a very valuable two points. Auger was out to get Burrows and made it be known in his on ice actions. The fact that he eventually got fired from the NHL tells you how good of a ref he really was. Auger single handedly cost us a game because of his own personal bias. That's what made it a huge story, because Auger's actions on ice backed up Burrows claims. Even non Canuck fans thought the reffing was a disgrace.

We aren't talking about the same game! I'm talking about the PREVIOUS meeting between the Nux and Nashville. In THAT game Auger singlehandedly gave us two points by giving us a 5 minute PP on a play that was one of the most obvious dives I've ever seen which set the table for the whole l'affaire Auger (we won the game on the ensuing PP... which Burrows participated in). I agree that the game you speak of was a travesty and that Auger was a lousy diva ref but most people here are completely forgetting why Auger was pissed at Burrows in the first place. I don't agree with what Auger did but I also see why he did what he did. Despite the NHL's best efforts refs are human too.

P.S. Officially Auger "retired" after 500 regular season games... and a measly 10 playoff games (which is a good indicator of how good the NHL thought he was at his job). Many speculated that he was "pushed out" by the league but he was not "fired". Others speculated that the initial Burrows dive sealed Auger's fate as far as reffing playoff games went and it was only a matter of time before he was "not rehired".

[King Heffy]

We aren't talking about the same game! I'm talking about the PREVIOUS meeting between the Nux and Nashville. In THAT game Auger singlehandedly gave us two points by giving us a 5 minute PP on a play that was one of the most obvious dives I've ever seen which set the table for the whole l'affaire Auger (we won the game on the ensuing PP... which Burrows participated in). I agree that the game you speak of was a travesty and that Auger was a lousy diva ref but most people here are completely forgetting why Auger was pissed at Burrows in the first place. I don't agree with what Auger did but I also see why he did what he did. Despite the NHL's best efforts refs are human too.

P.S. Officially Auger "retired" after 500 regular season games... and a measly 10 playoff games (which is a good indicator of how good the NHL thought he was at his job). Many speculated that he was "pushed out" by the league but he was not "fired". Others speculated that the initial Burrows dive sealed Auger's fate as far as reffing playoff games went and it was only a matter of time before he was "not rehired".

The problem is that there is absolutely ZERO accountability for refs. The fact that the league decided to issue a fine for Burrows despite the evidence suggesting that his accusations were true, while allowing Auger to continue to work does suggest that the NHL considers the way he acted acceptable.

Further, it sent the message that there is absolutely zero recourse if an official is obviously abusing his position to influence the outcome of games. It's sad, but it's only a matter of time before the NHL gets taken to court due to their officials' misconduct.

[thema]

The problem is that there is absolutely ZERO accountability for refs. The fact that the league decided to issue a fine for Burrows despite the evidence suggesting that his accusations were true, while allowing Auger to continue to work does suggest that the NHL considers the way he acted acceptable.

Further, it sent the message that there is absolutely zero recourse if an official is obviously abusing his position to influence the outcome of games. It's sad, but it's only a matter of time before the NHL gets taken to court due to their officials' misconduct.

Hmmm if there were "ZERO accountability for refs" don't you think Auger would still be reffing in the NHL? Burrows got fined because he made a very serious allegation that, had he actually had real evidence (such as a sound recording) of what he claimed Auger said, would have almost certainly led to Auger's immediate dismissal. The NHL simply can't allow such serious (yet unsubstantiated) charges against their officials to undermine their authority; if they did every NHL team would make such charges all the time in order to get a leg up on their opposition which really would make the league a laughingstock. IMHO the league saw the way Auger reffed the 2nd Van/Nashville game and made up their mind about his abilities without any help from Burrows. To fall for the initial dive was the real problem; to retaliate in the next meeting was just the cherry on top. Gullible refs don't get to ref many playoff games and IIRC Auger never reffed another one after this whole affair. As for the NHL being taken to court due to their "officials' misconduct" I would love to know how you would prove in a court of law that the refs were doing anything actionable.

[King Heffy]

Hmmm if there were "ZERO accountability for refs" don't you think Auger would still be reffing in the NHL? Burrows got fined because he made a very serious allegation that, had he actually had real evidence (such as a sound recording) of what he claimed Auger said, would have almost certainly led to Auger's immediate dismissal. The NHL simply can't allow such serious (yet unsubstantiated) charges against their officials to undermine their authority; if they did every NHL team would make such charges all the time in order to get a leg up on their opposition which really would make the league a laughingstock. IMHO the league saw the way Auger reffed the 2nd Van/Nashville game and made up their mind about his abilities without any help from Burrows. To fall for the initial dive was the real problem; to retaliate in the next meeting was just the cherry on top. Gullible refs don't get to ref many playoff games and IIRC Auger never reffed another one after this whole affair. As for the NHL being taken to court due to their "officials' misconduct" I would love to know how you would prove in a court of law that the refs were doing anything actionable.

If there was accountability for the refs, Auger would have not been permitted to officiate another Canucks game. People like Sutherland and Devorski would have been disciplined for the BS they insist on pulling. Punishing Burrows for comments that circumstantial evidence suggested were true, while allowing Auger to work exactly as he had before (no playoffs isn't a punishment for someone who wasn't going to work them to begin with) leads other refs to believe that his actions were not considered egregious, especially after Ron MacLean resorted to publicly slandering Burr on publicly funded TV.

Bottom line is that the NHL refs are so bad that it's not out of the question that either an owner could sue for match fixing or a seriously injured player could sue for negligence. It's the next step if you're not OK with guys like Burrows calling out obvious problem officials in public. There's a culture against whistleblowing that's really appalling.

[thema]

If there was accountability for the refs, Auger would have not been permitted to officiate another Canucks game. People like Sutherland and Devorski would have been disciplined for the BS they insist on pulling. Punishing Burrows for comments that circumstantial evidence suggested were true, while allowing Auger to work exactly as he had before (no playoffs isn't a punishment for someone who wasn't going to work them to begin with) leads other refs to believe that his actions were not considered egregious, especially after Ron MacLean resorted to publicly slandering Burr on publicly funded TV.

Bottom line is that the NHL refs are so bad that it's not out of the question that either an owner could sue for match fixing or a seriously injured player could sue for negligence. It's the next step if you're not OK with guys like Burrows calling out obvious problem officials in public. There's a culture against whistleblowing that's really appalling.

You do realize that if you are going to bring up slander then you have to realize that Burrows slandered Auger with his accusations which he could not back up with any real evidence ("circumstantial" evidence of course doesn't count in any court).whereas MacLean made a charge against Burrows that he managed to provide many video examples of. By bringing up Sutherland and Devorski you align yourself with the fringe of Canuck fans who seem to think the Canucks should be allowed to choose whoever officiates their games (you and Viking Mama might want to go out on a date or something). Care to provide any examples of the "BS they keep on pulling"? Also I'm not sure exactly how you are going to prove "match fixing" or "negligence" in any court of law outside of, perhaps Zimbabwe. Since you seem to like the idea of litigation I suggest that Auger could sue Burrows for damaging his career by diving and then slandering Auger which Auger could argue helped end his career. A ridiculous conciet? Of course it is as are your suggestions for legal action. Hey I'm fine with any player calling out "problem" refs as long as they have some sort of hard evidence to back up their claims; if there really are corrupt refs out there I want them gone and, believe it or not, so does the NHL. Oh well at least you haven't wished a career ending injury on anybody in this thread which I count as progress.