Believe in... Blackballing ?

[Joe Blough]

What have all of you been smoking? Can I have some? I see poor officiating in general, the last few years especially (although it's a very tough job when you're on the ice at game speed trying to enforce the rules. Try it some time), not conspiracy... although conspiracy is much sexier.

Do you think the NHL head office and officials are as cunning and resourceful as NSA, CIA, SIS and Mossad? I think the Occam's Razor principal should be used in this instance. A lot of newer refs and some egos with personal bias that creeps into games at times, with every team I might add. There is definitely bias at times with many players in the league, some of which are/were Canucks, but no blackballing of entire organizations.

[Gollumpus]

And I already spoke to your point, in that the rules change so often, and are now so entrenched in "grey area" that any infraction can arbitrarily be deemed anything from a simple penalty to outright assault.

Take the term "head shot" or "hit to the head" for example.

The calls for this are all over the map now. There is so much room for interpretation of the rule that officials have way too much leeway on what to call, when, and on whom.

The Rome hit is an excellent example because if you look at the replay you can clearly see that Rome had his arm tucked in tight to his body. There was no elbow or other specific targeting to the head. The fact that Horton, being the dumbass he is, decided to skate through the middle of the ice while not paying attention is irrelevant. He got caught. A bit late, sure, but if you shave off 1 second from the play and it still happens, (which it likely would have) - is it still a penalty and suspension? Of course not, because it would have been deemed a "legal hit".... but wait... the guy's out cold - well sh!t, we can't have that, throw the book at him!

This is what I'm talking about. The lines are drawn all over the friggin place. Intersecting each other, crossing over, and eventually so intertwined and messed up, the cat comes running to play with it.

Quick response as I have to blast out of here...

Are we more concerned over a referee having the power to give punishment up to a match penalty, or is the concern more that the league then hands out additional penalties (suspensions/fines) beyond what has been given in a game, or in some cases was not given in a game.

I see these as two different points of discussion.

regards,

G.

[THERETOOL]

I love the history that was made by roger N and the nucks waving the towels . very cool moment .

I hate that we have a statue outside of our arena that says " WE SURRENDER "

That thing needs to be moved

[xereau]

The best hockey in 30 years was just after the '05 lockout.

The refs called EVERYTHING. The game opened up.

Skilled players, like the Sedins, rocketed to the top of the league.

I highly doubt there is a conspiracy towards the Canucks.

That being said, consistency, and more importantly, accountability, are the dual achilles heel of the NHLOA.

[riffraff]

Yes. Every team has to deal with Officiating they don't agree with.

Do some teams deal with it more so than others?

If so, why?

There has been a fairly publicized history here in Vancouver regarding the issue and I just wanted to posit a theory as to why that may be.

Feel free to add your thoughts here. I'm by no means saying this is the definitive reason why the "refs have our number", just my 2 cents.

Let's go back in time to 1982:

We all know the story so just look at the pics and watch the video.

Officials are every bit as prideful as any player (which is to say a lot) so is it a stretch to suggest that having a permanent reminder erected outside the arena that celebrates their very public shaming, just might have had some long lasting affect with regards to how they feel about this team/organization?

It's no secret that even now, in 2014, hockey is still very much an "old boys club"....

Remember what happened to Ted Nolan? People can have a very hard time forgetting things in this business.

So, could this:

... in some way have resulted in this? :

(and here we see the 1st of calls against Burr where Hamhuis takes his skate out - no call - so then Burr tries to draw one and gets nailed for slashing?)

even worse....

Burr so p!ssed his voice is shaking...

Last but not least... WINK WINK.....

Maybe that's what we get for erecting a statue of Roger Nielsen holding up a white towel on the end of his stick, outside the arena commemorating possibly the most brazen public display of contempt for officials in the game of hockey - ever.

Although I dont believe in a vendetta against the canucks...I share your sentiment re the statue...I was flamed large for stating as such on a similar thread.

Personally im not in favour of the statue symbolizing the franchise.

[darkpoet]

Quick response as I have to blast out of here...

Are we more concerned over a referee having the power to give punishment up to a match penalty, or is the concern more that the league then hands out additional penalties (suspensions/fines) beyond what has been given in a game, or in some cases was not given in a game.

I see these as two different points of discussion.

regards,

G.

As I thought, the discussion has taken on a life of it's own and ran off into a few other areas.

To be clear, I originally wanted to discuss the possibility that our team and/or players could get blacklisted by the league for certain behaviour(s).

That expanded into discussions involving general collusion within league ranks (which has already been established in this thread for those of you who haven't gone through the whole thing), and then ran off onto mini tangents regarding general officiating.

All of these things are ultimately inter related so it's kind of difficult to focus on one by itself.

My concern with respect to your specific question then, is that there has been proven instances (the Campbell scandal) where collusion has happened between the League, and the Union of Officials.

This is Conspiracy FACT not a Conspiracy THEORY.

This obviously affects the outcome(s) of game(s) and is something that no doubt has been going on forever, and likely will keep going unless something is done about it. What that may be I can't say. I don't have all the answers. I'm just here to point out that it's not crazy to think there are things going on behind the scenes that can and do affect the outcomes of games in this League. It baffles me how some here can be shown the evidence of that, and still refuse to believe it.

There is a word for willful ignorance: Foolishness.

[Dan G.]

Maybe we should just get Greg Campbell on our team. Lol

[Hansman]

However, that's the point here, chum. A comparable (for what we need in this case) has to be from the same era, and has to have the same set of ground rules. Otherwise it's just not a valid comparable.

regards,

G.

It doesn't have to be same era, as interference has always been an infraction in the NHL, had Rome's hit been a head shot, or a blind side hit, than you would have a valid point, being as the Rome hit was a late hit, well your argument really has no validity. Now in saying all that, I'm not fully convinced that the league is after the Canucks or anything, but I have been watching hockey a long time, and am certain that the NHL has the special teams, that are slightly assisted in the drive for the prize. Just my two cents.

[Baggins]

you have a funny way of seeing reality.

boychuck had space and time to back out of breaking raymonds back, he intentionally chose to break him in half while raymond was in a vulnerable position (intent is there)

rome made a split second decision to stand up horton at the blue line, would have been a nothing play had horton not watched his pass instead of keeping his head up, especially while crossing the blue line. (there is no intent)

also the unspoken rule of thumb is that a suspension in the playoffs is worth about 4 in the regular season. so the math on keiths hit on danny would have been 1-2 games had it happened in the playoffs and romes hit on horton would have been 20-25 games had it happened in the regular season. see any disparity here?

your either trolling here or have some sort of hate for raymond to see things so backasswards

I've been a Canucks fan longer than most here have been alive. I simply look at things without the homer glasses on. I've watched both the Rome and Raymond incidents multiple times and stand by my opinion. The fact I agree with the league on both incidents doesn't mean I like the result of either.

[Baggins]

Edler had two fingers broken by a Bruin slash.

Bieksa got his knee taken out by Peverley.

There's Raymond with a broken back.

According to Baggins ,none of these are as blatant as the half second hit on a forward admiring his pass in the middle of the ice.

They let a lot of hacking go on in that series. I disagree with it but that went both ways. The refs let far too much hacking, interference, roughing after whistles and holding go. I also recall Henrik giving Chara a two hander to the ankle on the way to their respective benches. The ref was about 8 feet behind Henrik and there was no call. I've never been an advocate of letting more go because it's the playoffs. I have always been an advocate for call everything from the the first minute to the last, from game one of the season to the final game of the playoffs. It's just better hockey.

Horton was keeping an eye on the puck carrier as he was streaking towards our zone. He made the pass at center ice and was hit at the blueline. Rome was looking at him the entire time and was fully aware he was without the puck well before he even made his move to hit him. It was a blatant cheap shot on an unaware player. As I've said, I don't see how anybody can defend it.

[Baggins]

Pretty much the exact same play as Rome on Horton.

Kariya's in the middle of the ice with his head down and Stevens does what he does best.

No penalty. No suspension.

Both hits were the same amount of "late" but neither was malicious in that the shoulders were down when the hits were made.

Invariably,the old "well that was a different era" argument will come up but you asked for a comparable so there you go.

This is also part of the problem in that the league keeps changing the rules or changing the bar on these kinds of hits. The grey area with respect to interpretation of hits is now so wide they can arbitrarily nail who they want at will (for lack of a better pun)

As I stated earlier, Boston was getting away with bloody murder in that series and as soon as one of our guys tries to dish it back, he's excommunicated from the series, which again, has NEVER happened before in a Stanley Cup Final.

Think of it in terms of just that series. Considering what Boston had done, does that hit REALLY deserve 4 games? How about Thornton pulling a can opener on Raymond then driving him ass-first into the boards breaking his back. No call there either yet that is by definition a penalty.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXimH_N7TMs

The biggest difference between the two is Stevens already had Karya lined up and was moving toward him before he dished the puck. Rome on the other hand had Horton travel without the puck from center ice to almost the blueline before he even moved toward him.

[C.S.Strowbridge]

I thought 4 games was justified as it really was a cheap shot on an unaware player.

Oh I get it. You didn't watch the game. That's the only explanation I can give.

Horton wasn't unaware. Rome came at him from the front. Horton was admiring his pass and got leveled as a result. Hits like this happen all of the time and sometimes players are injured. There are usually no penalties and almost never suspensions.

[C.S.Strowbridge]

The biggest difference between the two is Stevens already had Karya lined up and was moving toward him before he dished the puck. Rome on the other hand had Horton travel without the puck from center ice to almost the blueline before he even moved toward him.

You realize Rome barely moves during the hit, right? I just watched the video, again. Rome passes the puck, doesn't watch where he's going, Rome moves maybe a few feet, and then levels him. Horton moves farther than Rome did between the pass and the hit.

[Autistic1]

burrows gets paid 4.5mil a year. If he really doesn't like auger he can pull out a few pennies from those deep deep pockets of his and have auger dealt with once and for all.

Always blows my mind how people have the balls to mess with rich people.

[4thLineGrinder]

The biggest difference between the two is Stevens already had Karya lined up and was moving toward him before he dished the puck. Rome on the other hand had Horton travel without the puck from center ice to almost the blueline before he even moved toward him.

so because stevens hunted karya down from across the ice and takes a lengthy run at him it's ok

and rome who stands up at the blueline and lets horton run into him while he is stationary this is the more vicious act?

your logic is seriously flawed. they are both late hits on players watching the puck, the only difference was the resulting penalties

[Joe Blough]

My concern with respect to your specific question then, is that there has been proven instances (the Campbell scandal) where collusion has happened between the League, and the Union of Officials.

This is Conspiracy FACT not a Conspiracy THEORY.

This obviously affects the outcome(s) of game(s) and is something that no doubt has been going on forever, and likely will keep going unless something is done about it. What that may be I can't say. I don't have all the answers. I'm just here to point out that it's not crazy to think there are things going on behind the scenes that can and do affect the outcomes of games in this League. It baffles me how some here can be shown the evidence of that, and still refuse to believe it.

There is a word for willful ignorance: Foolishness.

Collusion between two individuals in positions of authority, yes, league conspiracy, no. Campbell obviously had it in for Dean Warren and perhaps other officials, and used his position to influence referee assignments and thus games, no question. This was more to do with a particular referee than a team.

It isn't the same as a conspiracy to predetermine the outcome of games and series. Campbell, Senior Vice President and Director of Hockey Operations, discussing and complaining about officiating with Walkom, Director of Officiating (which even though Campbell was clearly biased, discussing officiating was part of his job), and him having Walkom direct officials to intentionally affect the outcome of games are markedly different things.

I'm by no means justifying his actions, but pointing out the difference between the two actions. Do I believe games have been called poorly? Certainly. You can ask many fans of any team in the league and they will say the referees have it out for their team and they were screwed. It's only on CDC that it's developed into an art form.

[Baggins]

Oh I get it. You didn't watch the game. That's the only explanation I can give.

Horton wasn't unaware. Rome came at him from the front. Horton was admiring his pass and got leveled as a result. Hits like this happen all of

the time and sometimes players are injured. There are usually no penalties and almost never suspensions.

A better explanation is a lack of objectivity on your part. Or maybe you're the one that didn't watch. Rome had to turn and move laterally to deliver the hit. He made that turn and move well after the pass was made. The .5 of a second standard is the time to process and react to the situation. Less than .5 of a second and you don't have time to stop what has already been set in motion. The fact, and it is a fact, Romes hit was late and he made his move after Horton passed the puck means he delivered the hit despite having the time to make the choice not to. He was fully aware Horton was without the puck and was also fully aware Horton didn't see the hit coming. It was a cheap shot that you'd be screaming about if it was delivered on a Canuck. A little objectivity goes a long ways.

[Baggins]

so because stevens hunted karya down from across the ice and takes a lengthy run at him it's ok

and rome who stands up at the blueline and lets horton run into him while he is stationary this is the more vicious act?

your logic is seriously flawed. they are both late hits on players watching the puck, the only difference was the resulting penalties

First bold - Love the exaggeration.

Second bold - A flat out lie. Rome turned and moved laterally.

Third bold: Nothing wrong with objectivity. You should try it.

[Baggins]

Pretty much the exact same play as Rome on Horton.

Kariya's in the middle of the ice with his head down and Stevens does what he does best.

No penalty. No suspension.

Both hits were the same amount of "late" but neither was malicious in that the shoulders were down when the hits were made.

Invariably,the old "well that was a different era" argument will come up but you asked for a comparable so there you go.

This is also part of the problem in that the league keeps changing the rules or changing the bar on these kinds of hits. The grey area with respect to interpretation of hits is now so wide they can arbitrarily nail who they want at will (for lack of a better pun)

As I stated earlier, Boston was getting away with bloody murder in that series and as soon as one of our guys tries to dish it back, he's excommunicated from the series, which again, has NEVER happened before in a Stanley Cup Final.

Think of it in terms of just that series. Considering what Boston had done, does that hit REALLY deserve 4 games? How about Thornton pulling a can opener on Raymond then driving him ass-first into the boards breaking his back. No call there either yet that is by definition a penalty.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXimH_N7TMs

As I've already said. Stevens was moving towards Kariya prior to him dishing the puck. A boarderline call at best. Also this hit was prior to the crackdown in the past decade. Back then the league didn't seem to care much about such hits and Cherry made a good living making videos of them.

[C.S.Strowbridge]

A little objectivity goes a long ways.

The irony is stunning.

"...was also fully aware Horton didn't see the hit coming."

This is just a lie. The only way Horton didn't see the hit coming was if he had had a stroke and was no longer aware of anything before Rome hit him.. Had Rome not moved, they would have passed within a foot of each other. Horton knew there was a player in front of him and choose to watch the pass instead of watching where he was skating.