Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Refs not even bothering to hide their anti-Canuck bias anymore


*Buzzsaw*

Recommended Posts

Is there a conspiracy against Van? I doubt it. Are the refs terrible at their jobs? Very much so. I do believe there is special treatment to star players around the league but don't believe the league is "out to get us".

Pretty much this.

I think the league is biased towards certain players and teams. Likewise, I think many of the refs play favorites with certain players or teams. They also have their "crap list" of players they don't like for whatever reason (justified or not). The frustrating part comes in with the fact that their bias doesn't seem to be fair. For example, why hate Burrows like they obviously do because of an incident from years ago when since then he's gone out of his way to be nothing but respectful to the refs but then seemingly have no problem whatsoever with the guys who argue with them all the time or the SJ players who dive all over the ice and make fools of them game after game, season after season? Why do some players get reputations for complaining or diving but others who do it as much, or even far more, don't get a bad rep with the refs at all? If it's truly about the refs feeling disrespected by these players, why is there no consistency in what they find acceptable? That's the problem when we allow feelings to come into play. The rules have to be the same for everyone regardless of the refs' feelings. If there are issues that need to be addressed, like diving, it needs to be done so at a league level and evenly so for all players. Otherwise, players will continue to be unfairly punished based on how bad of a mood a ref was in when the player did something, making it seem worse to the ref that day than another player doing the same thing in another game.

In past seasons I think their personal biases were allowed to influence games far too often. They still do to a certain degree, but even more frustratingly this season it seems to be mere incompetence. They don't seem to be trained well enough nor do they seem to be held accountable for making blatantly bad calls. Yes, they're human and make mistakes. But when they realize it they should own it and make up as best they can. (Like the blown icing call we saw recently. The linesman owned his honest mistake and just brought it back to center for the faceoff. That's taking ownership like a professional.) Unfortunately, far more often than not the refs don't own their mistakes or even seem to try to cover them up with more bad calls and the NHL does nothing about it. There have been multiple games this season decided by bad calls and those games could end up costing some franchises big $ if they miss the playoffs because of those few lost points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep. Last night was distinctly annoying.

I don't really care about the fact the Canucks have had virtually no powerplay time in this last run in with So-Cal teams, but that powerplay gift at the end of the game was infuriating - because it was so gd predictable.

Like you, I was reading Watson throughout that game, and when you know it's coming, it's unacceptable...... Both of Watson's calls on Stanton were exceptionally weak - and given the 'let them play' standard that was set throughout that game, to calll that crap with 4 minutes left wreaked of game management.

L.A. does not play shrinking violet hockey - they play hockey on the edge - and the only incident deemed worthy of a penalty to them. last night was a blatant trip on Hansen resulting in a faceplant into the boards. That part I can live with. The contradiction of repeated weak calls the other way - nope.

Devorski may have mangled the blueline repeatedly, but that's another matter - difficult judgement calls, one of which he owned the mistake.

But in the actual context of last night's game, those two calls on Stanton were fn slanted - and the second one smelled like a lump of dogturd.

It robbed MIller of a bloody stellar performance. What makes me laugh about the official apologists around here is the idea that a team deserves to lose if they are outplayed. That is crap. The Canucks have lost countless games over the past half decade where opposing goaltenders have stolen games - hell opposing backups have stolen lots of games against this team.

It's part of the game - goaltenders win games, steal games - and last night that was what Miller was doing - until he was jobbed at the 17:53 mark.

Some pretenders around here posturing that this team should be above winning ugly - what a load of self-righteous crap.

Who cares about embellished 'conspiracy' dismissals - that is not what this is really about. NHL officials lack accountability - they've ironically put their foot in their mouth fairly substantially - and imo haven't really recovered from the controversies they've surrounded themselves in (for those of you unfamiliar with the Campbell email scandal, Dean Warren's failed game management compliance, etc).. I expect more and I expect more transparency and accountability. Carey Fraser hasn't really been that shy about outing the incompetency and debatable integrity.

The Canucks went into SJ and won despite a deficit of a handful of powerplays and a pair of debatable penalty shots.

Otherwise, I've actually been fairly pleased with NHL officiating for the most part this season. The majority of games it hasn't really been an issue.

But to follow that up with last night's performance by Watson was infuriating. Miller and the Canucks had managed just enough to withstand L.A's relentless puck possession game - but that gift of a dubious last minute man advantage. What a piss off. And who are we kidding? Some of these guys - Chris Lee, Dan O'Halloran, Tim Peel, Kelly Sutherland - they're not household names because they're all stars - we know them because of the frequency with which they mangle what are otherwise good, entertaining hockey games.

If it weren't so predictable in some cases, it wouldn't be so gd infuriating.

You blame the officials for ruining Millers performance but the horrific non-coverage by Bieksa didn't help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You blame the officials for ruining Millers performance but the horrific non-coverage by Bieksa didn't help.

Well I could blame Miller for going down and leaving the top 4 inches of the next exposed, but I prefer to consider that a ridiculous call in the closing minutes of a game that had ironically been called nowhere near that closely.

Smells like game management, and regardless, jobbed a fine Miller performance to that point.

Btw - not sure what Bieksa was supposed to do about the shorthanded equalizer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

....

I just wish there could be some annual forum. Maybe on CBC, where top ref officials have to answer to the fans through questions, maybe on YouTube to answer for calls and non calls in crucial games for their teams. Wouldn't make it all better, but just to get a bit of clarity in some kind arena where they are made to defend some of the more atrociously called games. First they took off the names of the referees, then they put them in a bubble. This secretive club atmosphere is what led to Auger feeling like he could screw with the Canucks winning a game because he was still whining about some other game where a player dared to lay on the ice longer than he thought he should and thus "embarrassed him".

I don't know about a fan fueled forum of public shaming. As much as most of us try, we're not free of bias. Calls that go for our team often bother us less than the calls against our teams. That's just how it is. That, however, doesn't mean that there isn't a way the NHL could have a little more transparency with the refs. They have no problem publicly shaming the players when they do something wrong a single time, even if they admit it was unintentional (like Kass' accidental but stupid high stick), but then don't want to publicly address refs who make repeated bad calls. It makes no sense and frankly it's unfair.

I'm not saying they need to come out and point out every single bad or questionable call a ref makes. Mistakes happen and refs shouldn't be afraid that making a single mistake will hurt them in their job. They should, however, be expected to admit and own up to their mistakes and then strive to do better. To that end, I think the NHL needs to have a system in place to publicly address refs who continue to make multiple bad calls. They have no problem doing it with players who dive, so why should refs have any lesser professional standards placed on them?

Specifically, I envision something like this:

Starting anew each season, the following punishment is given for each game in which a ref makes multiple bad calls:

1st - private warning

2nd - public warning

3rd - fine (with the money going to the refs' union charity, if they have one, or their pension)

4th - larger fine

5th - suspension for a few games

6th - suspension for the rest of the season (with the chance to be reinstated for the following season provided they can pass a qualification test to prove they do know the rules and how to apply them.)

And, any ref with more than 3 games in a season in which they made multiple calls will be ineligible to work the playoffs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I could blame Miller for going down and leaving the top 4 inches of the next exposed, but I prefer to consider that a ridiculous call in the closing minutes of a game that had ironically been called nowhere near that closely.

Smells like game management, and regardless, jobbed a fine Miller performance to that point.

Btw - not sure what Bieksa was supposed to do about the shorthanded equalizer.

I get what you're saying but I have to laugh at the conspiracy theorists here (not saying you are one) that the Refs have it in for the Canucks. I'm sure every team has fans that believe the refs are out to get their team but the stuff said on here is ridiculous.

I've played sports (mainly football) at a high level in the UK and it's the same in any sport, don't give the refs any chance to call an infringement against you especially near the end of the game. Weak call yes but Stanton put himself in that position to get called.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know about a fan fueled forum of public shaming. As much as most of us try, we're not free of bias. Calls that go for our team often bother us less than the calls against our teams. That's just how it is. That, however, doesn't mean that there isn't a way the NHL could have a little more transparency with the refs. They have no problem publicly shaming the players when they do something wrong a single time, even if they admit it was unintentional (like Kass' accidental but stupid high stick), but then don't want to publicly address refs who make repeated bad calls. It makes no sense and frankly it's unfair.

I'm not saying they need to come out and point out every single bad or questionable call a ref makes. Mistakes happen and refs shouldn't be afraid that making a single mistake will hurt them in their job. They should, however, be expected to admit and own up to their mistakes and then strive to do better. To that end, I think the NHL needs to have a system in place to publicly address refs who continue to make multiple bad calls. They have no problem doing it with players who dive, so why should refs have any lesser professional standards placed on them?

Specifically, I envision something like this:

Starting anew each season, the following punishment is given for each game in which a ref makes multiple bad calls:

1st - private warning

2nd - public warning

3rd - fine (with the money going to the refs' union charity, if they have one, or their pension)

4th - larger fine

5th - suspension for a few games

6th - suspension for the rest of the season (with the chance to be reinstated for the following season provided they can pass a qualification test to prove they do know the rules and how to apply them.)

And, any ref with more than 3 games in a season in which they made multiple calls will be ineligible to work the playoffs.

In the UK for football if the referees have a series of poor games they get demoted for a while (Ref lower league games)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the UK for football if the referees have a series of poor games they get demoted for a while (Ref lower league games)

That's actually not a bad idea. I don't know if the NHL could do that though given that they don't own the lower leagues. Still, making them ineligible for NHL games for a while would likely get the message across pretty quickly!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know on one Forum I read about Sutherland in his High Schools days was a Canuck hater, Auger was not imagination....the guy was fired behind closed doors, Colin Campbells bias was clear for every one to understand. Now for fans to believe nothing happens that doesn't smell of bias is delusional. I suspect there was a lot of resentment from officials that worked with Auger ....it's natural. I have no idea what he's doing now but I'm sure of one thing he keeps in touch with his buddies ... I wonder if Auger lost his pension for instance. I don't think truth or transparency is high on the NHL priority list. The dismissive way Watson gestured for henrik to get off the ice last night spoke volumes IMO.

If I'm Linden/Aquallini I'm building a file of video eveidence to presnt and that includes things like the non suspension of Robidas for his hit to the head of Matthias, not to mention the career ending hit to Andrew Alberts head...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No Excuses. Whining about the reffing won't change a thing.

I agree with Mr. Bickle here, excuses are for losers. Every team could complain about the refs at some point. But I would have to bet that the fans of a team that wins the cup would complain less. The only time where I really thought there was something fishy going on was game 4 against the Sharts in 2013 but in retrospect it was all for the best as that team was heading nowhere fast and a higher draft pick was a better option than not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really post much, but I'm on the forum reading through everything daily (does that make me creepy?).

While the whole refs are out to get us thing is annoying, there's a reason so many people notice it and mention it.

I went to the game against the Kings the other night - I was sitting row 1 at the blue line, right behind Devorski for most of the night.

Before the game started, I was watching him, and he was super chummy with the Kings, even winking at a couple of them.

So what? Maybe they're just friends, a wink is a wink..

But for some reason, as a fan who traveled from Victoria and spent close to $1000 for me and the girlfriend to get over there, get a hotel and see the game (with pretty awesome seats), it made me super uneasy seeing him wink at the other team, and laugh it up with them.

He didn't do that once with the Canucks.

I mentioned it to my girlfriend at the start of the game that this guy is notorious with Canucks fans, and pretty much straight away it showed. He had some super questionable offsides (I was right on the blue-line), and a couple questionable icing calls.

You can tell the players are frustrated with it - Stanton knew he messed up, but he also knew it was a weak call - the look on his face was pure frustration.

When Devorski called that terrible icing on Daniel, the look on Daniel's face wasn't even surprised, it was just an annoyed, frustrated, almost laughing at the situation.

Somethings gotta give - I know these guys are humans, but they have to try their best to be robotic in their job - I don't want to see them laughing with or winking at the opposing team, it's not professional, and as a fan it just pissed me off.

Just my 2 cents..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know about a fan fueled forum of public shaming. As much as most of us try, we're not free of bias. Calls that go for our team often bother us less than the calls against our teams. That's just how it is. That, however, doesn't mean that there isn't a way the NHL could have a little more transparency with the refs. They have no problem publicly shaming the players when they do something wrong a single time, even if they admit it was unintentional (like Kass' accidental but stupid high stick), but then don't want to publicly address refs who make repeated bad calls. It makes no sense and frankly it's unfair.

I'm not saying they need to come out and point out every single bad or questionable call a ref makes. Mistakes happen and refs shouldn't be afraid that making a single mistake will hurt them in their job. They should, however, be expected to admit and own up to their mistakes and then strive to do better. To that end, I think the NHL needs to have a system in place to publicly address refs who continue to make multiple bad calls. They have no problem doing it with players who dive, so why should refs have any lesser professional standards placed on them?

Specifically, I envision something like this:

Starting anew each season, the following punishment is given for each game in which a ref makes multiple bad calls:

1st - private warning

2nd - public warning

3rd - fine (with the money going to the refs' union charity, if they have one, or their pension)

4th - larger fine

5th - suspension for a few games

6th - suspension for the rest of the season (with the chance to be reinstated for the following season provided they can pass a qualification test to prove they do know the rules and how to apply them.)

And, any ref with more than 3 games in a season in which they made multiple calls will be ineligible to work the playoffs.

Yeah something like this. Just the threat of this might just delay a trigger finger on the whistle when a vindictive ref is starting to pile up PP miniutes for one team on borderline calls while ignoring borderline calls on the other side. Its all so secretive. Why not expose that Auger was fired or let go because of his antics with Burrows, (which I highly suspect)? Wouldn't that actually instill some faith in the fans that the league is willing to get tough on bad behaviour amongst refs? instead they circle the wagons, allow Ron Maclean to smear Burrows in a 10 minute documentary, and then have him have a tete a tete with Colin Campbell interview about how wonderful our refs are in the NHL.

Right now its all so secretive its like the Stonecutters

stonecutters_song_1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's frustrating for fans when they spend large wads of money and rightly or wrongly see Official hamming it up with the opposition and then gesturing to Henrik to get off the ice when as Captain he wants to question the official I presume about a call. I don't want officials to be on first term names with Vcr neither do I expect them to enjoy a chat with other teams. Go out shut up and do your job in an unbiased manner. At some stage Vcr needs to start making fun of the officials the courtesy bit hasn't worked. I do not like the lack of transparency and hey let the refs answer to the Media after a game and explain their calls. Right now founded or unfounded fans think they're getting ripped off, it's just the reaction that differs....suck it up or get upset

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's frustrating for fans when they spend large wads of money and rightly or wrongly see Official hamming it up with the opposition and then gesturing to Henrik to get off the ice when as Captain he wants to question the official I presume about a call. I don't want officials to be on first term names with Vcr neither do I expect them to enjoy a chat with other teams. Go out shut up and do your job in an unbiased manner. At some stage Vcr needs to start making fun of the officials the courtesy bit hasn't worked. I do not like the lack of transparency and hey let the refs answer to the Media after a game and explain their calls. Right now founded or unfounded fans think they're getting ripped off, it's just the reaction that differs....suck it up or get upset

Exactly. Officials should strive to be almost robotic when doing their job - no laughing or winking with the players. Just get in the zone and call an honest game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The lack of accountability disgusts me. I remember Bettman going on HNIC and publicly claiming there was no issue with the officiating directly after he let Sutherland rig yet another playoff series. If the NHL won't end the corruption voluntarily, one of the owners needs to do so through the legal system. Allowing Sutherland to continue his garbage is criminally negligent towards player safety.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hate to break it to you guys but the NHL is a billion dollar business with hundreds of millions of dollars of tv and ad rights up for grabs every year.. To not think that has control to push the league to want big market teams featured in the playoffs and finals and to see smaller market teams lose is short sighted...especially teams like the Canucks that garner enought support, win or lose, to keep the team afloat..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hate to break it to you guys but the NHL is a billion dollar business with hundreds of millions of dollars of tv and ad rights up for grabs every year.. To not think that has control to push the league to want big market teams featured in the playoffs and finals and to see smaller market teams lose is short sighted...especially teams like the Canucks that garner enought support, win or lose, to keep the team afloat..

Absolutely correct. To deny it is not happening,like so many on this board, is to give license for it to contnue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I, like all fans, only want a fair battle field. If we lose so be it. I''m ok with losing a game fairly. Its just too many coincidences in too many games for my liking. At some point when your always catching Colonel Mustard, in the library, with a revolver, you start to wonder.

^Bingo! At what point do you stop being an apologist who makes excuses for a pattern behavior by certain individuals, and start believing there is something beyond mere co-incidences....and realize that you might just have some serial-killers of fairness in your midst? The scandals previously mentioned in this thread were outed by whistle-blowers & insiders,.. but the evidence has always been there for the fans to see,. as well.

And - how were those brave whistle-blowers treated by-they-way? It's better that CDC, bloggers & social media go on the attack & shame the NHL into addressing their issues, scandals & woes...rather than have another whistle-blower pay the price with their promising career. Glad Alex Burrows is finally claiming his path back again,... after facing hideous persecution for his honesty.

The 2nd question here is... when should one speculate about the motives or biases of these 2,..or 3 or 4.. or maybe 5 officials, and make our accusations stick to shame or force the most rotten eggs from their very comfortable & prominent spots in the egg-carton? The speculation is that there are still senior officials within the NHLOA who have not chosen to forgive nor forget the outting of one of their own... at least not those who approved of Auger's meddling "carry-over" justice methods & found his eventual demise - unjust.

The IIHF does everything that it can to vet their officials - properly. They carefully attempt to address all perceptions of bias...when assigning officials to work games in their high-profile tournaments.

For the number of times that the 'Nucks have had to see Sutherland, O'Halloran or either-Devorski work in their key divisional match-ups vs the Kings/Ducks/Sharks or a conference match-up vs teams like the Hawks, during the regular season or in the play-offs,...apparently the NHL doesn't have that same evaluation or reporting process in scrutinizing or ranking the performances of its' officials. Well, they freakin' SHOULD! But - that would take some more will & honest-integrity at the top by, Bettman, Campbell, Jacobs and/or Walkom. And - this is where the word conspiracy crops up.. because if there was a WILL to fix repeat occurances of the 'worst' officiating atrocities by the same characters,...they COULD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hate to break it to you guys but the NHL is a billion dollar business with hundreds of millions of dollars of tv and ad rights up for grabs every year.. To not think that has control to push the league to want big market teams featured in the playoffs and finals and to see smaller market teams lose is short sighted...especially teams like the Canucks that garner enought support, win or lose, to keep the team afloat..

Absolutely correct. To deny it is not happening,like so many on this board, is to give license for it to contnue.

Not saying that you guys are wrong, however I have some thoughts on this subject:

1.) As I understand it, what you guys are suggesting is that all 30 of the owners of NHL teams have to be in cahoots with the league brass on this conspiracy, to improve the chances of larger market teams winning a championship at the expense of these "smaller market" teams, in order to build TV revenue..

Also, what kind of risks of exposure is the NHL facing each time they have to deal with a potential new owner? Would you want to buy a small market franchise which has zero chance of winning a championship until the league decides that it benefits from allowing it to happen?

When is this potential owner brought in on the conspiracy, before or after the purchase goes through?

2.) Assuming number one is true, what sort of compensation are these smaller market franchises getting to go along with this plan? Certainly some financial compensation could be diverted to them from NHL coffers or larger market teams, but from what account to what account is this money moved? Is it done through personal accounts, and if so what about taxes? This money would be "easy" to track if you had a good accountant, and yet there doesn't seem to be any findings in this area.

Also, there has to be some kind of reward for an owners ego. Who really wants to own a losing team, but of greater importance, who wants to own a losing team which doesn't have a chance of ever becoming a winner (ie. win the Cup) unless the league decides that it is in their best interests?

3.) There must be some very tight security on this conspiracy below ownership level, otherwise someone at management level (or another emplyee) might have leaked an e-mail or hard-copy memo on the subject. When do these guys get read in to the conspiracy, if ever?

4.) The people in charge of NHL referees/linesmen would have to be involved in this conspiracy, wouldn't they? If they were on the outside then they'd not be able to give directives to the on-ice officials with regard to how to call a particular game. And if they were on the outside, wouldn't they notice that something was fishy if they call in a particular official because of a number of suspect calls, and are then told to back off by the head office?

Perhaps the league can get away without including every on-ice official in this conspiracy, but even if they have a limit of six or so that's still a heck of a lot of potential leaks. Further, how are these on-ice officials compensated for their part in this conspiracy.?

So many questions...

regards,

G.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really post much, but I'm on the forum reading through everything daily (does that make me creepy?).

While the whole refs are out to get us thing is annoying, there's a reason so many people notice it and mention it.

I went to the game against the Kings the other night - I was sitting row 1 at the blue line, right behind Devorski for most of the night.

Before the game started, I was watching him, and he was super chummy with the Kings, even winking at a couple of them.

So what? Maybe they're just friends, a wink is a wink..

But for some reason, as a fan who traveled from Victoria and spent close to $1000 for me and the girlfriend to get over there, get a hotel and see the game (with pretty awesome seats), it made me super uneasy seeing him wink at the other team, and laugh it up with them.

He didn't do that once with the Canucks.

I mentioned it to my girlfriend at the start of the game that this guy is notorious with Canucks fans, and pretty much straight away it showed. He had some super questionable offsides (I was right on the blue-line), and a couple questionable icing calls.

You can tell the players are frustrated with it - Stanton knew he messed up, but he also knew it was a weak call - the look on his face was pure frustration.

When Devorski called that terrible icing on Daniel, the look on Daniel's face wasn't even surprised, it was just an annoyed, frustrated, almost laughing at the situation.

Somethings gotta give - I know these guys are humans, but they have to try their best to be robotic in their job - I don't want to see them laughing with or winking at the opposing team, it's not professional, and as a fan it just pissed me off.

Just my 2 cents..

That's somewhat my feeling too. Some of the regualr So-Cal crews ,..can & do 'fan-girl' all over the Kings & their celebrity friends. It can happen in 'limelight' communities like LA. They wouldn't want to burn their bridges with the Stanley Cup Champs, a team who progresses in the play-offs ,..or harm their reps in that communty, in anyway. That's their hub. They like being there & have simply developed a bias especially - among some of these more senior & planted officials. This is why officiating crews need to be more-properly vetted & rotated ...& why accusations of bias should be taken a little more seriously...in this league of parity.

Perceptions & biases affect the way games are permitted to play-out. The 14-4-3 home record of the Kings vs their 5-8-6 road record is telling, in that it's the biggest differential in the league. Most have home & away records comparable to one another. We can speculate as to why this is & I'm just offering-up my own point of view on that, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...