The Experts Agree, Reffing is Biased
Posted 10:01 PM ET | Comments 0
As you read you will see that I kind of get "tuned" up and no matter how hard I try not to be just a "homer", I just can't agree with the way some of the calls and non calls go. Sometimes I watch the game and get cr@p from my da for criticizing the Nuck players for penalties not called against them, but by and large the most obvious non calls are quite often replayed by the "experts" as showing how such and such dived here or there or while others are showing "now thats Bruins hockey".
No matter who says anything that is opinionated it will have the flavor of whining, that can't be helped, but if this ran in Ottawa lets say, would this thread be less whining?
Put bluntly can anyone post anything comparing calls and not be labeled atleast whining? Anyway here we go.......
IMO the league and its ref's have tagged certain players as wide open targets supported by the bias of some of the journalists and commentators on the various telecasts. Burrows has been selected as a diver and as a consequence is sometimes/almost always ignored when incidents are against him that normally are penalized. Right or wrong the commentators state he didn't get the call because of who he is, which to me proves that a penalty should have been called or the incident was against the rules.
How could no penalty be called against Thomas when he hacked Burrows in the knee (slashing/intent to injure) and hit him with his blocker (automatic gross misconduct)? Was Burrows diving then? Or how about when hometown boy, Lucic, pushes him over to his knees and then delivers a league wide, well respected, left to the back of Burrows head while on his knees? In either case did Burrows flop around like a fish, no he just got up, but the ref's deemed not to call penalties for either infraction, in game 5, how can a cross check to the throat and being driven to the ice after the whistle not be a penalty, indeed Burrows was blamed for diving. Again later he is slew footed by Lucic before the faceoff and Burrows is given a penalty for putting his foot in front of Lucic's. Pardon me but isn't that common for players to try to get an advantage in order to prevent a winger faceoff win?
With record numbers watching the games in the US and Worldwide, the NHL is showing how bias thier reffing can be by getting even with perceived "divers" by suspending the rules when infractions are against them.
LaPierre was accused of diving when he got speared by 6'9" 265lb Chara, all he did was bend over and skate to the bench, but all the same, the color guy (Simpson?) on CB.C said he was diving and didn't deserve a call, again implying he thought should have been a penalty, just not against LaPierre.
For a while many commentators, including Ferraro, thought the Sedins did not get the respect they deserved as players of thier caliber, now he goes along with his T$N brethren berating how they don't deserve any respect because they dive so much, even though they never got the calls he used to think they deserved, this kind of perception, when televised to millions, can catch on regardless if true or not and eventually be picked up by the league and thier non talked about instructions to refs' regarding penalty calls.
While nothing can be done by the Canuck players or officials off the ice, maybe if they take the lesson learned and do likewise, the game will start to look so "bush", as what the Bruins did, they will start to enforce the rules of the game fairly to all players and issue fines for diving, especially in the playoffs.
On the flip side of being tagged and ragged on about being a "diver", Andrew Ference is applauded for throwing his head back (dive) and drawing a penalty when the stick didn't even touch him, no bias in these playoffs. How smart a player Marchand is for "getting players off thier game" by chirping and making little gestures like dusting off his hands after dumping a Sedin, all the while crusifing LaPierre and Burrows. Thomas's antics were interpreted as he was only getting even for having his stick hit (and not knocked out of his hands) by Burrows even though it didn't get knocked out of his hands.
Thomas draws a penalty (dive) against Kesler because Chara brushes into him beside the net, how left handed Kelser deserved that one is a wonder especially when later Lucic pushes Salo onto Luongo and then Krieche(?) piled on as well. Bias against the "divers" seems to mean suspending the penalty rules just about altogether against the team with the most perceived "divers"
For some commentators it must be difficult to wear two faces, one for each organization that pays them, Ferraro comes to mind here as he is one of the Vancouver morning guys on 1040 and quite often sings a different tune then. Come to think of it the NHL now controls just about all the programing with regards to the league, with the exception of the Globe and M@il I understand, "don't say want we want you to say and you don't get any interviews, press passes, or access" current NYI/NHL terms.
And Ron MacLean is in his glory at showing all the negativity he can against Burrows and the Canucks now.
No matter who says anything that is opinionated it will have the flavor of whining, that can't be helped, but if this ran in Ottawa lets say, would this thread be less whining?
Put bluntly can anyone post anything comparing calls and not be labeled atleast whining? Anyway here we go.......
IMO the league and its ref's have tagged certain players as wide open targets supported by the bias of some of the journalists and commentators on the various telecasts. Burrows has been selected as a diver and as a consequence is sometimes/almost always ignored when incidents are against him that normally are penalized. Right or wrong the commentators state he didn't get the call because of who he is, which to me proves that a penalty should have been called or the incident was against the rules.
How could no penalty be called against Thomas when he hacked Burrows in the knee (slashing/intent to injure) and hit him with his blocker (automatic gross misconduct)? Was Burrows diving then? Or how about when hometown boy, Lucic, pushes him over to his knees and then delivers a league wide, well respected, left to the back of Burrows head while on his knees? In either case did Burrows flop around like a fish, no he just got up, but the ref's deemed not to call penalties for either infraction, in game 5, how can a cross check to the throat and being driven to the ice after the whistle not be a penalty, indeed Burrows was blamed for diving. Again later he is slew footed by Lucic before the faceoff and Burrows is given a penalty for putting his foot in front of Lucic's. Pardon me but isn't that common for players to try to get an advantage in order to prevent a winger faceoff win?
With record numbers watching the games in the US and Worldwide, the NHL is showing how bias thier reffing can be by getting even with perceived "divers" by suspending the rules when infractions are against them.
LaPierre was accused of diving when he got speared by 6'9" 265lb Chara, all he did was bend over and skate to the bench, but all the same, the color guy (Simpson?) on CB.C said he was diving and didn't deserve a call, again implying he thought should have been a penalty, just not against LaPierre.
For a while many commentators, including Ferraro, thought the Sedins did not get the respect they deserved as players of thier caliber, now he goes along with his T$N brethren berating how they don't deserve any respect because they dive so much, even though they never got the calls he used to think they deserved, this kind of perception, when televised to millions, can catch on regardless if true or not and eventually be picked up by the league and thier non talked about instructions to refs' regarding penalty calls.
While nothing can be done by the Canuck players or officials off the ice, maybe if they take the lesson learned and do likewise, the game will start to look so "bush", as what the Bruins did, they will start to enforce the rules of the game fairly to all players and issue fines for diving, especially in the playoffs.
On the flip side of being tagged and ragged on about being a "diver", Andrew Ference is applauded for throwing his head back (dive) and drawing a penalty when the stick didn't even touch him, no bias in these playoffs. How smart a player Marchand is for "getting players off thier game" by chirping and making little gestures like dusting off his hands after dumping a Sedin, all the while crusifing LaPierre and Burrows. Thomas's antics were interpreted as he was only getting even for having his stick hit (and not knocked out of his hands) by Burrows even though it didn't get knocked out of his hands.
Thomas draws a penalty (dive) against Kesler because Chara brushes into him beside the net, how left handed Kelser deserved that one is a wonder especially when later Lucic pushes Salo onto Luongo and then Krieche(?) piled on as well. Bias against the "divers" seems to mean suspending the penalty rules just about altogether against the team with the most perceived "divers"
For some commentators it must be difficult to wear two faces, one for each organization that pays them, Ferraro comes to mind here as he is one of the Vancouver morning guys on 1040 and quite often sings a different tune then. Come to think of it the NHL now controls just about all the programing with regards to the league, with the exception of the Globe and M@il I understand, "don't say want we want you to say and you don't get any interviews, press passes, or access" current NYI/NHL terms.
And Ron MacLean is in his glory at showing all the negativity he can against Burrows and the Canucks now.