How about them Canucks!

[#juan]

Talloola
In that game Vancouver had 9 penalties against 4 for the other team. The penalties were mainly assessed against H. Sedin, A. Burroughs, with a couple to Willy Mitchell and one other player.
I have the game on VHS tape and I watched those so-called penalties over and over and that referee is obviously out to lunch. The Canucks certainly deserved a couple of those penalties but 9 penalties to 4 is B.S..

 

[talloola]

Talloola
In that game Vancouver had 9 penalties against 4 for the other team. The penalties were mainly assessed against H. Sedin, A. Burroughs, with a couple to Willy Mitchell and one other player.
I have the game on VHS tape and I watched those so-called penalties over and over and that referee is obviously out to lunch. The Canucks certainly deserved a couple of those penalties but 9 penalties to 4 is B.S..

there is definitely a problem there.

 

[Canaduh]

I hope for the Canucks sake this doesn't affect Burrows on ice performance over the next few games. He's single handily carried their front line the last 3 out of 4 games.

 

[talloola]

I hope for the Canucks sake this doesn't affect Burrows on ice performance over the next few games. He's single handily carried their front line the last 3 out of 4 games.

along with the twins.

 

[#juan]

along with the twins.

I expected a suspension. Either a player or that referee. There has been no word from the NHL so maybe it will all just blow away,,,,,as per usual.

 

[#juan]

Burroughs got a $2500.00 fine. I think that ref should have received some kind of penalty. If burroughs was right, that ref should have been suspended. If Burroughs was wrong he should have got more than a measly fine. This was a chickenshi t call by the NHL.

 

[#juan]

Apparently the NHL is reviewing that ref's performance.

 

[talloola]

Burroughs got a $2500.00 fine. I think that ref should have received some kind of penalty. If burroughs was right, that ref should have been suspended. If Burroughs was wrong he should have got more than a measly fine. This was a chickenshi t call by the NHL.

Yeah, I'm trying to find out what the explanation is from
the NHL, but nothing on web sites till tomorrow I guess.
But team 1040 will be blabbing about from 6 a.m. tomorrow
morning through till afternoon, so we'll find out something
from them. I know burrows would not make up this story,
so I'm assuming that he was fined for yapping off at the
ref right at the end of the game, as ref gave him a game
misconduct, and I'm wondering if Burrows will be playing
tomorrow night.
This is a messy story, and NHL will want to kill burrows
for talking to media about it, as now they will hear so
much from fans and media, so they won't be able to quietly
get their ref off the hook, without an explanation.

 

[wulfie68]

Well, I haven't seen the footage of the incident but everyone knows there are certain refs who REALLY hate being made to look bad. Don Cherry and others have been telling us that on HNIC for years. Obviously Auger is one of these refs (Kerry Fraser is another... Koharski was one too) and players need to be aware of that. In most ways its not "right" but if his willingness to carry a grudge cuts down on some diving and other infractions, its not all wrong either...

As for Burrows, he definately is not an angel: many of his "transgressions" are public record. He is the type of player that doesn't carry the greatest level of credibility with the league, officials or many fans because of his playstyle and his often cavalier way of addressing his own "shortcomings". Now he may have a legitimate beef here (some of the points made reinforce that) but he's already eroded his position in seeking some redress outside a small outcry by Canucks fans who want to believe him a) by his own history and b) by not going to his coaches when this happened, or quietly to the league & NHLPA. The $2500 fine is a no-brainer because even if he is right, none of the pro sports leagues allow verbally harranguing of their officials in public: justice is the League's to dispense, not the player/coach's to gripe about.

 

[Canaduh]

Well, I haven't seen the footage of the incident but everyone knows there are certain refs who REALLY hate being made to look bad. Don Cherry and others have been telling us that on HNIC for years. Obviously Auger is one of these refs (Kerry Fraser is another... Koharski was one too) and players need to be aware of that. In most ways its not "right" but if his willingness to carry a grudge cuts down on some diving and other infractions, its not all wrong either...

As for Burrows, he definately is not an angel: many of his "transgressions" are public record. He is the type of player that doesn't carry the greatest level of credibility with the league, officials or many fans because of his playstyle and his often cavalier way of addressing his own "shortcomings". Now he may have a legitimate beef here (some of the points made reinforce that) but he's already eroded his position in seeking some redress outside a small outcry by Canucks fans who want to believe him a) by his own history and b) by not going to his coaches when this happened, or quietly to the league & NHLPA. The $2500 fine is a no-brainer because even if he is right, none of the pro sports leagues allow verbally harranguing of their officials in public: justice is the League's to dispense, not the player/coach's to gripe about.

I agree he could have handled it better, but on the other hand if he hadn't made a spectacle of it and put it in the medias face the NHL would have simply swept it under the carpet. Catch 22.

I honestly don't watch all that many Canucks games but that's the first time Ive seen Luongo lash out. (he smashed the puck away at the end of the game and was "verbal" in his interview.) You could see the frustration on his face at the end of the game, he knew the refs blew it big time.

 

[#juan]

I think Auger blew it big time. He did talk to Burroughs before the anthem. He did make some questionable calls. His refereeing cost the Canucks the game. He called three or four penalties on H. Sedin who doesn't take that many penalties. I'll be interested to see if Burroughs plays tonight.. The NHL can make a smart decision or a dumb one. We should find out sometime today.

 

[#juan]

Here are a few more thoughts about it:

Canucks Community -> My two cents (or more) on the Burrows-Auger controversy

 

[talloola]

Well, I haven't seen the footage of the incident but everyone knows there are certain refs who REALLY hate being made to look bad. Don Cherry and others have been telling us that on HNIC for years. Obviously Auger is one of these refs (Kerry Fraser is another... Koharski was one too) and players need to be aware of that. In most ways its not "right" but if his willingness to carry a grudge cuts down on some diving and other infractions, its not all wrong either...

As for Burrows, he definately is not an angel: many of his "transgressions" are public record. He is the type of player that doesn't carry the greatest level of credibility with the league, officials or many fans because of his playstyle and his often cavalier way of addressing his own "shortcomings". Now he may have a legitimate beef here (some of the points made reinforce that) but he's already eroded his position in seeking some redress outside a small outcry by Canucks fans who want to believe him a) by his own history and b) by not going to his coaches when this happened, or quietly to the league & NHLPA. The $2500 fine is a no-brainer because even if he is right, none of the pro sports leagues allow verbally harranguing of their officials in public: justice is the League's to dispense, not the player/coach's to gripe about.

Flames fan right? Burrows should have reported this incident on the quiet, but I'm glad he didn't. The fine
is OK, as they cancelled the game misconduct 'that' ref gave
him right at the end of the game, so he can play tonight.
Ha, his bosses have 'again' changed one of his decisions,
so who came out 'rosy' on this one again?
I'm sure the ref was given a pretty good trashing by his
own bosses, as what he did was a stain on the league, and
bettman got rid of that fast.
Burrows is an honest guy, and as a canuck fan and follower,
I can vouch for that, and so will all of the other fans.
His style of play is on the edge, but not dirty or cowardly,
like cooke used to be with canucks.
He would not have made up that story, but probably didn't
take the ref seriously before the game when he threatened
him, and when it all came to be, and he realized that he
'would' actually do that, that's understandable, and we
all probably would have picked it up that way.
You have given an exaggerated discription of burrows, he
is a dedicated player, maybe more than most, and takes the
game and his team so so seriously, and if you listen to his
interviews it is quiet evident.
He was so upset after that game, his voice was shaking.
I'm sure there has been a gag order put on him now, but
that's OK, as he got it all out the other night, no harm
done, but that ref, i'm sure won't be stepping into GM
place any day soon, and maybe won't do canuck games for the
rest of the year, wherever they are, so he can clean up his
act now, and not threaten any more players.

 

[gerryh]

BS call from the NHL..... granted, the fine to burrows is small....BUT..... this looks more like a way to muzzle dissent against the NHL, and I'm not real keen on muzzling.

 

[#juan]

Talloola it looks almost like the NHL made the "smart" decision. The dopey ref has been subtly dealt with, the Canucks don't lose a player for tonight's game and Burroughs must feel a little better. I would have been happier if that ref had been dealt with a little more firmly but you can't have everything...:roll:

 

[wulfie68]

Actually Talloola, I'm a long suffering fan of the Islanders (and anybody but Edmonton). I don't have anything against Burrows but in the end, we have his word (a player who plays on the "edge" as even Vancouver fans admit) vs Auger's and the reputation of both parties. I should have added Auger isn't squeaky clean either (the Shane Doan alleged French slur incident) but how is the league supposed to take the side of a player vs the official with no hard evidence?

Auger has a reputation for interacting with the players, so his speaking to Burrows could be almost anything. It could even be a warning to Burrows that he would be watching him, which isn't the same as a threat, and which is actually within his rights as an official with a player he thinks may be a problem. Thats the problem with the whole situation: we have no witnesses one way or another and the evidence of the fouls on Burrows is highly subjective. I've seen some replays now and the calls were WEAK but nothing that seems excessively out of whack, especially when you take angles and the viewing points of the refs into account. How do you single a guy out based on that? Every player on a losing team could start complaining about every ref in the league...

There is no way the ref could be publicly admonished and even behind closed doors they'd have to be pretty careful how far they went.

 

[talloola]

Auger has a reputation for interacting with the players, so his speaking to Burrows could be almost anything. It could even be a warning to Burrows that he would be watching him, which isn't the same as a threat, and which is actually within his rights as an official with a player he thinks may be a problem. Thats the problem with the whole situation: we have no witnesses one way or another and the evidence of the fouls on Burrows is highly subjective. I've seen some replays now and the calls were WEAK but nothing that seems excessively out of whack, especially when you take angles and the viewing points of the refs into account. How do you single a guy out based on that? Every player on a losing team could start complaining about every ref in the league... .

Well, of course the league can't allow that, never has, and
never will.

I've watched hockey for about 60 years or more, wow, I'm
gettin up there. Have never witnessed an incident quite
like this one, and of course one can never know exactly what
happened, and the referee has many ways he can slither out
of 'actually what he said', he could say he was joking,
or that his wording was not quite like burrows stated,
but burrows has been around for a while too, he's not a
snotty nosed rookie, and he is 'honest', but I will say,
the referee had no business skating over to him to talk
about anything, let alone something that happened a month
ago, and the call he made a month ago was his call, not
burrows, the league felt that the call was too harsh, and
that has nothing to do with burrows, but ref seemed to
want to hand it back to burrows 'that' he embarrassed him,
no ref, you embarrassed yourself, you are the one with the
power, so make the right call, as the call is made by the
infraction at the time, not the condition of the player
on the ice.

If the ref needs to talk to a player about anything, it
should be a player with a letter, starting with the captain.
This referee has hurt his own reputation by shooting off
his mouth, when he shouldn't have, he obviously had walked
around for a month burning inside, and made a point of
getting even with burrows, a move he won't do again, hope
he learned something.

Burrows hasn't hurt his reputation at all, he is loved in
vancouver, and we all are glad he is playing tonight, although that particular referee tried to prevent that,he
didn't succeed.

Burrows would be snatched up by every team in the league, if he was available.

 

[#juan]

Actually Talloola, I'm a long suffering fan of the Islanders (and anybody but Edmonton).
Auger has a reputation for interacting with the players, so his speaking to Burrows could be almost anything. It could even be a warning to Burrows that he would be watching him, which isn't the same as a threat, and which is actually within his rights as an official with a player he thinks may be a problem. Thats the problem with the whole situation: we have no witnesses one way or another and the evidence of the fouls on Burrows is highly subjective. I've seen some replays now and the calls were WEAK but nothing that seems excessively out of whack, especially when you take angles and the viewing points of the refs into account. How do you single a guy out based on that? Every player on a losing team could start complaining about every ref in the league...

There is no way the ref could be publicly admonished and even behind closed doors they'd have to be pretty careful how far they went.

I don't think the ref should be interacting with the players. The ref is a game official and that is all he should be. The ref's bias was clear. In the third period he called six penalties against Vancouver an two against the Predators. Some refs want to have a bigger part of the action. Auger is one of those.

 

[shadowshiv]

It looks like it will be a third loss in a row for the Canucks. It was a 2-2 game for a while, and then Luongo forgot how to stop the puck from going into the net. He got pulled, but by then the damage has been done. I don't think the Burrows incident had anything to do with tonight's result, it was just an off night for Luongo.

 

[talloola]

It looks like it will be a third loss in a row for the Canucks. It was a 2-2 game for a while, and then Luongo forgot how to stop the puck from going into the net. He got pulled, but by then the damage has been done. I don't think the Burrows incident had anything to do with tonight's result, it was just an off night for Luongo.

yeah, not such a good game for canucks, and yes, luongo
didn't help the cause, he is suppose to bail team out of
problems, not contribute to them, but it works both ways
I guess, team has to bail him out sometimes too, and they
couldn't do that.
For those of you who don't follow other teams in the NHL,
minnesota has been on a tear lately, this is their 4th
consecutive win, and the havlat line have been on fire.
They were losing to calgary the other day 5-1 beginning
of the 3rd period, and minny won the game in a shoot out.
So, this is a team to watch now, they are making their way
up to a playoff spot. Maybe Gaborik should have stayed
there, they are a better team than rangers.
No the burrows incident didn't have any bearing on outcome,
and Burrows got a goal, right place, right time again, just
a very smart player, and great desire and determination,
and quick decision making ability.