Why is Boston such a good organization?

[jgatie]

Hilarious that in your imaginary world if the Maple Leafs got 1-2 more PPs they would have automatically scored a couple goals and negated the two goals the Bruins scored at ES… they were 0-4 that game

To point 4, where your entire argument completely falls apart (let’s pretend for a second it didn’t fall apart before you even started and this hasn’t been hilarious from the start)….

Why would the Bruins still be getting “favourable officiating” when they’re a very soft team who barely play physical?

B-b-b-b-but Game 2!!! 5 years ago!!!

 

[nbwingsfan]

Sorry I forgot your second point here. I mean, I’m a leaf fan. I watched Marchand slew foot lilligren and take him out of the lineup for around 6-7 weeks.

No penalty called. That seems like favorable officiating to me.

I haven’t watched a ton of bruins games this year, and I certainly couldn’t remember them off the top of my head if I did, but that wasn’t even a penalty, should have been a suspension

No now you’re basing the Bruins getting biased referring for the past 3.5 years because of ONE single PLAY (a play the NHL reviewed and had no issue with to boot)

Boston is a soft team now. They’re even behind the Leaf’s in hits this season. Last year they were 14th.

We’re now basing an entire 5 year sample off of not just one game, but one PLAY.

We’re done here. Someone else can take over with this nonsense

 

[Strangle]

No now you’re basing the Bruins getting biased referring for the past 3.5 years because of ONE single PLAY (a play the NHL reviewed and had no issue with to boot)

Boston is a soft team now. They’re even behind the Leaf’s in hits this season. Last year they were 14th.

We’re now basing an entire 5 year sample off of not just one game, but one PLAY.

We’re done here. Someone else can take over with this nonsense

What are you talking about?

Your stance is that the bruins don’t get favorable officiating, I’m asked ‘what about this year?’ And the play I remembered was when Marchand slew footed Lilly and didn’t get a penalty.

I don’t see how this is arguable, the fact it was looked at and the NHL had no issue with it only strengthens my argument.

You need to stop and think this stuff through

“Slew footing in the NHL results in an automatic match penalty, which is also accompanied by a five-minute major which needs to be served by a teammate who was on the ice at the time of the infraction. A match penalty means the player is ejected from the game, and the referee must report the incident to the league after the contest”

How many match penalties for slew footing has Marchand received in his career?

Answer: not enough!



I don’t know why the officials let this stuff go on, or why the league hasn’t suspended Marchand as often as they should have, but the evidence is pretty clear

When do we get to chara?

 

[ON3M4N]

SMH, Bruins up 2-0 vs Ottawa while continuing to get favorable officiating.

 

[Strangle]

SMH, Bruins up 2-0 vs Ottawa while continuing to get favorable officiating.

View attachment 810468

Looks like the refs are doing their job tonight. I’m not watching the game, but my gut tells me if all the bruins games over the past decade were called like this, they wouldn’t have won as many games

NHL games don’t end as often as they should where the bruins take double the penalties of their opponent. Theres still time for the refs to ‘even it up’ though

 

[Come Gun]

I don’t see how this is arguable, the fact it was looked at and the NHL had no issue with it only strengthens my argument.

No that actually weakens your point. You play some weird connect the dots game to try an draw an ambiguous line to prove your opinion.

Based on what you provided for "evidence", why can't one just reasonably assume that its not that the Bruins benefit from favorable officiating vs the opinion that maybe its the opposite, that maybe the Leafs suffer from unfair treatment and maybe that could explain all their recent failures.

If I play the same weird connect the dot game that you are using I can come up with Bettman, Arizona, Matthews as enough reasons as to why the league may conspire to have them fail.

 

[ZDH]

That "slewfoot" was super borderline. If Marchand had no history we wouldn't even be talking about it.

 

[nbwingsfan]

No that actually weakens your point. You play some weird connect the dots game to try an draw an ambiguous line to prove your opinion.

Based on what you provided for "evidence", why can't one just reasonably assume that its not that the Bruins benefit from favorable officiating vs the opinion that maybe its the opposite, that maybe the Leafs suffer from unfair treatment and maybe that could explain all their recent failures.

If I play the same weird connect the dot game that you are using I can come up with Bettman, Arizona, Matthews as enough reasons as to why the league may conspire to have them fail.

Yeah first the guy says he’s saying the Refs are biased towards the Bruins and let them get away with stuff and EXPLICITLY says it ISNT the NHL who’s biased towards them.

Fast forward to now where when he’s shown the NHL actually agreed with the Refs not calling Marchand here, and now he’s back tracking and saying the NHL is also biased towards them for… reasons?

Then again, this is a guy basing the Bruins “biased reffing” since 2020 on one SINGLE play, so I expect very, very little common sense or reasoning to be posted

 

[Strangle]

No that actually weakens your point. You play some weird connect the dots game to try an draw an ambiguous line to prove your opinion.

Based on what you provided for "evidence", why can't one just reasonably assume that its not that the Bruins benefit from favorable officiating vs the opinion that maybe its the opposite, that maybe the Leafs suffer from unfair treatment and maybe that could explain all their recent failures.

If I play the same weird connect the dot game that you are using I can come up with Bettman, Arizona, Matthews as enough reasons as to why the league may conspire to have them fail.

Because I think the officiating tries to manage the game through penalties.

So if the officials only want to give 3-4 powerplays per team in the game, that’s what they’ll do. It doesn’t actually matter how many infractions actually happen, a lot of games the goal is to just ‘make it fair’ in the box score and ignore what’s actually happening on the ice.

So a dirty team knows they won’t take 20 penalties in a game, the refs would rarely do that and that they’ll keep giving you power plays to look fair.

The bruins have benefitted from this. They’re probably smart to recognize this and take advantage of it, and the leafs are making a tactical error believing ‘our toughness is our powerplay’ because that’s just not how the league works.

But that’s irrelevant, really. The point is that Boston benefits from the league working this way and it manifests through favorable officiating

And that’s how they’ve been such a ‘good’ organization

 

[jgatie]

Yeah first the guy says he’s saying the Refs are biased towards the Bruins and let them get away with stuff and EXPLICITLY says it ISNT the NHL who’s biased towards them.

Fast forward to now where when he’s shown the NHL actually agreed with the Refs not calling Marchand here, and now he’s back tracking and saying the NHL is also biased towards them for… reasons?

Then again, this is a guy basing the Bruins “biased reffing” since 2020 on one SINGLE play, so I expect very, very little common sense or reasoning to be posted

A couple pages back he posted a series of Marchand videos highlighting his lowlites, all of which he got a penalty for, and half of which he got suspended for, as proof of bias in favor of the Bruins.

 

[Canadiens Ghost]

As a Habs fan, I hate the Bruins for all the usual reasons. But one thing I admire about them, their players always seem to buy in on the "team first" concept.

 

[PB37]

Because I think the officiating tries to manage the game through penalties.

So if the officials only want to give 3-4 powerplays per team in the game, that’s what they’ll do. It doesn’t actually matter how many infractions actually happen, a lot of games the goal is to just ‘make it fair’ in the box score and ignore what’s actually happening on the ice.

So a dirty team knows they won’t take 20 penalties in a game, the refs would rarely do that and that they’ll keep giving you power plays to look fair.

The bruins have benefitted from this. They’re probably smart to recognize this and take advantage of it, and the leafs are making a tactical error believing ‘our toughness is our powerplay’ because that’s just not how the league works.

But that’s irrelevant, really. The point is that Boston benefits from the league working this way and it manifests through favorable officiating

And that’s how they’ve been such a ‘good’ organization

So you continue to whine and complain about calls the Bruins get away with. But apparently the other team they play against don't get away with penalties... or maybe in your delusional Leaf Blue and White world, they don't get away with enough. You're biased about the Bruins and can't see this discussion clearly because the Leafs have lost to them in humiliating fashion. Even if the Bruins have been near the top of the league for penalties called on them, it's not enough in your eyes.

 

[Come Gun]

Because I think the officiating tries to manage the game through penalties.

No one is arguing this, we all know game management exist

So if the officials only want to give 3-4 powerplays per team in the game, that’s what they’ll do. It doesn’t actually matter how many infractions actually happen, a lot of games the goal is to just ‘make it fair’ in the box score and ignore what’s actually happening on the ice.

So a dirty team knows they won’t take 20 penalties in a game, the refs would rarely do that and that they’ll keep giving you power plays to look fair.

Sure, lets say this is the case, how does the video you provided show that the Bruins knows this and are repeatedly exploiting it for their own personal gain? Or how does it show that the refs are employing this strategy only to the benefit of the bruins and a few other select teams?

I personally feel like you are continuously referencing this game and want us to agree that this is an example of preferential treatment, instead of just an instance of a game that had a few miscalls, so that you can use it as a base for any other game that has a similar reflection as a clear example of favoritism because your first examples is, so how could we dispute that it isn't.

The bruins have benefitted from this. They’re probably smart to recognize this and take advantage of it, and the leafs are making a tactical error believing ‘our toughness is our powerplay’ because that’s just not how the league works.

But that’s irrelevant, really. The point is that Boston benefits from the league working this way and it manifests through favorable officiating

And that’s how they’ve been such a ‘good’ organization

You would have to show that only the Bruins were recipients of this benefit to use it as a means to diminish their accomplishments.

If your assertation is that teams that play a heavier style of game get only a small amount of the actual fractions they commit compared to teams that prefer a more finesse style of play your "evidence" would have to show that. It cant just be a game that you have an emotional investment in the outcome and that because you disagree with the non calls that there has to be some great conspiracy afoot.

 

[PatriceBergeronFan]

What are you talking about?

Your stance is that the bruins don’t get favorable officiating, I’m asked ‘what about this year?’ And the play I remembered was when Marchand slew footed Lilly and didn’t get a penalty.

I don’t see how this is arguable, the fact it was looked at and the NHL had no issue with it only strengthens my argument.

You need to stop and think this stuff through

“Slew footing in the NHL results in an automatic match penalty, which is also accompanied by a five-minute major which needs to be served by a teammate who was on the ice at the time of the infraction. A match penalty means the player is ejected from the game, and the referee must report the incident to the league after the contest”

How many match penalties for slew footing has Marchand received in his career?

Answer: not enough!



I don’t know why the officials let this stuff go on, or why the league hasn’t suspended Marchand as often as they should have, but the evidence is pretty clear

When do we get to chara?

Are you citing the Marchand puck battle as further evidence for this conspiracy? Ridiculous and time to get the topic back on track.

 

[FunkySeeFunkyDoo]

As a Habs fan, I hate the Bruins for all the usual reasons. But one thing I admire about them, their players always seem to buy in on the "team first" concept.

They fight harder to win puck battles than any other team I’ve watched this year.

 

[Terrier]

This weekend marks the first time Boston University and Boston College meet as the top-ranked men’s college hockey teams - The Boston Globe

The teams enter with 16-4-1 records, with the Terriers holding down the top spot in the national polls, as well as the PairWise.

www.bostonglobe.com

 

[bearcountry17]

Jacobs must have been short on his envelope this month. Only one PP vs the Sens who had 6.

 

[conFABulator]

I was polite and honest with my answers, and you come back with this. I'll not reply again.

Apologies if my post came across as rude. I appreciated your response and don't see how my reply wasn't appropriate. Honestly, try to read it with a matter of fact tone. I was simply pointing out how your post read for me and then that I hadn't read enough of the posts on here to have an opinion on your second point.

Once again, not meant to be rude and apologize if it came across that way

Eh, as a fan if a team who was competing for a very long time and now has put together some unwatchable rosters the last few years I think I would much prefer the Bruins model

I hear you. I am not knocking the Bruins and they have had a better run than most teams. I am just finding it very interesting that a team without cup success is being held up as an example of success.

 

[nbwingsfan]

Apologies if my post came across as rude. I appreciated your response and don't see how my reply wasn't appropriate. Honestly, try to read it with a matter of fact tone. I was simply pointing out how your post read for me and then that I hadn't read enough of the posts on here to have an opinion on your second point.

Once again, not meant to be rude and apologize if it came across that way


I hear you. I am not knocking the Bruins and they have had a better run than most teams. I am just finding it very interesting that a team without cup success is being held up as an example of success.

I don’t really think anyone is calling it Cup success, just that since 2011 their league standings are as follows:

2011 - 7th (Cup)
2012 - 7th
2013 - 5th (finals)
2014 - 1st
2015- 18th
2016 - 16th (missed playoffs by 1pt)
2017- 13th
2018 - 4th
2019 - 2nd (finals)
2020- 1st
2021- 10th
2022- 10th
2023 - 1st (NHL record in points)
2024 - competing for 1st

They’ve done all this despite losing two HoF level goalies, a HoF Selke champion, a HoF defenseman, a 1st like C calibre player in Krejci all due to age. You could even include Savard in there to injury.

They’ve done all that despite constantly being buyers at the deadline and their only top 10 picks on their roster weren’t even their own picks (Hamilton/Seguin) and weren’t around very long.

It’s just such an interesting way they’ve stayed so competitive for so long.

Sure Chicago has had more success with Cups but they had to go through a massive rebuild now.
LA had more success with Cups but they also bottomed out a few times in this span and still have a few key players from their Cup Runs remaining on the team (I think Boston only has Marchand who was a rookie at the time)

Both Pens and Bolts have more Cup success but they were both built off of 1st and 2nd overall franchise level players and the Pens especially are about to enter a long long rebuild.

But, apparently this can all just be explained by refferee preferential treatment…

 

[Score8]

What are you talking about?

Your stance is that the bruins don’t get favorable officiating, I’m asked ‘what about this year?’ And the play I remembered was when Marchand slew footed Lilly and didn’t get a penalty.

I don’t see how this is arguable, the fact it was looked at and the NHL had no issue with it only strengthens my argument.

You need to stop and think this stuff through

“Slew footing in the NHL results in an automatic match penalty, which is also accompanied by a five-minute major which needs to be served by a teammate who was on the ice at the time of the infraction. A match penalty means the player is ejected from the game, and the referee must report the incident to the league after the contest”

How many match penalties for slew footing has Marchand received in his career?

Answer: not enough!



I don’t know why the officials let this stuff go on, or why the league hasn’t suspended Marchand as often as they should have, but the evidence is pretty clear

When do we get to chara?

Not a slew foot , next.

 

[Cenzo_]

Team looks good in the regular season but 6 cups in 100+ years is not what I would call success

 

[Strangle]

Team looks good in the regular season but 6 cups in 100+ years is not what I would call success

They’ve missed the playoffs, what once? In like 30 years

I think that’s something to be proud of

 

[cneely]

What am I supposed to address?

All that you’ve said is ‘not THAT evidence!’ Like what the hell are you talking about?

Nobody has said "not that evidence". Not one single person. What we have continuously said is that one game is not proof of any widespread conspiracy to help the Bruins.

I was asked for evidence, I showed the video of most of the infractions that weren’t called in a specific game, along with the box score to show that the refs had favorably officiated the game in the bruins favor ….. and everyone got super butthurt about it. That part is not my problem, that’s a you problem.

The Mcavoy on Hyman play is not interference lmao. You can hit a guy after he lets go of the puck. I humored you, watched the highlights, and left my comments, which you completely ignored. The worst miss calls were the Gzreclyk high stick and Tavares pushing Rask in the crease. The DeBrusk knee was borderline, but I can't see him moving his leg, so it looks like incidental contact to me. What other play did you have an issue with?

A bunch of overly sensitive bruins fans then wanted to know if I thought Columbus was better than the leafs (like, what?). Or that I think there’s a conspiracy by the NHL to have the bruins win the cup 20 years straight (again…. Gonna need a quote for that one. Evidence? Lmao)

Wait...
So one game is enough to prove your point, but not enough to prove mine. Is that what you're saying?

So I realized that you guys don’t seem to know that the refs manage the game in the way they call penalties. So I explained that to you, the Tim peel firing is the easiest proof out there, so not a big deal.

Again, every single person in this thread knows that refs manage the game. What we don't know, and what there is absolutely no proof of, is that they do it to favour one specific team.

But you can’t even bring yourself to acknowledge even that.

I mean, what am I supposed to do with you? You’re pointedly not at all engaging with anything I’ve said or posted, you’re constantly trying to change the subject away from favorable officiating and trying to … make fun of me?

Many people are engaging with your specific points. You're ignoring them.

Man, lmao.

I was born in the 80’s, you’re not going to hurt my feelings.

I guess your slap down defense is “uh uh” *thumbs up* good one!

Did the way game 2 in 2019 was officiated help the bruins win? Should be easy to answer but I know you’ll say “ITS ONE GAME OMG OMG”.

Nope. The Bruins were a far better team that game.

Once we can establish that

1. Officiating is a subjective activity that is used by the refs to manage the game

no question

2. The Bruins should not have been up 2-0 before the leafs were given a powerplay

ok..... and?

3. Favorable officiating worked in the bruins favor to win that game

LMAO. I could argue the Muzzin boarding call on Krug was totally missed. But I'm not a whiny bitch.

4. The bruins have been consistantly effective due to a pattern of the same kind of favorable officiating that we see in game 2 of the 2019 playoffs

You are making an assertion. If you have proof of that assertion, bring it.

Once you catch up to the conversation, we can move on past “OMG OME GAME?!!! HAHAHAH YOU SO CRAT CRAY STRANG”

But we aren’t going to be able to do that until you catch up on terms of the discussion, which I’ve listed for you to recap.

Read it slowly, and try to address those 4 things. Now try to keep up, and try to stay on topic.

I've addressed those 4 things. As I have repeatedly in this thread.
I'm willing to bet big that you will go ahead and ignore my comments again.

 

[Strangle]

Nobody has said "not that evidence". Not one single person. What we have continuously said is that one game is not proof of any widespread conspiracy to help the Bruins.



The Mcavoy on Hyman play is not interference lmao. You can hit a guy after he lets go of the puck. I humored you, watched the highlights, and left my comments, which you completely ignored. The worst miss calls were the Gzreclyk high stick and Tavares pushing Rask in the crease. The DeBrusk knee was borderline, but I can't see him moving his leg, so it looks like incidental contact to me. What other play did you have an issue with?




Wait...
So one game is enough to prove your point, but not enough to prove mine. Is that what you're saying?




Again, every single person in this thread knows that refs manage the game. What we don't know, and what there is absolutely no proof of, is that they do it to favour one specific team.

I’m in the middle of something, but I’ll come back and respond. You put the effort in and did an honest job

 

[NDiesel]

Why are yall giving this poster the time of day? He had no intention in an honest debate 15 pages ago and it hasn't changed since then....