Does anyone else, find this as funny as I do? (playoff officiating)
- Thread starter vannuckles
- Start date
- Status
NoShowWilly
Registered User
ive always found it dumb that they don't call it the same way all season.
It makes the over the glass penalty so much worse then it should be because it is maybe the only infraction they enforce properly.
It makes the over the glass penalty so much worse then it should be because it is maybe the only infraction they enforce properly.
vannuckles
DieBettmanDie
Horse McHindu
They call me Horse.....
In 2011, definitely. That, along with injuries. Nashville, San Jose, Boston, and Philadelphia were the 4 most physical teams that year, and we ended up playing 3 of those teams.
In 2012, the only team that was capable of stopping us under a full healthy roster was the team we played in the first round that year (and for the first few games, we were without Daniel).
Games 3, 4, and 5 against the Bruins in 2011 were an absolute joke.
Ironically enough, Game 5 was one of the worst officiated and biased games in NHL history and yet the Canucks managed to win 1-0 somehow (thanks to some off-the-charts defensive play and goaltending). To Boston's credit however, Games 6 and 7 were called fairly evenly (my guess is that after the Boychuk hit on Raymond, the refs decided that enough was enough, in terms of getting back at the Canucks' for Burrows' antics).
Games 4, 5, and 6 against Chicago in 2011 were also incredibly biased, since Pat Kane and Jonathan Toews are the NHL's 'darlings' (2nd fiddle to only Crosby).
However - the series' against LA in 2012 and San Jose in 2013 takes the cake in my view.....especially the San Joe 2013 series. Any attempt at the Canucks playing a physical style was penalized right away, whereas LA and San Jose were pretty much allowed to run amock (which then gave birth to the notion that the Canucks were being physically man-handled).
I didn't have too much of an issue with the Calgary series in 2015, but did find it strange that Michael Ferlund was allowed to take 4-5 strides towards a Canuck player in an attempt to belt him. #Charging?
My guess is that the Canucks were being punished against Boston due to the refs mishandling of the Burrows' situation in Game 1. I suspect that the LA and San Jose series' in 2012 and 2013 were officiated in that way to punish the Canucks for their diving in 2011 (I will concede that they dove quite a bit in 2011), along with possibly punishing the fans' for rioting. That's the only explanation I have for such terribly biased officiating during those years.
Last edited:
Pip
Registered User
playoff officiating is a complete joke. There is no way the rules should change so drastically from the regular season to the playoffs.
Addison Rae
Registered User
2013 against san jose was one of the most disgusting things ive ever had to witness as a fan, it's sad that it was swept under the rug by the national media.
They will change it when Benning is finished building the toughest "playoff style" team of all time.
Win One Before I Die
Cautious Optimism
- Jul 31, 2007
- 5,119
- 4
Just like when they changed the officiating from calling everything, to nothing, game 7 of Tampa vs Boston. It is comical
Horse McHindu
They call me Horse.....
It legitimately was the first time I pondered the idea of a team filing charges against a league, or even a civil suit against a specific referee (Kelly Sutherland). After the Marchand/Sedin incident in 2011, the idea of hunting down Sutherland actually crossed my mind. Not serious thoughts mind you, but the idea of it did enter my mind for like 10-15 seconds.
I'm not sure if I can feel anger anymore.
A legitimate concern. The officiating not only cost Canucks at least one Cup, but also put the organization in a direction that's proving to be self-destructing and will take a lot of time to recover from. Can we hire Gillis back Carlyle-style?
A legitimate concern. The officiating not only cost Canucks at least one Cup, but also put the organization in a direction that's proving to be self-destructing and will take a lot of time to recover from. Can we hire Gillis back Carlyle-style?
Horse McHindu
They call me Horse.....
Agreed. Even Gillis went on record stating that after 2011, a mistake they made was in 'chasing goal-posts' (i.e. trying to get bigger and grittier, as opposed to preserving their style that was almost a complete success). Sure, they could've made a few adjustments to becoming bigger/grittier, but they didn't need to re-write the book.
From 1994-2006, the Redwings were my 2nd favorite team. Before they became a dynasty from 1997-2008, I saw the Redwings experience some significant growing pains. They choked in the playoffs against San Jose in 1994 1st round, and then got absolutely spanked by the Devils in the 1995 finals (i.e. physically man-handled, and trapped to death). In 1996, they got out-classed by the Avs.
In all of those defeats however, the Redwings maintained their identity of being a skilled team. They made a few adjustments in becoming grittier, but for the most part, their bread and butter was still skill. After McCarty beat the living monkey piss out of Claude Lemieux, the Wings ripped the torch out of the Avs' hands and went on to win 4 cups in 11 years.
vannuckles
DieBettmanDie
That was disgusting.....weren't the penalties 24 for Van and 10 for San Jose?
Daniel Sedin was sent off for boarding Tommy Wingels, and he got a game misconduct penalty after the game for abusive language.
Because we all know how dirty Daniel is
Vancouver was outplaying San Jose 5on5 that series....so they had to shut us down. The NHL could have TRIED to make it look a little more realistic, by letting us win at least two games.
Samzilla
Prust & Dorsett are
- Apr 2, 2011
- 15,297
- 2,151
That was disgusting.....weren't the penalties 24 for Van and 10 for San Jose?
Daniel Sedin was sent off for boarding Tommy Wingels, and he got a game misconduct penalty after the game for abusive language.
Because we all know how dirty Daniel is
Vancouver was outplaying San Jose 5on5 that series....so they had to shut us down. The NHL could have TRIED to make it look a little more realistic, by letting us win at least two games.
The reffing was a disgrace.
Still, we lead in 3 of the 4 games. Should've been able to win at least one.
Horse McHindu
They call me Horse.....
Agreed with this.
We can complain about the reffing all we want, but the Canucks mental fragileness was also to blame. Even against LA the previous year, the Canucks were leading in most of the games (I think Game 2 was the only exception but my memory is fading now), and they still managed to blow leads.
Speaking of blown leads, I literally have no idea WTF happened against Calgary in Game 6 2015.
Samzilla
Prust & Dorsett are
- Apr 2, 2011
- 15,297
- 2,151
Luca Sbisa at the end of the first happened to give Calgary hope. Big difference between going into the second period down 3-0 vs 3-1.
NoShowWilly
Registered User
mossey3535
Registered User
- Feb 7, 2011
- 13,480
- 10,065
Yeah I've been calling for this for awhile now.
Let's face it, the casual fan doesn't know that PP's can disrupt the flow of a game. They just know there are more goals.
As for hardcore fans, let's be honest the regular season product has a range of quality. I think hockey in many ways is much better now than it was in the 90's or early 2000's but no matter what you do there are dog day games in the middle of the season for every team.
They are twisting themselves in knots trying to increase scoring but since the lockout the interference calls have slowly but steadily declined. We will never get back to the deadpuck era, where defenders would literally get towed along like a trailer by the offensive players. But those first few years after the lockout for me are the way the game is supposed to be called. And it increased scoring a ton.
Let's face it, the casual fan doesn't know that PP's can disrupt the flow of a game. They just know there are more goals.
As for hardcore fans, let's be honest the regular season product has a range of quality. I think hockey in many ways is much better now than it was in the 90's or early 2000's but no matter what you do there are dog day games in the middle of the season for every team.
They are twisting themselves in knots trying to increase scoring but since the lockout the interference calls have slowly but steadily declined. We will never get back to the deadpuck era, where defenders would literally get towed along like a trailer by the offensive players. But those first few years after the lockout for me are the way the game is supposed to be called. And it increased scoring a ton.
Saturated Fats
This is water
Yeah, it was a complete joke, and Vigneault said as much.
To be fair, San Jose outplayed us on the whole - but that was an example of one of the clearest and most obvious officiating agendas I have ever seen. The tail end of game four was a total and complete farce - particularly the penalty on Daniel in overtime - and had basically everyone on the team steaming afterwards.
A lot of the sheer subterfuge of it was lost in the fan anger towards Vigneault & co. getting swept, and in the fact that the Eastern media still had a lot of residual hate towards the club for 2011... but it was one of the biggest con-job ruses I have ever seen in professional sports.
Highly suggest you avoid posting things like this on public forums. Like, highly suggest.
That was disgusting.....weren't the penalties 24 for Van and 10 for San Jose?
Daniel Sedin was sent off for boarding Tommy Wingels, and he got a game misconduct penalty after the game for abusive language.
Because we all know how dirty Daniel is
Vancouver was outplaying San Jose 5on5 that series....so they had to shut us down. The NHL could have TRIED to make it look a little more realistic, by letting us win at least two games.
Logan Couture also picked up the puck and threw it down the ice on the PK.
Horse McHindu
They call me Horse.....
Sorry, but that's not how I operate. Never have never will. Given Kelly Sutherland's mis-treatment of Vancouver during that time period, there was a lot of justified anger towards him.
Now obviously, no one took action against him (thankfully), and I didn't nor did I ever plan to take action against Sutherland, but I think Sutherland should consider himself lucky that no one took him into a back alley.
A sport event between two teams should always be officiated without biased treatment of any kind, and Sutherland crossed a line numerous times. He should thank his lucky stars that his disgraceful officiating wasn't met with physical violence (from players or fans).
Masterchief
Registered User
- Dec 3, 2012
- 30
- 0
The way it was/is officiated whether an NHL agenda or coincidence, is the reason why I no longer really care about the league. I would sooner do something else than watch wwe on ice
PM
Glass not 1/2 full
- Apr 8, 2014
- 9,869
- 1,664
When your team is terrible and competing for the draft lottery instead of the cup suddenly the NHL's terrible officiating doesn't bother me so much.
Ainec
Panetta was not racist
- Jun 20, 2009
- 21,784
- 6,429
You're a true fan lol
This is why I can't stand watching Canucks games. Refs be wrecking my positive vibes
- Status
Ad
Latest posts
-
Post-Series Talk: Boston Bruins Defeat Toronto Maple Leafs (win 4-3)
- Latest: KillerMillerTime
-
-
Upcoming events
-
-
-
2024 NHL Draft Lottery Team that wins #1 pick - PICK ONLY ONE TEAMWagers: 9Staked: $11,200.00Event closes- Updated: