HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Stephane Auger's Job Status?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-16-2012, 03:50 PM
  #51
Hugh Mann*
Hey! Hey! You! You!
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: New Westminster, BC
Country: Greenland
Posts: 17,514
vCash: 500
Alright then, I guess it's true that you don't know what the word "proven" means. No, a bunch of bad calls (once again, I agree that Auger is a terrible referee, but only due to incompetence and not evil) doesn't constitute proof that he intentionally and deliberately handed out penalties with complete disregard for the rules. I'd advise you to stop using that word in the future, or at least consult a dictionary before doing so again. Either that or obtain some actual proof that Auger intentionally handed the Canucks terrible calls simply because he doesn't like them (I'll wait).

I care because people like you make the rest of us Canucks fans look bad. Whining about a ref being biased simply because of a few blown calls (and in the case of the Canucks, nothing other than the word of Alex Burrows, who isn't exactly known around the league as a stand-up guy) in the absence of any evidence makes the rest of us look like spoiled little children.

Hugh Mann* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2012, 03:54 PM
  #52
Balls Mahoney
SAVE US SVEN
 
Balls Mahoney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: +44 1252 230 607
Country: United States
Posts: 13,041
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh Mann View Post
Alright then, I guess it's true that you don't know what the word "proven" means. No, a bunch of bad calls (once again, I agree that Auger is a terrible referee, but only due to incompetence and not evil) doesn't constitute proof that he intentionally and deliberately handed out penalties with complete disregard for the rules. I'd advise you to stop using that word in the future, or at least consult a dictionary before doing so again. Either that or obtain some actual proof that Auger intentionally handed the Canucks terrible calls simply because he doesn't like them (I'll wait).

I care because people like you make the rest of us Canucks fans look bad. Whining about a ref being biased simply because of a few blown calls (and in the case of the Canucks, nothing other than the word of Alex Burrows, who isn't exactly known around the league as a stand-up guy) in the absence of any evidence makes the rest of us look like spoiled little children.
You don't think video evidence of a ref saying he's going to nail a player while violating the rules to do so and then nailing that player is proof?

Balls Mahoney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2012, 04:07 PM
  #53
Hugh Mann*
Hey! Hey! You! You!
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: New Westminster, BC
Country: Greenland
Posts: 17,514
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Balls Mahoney View Post
You don't think video evidence of a ref saying he's going to nail a player while violating the rules to do so and then nailing that player is proof?
Uh, provided you're referring to the video of Auger talking to Burrows on the ice pre-game during that particular match, then no, neither I nor you know what was said (only what either party claimed was said).

Hugh Mann* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2012, 04:23 PM
  #54
Balls Mahoney
SAVE US SVEN
 
Balls Mahoney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: +44 1252 230 607
Country: United States
Posts: 13,041
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh Mann View Post
Uh, provided you're referring to the video of Auger talking to Burrows on the ice pre-game during that particular match, then no, neither I nor you know what was said (only what either party claimed was said).
But we know what happened fit Burrows' story, Auger violated the rules at the beginning of the game, Auger called two soft penalties on Burrows that night, a NHL player risked massive retribution to bring this story to the press, and the NHL worked it's ass off to sweep it under the rug. All the evidence is there. And this is just one instance of controversy surrounding Auger.

Balls Mahoney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2012, 04:32 PM
  #55
Hugh Mann*
Hey! Hey! You! You!
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: New Westminster, BC
Country: Greenland
Posts: 17,514
vCash: 500
No, the evidence isn't there. Burrows did not risk "massive retribution," if by retribution you meant punishment (since the league's disciplinary rules aren't in place to enable officials to exact revenge), since the punishment for criticizing officials is pretty tame (Burrows only got a fine of $2,500, which for a millionaire is nothing). Further the NHL did not "sweep it under the rug," as they did not have to since there was never any evidence corroborating Burrows' accusation in the first place. All they had to do was fine Burrows and move on, and maybe try to avoid scheduling Auger to work Canucks games in the future. None of this is evidence that Auger intentionally and maliciously called penalties on Burrows/the Canucks because of a personal dislike.

The fact that there have been complaints about Auger by other players on other teams is simply evidence that he's incompetent as a referee; in those cases, just as with Burrows, Auger made bad calls, but without any evidence he did so out of malice rather than incompetence.

And I seriously doubt the referees are prohibited from speaking to players prior to puck drop...

Hugh Mann* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2012, 04:42 PM
  #56
Pump n Dump
Registered User
 
Pump n Dump's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: North Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 272
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh Mann View Post
No, the evidence isn't there. Burrows did not risk "massive retribution," if by retribution you meant punishment (since the league's disciplinary rules aren't in place to enable officials to exact revenge), since the punishment for criticizing officials is pretty tame (Burrows only got a fine of $2,500, which for a millionaire is nothing). Further the NHL did not "sweep it under the rug," as they did not have to since there was never any evidence corroborating Burrows' accusation in the first place. All they had to do was fine Burrows and move on, and maybe try to avoid scheduling Auger to work Canucks games in the future. None of this is evidence that Auger intentionally and maliciously called penalties on Burrows/the Canucks because of a personal dislike.



The fact that there have been complaints about Auger by other players on other teams is simply evidence that he's incompetent as a referee; in those cases, just as with Burrows, Auger made bad calls, but without any evidence he did so out of malice rather than incompetence.

And I seriously doubt the referees are prohibited from speaking to players prior to puck drop...
Burrows' account of what happened is evidence, although perhaps not sufficient evidence on its own to justify disciplinary action or a dismissal.

Pump n Dump is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2012, 04:57 PM
  #57
ddawg1950
Registered User
 
ddawg1950's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 10,014
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Balls Mahoney View Post
But we know what happened fit Burrows' story, Auger violated the rules at the beginning of the game, Auger called two soft penalties on Burrows that night, a NHL player risked massive retribution to bring this story to the press, and the NHL worked it's ass off to sweep it under the rug. All the evidence is there. And this is just one instance of controversy surrounding Auger.
One hundred percent agreement.

The only thing I would add is that should have been the last game Auger ever officiated.

ddawg1950 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2012, 06:10 PM
  #58
vanuck
Griffiths Way Goons
 
vanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 12,237
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh Mann View Post
Alright then, I guess it's true that you don't know what the word "proven" means. No, a bunch of bad calls (once again, I agree that Auger is a terrible referee, but only due to incompetence and not evil) doesn't constitute proof that he intentionally and deliberately handed out penalties with complete disregard for the rules. I'd advise you to stop using that word in the future, or at least consult a dictionary before doing so again. Either that or obtain some actual proof that Auger intentionally handed the Canucks terrible calls simply because he doesn't like them (I'll wait).

I care because people like you make the rest of us Canucks fans look bad. Whining about a ref being biased simply because of a few blown calls (and in the case of the Canucks, nothing other than the word of Alex Burrows, who isn't exactly known around the league as a stand-up guy) in the absence of any evidence makes the rest of us look like spoiled little children.
It's funny that you go asking for proof that Auger deliberately handed out penalties to the Canucks, then turn around and make this kind of an unsubstantiated statement.

Why should it matter to you, a Canucks fan, what the rest of the league thinks? Do you actually need their 'opinions' to determine what kind of a guy Burrows is?

vanuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2012, 01:26 AM
  #59
LiveeviL
No unique points
 
LiveeviL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Jämtland, Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 5,852
vCash: 50
Send a message via ICQ to LiveeviL
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barney Gumble View Post
But....but.....Ron McLean personally vouched for Auger!
How does that work (for real, I do not know)?

LiveeviL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2012, 10:22 AM
  #60
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
HFBoards: Night's Watch
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,993
vCash: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh Mann View Post
Uh, provided you're referring to the video of Auger talking to Burrows on the ice pre-game during that particular match, then no, neither I nor you know what was said (only what either party claimed was said).
How about the three blatantly questionable penalties, one of which was impossible to have been a legitimate call because Burrows, who was cited for goaltender interference, was not near the goaltender. Granted, there is no definitive proof but the likelihood certainly weighs heavily in Burrows' claim of bias.

Bourne Endeavor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2012, 10:57 AM
  #61
Uhmkay
Weber2Canucks2013
 
Uhmkay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,805
vCash: 500
Apparently Auger has retired this summer as a Ref. There was a thread about it in the main boards a week or so ago.

Uhmkay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2012, 12:11 PM
  #62
neksys
Registered User
 
neksys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,402
vCash: 500
Yep, he's retired.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...rticle4268270/

Quote:
...But it was clear that if Auger, who is due between one and two year's pay based on his 13 years of service in the professional ranks, did not retire now, the decision would have been made for him.
Good riddance to a poor official.

neksys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2012, 12:12 PM
  #63
VinnyC
vancity, c-bus, 'peg
 
VinnyC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 新香
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,243
vCash: 500
Good riddance.

VinnyC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2012, 02:33 PM
  #64
MikeK
Registered User
 
MikeK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,084
vCash: 0
It wasn't just his famous run-in with Burrows, he has had numerous incidents where he was criticized for allowing his personal opinion about a player interfere with his decisions on the ice. He is with out a doubt one of the worst refs the NHL has ever had.

I won't even say good riddance because he doesn't even deserve that. The guy is a loser.

MikeK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2012, 08:48 AM
  #65
thenextone
Registered User
 
thenextone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: New York City
Country: United States
Posts: 4,007
vCash: 500
Great news. You're next Ron McLean

thenextone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2012, 04:21 AM
  #66
JayBeautiful
Nature Boy
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Maple Ridge BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 451
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thenextone View Post
Great news. You're next Ron McLean
Great! maybe Ron will retire to show his support

JayBeautiful is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:57 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.