Jump to content

You have got to be frickin kidding me with this...


Guest Bakanekimiwa

Recommended Posts

ok... we're gonna play the semantics game here again? so he didn't say he was 'sorry', but it was sure as **** a mea culpa and a highly unusual one at that. can you ever recall another time where the league VP came out and said as much in an interview?

i don't care if it was an interview either... these words are carefully measured and the timing and narrator are all highly suspect. victim complex? please. i have no victim complex. i've just followed hockey for a long a s s damn time and i don't recall ever a situation where a league VP seemed it fit to express his 'opinion' on a blown call in such a way.

and the point begs to be brought up... why did he not make a statement about the ryan clowe incident which was much more egregious than a blown off-sides call. which BTW, happens just about *every* frickin game.

Um...hello? You want a statement on Clowe?

http://www.oficeandmenhockey.com/2012/04/nhl-playoffs-colin-campbell-apologizes-for-missed-offsides-call-no-suspension-for-weber/

“If the officials had seen the actions of Ryane Clowe it would have definitely been a two-minute interference penalty,” Colin Campbell, the NHL’s senior vice president for hockey operations, told The Times on Friday. “It was obviously a missed call.” – LA Times

There it is in all it's glory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ok... we're gonna play the semantics game here again? so he didn't say he was 'sorry', but it was sure as **** a mea culpa

?

semantics? he stated it was a blown call, and that the league does not like it when it's officials blow calls. you guys make it sound like he was bowing and scraping and begging forgiveness. he acknowledged a mistake happened. good lord.

i don't recall ever a situation where a league VP seemed it fit to express his 'opinion' on a blown call in such a way.

and the point begs to be brought up... why did he not make a statement about the ryan clowe incident which was much more egregious than a blown off-sides call.

you mean like this?

“If the officials had seen the actions of Ryane Clowe it would have definitely been a two-minute interference penalty,” Colin Campbell, the NHL’s senior vice president for hockey operations, told The Times on Friday. “It was obviously a missed call.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

a blown off-sides call. which BTW, happens just about *every* frickin game.

oh, and, this:

pens-flyers-offside.jpg

does not happen in just about every fricken game. that is brutal.

my point here isn't to piss off fellow flyers fans, but can't we just enjoy the flyers were on the happy side of one of these situations, and not be surprised the league is embarrased at how badly the linesman screwed this one up? i mean, seriously, did you expect the league go into "nothing happened" mode on it? you have to know the brass would be asked questions about it, and it isn't like they can deny it happened. look at the picture. what do you expect them to say? the fact it led directly to a goal that ultimately turned a playoff game around says campbell had no choice but to try to get in front of it.

Edited by aziz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Um...hello? You want a statement on Clowe?

http://www.oficeandm...sion-for-weber/

“If the officials had seen the actions of Ryane Clowe it would have definitely been a two-minute interference penalty,” Colin Campbell, the NHL’s senior vice president for hockey operations, told The Times on Friday. “It was obviously a missed call.” – LA Times

There it is in all it's glory.

well, i'm glad he said as much for the clowe incident.. i never saw that before. however, the wording he used for the pitt incident was weird, at best. 'we feel as bad as the penguins do' ? come on...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well, i'm glad he said as much for the clowe incident.. i never saw that before. however, the wording he used for the pitt incident was weird, at best. 'we feel as bad as the penguins do' ? come on...

Could not agree more about it being "unusual". I wish he'd just STFU. Anything he says that even remotely seems like favoritism is going to flame that fire even more people like myself have to run damage control. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

oh, and, this:

pens-flyers-offside.jpg

does not happen injust about every fricken game. that is brutal.

the simple fact, and my point which you refuse to ignore, is that there are mistakes that happen in every single hockey game that is played. mistakes by officials, players... coaches. even fans make mistakes... like dressing as hulk hogan.

but, my point is that the league VP picks and chooses his calls to get upset over. i don't care if briere was 2 feet over the line, it's the same as if he was 2 inches over the line. he WAS indeed off-sides and it was indeed a missed call.

however, SO was the missed icing touch-up that led to a Pitt goal. why was Colin not so upset about that blown call? why did he not see it fit to just make a blanket statement that there were some critical missed calls and that the league was unhappy about that? i think anyone could understand that.

but no... colin only made mention of the briere off sides. this is what i have a problem with. GOOD LORD!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@B21

I agree that the term “official apology” was false.

What’s interesting, though, is how many people—whether they’re Flyers fans or not—have interpreted it as an apology. Meltzer’s certainly not the only one using the term.

Regardless of the “official apology” thing, I just think he’s saying that the league isn’t always consistent when explaining its mistakes. If you’re going to admit to one or two of them, you should admit to all of them.

I think a weekly “blown calls” report on NHL.com would do the trick…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i don't care if briere was 2 feet over the line, it's the same as if he was 2 inches over the line. he WAS indeed off-sides and it was indeed a missed call.

however, SO was the missed icing touch-up that led to a Pitt goal. why was Colin not so upset about that blown call? why did he not see it fit to just make a blanket statement that there were some critical missed calls and that the league was unhappy about that?

the difference between 2 feet and 2 inches is you can understand how 2 inches at full game speed gets missed. i, honestly, can't figure out how the 2 feet were missed. the bigger the margin, the bigger the mistake by the linesman, and this one was laughably huge.

as for the icing, i'll be honest, i have heard a ton about it, but don't actually know what play people are talking about. was it the one on the pen's third goal? grossmann is engaged in the neutral zone and can't play the puck as it goes by him, but the linesman waves it off anyway?

if so, that looks like a judgement call situation to me. icing is usually a judgement call, unless we're taking about a race for a touch up. as opposed to offsides, which is black and white, onside or not. making a bad judgement about whether a player could reasonably have played the puck versus not noticing a player is 2+ feet offsides as he is sprung for a breakaway.....do you really see those as analogous things?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the difference between 2 feet and 2 inches is you can understand how 2 inches at full game speed gets missed. i, honestly, can't figure out how the 2 feet were missed. the bigger the margin, the bigger the mistake by the linesman, and this one was laughably huge.

as for the icing, i'll be honest, i have heard a ton about it, but don't actually know what play people are talking about. was it the one on the pen's third goal? grossmann is engaged in the neutral zone and can't play the puck as it goes by him, but the linesman waves it off anyway?

if so, that looks like a judgement call situation to me. icing is usually a judgement call, unless we're taking about a race for a touch up. as opposed to offsides, which is black and white, onside or not. making a bad judgement about whether a player could reasonably have played the puck versus not noticing a player is 2+ feet offsides as he is sprung for a breakaway.....do you really see those as analogous things?

what is analogous to me is that there are often missed calls and those missed calls often lead to goals. why campbell saw fit to choose that one over any other is what i don't get. granted, briere was a good margin over the line, at real time, it was not as obvious as the images show. it was a quick play and i had the 'feeling' it was off-side when he corralled the puck, but it took the replay to know for sure. same with the icing missed call.

look, i would be as upset as any pitt fan if that had happened to the flyers, i don't like seeing missed calls as much as the next guy. but, they happen and goals can be the result.

i like what bylsma said, it's not the reason they lost. but, when your league VP comes out and chooses his blown call to focus his unhappiness over, well, then it's getting a bit ugly to me. there are all kinds of degrees of missed calls, but the fact remains that the missed icing call is as bad as a missed off-sides call and both, indirectly, resulted in goals. from pitt's perspective the briere call was much worse, but from ours the icing call was much worse. campbell comes off as a pitt fan here as a result. well, we all know he just hates the flyers, but we have history as evidence for that.

it's pretty simple here... if the league wants, and should, avoid the perception of favoritism among teams, they should steer way clear of making statements such as what campbell did. there are so many things wrong with what he said it's hard to pick an angle i have a problem with. he basically put down the league's integrity of officiating while he was at it.

so honestly, aziz, i really don't see what's so hard to understand about a flyer fan's ire here. it's just simply ridiculous for the league's VP to make a one-sided statement when there were examples for both. it sends a less than impartial message to fans. it's pretty simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's an outright lie by Meltzer. Campbell was asked in an interview and answered. Period. There was no official friggin' apology.

http://www.oficeandm...sion-for-weber/

Similar comments for the Clowe incident, too. I didn't see anyone up in arms over that. And pointed out by a Flyers blogger no less.

So typical...

Maybe it wasn't couched in terms of an official apology, but the way Campell phrased it certainly made it sound like he is speaking for the league, or at least the league office in which he works:

"We're as upset as Pittsburgh almost. It's a mistake."

If he had said "I" instead of "we" it could be more easily passed off as just his opinion. But when the senior executive VP of hockey operations for the NHL says "we", it's not hard to figure out what he means.

All of that said, I could care less what he says. The games will be won or lost on the ice, not in Colin Campbell's office. I do wish the NHL would just turn the guy out to pasture already though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so honestly, aziz, i really don't see what's so hard to understand about a flyer fan's ire here. it's just simply ridiculous for the league's VP to make a one-sided statement when there were examples for both. it sends a less than impartial message to fans. it's pretty simple.

you say so. as i look at that icing play more closely, i actually agree with the call on the ice...grossmann decided to take his man into the boards (interference, if we're being honest) rather than play the puck that goes right by him. linesman waves the icing off based on that...correct call, imo.

and that's the difference. there is an arguement to be made on that one. the linesman had to make a judgement call on whether grossmann had an opportunity to play the puck and opted to not take it. he also had to decide if the pass out of the defensive zone was intended to go the length of the ice, or if it was a pass to dupius in the neutral zone but grossmann removed his ability to receive it. the league is not going to make a statement on what was purely a judgement call, especially when the accuracy of that judgement remains open to interpretation. a wildly offside play on the other hand.....

whatever. if it helps you guys to get upset about all these tiny little things, then go to it. my bad for getting in the middle.

Edited by aziz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not at all. Look at the first statement of the article.

The NHL's Colin Campbell officially apologized to the Penguins for the obvious blown offside call that led to Briere's first goal of the game. No. I have problems with that.

How Meltzer "feels" is irrelevant. His statement is completely false.

The "this is not an apology" notion is silly. Should we say he was "contrite" or that he "acknowledged that an error was made and expressed remorse"? That's not a reach. Now, let's discuss the difference between what I just said and an "apology". That would really be silly. While we're at it, let's explore the difference between on the record statements by league officials and "official" statements by the league. This would be an inane debate even by the standards of this board.

Also, look at the actual blog. Meltzer says he has no problem with the statement (and not the opposite).

Edited by terp
Link to comment
Share on other sites

“It affected the game,”

Sidney Crosby

said. “But at the end of the day, worrying about it or thinking about it is not going to change anything. It’s over.”

what a b i t c h. geebus.. it's saying stuff like this that makes me lose more and more respect for him every day. a non whiner would say exactly what bylsma said... it wasn't the reason we lost.

He really loves to pretend to rise above things while commenting on them indirectly. He just can't help himself. Bylsma just blew past it and said it isn't the reason for the loss, but Crosby has to throw his little backhanded comment. Ask Crosby if the blown icing call affected the game too? Whatever. I'd prefer that his team's focus be on Briere's goal and not the fact that they blew a 3-0 lead at home to the Flyers and the Flyers beat them again in their own building.

But Crosby doesn't whine as much anymore..... right

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I posted this in @Irishjim's @B21 baiting thread

but it is applicable here too

Hey guys pr rule #1a everything is on the record... which only follows rule #1 which states the mic is always on.

Campbell is being interviewed because of his capacity as VP of NHL douchebaggery or whatever, he needs to realize he's representing the league at all times, Especially during an "on the record" interview. Whatever he says in that capacity can be construed as a league position...

Personally I don't care what he says, I thought the refs sucked equally for each team, they missed an egregious leg sweep on Fluery by Simmonds but whistled claude "meat" giroux on a vicious boarding call on Orpik things evened out and for they let the players decide the outcome of the game.

campbell needs some media training, because it seems to me like he is often overmatched by weasel reporters and bloggers who want to get / create a story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought I heard last night that the NHL did issue a formal apology to the Penguins.

Campbell's comments were not about making the right call, they came off as sympathetic to Pittsburgh.

Consider the source of the comments guys. What did you expect from Campbell?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Merrick

<< I agree that the term “official apology” was false.

What’s interesting, though, is how many people—whether they’re Flyers fans or not—have interpreted it as an apology. Meltzer’s certainly not the only one using the term. >>

That's an easy one. (This might be long...sorry).

Right now there is a big...huge...wave of anti-Pens sentiment out there that all started with Milbury. That sentiment has always been out there if you talked to fans of other teams (mostly Flyers, Rangers and, to a lesser extent, Bruins) or read message boards...but nothing like this. Not even close. If anything, it had died down a bit in the last 1-2 years i/m/h/o. The two biggest reasons for that sentiment (again, i/m/h/o) were this favoritism that Crosby was alleged to have gotten since he came into the league which was compounded by the fact that he was guilty of lots of whining and diving during his first few seasons. The other reason was Lemieux and Shero speaking out on concussions (after the Steckel and Hedman hits) while continuing to employ Matt Cooke. Frankly, a lot of that sentiment was justified. That said, a lot of the reason for it has been...remedied? Cooke certainly got his and has been a model citizen since. Crosby has toned down his antics to the point where I will say he is no better or worse than any other NHL player in that regard. In the meantime, other coaches/franchises have also toed that "hypocritial lines as well. Example: Boston. Screaming like mad over Savard yet they were awfully quiet when Lucic went unpunished for running Miller (consussion)...or when Chara nearly decapitated Pacioretty (concussion). All worthy of suspension. All unpunished. No different than Lemieux and Shero...yet not nearly as much vitriol out in cyber hockey world.

Cue Milbury. Briere gets taken out by a clean hit. No reason for Flyers fans to get upset over that one especially now that Briere is back for the playoffs (damnit!). Lavi goes up on the boards and calls out Bylsma. He's instead confronted by Granato. If you watch the clip you see Blysma yelling back. So Milbury is upset Bylsma didn't get up on the boards and duke it our with Lavi? Over a clean, legal hit? So Milbury calls out Bylsma (take the skirt off)...and decides to take a few shots at Crosby and his consussions in the process even though this whole blow up had nothing to do with Crosby.

Cue Lavi. Upset about the hit so he takes a veiled stance about having a problem with the fact that the Pens were wrong to send out their 4th line? Really? Since when is that wrong? Since when do FLYERS fans take issue with sending a message at the end of a game against a team you will face in the playoffs? But like **** e follows a fart, here was Flyer nation killing the Pens, Bylsma and Crosby and taking the side of a known blowhard. Sorry but that is hypcorisy at it's finest.

Cue Berube. See Lavi. Same thing said.

Cue Cherry. Do I really need to explain that one?

Cue Torts. At least he had a beef with the Orpik hit. No need to go off like he did on Crosby though. Uncalled for and inappropriate. I'm all for a little gamesmanship before the playoffs but there are right ways and wrong ways to go about it.

Cue Roenick. Ibid. See Milbury and Cherry.

All getting all over Crosby (and Malkin and then Pens organization to a lesser extent) and all triggered by indicents that had nothing to do with either Crosby and Malkin.

Cue fans of Flyers/Rangers/Bruins. Ha ha! See - we told you! Milbury, Cherry and Roenick said so!

The most interesting thing to me is that I see fan after fan citing these blowhards as if they are well respected members of the hockey media. The same blowhards routinely killed in Flyers forums. Milbury, Roenick and Cherry all have a history of saying things to get attention. To get people to watch or listen. They almost have to or else they can find a new line of work. So who is on "my/Pens"side in this?

Stu Hackel. CNNSI and New York hockey writer. http://nhl-red-light.si.com/2012/04/04/mad-mike-milburys-act-is-obsolete/

Ray Ferraro. http://espn.go.com/nhl/playoffs/2012/story/_/id/7796394/how-pittburgh-penguins-feel-being-most-hated-team-national-hockey-league

Former NHLer and broadcast analyst Ray Ferraro admitted he is a bit surprised at the vitriol, especially when some have brought up the old chestnut about Crosby and diving.

"They're about two years too late. That's an old story and he doesn't do it anymore," Ferraro told ESPN.com.

Ferraro has more credibility as an analyst that Roenick, Cherry and Milbury combined.

So now, cue Colin Campbell. Mr. Pens Bias himself. He basically says that an obvious bad call was well...a bad call. And again, like **** e follows a fart, he is "apologizing" even though he made a similar statement a few weeks earlier about the Clowe incident. Again...more hypocrisy. I didn't see anyone killing him them for "apologizing" to the Kings and not to their own teams for all the bad calls their own teams have been victimized by. But now that the play involves the Pens? Bam.

That about sums it up. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@mojo1917

out of curiosity, what should his response to the question have been? his answer starts off with, "There's no other way to explain it but a missed call." presumably, the question was something along the lines of, "so, what happened with that offside goal by briere?" what was the appropriate "everything is on the record" answer there?

seems to me, the correct answer was, "well, it was a blown call."

it just sounds to me like flyer fans are upset that the play was aknowledged at all. like it should have been a super secret "no comment" thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...my bad for getting in the middle.

this we can agree on. the thread is here to express an opinion that the league should stay out of biased types of comments. if you don't agree, that's fine, i just don't see why you have to poke your nose in here to claim that it's just flyer's fans that want to cry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe it wasn't couched in terms of an official apology, but the way Campell phrased it certainly made it sound like he is speaking for the league, or at least the league office in which he works:

"We're as upset as Pittsburgh almost. It's a mistake."

If he had said "I" instead of "we" it could be more easily passed off as just his opinion. But when the senior executive VP of hockey operations for the NHL says "we", it's not hard to figure out what he means.

All of that said, I could care less what he says. The games will be won or lost on the ice, not in Colin Campbell's office. I do wish the NHL would just turn the guy out to pasture already though.

Hey, Jack. I agree with everything you said. It was an awkward statement to say the least and I could see how it could be construed as an apology...by those looking for anything to get on the Pens for. But close examination shows...it was Campbell answering a question and not anything "official". No different than the statement he made regarding the Clowe incident.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i just don't see why you have to poke your nose in here to claim that it's just flyer's fans that want to cry.

because i'm embarrased by these paranoid sob fests. i'd like for flyers fans to grow up, find some balls, and stop wailing like 5 yearolds who don't want to eat their broccoli every time they can find some obscure reason to be upset.

there are reasons to get pissed at the league, sometimes. this was VERY not one of them, and the wolf-crying isn't doing the fanbase's rep any favors.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@terp

<< The "this is not an apology" notion is silly. >>

Not as silly as the notion that this was some official apology by the league aimed at their darling Penguins.

<< Should we say he was "contrite" or that he "acknowledged that an error was made and expressed remorse"? >>

We can say he acknowledged an error was made. I see no contrition or remorse.

<< That's not a reach. Now, let's discuss the difference between what I just said and an "apology". That would really be silly. While we're at it, let's explore the difference between on the record statements by league officials and "official" statements by the league. This would be an inane debate even by the standards of this board. >>

Not really because there is a distinct difference.

<< Also, look at the actual blog. Meltzer says he has no problem with the statement (and not the opposite). >>

And as I said, Meltzer's "feelings" are irrelevant and do not take away from the inaccuracy of his opening statement...that the league issued and official apology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

because i'm embarrased by these paranoid sob fests. i'd like for flyers fans to grow up, find some balls, and stop wailing like 5 yearolds who don't want to eat their broccoli every time they can find some obscure reason to be upset.

there are reasons to get pissed at the league, sometimes. this was VERY not one of them, and the wolf-crying isn't doing the fanbase's rep any favors.

ok, well, when the league VP makes a very unbiased comment about a playoff game that my team is involved in, i'm going to have to disagree with you and say that this was VERY one of those reasons to get upset.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

seems to me, the correct answer was, "well, it was a blown call."

Imo, the correct answer was, "the league doesn't comment on the correctness of specific calls that happen during the game. We review all the games on tape and assess the performance of the on-ice officials. We use that to determine which officials work the playoffs..." etc, etc...

Coaches are not supposed to throw their players under the bus (though some do). League officials should not throw their "players" (their players being the on-ice officials) under the bus in public. Keep it internal. The whole world knows it was a blown call, no need for a league official to state the obvious and come off as appearing sympathetic to one team.

Edited by JackStraw
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@mojo1917

<< Hey guys pr rule #1a everything is on the record... which only follows rule #1 which states the mic is always on. >>

True but I don't think he was trying to avoid or hide anything. Just a dumb statment.

<< Campbell is being interviewed because of his capacity as VP of NHL douchebaggery or whatever, he needs to realize he's representing the league at all times, Especially during an "on the record" interview. Whatever he says in that capacity can be construed as a league position. >>

Excellent point. Still not "official". Still not apologizing.

<< campbell needs some media training, because it seems to me like he is often overmatched by weasel reporters and bloggers who want to get / create a story. >>

He needs to be locked in a dark room at NHL HQ and not give media interviews! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, Jack. I agree with everything you said. It was an awkward statement to say the least and I could see how it could be construed as an apology...by those looking for anything to get on the Pens for. But close examination shows...it was Campbell answering a question and not anything "official". No different than the statement he made regarding the Clowe incident.

Well, when he makes a statement in public, it's going to carry the weight of the league regardless- at least in the eyes of the public. Like I said in another post, I don't think league officials should be publicly commenting on specific calls on the ice, other than things that fall into the suspendible offense category. It's a very slippery slope.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...