7 comments for “Yeah, that’s pretty lame

  1. Kings of Hockeywood
    May 28, 2013 at 12:59 AM

    I don’t know if there are any clips of it online but Burns totally took a dive on the play that led to Richards’s penalty. It’s ridiculous but that’s the way it goes in the NHL.

  2. OneTimer
    May 28, 2013 at 7:21 AM

    Brent Burns – so big, so powerful, so strong, so manly … so goes down like a leaf.

    And the Brown dive a little embellishment there ok, but it was more from the Boyle high-stick (which the NBC guys missed) clanking off his upper shoulder (and I think maybe even visor?) Can almost see it in the reflection off the glass.

    • USHA#17
      May 29, 2013 at 5:24 PM

      Brown began his dive before he was touched. I believe it was a makeup call however after the earlier dive which send Doughty to the box at the start of the game.

    • kong
      May 30, 2013 at 4:05 PM

      i think you’re right! I looks like Boyle tried to lift Browns stick and missed….clipping him high, hence the high stick penalty. the dive wasn’t from the cross check as implied by the NBC and TSN guys.

  3. Samuel Aronoff
    May 28, 2013 at 7:53 AM

    I hate that Brown dives and embellishes but if people act as if he is the only one doing it, that’s the lame part.

  4. May 28, 2013 at 9:14 AM

    Just hope refs don’t buy the dives from both teams tonight, I don;t want the Kings to win that way, and especially don’t want them to lose that way either.

  5. m_and_m
    May 29, 2013 at 6:26 PM

    What was more problematical than Brown diving (yeah, he does do it occasionally) was the comment that the refs will “take notice” and do something about it in the future.

    There has been a very disturbing “symmetry” about the refereeing in this series which I thought was supposed to have been done away with with the new rules interpretations.

    For example: The Kings get a 5-3 power play at the end of game 2, and use it to score a come from behind win. In game 3, by the wildest of coincidences (?) the Sharks get a 5-3 at the end of the game to enable them to win in OT.

    For example: TJ Galliardi pops of in the press that Quick has been “diving and embellishing”. The next game TJ Galliardi is called for interference with the goalie. That night, he says, sarcastically, “well, Quick got his call”. Fast forward to game 7 and Adam Burish spears Quick in the throat, which should have been at least a five minute major, but gets only a 2 minute minor for goalie interference AND, Quick gets a minor for embellishing!

    For example: In game 6, the Kings lose a game tying goal to a ridiculously fast whistle. Then in game 7 Justin Williams scores a power play goal on a play that probably should have been whistled dead.

    I thought the new rule interpretations were put in in part to do away with the “Third Period/Overtime” rule book, the make up calls and the even up calls. I thought a tripping in October is also a tripping in game 7 over the Stanley Cup finals. What went wrong. Do the refs read the papers, listen to the NHL channel and watch NHL Center Ice? Should they?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.