L'Affaire Burrows

Funny how people are so ready to believe Alex Burrows, and so ready to assume Stephane Auger essentially cheated the Vancouver Canucks.

Come to think of it, funny how it's always the Canucks screaming outrage about something. Unless, of course, its a Vancouver fan shining a laser into the face of an opposing goalie. Then, in the words of Alain Vigneault, they're just "great fans."

They sure get unhinged in a hurry over hockey in Vancouver. Geez, years later, you can still get folks all up in a lather over the Bertuzzi-Moore incident, claiming Steve Moore deserved what he got and how he faked his injuries, etc.

Never much moderation out of B.C. when it comes to these things.

Just last summer, Canucks GM Mike Gillis accused the Leafs not once but twice of illegally meddling in Vancouver team business. The NHL essentially laughed and went on to other business.

Now Burrows and his accusations against Auger, which have many in Vancouver screaming that justice must be done, how this proves referees carry grudges and how Auger should be thrown out of the sport.

For starters, how do we know Burrows is telling the truth?

There's absolutely no corroboration of his story. What we do know is that he's a known dive artist and agitator who is more than happy to fake an injury or a foul if it draws a penalty against an opponent. He believes referees are there to buy into his various cons and acting jobs.

He's a pretty good hockey player, too. It's just that the nonsense sometimes overshadows the ability, just like his teammate, Ryan Kesler.

Auger? Solid, not spectacular ref. Not one of the NHL's best, but solid. To be honest, most nights I couldn't tell you who the referees are any more. It's just not a big factor to me.

The willingness of so many to accept Burrows' story, however, is just an extension of the way in which many adults feel when they go to the neighborhood rink and watch their kids play. So many constantly harp on referees and accuse them of deliberately falsifying calls to benefit one team or the other.

Let's face it. As a nation, we're a bunch of crybabies and referee baiters.

To many (say, Leaf broadcasts) the game is nothing more than a constant discussion of officiating calls, how they got it right or wrong or why they missed this or that. Always, there's an underlying message — Pat Quinn is the best at this — suggesting the men in the striped jerseys are somehow dishonest, unmanly and not to be trusted.

Hockey Night in Canada fostered this mentality for years, although it has improved slightly in this regard in recent times.

There's still an attitude in this country that the best officiated game is one in which referees don't make any calls at all but simply give the advantage to the lesser skilled players and the lowest common denominator.

I always want to ask those people what they think the refs are out there for. To break up fights, I guess. But not too quickly.

I don't know what Auger said to Burrows. But I don't believe Burrows, either, and I don't believe the integrity of the sport has been terribly compromised.

I do believe the Canucks are making a mountain out of a molehill. But then, they always do.

Comments

[Steve]

Despite this generally accurate assessment of Vancouver hockey (which is not much different than anywhere else unfortunately), let me explain why Burrows is generally believed. Video of Auger talking to him, the previous dive ruling, the questionable nature of the calls and his earnest and agitated delivery of his story. I do believe that most referees see themselves as deliverers of justice rather than monitors of rule violations. Auger may have intended his remarks to Burrows to be of a cautionary 'be on your best behaviour' nature, but even that would be inappropriate. Referees seem to enjoy customizing their calls for individual players, particularly for certain pests or goons who could almost never be legitimately fouled in the eyes of the ref because of their own rough play (I'm thinking guys like Domi or Theoren Fleury). Soccer and basketball refs are just as bad or worse. They should make calls consistently rather than seeking frontier justice.

[T Hall]

You never fail to disappoint, Cox..... your article, per usual, is dripping with your usual anti-Canucks poison. I realize it's all about the dollars and cents in your paycheque but seriously, how did you ever get this snarky? Is it that you weren't breast fed as a baby, someone tinkles in your cornflakes every morning........ what? In all the years I've actually managed to read one of your articles (albeit with my bottle of Peptobismal in hand) to completion, I think there was perhaps one that I could honestly say showed any actual insight and humanity.

[Mark]

I wouldnt expect any writer based out of Toronto to ever side with Vancouver, or a player on Vancouver, but your article is ridiculous. You dont want people to believe Burrows, but you want us to believe, or even waste our time reading, the crap you write from now on Cox? Im not a huge Canucks fan, but I would choose to believe an NHL hockey player about something that happened on the ice way before Id ever believe what you think. Have you even watched the overwhelming footage Cox? Or did you just hear that the Canucks were mad about something and decide to write something negative about it. The sentimant here in Vancity is not agreeable with what Bertuzzi did by the way, so thats just another part of your article that is stupid and again gives your writing even less credit then it already had. Maybe at somepoint, 10-15 years from now, when the Leafs make the playoffs again all T.O. writers and fans will stop being so bitter about life in general.

[Pete Nardi]

Cox, whether or not you believe Burrows is your opinion and no one can argue that. But I think it's more about whether the calls were debatable, as opposed to whether or not he's lying. NHL refs make bad calls all the time, and are they ever penalized for it? You call the nation a bunch of cry babies, but have you ever considered why that might be. We don't just complain about refs, we complain about people in a position of authority, or people who hold the microphone and get to say whatever they want (like you). You've been bashing the Leafs for years, and many times it's wrong but that crap gets printed anyway. We hate the government because it gets away with murder and shrugs it off like nothing matters. We hate refs because many times they ARE WRONG, but skate away from players as if they're kings. Sure, the NHL may review a ref's work over the year, but I've never seen him called out and prohibited from working a game. The NFL did it a few years ago to Ed Hochuli and told him that he wouldn't be officiating any playoff games that season, and he's the league's longest serving ref. He made a bad call and was punished. Get my point? Maybe if those stupid zebras on the ice were penalized when THEY made mistakes, fans (and players too) wouldn't be such "crybabies."

[Steve]

The tone and the overall content of the article is ridiculuos. Cox is essentially saying that he doesn't believe Burrows because he's a diver and a pest. But why or how does that make him a liar? There is video, video that Burrows probably didn't know existed at the time of his rant, that shows Auger following Burrows around during the pre-game skate. Now, I've watched plenty of hockey games and I can comfortably say that this type of behavious is highly unusual. I am in no way saying that this 100% validates Burrows' comments but the video, and the brutal penalties, cause me to believe that Burrow may be telling the truth. And why does Cox shrug off the allegations so easily by saying Auger is he is a solid ref. So? Isn't this the same guy who branded Shane Doan a racist? I expect reporters to express their opinion but a little objectivity would be appreciated. The rest of comments are throw aways to create discussion.

[Brock]

This is the first article I've ever read of yours Mr. Cox, and will likely be the last. I have no interest in raising hit counts for a 'journalist' writing controversial and offensive material simply to boost his hit count (and that's what it is when you make generalizations regarding an entire province based on a hockey situation). Further, you even go so far as to blatantly misrepresent the facts. "Just last summer, Canucks GM Mike Gillis accused the Leafs not once but twice of illegally meddling in Vancouver team business. The NHL essentially laughed and went on to other business." In case you were honestly just ignorant of it, the Leafs were fined for one of the instances addressed. I'd say that means the NHL agreed there was a case. I don't know how you can interpret it otherwise.

[Brock]

I meant to add, this type of journalism has about as much credibility as Eklund's trade rumours. It just plays to the hit counts.

[Sean]

Bob MacKenzie should be the only writer from the East allowed to write about the NHL's Western Conference. Bob watches hockey. It's obvious most of these other eastern writers do not. Damian Cox is a journalist who happens to live in Canada. He's not a hockey person who happens to be a good writer. It's a shame someone with such a hate-on for one team is allowed to give his written opinion about them.

[hector72]

If the ref said what he did to Burrows, why would Burrows have not gone to his coach IMMEDIATELY to tell him? Wouldn't that have been a reasonable response to go to you coach and say the ref just threatened to get him back for embarrasing him? They could have raised the issue to the league before the game even started, but Burrows kept his mouth shut until after he cost his team the game.

[Brent]

I actually thought Cox might like Burrows as they share a few things in common. Cox is nothing but an agitator as well, stirring the post for a reaction...gimme a break! You're a hack and a joke and if you see this a molehill you're also completely incompetent.

[Neil]

I really don't get this article - What could Burrows possibly gain by making this up?

And what is with the childish and broad insulting generalizations?

You've written some fine articles in the past Mr. Cox, but this is certainly not one of them. Anyone who has put some thoughtful analysis into the situation would disagree with most of the statements in your article.

[Jason Hong]

I guess you accomplished what you set out to do Damien. Up until today, I have never heard of your name but writing such a BS article to entice Vancouver fans certainly got your name out (As a completely irresponsible journalist). This isn't how you should gain readership. People only lose respect for you when they read this article and I will forever link your name with poor journalism when I hear your name. Very memorable but also very poor 1st impression.
Not only is the tone of your article completely antagonizinig, your logic does not even make sense.

"Come to think of it, funny how it's always the Canucks screaming outrage about something. Unless, of course, its a Vancouver fan shining a laser into the face of an opposing goalie. Then, in the words of Alain Vigneault, they're just "great fans.""

What does the laser pointing incident (a very moronic Vancouver Fan that nobody supports) have anything to do with the Burrows - Auger incident?

"They sure get unhinged in a hurry over hockey in Vancouver. Geez, years later, you can still get folks all up in a lather over the Bertuzzi-Moore incident, claiming Steve Moore deserved what he got and how he faked his injuries, etc."

How does the opinion of "some" Vancouver fans help advance your point about Burrows and Auger which is your topic of the article?

"Just last summer, Canucks GM Mike Gillis accused the Leafs not once but twice of illegally meddling in Vancouver team business. The NHL essentially laughed and went on to other business."

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Toronto get fined for tampering? I don't think you can consider that as "the league laughing"

The 3 quotes are just small examples of your poor work that is evidenced throughout the entire article. It illustrates that you are a hack writer who tries to gain noteriety by stirring up your audience with poor, unintelligent, writing.
I will skip any future articles that you write because I know your "integrity" is also very lacking and not worth my time. I urge other readers to do this as well as Damien seems like the type of character who will continue to write in this manner as long as he has a readership.

[Mabruk]

I am not a Canuck fan but man you are bias against them stinks throughout your piece. You seem to have issues with whole province! There are many ways of looking at what happened at that game that i may stop at and consider, yours is amongst them indeed!
What do you say to people who are saying the same about you and your precious leafs? I cannot wait until something like this happened to the Leafs, just to see what would you say.

[A. McCulloch]

This is just a total joke and indicative of the Mickey Mouse way the league does much of its business. Campbell hasn't yet concluded his investigation, yet Burrows has already been fined!! Has Campbell asked Auger why he was chasing Burrows around the ice before the game? Is Burrows being fined because he lied or because he spoke out? Cox, this column is weak, weak, weak.

[Marc]

You talked about how you don't like the Canucks but never mentioned the details of that game in question. Did you see it? Or you just don't like the Canucks?

[gm]

Yes Mr. Cox we know you are from the know it all"Centre of the Universe" and approve Brian Burke for Sainthood.

[Ed Baynton]

You sir are a total moron with no clue about the game of hockey. Did you even watch the game and see what cheap calls were made on Burrows? Is their no one on any team in the league that does not embelish an infraction? Alex Burrows is justified in his comments and yes the ref did cheat the Canucks and their fans out of their money by ruining the game with unprofessional calls. And for the record, Toronto did in fact tamper with the Sedins but the league chose to turn a blind eye because it was Toronto. Further to that you are questioning the Maple Leafs present brass by stating that Vancouver was not correct in calling the Leafs for tampering. Talk to Burke and Nonis before you run off like a babbling brook without a clue!

[Ken leach]

Makes be grateful that Cox lives in Hog Town, no one out west much cares what the petite whiner has to say! Burrows was not lying and Auger should be fired.

[gil dicesare]

Cox you are so far off the mark here you are way out of touch with the majority of the Canadian hockey public.....just have a look the the TSN.CA poll yesterday.....29000 votes....25000 believe Burrows....as far as slamming the folks out west ...pure jealousy ....

[Ross, Vancouver]

Whoah, hold up a minute.
First, one idiot with a laser pointer and everyone in Vancouver is tarnished? There are no idiots at Leafs games apparently. Or is everyone an idiot in your eyes?
Second, the tampering allegations were fully justified. The fact the NHL 'laughed' is a pox on the league, not the franchise, which was following the 'proper channels' that everyone is saying Burrows should have followed.
You're painting with an incredibly big brush here.
Burrows does dive, just like a very large number of other players in the league. If officials don't like diving, the onus on them to call the games fairly, consistently and without bias. When they constantly call cheap crap that had no bearing on the flow of the game, they just encourage players to embellish in order to make up for perceived unjust punishments.
Vancouverites are speaking up on issues that any hockey fan who pays attention has noticed himself. Cherry-picking a few wingnuts doesn't take away from the main argument. Speaking on a game you obviously didn't watch, and chanting the NHL mantra does nothing for the game.
I do agree about no calls=well officiated being bad as well. Canucks had a game like that on Sat vs. the Flames. All fans want is consistency. But pointing that out is just whining and complaining, right?

[Stephen]

I would rather believe Burrows than a ref who accussed Shane Doan of calling out "cultural" slurs during game. The poor guy got dragged in front of a parliamentry witch hunt headed by the bloc québécois and was almost removed from team Canada 2006. Auger is not a professional.

[jim]

unfounded tampering, haha, they had wilson on tape for christs sakes, as far as burroughs the interference call was a joke and backs up his story. typical comments from a reporter from the center of the universe. damian cox is a joke

[drew]

I agree with your comments Damien!!
what is ironic, however, is that you write in Toronto - home of Joe Bone-head and Jim "you-make-me-wanna" Ralph and their crew of rabid ref critics and Leaf apologists ... every call against the Leafs is a bad one, the opponent is always getting away with murder, and in many case where they are given penalties, they should be given more! They have helped to support a further develop a whole "nation" of whiners! Cannuck fans may be too - but there cannot be more out-of-touch-with-reality fans of any sport in the world than Leaf fans, can there??? (By the way, in my eyes - you are the antithesis of Bonehead and Ralph.)

[NoWorseTeamThanCanucks]

Burrows finally reaped what he had sown. His years of diving, crying and hair pulling finally caught up to him.

I'd like to buy the ref a beer!

[Cox Sucker]

Geez, Cox. Did you watch the game? I agree with previous posters who stated that it makes it difficult to not find a shred of truth in Burrows allegations. Auger has a spotty history in recent years:

- Shane Doan: Anglophone Rascist
- Phoenix Coyotes: the Goal that wasn't a Goal

Refs may be 'only human', but this guy has a history of making bad calls that have the distinct whiff of an agenda.

BTW ... how is that singing career coming? I think you should stick to that instead of generating schlock for the sheep in Toronto.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zc8yRL41uPA&feature=player_embedded