| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Guest4524 |
Posted - 01/21/2010 : 20:59:24
WHY HASN'T STEPHANE AUGER BEEN FIRED YET? |
| 18 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 01/26/2010 : 00:35:27
I find it absolutely amazing that a post that said "WHY HASN'T STEPHANE AUGER BEEN FIRED YET?" has generated this much response! 
I think i'll try to stay out of the Burrows / Auger argument. My week away saw the HUGE thread on the incident disappear off the front page and i have yet to bother looking it up. Trying my best to be done with it! |
| baumer |
Posted - 01/25/2010 : 13:14:06
I won't doubt that Auger is a bad ref. That's the Burrows incident aside. I watched him do a Tampa game last weekend and he looked confused the whole game, it seemed he didn't know where to watch. But as far as the Burrows incident goes, the reason Burrows was the only one that got fined was because he made comments to the media. If he had of stayed silent and talked to the correct people in the league along with the organization, the outcome of this whole thing would have been alot more fair on both sides. |
| Matt_Roberts85 |
Posted - 01/25/2010 : 07:14:04
Auger was the ref that waived off a blatant goal by brad may earlier this season, one of the worst calls ive seen ever. That probably got him into some hot water.
There is no "I" in team, but there is an "M" and an "E". |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 01/24/2010 : 12:40:33
Here is something we can find some common ground on Slozo. IF (and I say that clearly) Burrows did actually go to Raycroft afterwards and said something, the investigation was very weak. However, I also think that there is much more going on behind the scenes than what he know. Furthermore, once a decision is made, it's really tough for the league or the refs group to come back after and change that ruling.
Firstly, on HNIC last night, one of the fellows stated he had confirmed reports of a meeting between Mike Gillis and Colin Campbell, including a viewing of the pregame tape. It appears nothing concrete came from the meeting, but at the least the NHL is willing to listen.
Personally, I think this Auger guy will get few to no playoff games this season, and I would not be surprised to see this fella fade away and not be found on an NHL ice surface after this year. But only time will tell.
I don't need a public announcement to be confident that the league and the officials union made the proper decision that will be found to be correct in the long run. |
| n/a |
Posted - 01/24/2010 : 09:44:18
The referee's union performing a whitewash 'investigation' with the full backing of the NHL is no real conspiracy . . . it is in their own perceived best interests to cover it up. It's terrible PR, and makes the whole operation look shoddy. I look at it more as a knee-jerk reaction . . . a conspiracy takes some sort of planning.
I have no personal bias against unions. I am trying to restrict my comments to the shortest answer I can make, so . . . I'll leave it at this: I have been a part of a union before (am not currently) and I think some are very necessary. I do not live in a black and white world.
Anyways, I'll leave the subject, and edit out the offending descriptions . . . those were unecessary, I'll give you that.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 01/24/2010 : 09:25:47
quote:
Originally posted by Guest8764
100% agreement here Slozo. If two people are saying two different things and there is no one to corroborate it the general course of action would be to penalize them both or not penalize them at all.
The one sidedness of the fallout is stupid. Like saying that everything cops do is right because they are cops.
No common sense involved in this situation at all.
Wow. Don't know where all this commenting is coming from, might just have to get me a username!
THe NHL has an established rule against smack talking anything about the league to the media. Let's not take that fine out of context. Burrows was not fined for what he said, he was fined for who he said it to and how he said it. If Burrows would have written a letter to the league, called the NHLOA, called Bettman or Campbell, contacted his agent, etc, nothing would have happened.
|
| Guest8764 |
Posted - 01/24/2010 : 09:08:07
100% agreement here Slozo. If two people are saying two different things and there is no one to corroborate it the general course of action would be to penalize them both or not penalize them at all.
The one sidedness of the fallout is stupid. Like saying that everything cops do is right because they are cops.
No common sense involved in this situation at all.
Wow. Don't know where all this commenting is coming from, might just have to get me a username! |
| Guest5272 |
Posted - 01/24/2010 : 02:52:04
Just to get back to the topic, I know Alex Burrows had to pay a fine of 2500$ but I didn't find anything about Auger. It ended up with the conversation with Mr. Campbell, I guess. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 01/23/2010 : 17:43:15
Firstly, making mistakes is inherant to all humans(except Slozo it would appear) which means that people are to be forgiven, given 2nd chances, etc. Even murders often get a 2nd chance. Why is it, that this Auguer guy doesn't get one. Perhaps we should set up a stake in Town Square and stone this man??? I mean please, this is such a huge mountain out of a mole hill!!
Now Slozo, you bring up these 'strawman arguement' comments when ever you disagree with something. Not when it's a poor arguement. It's clear that you are on the side of Auger said something to Burrow. I am on the otherside, among many other people, that don't think this ref was that stupid. Regardless, if you don't agree, your 'strawman' comment comes out and I am personally gettting tired of it. I have that right.
And to the conspiracy. You are again, of the opinion that Auger's actions are, and I quote: destroying the credibility and integrity of all reffing fall under that category and that Bettman, Campbell, and the refs Union are all aware fo this and doing nothing about it.
Definition of Conspiracy:
an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act
Specific enough?? Or is that just another 'strawman' arguement that you disagree with.
And finally, I am asking again to drop the union comments. If one is part of the brotherhood of Union Workers or not is completely irrelevant to anything in here. |
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 01/23/2010 : 16:02:25
So just to clarify, am I to understand your point that you think the Officials's union, like most others, did themselves a disservice by not being punitive to a member even though the organization that they work for found that there was not a case for discipline to happen.
Huh?
If the Official's union has no fight to fight, why would they look for one? Ahh, because you think there was a wrong to be righted. The whitewash is then being applied by all involved then? Sounds like the referred to conspiracy theory to me.
I don't see it.
As a moderator I would expect personal biases towards most things be avoided, yet instead of addressing the fact that you clearly let these biases creep in to your response, you carry on using these fallacies to bolster your point that I mentioned above?
Although the comments made regarding unions is your own, they are still unneeded to discuss HOCKEY related concerns, and yes, as a dues paying union member, I indeed found them unfounded and somewhat insulting, using the descriptors that you did. Nothing other than your word, says that ,
'but my opinion is not that uncommon . . . whether you like it or not.'
This again is stepping into the world of conjecture, where I am starting to believe you have a permanent address.
All I asked was for some respect to the fact that we all come from different walks of life to discuss hockey, can it not recognized and respected as such?
Now I realize that Beans doesn't want this to become a non-hockey discussion as per the rules of the forum, but if we can't stand up and call foul, what good are the rules?
Believe it or not Slozo, I write this with a smile on my face and am not taking this overly personal, but as I teach my kids, stereotyping is not good. I would think that as a self-proclaimed former educator, you would understand the difference between parlaying opinion and talking facts. |
| n/a |
Posted - 01/23/2010 : 15:06:38
You all protest too much I think . . . union members?
Seriously, I made my point about the non-firing in reference to the other comments beforehand, and quite simply made my point about unions, and how I think the ref union would be fairly similar. All relevant to the topic of why Auger gets a pat on the back, and a whitewashed investigation, as opposed to a suspension with pay, thorough investigation, and then further suspension if not termination.
I knew people would get their fur up about my union comments, and that's why I added the disclaimer - but my opinion is not that uncommon . . . whether you like it or not.
Beans - no one gets fired unless they make a serious mistake that is detrimental to the institution . . . would destroying the credibility and integrity of all reffing fall under that category? Because of one idiot the rest of the refs have to suffer under the idea that all of them might hold grudges, and make phantom calls to get back at players that might have fooled them with a dive in another, unrelated game?
What strawman argument that I made are you referring to, please be specific?
What conspiracy did I mention, please be specific?
And what statement did I make where it could be construed that I was making things "black and white", please be specific?
FatElvis - no need for me to amend anything, I read it over again. It's pretty clear that they are my thoughts, as I am writing them. And no, I don't think the official's union did their job at all, actually . . . you missed my hidden point. A union is also supposed to protect the integrity of their staff, and by letting Auger get of scott-free with very little investigation it makes the whole staff with look bad . . . as if they have something to cover up.
But the Player's union is the worst, but we all know that already with all the personnel changes, etc . . .
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 01/23/2010 : 11:51:36
No one gets fired for making a singular mistake unless it is seriously detromental to the organization they are a part of. As far as this goes, there are 'questionable calls' in every single NHL game. If an official 'got fired' for each bad call, there would be no refs available within a week!
And I am the one accused of living in a black and white world!! Seriously, all of these 'strawman' arguement comments are getting a little tiresome. Not everything is a conspiracy and not everyone needs to share the same opinion. Personally, I LOVED this entire situation and it couldn't have happned to be a better guy. It's also obvious that I am not alone in my opinion(Ron MacLean, Dave Hodge, etc). Call me what you will, but when people get their medicine, it makes me smile. Burrows is a dive artist who ruins the game more than any weak call by any official regardless of them saying they will make the bad calls or not.
Now, let's drop this Union vs Non-Union stuff. It's close enough to politics to be against the rules of the forum as it obvious that it's sensative issue. I also fail to see it's relevance to this arguement.
|
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 01/23/2010 : 10:01:41
Slozo, in your disclaimer, could you please amend to 'these are YOUR generalisations', that would at least make the post your own, and not the general consensus you imply it to be...
Now I agree that there is validity to the point about the Official's union, MOST LIKELY, having weight in the decision of what happens to Auger, I haven't heard anything concrete and refuse to allow my personal biases to get in the way of fact.
That was the simple guesstimate to answer the poster's initial question. My answer would be more along the lines of, any discretions regarding judgements alotted from said official have been investigated when necessary, and nothing was found to warrant any action.
Of course what do I know, I must be a 'brainwashed brother', living in my 12 steps of security, wallowing in my entitlement, pompousness and self-righteousness.
This is supposed to be a hockey site, please keep pontifications that others may find offensive to yourself. The point that the Official's union may be doing their job was made, the rhetoric that accompanied it was uncalled for. |
| n/a |
Posted - 01/23/2010 : 09:10:19
Well, for the adults living in Adult World posting on this site, a very poor performance at your job can and will probably get you fired. No has to die, and very often, no one has to do anything dramatic. However, if it is a union of some sort, you have a much bigger chance of keeping your job unless you do something dramatic . . . unions and gov't jobs.
Auger belongs to a union of refs, and just like many unions, you will hear almost every ref defend their brother Auger, no matter how badly he performs (like Ron Maclean, who lost all my respect in his ridiculous tirade against Burrows that was the biggest straw man argument ever and addressed none of the real issues). And, just like most other unions, you have an extra 12 steps before you get fired, unlike the rest of the population who have to watch their step a lot more.
Auger is a union man, and is defended by union men. Which begs the question, of course:
Where is Burrow's union?
This player's union sucks bigtime . . .
* Please note that these are 'generalisations' about unions and their members, and not an indictment on every person who has ever belonged to one or is part of one. Just like any generalisation, there are very many exceptions to the rule.
**Edited for potentially offensive generalisations
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Guest5272 |
Posted - 01/23/2010 : 02:58:30
Stéphane Auger hasn't been fired simply because NHL caliber refs aren't running down the streets. He hasn't killed somebody so he won't get fired, but they won't let him be the ref for a Canucks game anymore.
BTW, typing in capitals means you are shouting or yelling or screaming. Just in case you didn't know, Guest4524. |
| Guest9668 |
Posted - 01/22/2010 : 19:21:11
Don't post again. |
| Guest4524 |
Posted - 01/22/2010 : 19:17:48
why are you a [ moderator edit ] ? nobody knows.
sens fan i guess it makes sense. |
| JOSHUACANADA |
Posted - 01/22/2010 : 08:44:33
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4524
WHY HASN'T STEPHANE AUGER BEEN FIRED YET?
WHY DO YOU TYPE IN CAPITAL LETTERS? |
|
|
