I Watched This Game: Canucks at Anaheim Ducks, January 15, 2014

This was an epic disaster. How bad was it? Imagine the movie 2012 as a hockey game. It was like that. A good ensemble cast and a big budget sunk by mind-numbing stupidity.

But here’s the thing — and this won’t be a popular or even understandable opinion — I don’t think the Canucks were that bad in this game. I won’t try to tell you that the Canucks played well, by any means, though there were some good performances hidden in the mire, but the 9-1 score makes the game look a lot worse than it actually was.

The other point of view would be that the 9-1 score is what that game actually was, but that just sounds confusing. Is what it was? That’s just mixing tenses, which doesn’t make any sense. Don’t be daft. I watched this game.

Canucks 1 – 9 Ducks

***

  • This game was about as frustrating to watch as it likely was for the Canucks to play. I was frustrated for different reasons than other Canucks fans, I suspect. Others were likely frustrated by the way the Canucks were playing, while I was frustrated that the Canucks weren’t rewarded for the way they were playing, at least early in the game. The biggest frustration is that it’s going to be impossible to convince anyone the Canucks weren’t awful.
  • I’m not kidding about that. Normally in a blowout game like this you can point to some particularly bad performances from individuals, but no one stood out as being terrible in this game. The worst you could say is that the Sedins needed to be better, that there were some miscues and turnovers from the defencemen, or that Joacim Eriksson isn’t ready for NHL action just yet. Weirdly, it was the good performances that stood out a lot more.
  • The Canucks played a solid first period, but couldn’t get the puck past Frederik Andersen despite some fantastic chances. Ryan Kesler seemed in the zone, hitting the post just 10 seconds into the game. That wasn’t the only puck that got past Andersen in the first, as a Santorelli chance snuck through, but was stopped on the line. Nothing else got past Andersen until, like a Kryptonian sent to the Phantom Zone, it didn’t matter. Wasn’t matter. Whatever, I’m not making sure my jokes make sense for a game like this.
  • The penalty kill is normally the Canucks’ strength; in this game it was their biggest weakness. 6 of the Ducks’ 9 goals came with the man advantage, as they went 6-for-11. That strikes me as an anomaly and unlikely to happen again. I’m not worried about the Canucks’ penalty kill, even though it dropped from first to second in the NHL. One anomalous game does not mean the Canucks have forgotten how to kill penalties. Also, the word “anomalous” is fun to say.
  • Maybe it’s only fun to say if you’ve been drinking, but I’m guessing all of you have been after that game. Even if you’re reading this in the morning.
  • Let’s take stock of the Ducks’ goals: 3 of the goals were scored with a two-man advantage. 3 of the goals deflected in off Canucks’ sticks. Another deflected off Chris Tanev’s body as he went down to block the shot and it would have gone wide, except for Teemu Selanne inexplicably holding his stick at the perfect height. The first goal came off a fluke bounce off a stanchion that turned a routine dump-in into a breakaway. Everything that could have gone wrong for the Canucks did go wrong, to the point that how the Canucks were actually playing became irrelevant.
  • Of course, you could argue that the Canucks’ lack of discipline was the problem, giving the Ducks too many opportunities on the power play, but the ref’s performance was about as baffling as the bounces the Ducks received. The first penalty against the Canucks was a phantom high sticking call on Zack Kassian, as the ref — Paul Devorski — demonstrated what he thought happened by literally karate chopping Kassian on his helmet.
  • I need to say this: the refs are not to blame for this loss. Not even Paul Devorski. Like my opinion that the Canucks weren’t that bad in this game, that won’t be a popular opinion in Vancouver. I mean, sure, Devorski called someone on the Canucks bench, likely John Tortorella, a “****ing ***hole“, which doesn’t make him look particularly objective, but let’s face it: Tortorella was probably being a ****ing ***hole at the time. I would have been if I had to coach the Canucks in that game.
  • But still, there were some inexplicable calls. Bieksa got called for leaning on Andrew Cogliano a little too hard. Tanev got a tripping penalty — which should have been a sign that something was wrong — for bodychecking Corey Perry. Then there was the bizarre 7-minute 5-on-3 at the end.
  • Remember how Tom Sestito got two minutes for instigating and a 5-minute major in the game against the Kings, while Jordan Nolan got nothing, giving the Kings a 7-minute power play? It happened again, except it wasn’t just Sestito, who took to punching Tim Jackman, it was Jannik Hansen as well, who dropped his gloves opposite Sami Vatanen. Despite Jackman and Vatanen both initiating contact in the scrum, they didn’t drop their gloves and either turtled or got ragdolled, so they didn’t get any penalties.
  • The consequence of not taking Jackman off the ice? On the subsequent power play, he dropped his gloves and went after Kevin Bieksa at his earliest opportunity. This is why the refereeing was so baffling. A lot of what is considered bad reffing is part of game management, just trying to keep a game under control. The refs made calls throughout this game that just let the game get further and further out of hand.
  • David Booth was awesome. It wasn’t just that he was decent when everyone else was terrible because, as I’ve already established, no one was outright terrible (though Eriksson wasn’t great). Booth was the best player on the ice: the Canucks out-shot the Ducks 16-3 when he was on the ice, he had 6 scoring chances according to Sportsnet, and he created the Canucks’ only goal by powering to the net and, in the process, knocking Andersen out of the net, so Kassian, following up, had an open net. Booth managed all of that in under 12 minutes of ice time. Don’t read too much into his ice time, though: by the end of the game Booth was on the top line and only didn’t play more because the Canucks spend so much time shorthanded.
  • Anyway, hockey is stupid, you guys.

54 comments

  1. ikillchicken
    January 16, 2014

    It was a moral victory.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +30 (from 30 votes)
  2. dontpassjustshoot
    January 16, 2014

    Earlier tonight I left a comment on another pitb post asking for an explanation of the instigator rule. Now I’m really asking. I was baffled earlier this year when Ray “Defend Yourself” Emery headhunted another goalie and the explanation for not being punished seemed to be that he hadn’t done it often enough for punishment. But I don’t remember seeing Hansen do anything like that. John [announcer] just wrote a piece on abolishing it, which may have somehow triggered sudden madness in the refs (“they haven’t seen instigator penalties yet! Bwah-ha-haaaa!”)

    One of the Johns was saying that one of the two Ducks – Sestito’s guy – did actually drop his gloves, but I didn’t see. I think I was probably pouring a stiff drink or sadly playing a violin.

    Good post – thanks for sticking with it and seeing the positives. I thought the same: that the Canucks were a little lackluster and had horrible luck, the Ducks were really strong in their building (what a fanbase – it sounds like a British footie match, with real chanting!) and that the bad calls didn’t directly affect the outcome, though one or two goals may have come of them.

    I will say though, it might hit a team’s morale and thus performance badly if they realize one or two refs who they will never be able to get away from appear to have a profound hatred for your team that will last through any and all changes in personnel. It is possible that that isn’t what is happening here. But can the NHL afford to lose the revenue that comes with a certain proportion of the less devoted fans coming to think so, from dreadful calls like this?

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +15 (from 15 votes)
    • DuaneHayes
      January 16, 2014

      I agree, I just hope Devorski isn’t in Phoenix tonight.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  3. dunegig
    January 16, 2014

    Remember in the 2011 playoff series against the Hawks when they called up John Scott to add “toughness”, and we all laughed and clapped ’cause it was awesome the way that they just got slapped with penalites and goals against? I do. The Canucks don’t seem to. Now, look at everybody laughing at us.

    Bart: “And why did Humpty Dumpty have a great fall?”
    Navajo Kid: “Because he took his eyes off the prize?”
    Bart: “That’s right – you stay on the ball, you stay on the wall.”

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +5 (from 7 votes)
    • ikillchicken
      January 16, 2014

      The penalties that cost us the first four PPGs were…Edler (tripping) Bieksa (interference) Kesler (holding) and Tanev (tripping). The only ones called on “tough” players and/or relating at all to “tough” play came after we were down 7-1 with less than ten minutes to go and absolutely zero hope of winning. And if you’re alluding to “tough” players giving up 5v5 goals, the bottom 6 were all +/- 0 on the night. Literally everyone else was a minus. You’re completely misinformed if you think “toughness” has anything to do with us losing this game or that there’s any sort of analogy to be drawn to guys like John Scott.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +12 (from 14 votes)
  4. JustAnotherEuropeanCanucksFan
    January 16, 2014

    Almost always I totally agree with the posts here at PItB, so no wonder I have not commented earlier. But this time.. I wonder if we were watching the same game? The Ducks were so clearly better at everything, especially their skating and lightning fast passing were so much more inspiring compared to our guys. The Canucks seemed to be confused at 2-0 when the Ducks furiously tried to get another goal. The same at 3-0. Don’t the Ducks know you are supposed to start protecting that one goal lead, and so allow the other team to come back?! Not fair!

    You know, I think it is worse to watch a bad game here in Finland than there. The West-Coast games start at 5 am so I have to get up an hour or two earlier than usually, and afterwards I go to work steaming with suppressed rage..

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +3 (from 3 votes)
  5. chicken chick
    January 16, 2014

    Vancouver is another time
    Against first place Anaheim.
    The mighty Ducks are first to score
    And get their second five on four,

    Of course it’s Edler in the bin.
    The ‘Nucks best put the next one in,
    Which I soon see them fail to do.
    Ducks score again Vancouver’s through,

    As in finished for the night.
    There’s but one thing I wish to write:
    I wish these guys had come to play
    The way they did against L A.

    There’re maybe three deserve their pay.
    So count me out as of today!

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -3 (from 7 votes)
  6. naturalmystic
    January 16, 2014

    If I have five words left and I’m about to f’n expire and all I have left to say is to curse f’n Vancouver, I’m probably not going to say, “Vancouver funkin’ blow.”

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -8 (from 14 votes)
    • shoes
      January 16, 2014

      They did and your post does. ET tu?

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)
  7. whisky jack
    January 16, 2014

    Dear Skeeter Dan

    some salient facts that you ignore
    our forwards simply cannot score
    and we are slow in getting back
    to protect poor eddy lack

    as for last night we botched that game
    and though the refs must take some blame
    i witnessed not a single hit
    to slow things down a little bit

    if we don’t show up thursday night
    it will be clear that things aren’t right
    except at L A it would seem
    that we’re not playing as a team

    perhaps it’s time this theme to broach
    mayhap we need another coach

    sincerely
    whisky jack

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: 0 (from 6 votes)
  8. BV
    January 16, 2014

    “to the point that how the Canucks were actually playing became irrelevant.”

    I think this sums up the season. The Canucks typically play well, especially against good teams, but seldom good enough. Particularly against the good teams in the division.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +13 (from 13 votes)
  9. Chinstrap Joe
    January 16, 2014

    BOLD PREDICTION TIME!!!!!!

    Ahem….***The Canucks home sellout streak will end sometime this year.***

    I mean, really. I can’t even get the dog to watch a game with me anymore.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +9 (from 13 votes)
    • GeezMoney
      January 16, 2014

      There’s the true Canucks fan, sticking with his team through thick and thin.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +5 (from 7 votes)
      • Chinstrap Joe
        January 16, 2014

        Is that a disparaging remark about my dog? Cause let me tell you, I let that Beagle loose and he will lick you till you cry uncle.

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: +13 (from 13 votes)
        • GeezMoney
          January 16, 2014

          That may be so, but I should warn you that dogs are allergic to my face.

          VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
          Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)
    • naturalmystic
      January 16, 2014

      It isnt the team, it’s the company…..

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +1 (from 5 votes)
  10. mb13
    January 16, 2014

    Yep – the Canucks really turned the corner on Monday vs. the Kings. The “win” brought them all together. *rolls eyes* A few people cautioned about that a few days ago – saying that everyone thought that when the Canucks beat the Bruins they had avenged the SC loss only to fizzle the rest of the way. Fast forward two years and everyone is excited about how the Canucks turned the corner with their LOSS against the Kings. Maybe they turned a corner… but waiting around the corner wasn’t smooth sailing but a brick wall. That’s how the NHL works – when you start patting yourself on the back (for a LOSS) and think life will get easier, it’s usually the opposite.

    Daniel – out of curiosity. How is the Canucks advanced statistics looking these days? I checked out a site and determined they are closer to mid-pack these days (10th and 13th) but I’m not sure if I’m reading correctly. Am I wrong or have the Canucks slipped? Thanks in advance.

    Tonight all of a sudden is a very very big game.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +2 (from 8 votes)
    • shoes
      January 16, 2014

      Hi Paul….is that you? You sound like a keyboard version of a very suspect ref.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)
      • MB13
        January 16, 2014

        Yep – if it wasn’t for the me, the Cantucks would have lost 6-1… feel better? If not, maybe time for a soother.

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
        • Pavo
          January 16, 2014

          At least the Canucks getting shellacked last night is good for something.

          Happy Days are here again for mb.

          VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
          • mb13
            January 16, 2014

            I’m not happy… just right. This team is what it is. One game vs. LA doesnt change that no matter how much the players, the media or Shoes wants it to be.

            Granted… I kind of enjoy seeing Shoes get all worked up qhen they lose.

            VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
            Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
            • Daniel Wagner
              January 16, 2014

              One game vs. Anaheim doesn’t change it either.

              VN:F [1.9.16_1159]
              Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
            • shoes
              January 18, 2014

              but MB13……your “team is what it is” too!! the difference being….is that you lack the fortitude or worse to even identify your team. Lets face it….it is FUN for you to pound away on your keyboard trolling the Canucks and eating cheeseburgers, with the odd annoying interuption from your mom yelling down the stairs….. “Wickstrom will you stop that d*mm chortlin’ afore I come down thar and whup ya, I’m watchin’ my soap”

              The only question I have…..how in the H did you get the handle MB13 from “Wicktrom?”

              VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
              Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  11. Shade of Blue
    January 16, 2014

    I agree with your overall take Daniel — that the Canucks generally played well early, especially the starting 4th line combo of Santorelli, Weise, and Booth — but draw a different conclusion: the Canucks are not playing well enough to match up against the league’s elite.

    Sure the Canucks sorely missed Luongo, and the Ducks are the hottest team in the NHL, but that was the Ducks’ back up in net, too.

    The Canucks have struggled mightily against the California teams this year, and there inability to score is going to cost them, however many “statement” games they play. Take away all *6* Ducks power plays goals, and the Canucks still lose 3-1.

    Hopefully, Burrows will return and the top line will play like it is mid-season 2011. If they are going to give up 9 goals, I’d like them to score at least 6 or so (and preferably 10 or more!) so the games are worth watching, even if they lose.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +6 (from 6 votes)
  12. Paul from YaleTown
    January 16, 2014

    I agree that the Canucks didn’t play a bad game, but did seem to give up after it was out of reach – but who could blame them. The score and their luck, or lack of, deflated the teams confidence as the game wore on. Even the lack of celebrations by the Ducks players on their 7th, 8th & 9th goals said it all as they too knew the score was out of hand and no way that the Canucks could climb back into things.

    Between the unlucky bounces, the phantom calls by Devorski and the lack of game management by the refs you can’t really fault the Canucks. I am really hoping that Devorski isn’t officiating tonight’s game as well.

    I give Torts credit for pulling Lack before his confidence was swayed in a game where the 3 goals were not his fault and you could see that the game just wasn’t going in the Canucks favour, but I also have to feel for Ericsson as this was his 1st NHL season game he played in. I’d hope to think that this game is not a reflection of what he can bring.

    I guess on a positive note the Canucks have embarrassed the opposition by an 11-0 win versus the Flames in ’92 where Gary Valk scored twice himself.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +3 (from 3 votes)
  13. Noodle
    January 16, 2014

    It’s almost like the hockey gods are saying “You think you can win the Cup, Canucks fans? Well watch THIS. LOLLOLOLOL”.

    Is there some Pacific Northwest equivalent to the Curse of the Bambino?

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +8 (from 8 votes)
  14. GeezMoney
    January 16, 2014

    The reffing, while nowhere close to the reason the Canucks lost last night, can’t continue to be this abysmal. It is ruining the game. Refs need to stop making things up on the fly and every game needs to be called exactly the same way. It would be good if the biys from Pass It to Bulis followed Devorski around for a whlile (on TV, not on the street) and see if he makes the same “interesting” 7-minute fighting penalty call.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +12 (from 12 votes)
  15. Amor de Cosmos
    January 16, 2014

    “perhaps it’s time this theme to broach
    mayhap we need another coach”

    I’m beginning to wonder the same thing.

    I realise the canning the coach is the default knee-jerk reaction to a run like we’re on. But it’s not just the past couple of games. Tortorella’s made a few comments lately that, frankly, strike me as asinine, especially regarding the overemphasis, or even uselessness, of practices. Now maybe they were taken out of context, but if they weren’t then we have a long term problem. Any kind of skill needs to be practiced intensively, and the higher up the food chain you are the more that’s the case. Musicians, dancers, hockey players spend hours and hours making repetitive movements and drills. So they don’t have to think, so their body knows what’s possible instinctively.

    Under AV (and no, I’m not saying it was wrong to get rid of him) the prep work was evident in games. It showed in the players’ confidence. Individually they could count on others to be where they expected them to be. That’s not happening now and, frankly, except on defence and the PK, it hasn’t all year. The breakout play is helter skelter, shots maybe plentiful but they’re snatched, mostly from poor positions, so easily saved or blocked. Tortorella appears to rely on constant line juggling in order to disguise more fundamental inadequacies.

    What we know about this group of players is that they’re intelligent and disciplined, or have played that way in the past. They’re good at staying on task when things aren’t going well. In contrast Tortorella seems impatient and happy to look for a temporary quick-fix rather than come up with a system that builds on the abilities of the group of players he’s inherited.

    Should he go? No, not yet. Too soon, silly time to fire a coach. But if nothing substantively changes by the end of the season — play-offs or not — then yes. Unless club management wants a total reboot of player personnel, because the indications are, most of the guys we’ve got are better than their coach.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +3 (from 5 votes)
    • Aaron
      January 16, 2014

      Overall I like the spirit, pushback, team toughness Torts has brought to the Canucks, I do have a couple concerns though. I don’t undertsand the PP deployment , I don’t understand the constant line juggling as chemistry is built by familarity. I do like the style of play but there needs to be some moves that help us with our finish. It’s easy to sit here and critisize but we have a good team that needs some tweeks made now before its to late! 1 bad game or 1 good game will not make a difference but we need to put more pucks in the net. I think Torts will need time but he needs to get it figured out! WE still have lots to be happy about on our team. No overhaul needed just some tweeking. Go Canucks GO!!!!

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +7 (from 9 votes)
  16. akidd
    January 16, 2014

    ouch! well…uh…that was pretty painful. i watched til almost the end of the second which was pretty good i thought. what a depressing spectacle. bummer.

    take away the top-notch goaltending and combine it with the canucks usual goalscoring prowess and it gets ugly quick. basically this team just can’t score. if they let more than one goal in it’s basically game over. sure kesler hit the post. big whoop. the canucks don’t generate many scoring chances. just shovelling the puck towards the goal and going scrambly, scrambly isn’t really much of a plan. neither is going wide to the corner , running out of options,then passing it back to the point where everyone is expecting it and the dman has no room. time to rethink scoring strategy.

    you say booth had a strong game. part of him did. those hand are still in the stone ages. there’s a skill deficit on this team. take away the sedins(and it seems like they were taken away about two months ago) and there’s not much left as far as scoring talent. giving up nine goals was painful, another game of just scoring one is plain scary.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +6 (from 6 votes)
  17. Chris the Curmudgeon
    January 16, 2014

    Well, I gotta say I’m pretty glad I skipped this one, folks. However, one thing seems pretty obvious, the Canucks team that was beating everyone in mid-December is a very distant memory. Somehow, not only have the scoring woes returned in full force, but discipline has gone out the window too. I know the officiating is baffling. It was baffling last year in the first round of the playoffs too. However, losing + complaining does not equate to winning. Just like puck possession and shots on goal do not equate to scoring. Brief periods of success might draw attention away from the problems, but the fact remains that this team STILL has not addressed the need for a proper puck-moving defenceman and for a top 6 winger. With Burrows coming back and Luongo hopefully on his way too, a couple of the major deficiencies could be taken care of soon, but Gillis is starting to look like the biggest thumb-twiddler amongst all the NHL GMs. How much more obvious does it need to be that this team isn’t a Cup contender as currently constructed? I know we’ve just come through a tough stretch of schedule, but guess what, IF we make the playoffs, we’re not going to be playing the Oilers.

    Coming off the game vs LA, last night was a big opportunity for a “statement” game. The team made a statement all right, loud and clear, but just not a good one.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +3 (from 5 votes)
    • Noodle
      January 16, 2014

      In Gillis’ defense, his hands (and most other GM’s) were tied last summer with the cap temporarily coming down. We weren’t in a position to add an impact player, and the trade market was pretty much cold anyways (due to that cap issue).

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +5 (from 5 votes)
  18. BBoone
    January 16, 2014

    The Canucks, from the top down, talked way too much after the last game, and in general ,after every game all season. It is best to Walk the Walk and simply talk platitudes praising your coming opponent etc etc . The season is way too long for the constant distraction of “Big Boy ” psychobabble . It starts with Torts . He needs to keep his mouth shut, inform his team to keep their mouths shut , and let his teams’ play do the talking.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +5 (from 7 votes)
    • Chris the Curmudgeon
      January 16, 2014

      Agreed, the team is like the Charleston Chiefs meets the Bad News Bears right now. I really can’t stand this identity the team seems to have right now. Time to scratch Sestito, and tell the rest of the guys to shut up and put up. I’d like to see a few games with no retaliation, no chirping, none of that nonsense to send the message that this team is down to business rather than being willing to devolve into a clown sideshow act.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +2 (from 6 votes)
      • Amor de Cosmos
        January 16, 2014

        Uh huh. Remember the “play between the whistles, not afterwards” mantra the players used to recite? Be nice to see it return.

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: +4 (from 4 votes)
        • Pavo
          January 16, 2014

          Except they got panned for taking that approach in the SCF.

          Damned if you do. Damned if you don’t.

          VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
          Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)
      • shoes
        January 18, 2014

        As someone already pointed out …..NO Canuck “tough guy” got a penalty until the double 7 minute man advantage Ducks.

        If you look at the penalty line it appears that Tim Jackman and Sami Vatanen were dressed in matching pink tutus playing tag at centre ice with referee Paul Devorski when Sestito and the heavy fighting Hansen came and attacked them.

        If you had a TV and a hockey IQ ….you would see something quite the opposite in that Jackman got his stick up in Sestitos face and Vatenan had Hansen in a headlock. How of either of those led to the Canucks players taking ALL of the penalties is beyond me. And a mystery that only Devorski can unravel.

        Its history now, except for one thing. I see posts like yours saying the Canucks should take stuff like that. In fact both Hansen and Sestito should have taken a beating and then they likely would have only put the team down 2 men for 2 minutes. The Canucks are more heroic to me for standing up then not, because as others have pointed out…..they have tried both ways and the refs have reacted in 180 degree positions both instances.

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  19. Anthony
    January 16, 2014

    “◦Anyway, hockey is stupid, you guys.”

    Lol, kudos to you to even write about this game

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +7 (from 7 votes)
  20. Len Wike
    January 16, 2014

    this for this insightful blog post where most fans just rage and dive off the bandwagon. It wasn’t a pretty game, but I’m really glad how you can find at least the positives in the pile of mess.

    Hockey is stupid, lol but somehow all of us can’t turn away

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +7 (from 7 votes)
    • Amor de Cosmos
      January 16, 2014

      It’s not hockey that’s the problem. At it’s best, played with grace, strength and skill, it’s a thing of beauty. Unfortunately the NHL runs it like a Spuzzum beer league.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +6 (from 6 votes)
      • Pavo
        January 16, 2014

        “At it’s best, played with grace, strength and skill”.

        Not according to Cherry, the high priest of hockey. What you describe, my friend, is the ‘sissy Euro’ version :( !

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  21. James W.
    January 16, 2014

    When it was in the middle of the 5 on 3, and there were two more minor penalties called against Vancouver, all I did was look at the TV and say “WHY.”

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +3 (from 3 votes)
    • dontpassjustshoot
      January 16, 2014

      Agreed. When there is no good reason, in spite of all the people working in or on the periphery of the NHL industry who carefully say, as they must to keep in with the right people, “there is no plan – no one is out to get the Canucks – only conspiracy theorists would think that some teams in the league receive different officiating treatment than others, because there’s no such thing as bias in the absence of conspiracy…”

      … fans are watching the screen saying, “why?”, and there is literally no reason to come up with besides, “I guess they want to punish this team.”

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)
  22. Sightseer
    January 16, 2014

    Sestito got penalized & ejected vs LA & Jordan got nothing because Sestito dropped the gloves and Nolan didn’t engage. That’s DISCIPLINE not bad officiating. Canucks are doomed to the curse of Burrows; never taking ownership for their losses and never really winning b/c they feel entitled. The CA teams are owning you in your race to the goonie bottom under capt Tortorella. . Have fun in your wildcard showdown with the Phoenix Coyotes.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: -9 (from 9 votes)
  23. shoes
    January 16, 2014

    Listen up Sportsfans….for the last 12 years the NHL has had a policy of not using a ref 2 games in a row, because of the chance of emotion and anger entering into the game both from the officials and players points of view. It is there policy. Full stop. So why did they take a ref who had a bad night in LA, change his partner who had a reasonable night in LA, and place him with a new partner back in with the same team. Against the policy. And the results were predictable. The Sun is carrying an article showing Devorski pointing at the Canucks bench and mouthing the words “f’ing a-whole” Not nice and not professional after all until the last 7 minutes the Canucks were not exactly acting out. When they did he ambushed them and choose to punish them alone. His latest flame, ex-flame i mean was given a free pass and allowed to instigate a fight later with NO repercussions. Devorski cheated in this game and cheating is not a good example for hockey fans no matter the club. Having said that….you mullets ago, can celebrate as it is your SCF this year.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +6 (from 6 votes)
    • naturalmystic
      January 16, 2014

      Devorski is correct about Tortorella.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: -1 (from 5 votes)
      • Chris the Curmudgeon
        January 16, 2014

        Perhaps, but expressing that opinion while calling a 7 minute 5 on 3 against his team is extremely unprofessional.

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: +5 (from 5 votes)
      • shoes
        January 18, 2014

        And your reasoning….. besides your membership in the Million Mullet Army. (MMA) Not like the real MMA……this MMA is just keyboard tuff. :D

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  24. iain
    January 16, 2014

    hum. that was painful.

    leaving aside the disaster that ensued following corey perry’s assist on dan hamhuis’s first goal, you could see why anaheim is riding so high right now. not only do they have talent, size and speed, their puck luck is off the charts. every bounce that could bounce went anaheim’s way, from kesler’s shot off the post 10secs in to the weird bounce off the stanchion that led to the ducks’ first goal. in fact, you could tell that the nucks were doomed the moment kesler’s shot hit the post.

    i did think they played pretty good to start with, had some jump and created some chaos in the anaheim defensive zone. and yes, shock horror, booth was good. but the luck, plainly, was not with them and by the first intermission you knew they weren’t likely to win. and let’s not discuss the shambles that is the powerplay, please. torts, please fix this.

    oh and while you’re at it, could you get the canucks to take some quality shots too please? i.e. shoot for the good bits of the net – top shelf corners, five-hole, etc. – not right at the goalie’s logo or his glove hand. i get that that this is more tricky than simply throwing it somewhere in the region of the goal, but i thought pros spent hours practicing taking shots for accuracy, etc that sort of thing.

    the mess later was chiefly irrelevant, but does raise a question: why does the NHL allow officials to officiate the same team back to back? especially when all concerned could have guessed the nucks-kings game would be a tricky one to officiate. it was obvious that devorski, being human, was not totally objective when calling the game last night. yep, the officiating didn’t have a lot to do with the outcome (except in the final score), vancouver was clearly gonna lose this one, but it was brutal nonetheless. the first penalty – the highstick that never was set the tone, and it never improved from there. the hooking penalty on anaheim in the first was another phantom call – far lamer than many hooks that are overlooked. i reckon with halfway decent officiating, the canucks would have lost this one 4-1, maybe 5-1.

    NB. i guess turtling is now part of The Code(TM)…….but i can only imagine the hoots of derision if it had been a canuck player taking that route when set upon by a king or a duck.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +6 (from 6 votes)
  25. DuaneHayes
    January 16, 2014

    I couldn’t agree more with Daniel Wagners point of view, its refreshing when someone sees the game as I did. Even reading Devorskis lips, good job! I do believe Devorski had a personal agenda though, if not from the beginning of that game then at least from somewhere in the middle of it. Kerry Fraser has admitted that refs do this, saying its hard not to, your human. Wheres Stephan Auger now? The natural progression of two teams imposing their will on each other to settle a game fairly was disturbed early and often. The Kesler,Bieksa,Tanev Kassian penalties were border line at least. Ive never seen a 7 minute power play in my 35 years of watching hickey before the Kings game but was in absolute shock to see the 7 minute double 5 on 3 on Wednesday. And why don’t we get a player back after the first goal? Devorski would’ve given the Kings a second goal to Richards in LA if the other ref hadn’t stepped in. And most calls last night were called by Devorski again. He was calling someone an asshole. unbelievable. Reenacting Kassians high stick clearly shows hes making stuff up.I feel sorry for the Yotes tonight!!

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)
  26. wes
    January 16, 2014

    talking about game management, when the ducks received a 7 minute 5 on 3 with a 7 -1 lead and decided to try to set up players for hat tricks, what incentive do the canucks have to not slash or in another way hurt a duck? they can’t take anymore guys off the ice. if one of those players got injured it would most certainly be on devorski. so strange a call considering both teams were seemingly content running the clock down, as we had seen much continuous play up until them. very poor reffing.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +4 (from 4 votes)
  27. lagunasurf
    January 17, 2014

    I guess you can use any kind of rationalization for the Canucks poor performance with their games against LA, Anaheim, and Phoenix. All you Vancouver fans, get over it. Your Canucks got it handed to them and their thuggish actions in Anaheim backfired. Put on your big boy pants and move on.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  28. shoes
    January 18, 2014

    your comment, Lagunasurf, smacks of coming from someone who has watched little hockey and knows little about it. There is some very good comments on it from Ducks fans on some sites that fully agree the reffing was terrible and right out the first shift of the game dictated that the Canucks were not going to get an evenhanded game. I don’t care what you or you BF think about it, but I just hope Devorski is satisfied that his pound of flesh for ______________is now equal.

    Thanks for coming out.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
    • EIGHTHSEED
      January 18, 2014

      The refs can’t throw the game if you are putting pucks in the net. Claim you know more about hockey to make yourself feel better, but losers always find an excuse and winners always find a way to win. VAN used to be a formidable opponent and highly skilled. Now, VAN is cheapening the game with thug tactics. Canuck fans deserve to win, not whine. Please come back to playing sticks & drop the shenanigans. Love – LA, Chicago, San Jose, St. Louis,

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)