diving? really

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from adkbeesfan. Show adkbeesfan's posts

    diving? really

    ok, he wasn't hacked to death. but stamkos did contact his legs with his stick. he didn't drop to the ice like he was shot, and his arms didn't reach for the sky in an attempt to "embellish". was it borderline diving...questionable. how is it that the guy that falls to the ice like he's shot, arms flailing everywhere, then remainins on the ice looking for a call doesn't get called? and this does? this in no way effected the outcome of the game. it's just tough to see teams that do this for a living not get called for it. the bruins, a team that has zero history of embellishment gets called for it, in a pretty weak example. mind boggling. again i reiterate, this did not cost the bruins the game. it's just a blown call, that has me scratching my head and saying "i've seen 100x worse not called?" who knows, maybe they should call one or two a game, even the borderline ones...it may help ridding the league of the real "embellishments".
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from I-Like-Hockey. Show I-Like-Hockey's posts

    Re: diving? really

    In Response to diving? really:
    [QUOTE]ok, he wasn't hacked to death. but stamkos did contact his legs with his stick. he didn't drop to the ice like he was shot, and his arms didn't reach for the sky in an attempt to "embellish". was it borderline diving...questionable. how is it that the guy that falls to the ice like he's shot, arms flailing everywhere, then remainins on the ice looking for a call doesn't get called? and this does? this in no way effected the outcome of the game. it's just tough to see teams that do this for a living not get called for it. the bruins, a team that has zero history of embellishment gets called for it, in a pretty weak example. mind boggling. again i reiterate, this did not cost the bruins the game. it's just a blown call, that has me scratching my head and saying "i've seen 100x worse not called?" who knows, maybe they should call one or two a game, even the borderline ones...it may help ridding the league of the real "embellishments".
    Posted by adkbeesfan[/QUOTE]


    While I agree I hate the consistency(re: lack of) with which this call is made. I do think this was a sell by Seguin and good on the Ref for calling it. Now if only they would call more of Subban, Burrows, Lapierre and others for thier constant antics I would be even happier.

    Also, the bruins aren't squeeky clean here. Savard was a diver, Seguin has also been known to dive a bit ( this isn't the first time ive seen him do it), Marchand definitely dives and I've even seen chara go down pretty easy before.

    So its not like we have "no history of diving" all teams have some history just some like MTL, VAN, Tampa etc.. have more of a tradition of diving than anything else.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from DrCC. Show DrCC's posts

    Re: diving? really

    What was the situation on that?  It was Pouliot and him against one or two defenders right?  That would be a really dumb situation to dive in.  I think it far more likely he simply lost his balance.  I wouldn't have called either penalty.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from I-Like-Hockey. Show I-Like-Hockey's posts

    Re: diving? really

    In Response to Re: diving? really:
    [QUOTE]What was the situation on that?  It was Pouliot and him against one or two defenders right?  That would be a really dumb situation to dive in.  I think it far more likely he simply lost his balance.  I wouldn't have called either penalty.
    Posted by DrCC[/QUOTE]

    Stamkos barely even lovetapped him in the thigh with the stick. Both legs instantly went flying out from underneath him.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from DrCC. Show DrCC's posts

    Re: diving? really

    In Response to Re: diving? really:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: diving? really : Stamkos barely even lovetapped him in the thigh with the stick. Both legs instantly went flying out from underneath him.
    Posted by I-Like-Hockey[/QUOTE]
    I wish there were a video of it posted - I can't find any so I am trying to go from memory.  There was certainly not enough from Stamkos to warrent a penalty, that I am sure of.  I thought Seguin was already losing one foot off the ice when he was tapped, though, because he had to reach for the puck.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from I-Like-Hockey. Show I-Like-Hockey's posts

    Re: diving? really

    In Response to Re: diving? really:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: diving? really : I wish there were a video of it posted - I can't find any so I am trying to go from memory.  There was certainly not enough from Stamkos to warrent a penalty, that I am sure of.  I thought Seguin was already losing one foot off the ice when he was tapped, though, because he had to reach for the puck.
    Posted by DrCC[/QUOTE]

    I could be wrong as well. But it looked like a dive to me last night.

    At first I thought it was obviously a trip but when they showed replays it sure looked like Seguin helped sell that one as much as he could without going full out Riberio out there.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from DrCC. Show DrCC's posts

    Re: diving? really

    Found a video.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from adkbeesfan. Show adkbeesfan's posts

    Re: diving? really

    i think both calls were wrong. no tripping, no diving. my point is that none of the tell tale signs of an egregious embellishment were there. and when there is, it's NEVER called. and to say "his legs went flying from under him" is entirely incorrect. understand it's not this call that bothers me, it's that there are 100 examples of more blatant "embellishments" that never get called. to your point ILH, that fact that he didn't go "full-out ribeiro"- to me means he didn't embellish. arms to the sky, dropping like a ton of bricks, when nobody touches you is the unsportsmanlike act. falling to the ice(without the dramatics) after someone actually contacts your legs is hardly unsportsmanlike. both calls were wrong
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from bogie6. Show bogie6's posts

    Re: diving? really

    I just watched Dr. CC's video, and as my memory, and older eyes, saw it last night,Stamkos hooked Seguin just above the knee, so no dive, and definitely a hook. Also, the penalty on Lucic for a "play" that every team makes to protect the puck, was ludicrous. Yes . Looch stepped across and in front of the other forward, but that is done every day, and by every team. It's a set play, why call it once in a lifetime???
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: diving? really

    I hate everything about this.  Most hockey people have a hard time figuring out how the same play can be both a dive and a tripping penalty.  Either the action warranted the tripping penalty or it didn't.  Falling as a result of a trip, no matter how dramatically, isn't the same and falling for no reason other than to make it look like you were tripped.  So the call is stupid regardless.

    I'd love to see them make this really simple. 

    Player A makes light contact with the legs of player B, who falls a little more easily than you'd expect.  NO CALL.  
         - There has to be some responsibility on the player to fight through incidental stuff, and unless player B is trying to dupe the refs, losing your balance isn't the same as diving.

    Or:

    Player A makes solid contact with the legs of player B, and player B does his impression of Willem DeFoe in Platoon.  DIVING is the only penalty.
         - To me, diving is not part of a hockey play the way the trip is.  It's not about playing the puck, the body, the position on the ice.  It's about trying to influence the integrity of the officiating so that they not only have to judge whether the initial infraction deserved to be penalized, they have to judge how much of the fall was real and how much was acting.  Embarrass the player.  Punish his team with not only a lost PP but a PK.

    Otherwise, just call the infractions as you see them.  It's still a judgment call whether the trip is a trip or not, but you'll see less of the embellishing if the risk is higher than the reward.

    Oh, and a last thought - if the acting intends to imply a high stick, elbow, or other shot to the face or head and is caught?  It should be 4 minutes and 10 because the potential penalties for a head shot are so much higher.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: diving? really

    Diving is where the player has watched the Ribeiro/Lapierre 2004 Shab diving instructional video. Arms flailing, crying, looking at the ref, convulsions. What Tyler did was embellish a little without the theatrics.

    Either way I thought it was weak sauce by Seguin because it cost the team an odd man rush and he put himself in the box whether you agree with the call or not.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: diving? really

    That's a penalty on the defender, 100 times out of 100.  Even in the old days, with all the stick work, and clutching and grabbing, it's a definate minor.
      Looked like a breakout 2 on 2, so if Seguin did dive, it wasn't very smart.
     When a player is sprinting hard, really digging in, they're more easily tripped up, however, it's hard to argue Seguin "definately" didn't dive, when Stamkos has only one hand on his own stick, when he's swatting at Seguin.
    I will say this.  The replay shows it's certainly tough to say one way or the other what Seguin did, however it's easy to see the trip.  I don't think most referee's, would ever call 2 penalties on this play, because the first is so obvious, and the second, not nearly as much.  
    I understand the human factor, blowing a call, missing something, but creating a call is an example of poor training, getting caught up in the game, and preferring to be part of the game as opposed to background.  That's not how referee's are supposed to practice their craft.
    Anyway, guess it's possible defending cup champs are held to a higher standard, and probably very few of us here have great memories of the officiating in 73.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Macfact. Show Macfact's posts

    Re: diving? really

    I have said it many a time not letting these guys police the game and leaving it to the league and the refs will RESULT in DIVES just like soccer, Welcome to the new error of Hockey and the refs simply do not know how to handle it. More bad calls to come.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from adkbeesfan. Show adkbeesfan's posts

    Re: diving? really

    thinking a guy went down easy, and embellishment are two totally separate things. when you embellish you "add to the attractiveness"- look up the meaning of the word, you know... make it look WAY worse than it is.  seguin did not add anything to get a call, he fell normally after being contacted in the legs while skating. no head jerking unaturally, no arms flailing, no super man dive...bogus call. 
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: diving? really

    Incidentally, as much as head shots, the league has boisterously stated it's mandate to seriously crack down on anything regarding any kind of obstruction.  That's been a few years now, and to me, the league has been hopelessly inconsistent.
    One night, the calls are reminiscent of a basketball game, the next it's like a retro Bruins-Flyers game.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: diving? really

    Stick hit him in the thigh and his legs came out form under him. He dove. Stamkos knew it the second it happened and so did the ref...Boy wonder. wearing a black n gold jersey dove, your all going to have to deal with it.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49-North. Show 49-North's posts

    Re: diving? really

    In Response to Re: diving? really:
    [QUOTE]Found a video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0g9FUBmmWpQ
    Posted by DrCC[/QUOTE]

    From someone who's seen players on his own team do it many times (much to my embarrassment) --- yeah, that was a big-time bellyflop by Seguin.  He shames himself even more with the pained expression on his face as he's heading to the box.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: diving? really

    In Response to Re: diving? really:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: diving? really : From someone who's seen players on his own team do it many times (much to my embarrassment) --- yeah, that was a big-time bellyflop by Seguin.  He shames himself even more with the pained expression on his face as he's heading to the box.
    Posted by 49-North[/QUOTE]

    A player that dives and tries to sell a penalty then does not try to make a play while he's on his belly on the ice. 
    A diver just waits for the the refs call.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from I-Like-Hockey. Show I-Like-Hockey's posts

    Re: diving? really

    In Response to Re: diving? really:
    [QUOTE]Stick hit him in the thigh and his legs came out form under him. He dove. Stamkos knew it the second it happened and so did the ref...Boy wonder. wearing a black n gold jersey dove, your all going to have to deal with it.
    Posted by kelvana33[/QUOTE]

    Exactly
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from fishfinger. Show fishfinger's posts

    Re: diving? really

    I did not see a dive..he pulled on the knee when Tyler was in mid stride he was about to bring his leg forward. It threw him off stride. Maybe it happens 1 out of ten that he falls but this time he did. I would have been fine with no call just do not agree that it is a dive.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from adkbeesfan. Show adkbeesfan's posts

    Re: diving? really

    if that was diving or "embellishment", then it happens 25 times a game. every guy who falls to ice could be questioned whether or not they are embellishing(hey that guy went down pretty easy-diving). get a parade started to the penalty box. my take on the rule is someone doing something overly dramatic to draw attention to an otherwise non-penalty. it's not the act of falling that is diving, it's how you do it. falling to the ice, is not against the rules, so long as it is not overly dramatic. everyone knows exactly what i'm talking about. if seguin jumped forward and literally dove(arms reaching forward)- yes diving. if he jerked his head back in a fashion that resembles a whiplash- yes diving. if he drops like a ton of bricks with no apparent contact- yes diving. but he didn't do any of these things. stamkos actually did contact his thigh with his stick from behind. was it enough to illegally take him off his feet- who's to know. one thing i do know, he did nothing to draw extra attention to his plight. bad call period, both ways.   
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from bogie6. Show bogie6's posts

    Re: diving? really

    Watch the video. Stamkos hooks Seguin's knee just as Seguin's normal stride is forward, which pulls Seguin off balance. Don't even try to use the one hand on the stick bit. Stamkos has had "Gary roberts" training for the past few years , so his one hand is stronger than a lot of two handers. The ref blew it.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from 306bruinsfan. Show 306bruinsfan's posts

    Re: diving? really

    To me it looks like he toe-picks.  I definitely do not see a dive.  The fact that he continues to try and play the puck afterwards makes me think moreso that it is not a dive.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: diving? really

    In Response to Re: diving? really:
    [QUOTE]To me it looks like he toe-picks.  I definitely do not see a dive.  The fact that he continues to try and play the puck afterwards makes me think moreso that it is not a dive.
    Posted by 306bruinsfan[/QUOTE]

    Exactly.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from adkbeesfan. Show adkbeesfan's posts

    Re: diving? really

    a legitimate "embellishment" definitely requires a full commitment to the play. you all know what i'm talking about. arms and head flying backwards, jumping in the air and falling like a ton of bricks- all the while not playing the puck, looking to the officials for a call. seguin's skating stride was interupted, he fell to his knees, and continued to play the puck. where's the overly dramatic- having nothing to do with the action -reaction from seguin? there isn't one. how many times do we see a stick paralell to the ice across a guys mid-section- and he falls to the ice. sometimes it's called hooking/ sometimes not, but simply falling to the ice has never warranted a diving call.  if you hook a guy and his arms raise above his head, he jumps, and falls limply to the ice- THAT'S DIVING. yet that doesn't get called. funny

     

Share