Comments on: Ex-referee: Prust “appropriately” called for diving on Antropov hit (w/video)

By: thebadguyswon

thebadguyswon — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 15:52:50 +0000

Of course he wouldn’t. But I’d like to see if you had the stones. Bet you don’t.

By: dropthepuckeh

dropthepuckeh — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 15:21:49 +0000

This is what happens to good, tough players when they go to Montreal. It must be something in the water that makes them turn into whiners and divers. Prust doesn’t need this in his game.

By: rdurk86

rdurk86 — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 14:51:10 +0000

Don’t you think he had to know it was coming? He had the presence of mind to immediately hit the ice and lay there like he’d been shot. Oh and then he’s immediately up and yucking it up with people on the bench. Good job hiding on the bench too, don’t respond or anything, let the smallest guy on the team stand up for you. What a joker.

By: rdurk86

rdurk86 — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 14:46:48 +0000

Right, because Prust would definitely haul off and slug a fan who heckled him….

By: keith8

keith8 — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 04:00:18 +0000

Starting to notice a trend. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uh-eH451n5Y

By: thebadguyswon

thebadguyswon — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 03:17:38 +0000

I’d pay to see you say that to Prust’s face.

By: stakex

stakex — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 02:47:59 +0000

The first point Fraser makes seems quite incorrect from watching the video. Antropov’s elbow clearly makes contact on Prust’s number on his back…. which clearly shows the hit was from behind. No doubt Prust embelissed the call, and theres debate to be had if it was hard enough to warrent a call… but the contact was from behind.

There is also no rule that says you can’t turn your back to an opponent in an effort to draw a boarding call, so long as it isn’t a split second before the hit. So while Prust might have known it was coming… that doesn’t matter at all.

By: stakex

stakex — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 02:42:40 +0000

There are plenty of times where I can see a reason to call both. For example it happens a lot where someone is actually hooked and it would be a penelty… but then they try to sell it some more and do a nice dramatic flop to the ice. In those cases, its perfectly reasonable to call both.

I do agree though that the matching calls happen too much. I actually don’t remember that last time I saw a strait diving call without a matching penelty.

By: stakex

stakex — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 02:39:13 +0000

Which is sad considering most “penelties” these days are the result of outstanding performances.

Of course the reason the NHL doesn’t want a lot of diving calls is because it looks bad for the sport, especially when some of their super starts would be the biggest offenders if diving was called correctly.

By: ryanw822

ryanw822 — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 00:16:28 +0000

Montreal is gonna Montreal.

That organization is an embarrassment to real men.

By: hockeyflow33

hockeyflow33 — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 23:43:21 +0000

The penalties are not mutually exclusive though. There can be times when only one is called but in this instance both were warranted

By: sabatimus

sabatimus — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:55:43 +0000

I’m surprised Subban did start clapping afterwards.

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bK2EJhuHsl0&w=560&h=315%5D

By: sabatimus

sabatimus — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:46:07 +0000

Montreal players never dive. Don’t know what the article is talking about.

By: jasndc75

jasndc75 — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:38:01 +0000

seemed a pretty soft hit to give 2 for boarding. the diving had to be called there. be a man. Prust falling like he was knocked out was just petty, he didnt even hit his head on anything.

I’d rather the refs err on the side that if it looks like diving it gets called even if it might not be. Diving has the potential to seriously ruin the game

By: freneticgarfieldfan

freneticgarfieldfan — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:22:54 +0000

Brandon “fall easy like a rotten tomato” Prust would look perfect in a Canucks uniform

Did you recognize how Therrien listens carefully and respectfully to the zebra at 01:51?

By: blockedshotnyr

blockedshotnyr — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:17:37 +0000

Still think it is the dumbest thing about the call – if you’re calling diving/embellishment – you should not call the other penalty. It should be one or the other, either the penalty occurred and the referee should call it or the player dove or embellished the action and the penalty did not actually occur.

If they really wanted to eliminate diving and embellishment, they would call just those penaltiies – at worst for diving you are even strength… Where is the harm?

By: 1943mrmojorisin1971

1943mrmojorisin1971 — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:12:43 +0000

You mean refs are calling diving again now? Fantastic. I can’t remember the last time I actually saw a diving call.