Skip to content

Henrik Sedin on brother’s critical penalty: ‘It’s a [expletive] call’

May 8, 2013, 9:03 AM EDT

With the series on the line in overtime, Vancouver Canucks forward Daniel Sedin was sent to the sin bin for a boarding penalty that several Canucks players questioned, no more so than his brother and team captain, Henrik Sedin.

“I shouldn’t say it right now, but, it’s a [expletive] call,” Henrik said, according to the National Post.

The San Jose Sharks made the most of the opportunity with Patrick Marleau scoring the series-winning goal early in the power play.

Here is the penalty so you can judge it for yourself:

This video is no longer available. Click here to watch more NBC Sports videos!

Canucks defense Kevin Bieksa, who accused San Jose forwards Joe Thornton and Logan Couture of embellishment prior to this contest, admitted that Vancouver wasn’t eliminated solely based on one penalty.

“We put ourselves in the situation where one bad call costs you a game,” Bieksa told the Vancouver Sun. “It was four games of not executing. This wasn’t an isolated incident; we were in a 3-0 hole. We didn’t play good enough to win the series. It sucks. There’s no way to sugarcoat it.”

For the second straight season, the Vancouver Canucks have been great in the regular season, only to completely collapse the moment the playoffs start. Big changes could be coming in Vancouver.


Video: Daniel Sedin’s controversial penalty leads to Sharks OT winner

Discuss: San Jose sweeps out Vancouver with 4-3 overtime win

  1. homelanddefense - May 8, 2013 at 9:18 AM

    Jeez, as a Bruins fan I hate to stick up for Sedin here, but I dont see much wrong with that. Didnt cost them the series, but a bad call.

    Poor Sedins, these two get criticized for being soft, then the one time they play physical they get a cheap penalty. No win.

    • sabatimus - May 8, 2013 at 11:15 AM

      I’ve seen Chara pick up that exact so-called “boarding” penalty. It was BS then, and it’s BS now.

      • valoisvipers - May 8, 2013 at 3:09 PM

        It is boarding when you hit a guy into the boards from that distance.

    • elvispocomo - May 8, 2013 at 12:27 PM

      That’s my biggest takeaway, people call them ‘sisters’ but then one goes shoulder to shoulder into the boards with a guy of similar size who hits a lot and gets penalized for trying to push back and gain position.

      As a Canucks fan, I take Bieksa’s view that they didn’t do enough, but that’s still a hard pill to swallow (and Daniel also got a 10min misconduct for abusive language after the call).

    • elvispocomo - May 8, 2013 at 12:51 PM

      It should be noted as well that’s the same ref who gave Sedin a 10 minute misconduct along with Marchand in the SCF for this incident:

      He also gave AV a bench minor that allowed Calgary to score and win the game late earlier this year.

      • sharksman - May 8, 2013 at 3:58 PM

        on that one I would have to say what did he say to the ref ? has to be a reason for the penalty.
        you cant call a penalty on his face for hitting marchand , can you ?

      • elvispocomo - May 8, 2013 at 6:42 PM

        He said something along the lines of, “how many times can he punch me before it’s a penalty?” Worth a 10 minute misconduct even if it is him hitting his gloved hand with his face? Hardly.

        The explanation was something about maintaining control of a volatile situation or some crap like that. The Canucks, not trying to do anything were getting pushed around repeatedly after the whistle. The easy way to maintain control is send deserving Bruins to the box.

  2. gallyhatch - May 8, 2013 at 9:19 AM

    Man up and accept the fact that you did not play well enough to win.
    That’s what this all boils down to, not officiating.

    Canucks continue to expose themselves as whining crybabies year after year.

    What a joke team.

    • elvispocomo - May 8, 2013 at 12:29 PM

      Just calling a spade a spade, and by that I mean the officiating around the league has been terrible this year. Come back with all the times your team hasn’t whined about anything at all and we’ll talk.

      • sunderlanding - May 8, 2013 at 3:16 PM

        Every year there are calls people complian about. Officials make mistakes as well. Deal with it. Teams need to be able to kill penalties if they’re ever going to win anything.

      • elvispocomo - May 8, 2013 at 6:59 PM

        Mistakes I can deal with, mistakes should average out. Can you call 24 penalties to 10 averaging out? How about 20:40 more PP time than PK time, when the next closest is just over 8 minutes (St Louis Blues) this year in the playoffs.

    • imleftcoast - May 8, 2013 at 12:59 PM

      You’re a joke. That is not a call at 6:55 of OT in an elimination game. Don’t come back on here here complaining when your team is the victim of the lack of consistency.

      • 19to77 - May 8, 2013 at 1:43 PM

        Aaaand out come the ‘Nucks fans with the “victim” card. Please. San Jose was the better team every game and no amount of “Wah, wah, the refs screwed us!” can change the fact that your team put themselves in the hole they were in. It was an awful call. A stunningly awful call. Seems like most of us are in agreement there. But Bieksa hit the nail on the head – the call didn’t do anywhere near as much damage as the Canucks’ play all series had done to themselves.

      • kitshky - May 8, 2013 at 4:29 PM

        @19to77 … There hasn’t be one (one) Canuck fan here who has said Vancouver should have won the series and would have if these calls had gone there way.

        Grow up pal.

    • shoobiedoobin - May 8, 2013 at 1:14 PM

      I hate the Canucks but this isn’t about whether or not they won. You’re just taking advantage of this and using as a chance to pat yourself on the back and feel big with the tired old “don’t whine, just win” garbage.

      Of course they didn’t play well enough to win. Only a moron thinks that excuses a poor call, which is all we’re talking about. He wasn’t using that as an excuse or tool, but that didn’t stop you from acting like he was. Getting this jacked up over laying judgment is practically masturbation.

      • gallyhatch - May 9, 2013 at 6:57 AM

        That ‘old and tired garbage’ as you call it isn’t nearly as old & tired as the ‘star player has a crap performance in the playoffs then complains aout the officiating after his team is swept’ garbage.

        Yes, It was a bul$&$^ call (or whatever he said about it) but I still expect more from the Captain after his team just got swept. Yeah, I realize he’s only human, and emotions are running high, but he’s the captain, he should act like it.

        To complain about the officiating after the performance he had in the series is poor form no matter how you look at it.

      • shoobiedoobin - May 9, 2013 at 2:10 PM

        ^No it isn’t. It’s called just being honest and when a call is that bad, it needs to be said. Why not? How far do we go being PC before we realize the whole concept of being PC and “professional” was conjured up to keep butts from being hurt. If it’s every 5 minutes about every little thing, you’d be right, but if it’s something this blatantly horrendous it’s almost irresponsible and gutless to stand idly by and accept it.

      • gallyhatch - May 9, 2013 at 4:21 PM

        Your labeling of my opinion as ‘wrong’ is downright comical, ESPECIALLY in light of your first post.
        It’s subjective, there is no right or wrong.

        I would rather have my kids look up to an athlete who reflects on his own performance, rather than ‘point out’ factors that are beyond his control. Complaining about officiating is for the coaches, g.m.s etc.

        Just my opinion Shoobie.

      • shoobiedoobin - May 9, 2013 at 4:48 PM

        ^Why not do both? Why is it one or the other? Just like it’s being a whiner when you do nothing but complain, you’re being just as much of a coward by ignoring something as glaring as this.

        This just boils down to us reading the headline and jumping to the conclusion that whoever questions a ref is automatically placing blame and deflecting it all from his or her self. That’s just us needing our whiners to whine and our heros to be manly men. We love to judge and we need black and white-grey area makes it unsatisfying to lay judgment or heap praise.

  3. lostpuppysyndrome - May 8, 2013 at 9:25 AM

    Well said, Bieksa. Way to redeem yourself by calling a spade a spade.

  4. mclovinhockey - May 8, 2013 at 9:25 AM

    Lets play fill in the blank….

    It was a _(blank)__ call

    For some reason I want to say…. Banana

    • wingsdjy - May 8, 2013 at 9:58 AM

      I’m leaning toward “turkey”

    • axisofweasels - May 8, 2013 at 10:25 AM

      kitty litter!

    • sabatimus - May 8, 2013 at 11:16 AM

      Fertilizer, obviously.

    • nothanksimdriving123 - May 8, 2013 at 1:21 PM

      He’s Swedish, so he likely said “skit”. And it was. And my recollection is that the ref who was closest let it go, while the far ref made the bad call. Would have been a good time for a chat.

  5. gmenfan1982 - May 8, 2013 at 9:28 AM

    That has been called a penalty all season. I don’t think it was that bad at all but a little closer to the boards and that hit is bad news.

    • gradyspop - May 8, 2013 at 10:58 AM

      Shoulder to shoulder has been called all season? Not sure what league you are watching. I am by no means a Canucks or Sedin Sister fan. But, that was a BS call.

      • sunderlanding - May 8, 2013 at 3:18 PM

        Shoulder on shoulder doesn’t matter when it’s a boarding call. No one said it was a headshot, so the body part used for the check doesn’t matter. The reason this is a penalty is because he knocks him into the boards.

    • kitshky - May 8, 2013 at 1:18 PM

      Matt Cooke laid almost that exact same hit on the exact same night and it led to a goal … no call, no controversy, not even a thought about it being a penalty.

      No it has not been called all year, and it’s never called in OT. Don’t take my word for it, take the word of the referee who was less than 10 feet away from it…

  6. rpiotr01 - May 8, 2013 at 9:33 AM

    Brutal call, he hit him shoulder to shoulder. But still, if a guy hits the boards a certain way they’re going to call it every single time, and it was just a little too close to the boards.

    • ziplock10 - May 8, 2013 at 10:50 AM

      If you watch the replay a few times, it appears he pokes him pretty good while he laid on the ice. That may have been the trigger for the call.

  7. sjsharks66 - May 8, 2013 at 9:54 AM

    It was not a board. I would call it interference. That is called 9 out of 10 times. Look the refs gave the canucks a soft chance to. Remember the desi penalty? It happens.

    • orangandblack - May 8, 2013 at 10:01 AM

      Nah, no interference, they were both making a play for the puck. It’s just one of those calls. It wasn’t intentionally dirty, but still worth 2 minutes. Like you said, it happens. Congrats to San Jose, the better team clearly won

    • elvispocomo - May 8, 2013 at 12:32 PM

      The refs didn’t think it was interference, or at least that’s not what they called. And even that’s borderline since it was Wingels who’d had the puck just prior and Sedin had poked it away from him. That’s when they both turned and went to the boards, shoulder to shoulder, to get it. It’s not Sedin’s fault Wingels crumpled like a wet paper bag when he initiated contact.

  8. captn58crunch - May 8, 2013 at 9:58 AM

    These guys have to learn in the new No Hit League that if your opponent is in the least type of awkward position, don’t check him. After learning the opposite since juniors, this will be a long learning curve.

    As far as Bieksa, I like him and he is a good player, but those who live in glass houses should not throw stones. It was his careless, dumb cross-check that gave the Sharks the opening to tie the game late in the 3rd period. If he uses his brain there, the game doesn’t go into OT and we have a Game 5.

  9. beelza - May 8, 2013 at 10:35 AM

    As a Detroit fan, I couldn’t care less about the Canucks. I do take interest in egregious errors officating crews make. That call on Daniel Sedin, was not made the entire series, yet the only and best time to make that call was in OT, on an elimination night, in a potential series sweep situation. Grossly negligent. Every participant on the ice, in pro hockey (NHL) is accountable, except the officials. Coaches, players, GM’s, owners all take questions and nearly all address fan’s concerns, but not Bettman and his poltical machines: Dept. of player safety (Joke) and NHL Officiating (Joke).
    If I wanted to really affect betting lines and Vegas bookmakers, by way of “shaping game outcomes” or blatant match fixing, I would use punishment and suspensions. I would do it via referees and the calls they make and don’t make (disproportionate 5-3 penalty situations in the NHL post-season). The officals work for Gary Bettman. Is it not possible that the referee’s are told by their boss to concentrate and call certain penalties. I won’t even touch the face-off issues.

    • pandorasdadca - May 8, 2013 at 11:23 AM

      Tommy Wingles went into the boards head first and had to be helped off the ice where he went straight to the dressing room. The ref closest didn’t call it, but the one on the other end did. I don’t think it gets called if Wingles pops right back up.

      • sporkov - May 8, 2013 at 12:05 PM

        I am not saying that this was the right call, but the biggest difference between the in zone referee not making this call and the up ice official is the angle. I would like to see a replay from the up ice officials view point.

    • imleftcoast - May 8, 2013 at 1:03 PM

      There is a lack of accountability and transparency. You have to wonder what Bettman and the league are up to. Some of the worst calls seem to be coming at the most critical points of games. It doesn’t seem to be in the game’s best interest so who is calling the shots? Is it Vegas?

      • hockeyflow33 - May 8, 2013 at 3:10 PM

        I’d really like to hear how Vegas benefits from a team already up in the series 3-0, calling a penalty that would potentially help out the series clincher.

    • antiqueff - May 8, 2013 at 1:05 PM

      I completely agree with you. I am a Hawks fan, so I don’t care about the Canucks. I’ve been a fan for over 40 years and can honestly say that the officiating has been worse than it has ever been. And to prove your point about the calling of penalties disproportionately, last night in the Chicago/Minnesota series, the Blackhawks were whistled for 6 penalties to the Wilds 2. During the regular season, Chicago was on of the least penalized teams. Now that its the playoffs, all of a sudden the Hawks are commiting many more fouls? And its not just Chicago, it is league-wide. I’m not a conspiracy theorist, IMO these clowns that wear the stripes seem to make more bad calls than they do good ones. I don’t like the Sedins, but that call on Daniel was very weak at best. In those circumstances (in OT in a potential elimination game), a call like that is inexcusable.
      It is time that these referees and linesmen are held accountable for their actions, or lack thereof.

  10. 950003cups - May 8, 2013 at 10:38 AM

    Total BS call. Another example of a failure by the league to weed out the bad referees in the postseason

    • greenmtnboy31 - May 8, 2013 at 11:07 AM

      Excellent point. No way is that a penalty. One ref is standing 15 feet away, looking right at it and passes on any call because their was no penalty. Then the knucklehead ref waaaaaay down the ice in the neutral zone makes that call???? The league needs to be speaking with that dumba$$ and sitting him down for the rest of the playoffs. This is the playoffs and if that is the new lower standard that the particular ref wants to impose, then we are in for a long, boring, penalty filled playoffs.

    • 19to77 - May 8, 2013 at 11:24 AM

      I think most of us generally assume that’s true. The Pens committed about a dozen penalty-worthy infractions in the third period of their last game and hey, all of a sudden the refs were mysteriously quiet. I wonder who’s agenda THAT might serve?

      Meanwhile, arguably the most hated team in the West was quickly swept in a series whose final two games were absolutely dictated by Sharks power play goals. Not taking anything at all from the Sharks, who outplayed their opponents all series, but when the double-standard is that freaking obvious…

      • elvispocomo - May 8, 2013 at 1:07 PM

        PPs were 24-10 in favour of San Jose, and they also enjoyed over 20min more PP time than PK time (meaning the Canucks enjoyed the opposite).

    • barkar942 - May 8, 2013 at 11:49 AM

      Is there such a thing as a good ref in the post season?
      Kerry Fraser retired.

      • 950003cups - May 8, 2013 at 12:58 PM

        Don’t let a Leafs fan ever hear you say that. LOL

  11. nateriemer - May 8, 2013 at 11:04 AM

    Not a fan of either team, hate them both actually but that was pretty bad. Notice it wasn’t the ref that was right next to the play that called the penalty, but the ref up around center ice. That might, MIGHT, be a penalty in regular season, but not in the playoffs, not in OT and certainly not in the playoffs in OT in an elimination game. Their may be some that say it should be the same calls all the time, but we know its not.

    • greenmtnboy31 - May 8, 2013 at 11:24 AM

      That is never a penalty at the NHL level. If it is, then they need to eliminate checking. I am by no means a Canucks fan, but calls like that have no place in the playoffs. Their was a day when a ref waaaay down the ice in the neutral zone would never dare think of making that call in front of his partner. No one would have made that call in front of Kerry Fraser or another veteran ref like that, or they would have crucified them in the locker room. It’s BS nonsense like this that makes it so easy to turn off the NHL playoffs and I’m used to being a stay up for the late game, go to work tired and bleary eyed kind of fan, but this garbage is a complete turn off.

    • elvispocomo - May 8, 2013 at 1:12 PM

      Yup, the Canucks got labelled as whiners for trying to have penalties in the regular season still be penalties in the playoffs, which would have been a boon since they had one of the top PPs in the league. The result of that: the face Boston and very little gets called as has been the case with any number of SCFs.

      This year the Canucks PP wasn’t as good, but the Sharks PP had been excellent in the regular season, so the Canucks ask for the calls to at least be the same for both sides and that embellishment be seen as such. The result: San Jose gets 14 more PP than the Canucks and 20:40 more PP time than the Canucks, allowing them to score half their goals on the PP.

      Valid or not, you can’t help but be frustrated as a Canucks fan.

  12. r4n6er - May 8, 2013 at 11:08 AM

    Some fun facts relating to the officiating in this series. Total Canucks penalties over the entire series were 66pim, compared to the Sharks 26pim. If we look at the total minutes played in this series (approximately 253 min) the Canucks were short-handed for and game and about half a period compared to just over one period for the Sharks. To give a different perspective to this the Canucks were short-handed for a little over 26.08% of this series.

    • pandorasdadca - May 8, 2013 at 11:25 AM

      Which is why they lost. They took a lot of boneheaded penalties. The Canucks are a borderline dirty team anyway. They just weren’t subtle about it in this series.

      • elvispocomo - May 8, 2013 at 1:30 PM

        I’m fine with legitimate penalties, but when the Sharks haven’t been called for the same things, even in the same game, you have to wonder about how much impact that had on any momentum the Canucks were trying to generate.

        Momentum can be a determining factor in any game if a team is given penalties – particularly if they’re early in the 1st period or late in the 3rd/in overtime. How many times did we see that in this series against the Canucks vs against the Sharks.

        Game 1: two Canuck penalties in the 1st, one in the 3rd; none in either period for the Sharks (4-2 PP in favour of SJ)
        Game 2: two Canuck in the 1st, one in the 3rd; one in 3rd for Sharks (5-3 PP in favour of SJ)
        Game 3: three Canuck in the 1st, six in the 3rd; three in the 1st, one in the 3rd for Sharks (9-2 PP in favour of SJ)
        Game 4: two Canuck in the 1st, one in the 3rd/one in OT; one in the 1st, one in the 3rd for the Sharks (6-3 PP in favour of Sharks)

        That’s a total of nine Canuck penalties in the 1st and ten in the 3rd/OT. Compare that to four in the 1st and three in the 3rd/OT for the Sharks. That’s 9/10 penalties compared to 4/3 in the opening and closing periods of the games well in favour of the Sharks.

      • pandorasdadca - May 8, 2013 at 7:46 PM

        Instead of whining (Like the Canucks themselves) about the penalties and blaming the refs, you could just man up and realize that the Canucks played boneheaded, stupid hockey. They got out of control, got hooked into retaliating and got sent to the box. It cost them the series. Was it a (bleep) call when Henrick punched Logan Couture with the butt of his stick in Game 3? (Resulting in a Couture PPG, BTW) The Canucks blew it again. At least you folks had the decency not to burn your own city down this time. Good on ya!

      • elvispocomo - May 9, 2013 at 11:55 AM

        Hey, not saying there weren’t valid calls, just saying were there 14 more valid penalties worth 20:40 of extra PP time for the Sharks? And your example if the Henrik high stick is a good one, since it points out the dive by Couture on the play to embellish the impact of the shot.

        (inserts condescending Willy Wonka) Go on, tell me about how a stick to the back of the head causes Couture to snap his head back and have his skates jump off the ice, also backwards.

      • pandorasdadca - May 9, 2013 at 6:04 PM

        Still a bonehead move. He got owned in the faceoff circle (Like the rest of the Canucks except for Kessler) the whole series, got frustrated, did something dumb and cost his team a goal. Not that that particular one meant that much. That was the blow-out game.
        I know you need to defend your team, and that’s OK. But really all that matters is the scoreboard, and Vancouver is on the short end of that. No amount of whining by Canucks player or fan changes that.

      • eddy333 - May 9, 2013 at 6:17 PM

        @elvis Maybe your face resides on the back of your head but not the rest of us. A stick to the face is a penalty no matter how you want to slice it and guys going down on high sticks happens throughout the NHL.

        You can remain a hypocrite by calling other teams divers, when your team has continued that practice into this year. The Desjaridins penalty??? So being undisciplined now means that everything should even up? They lost because they were outplayed, outmatched, and undisciplined. No amount of complaining can change that.

      • elvispocomo - May 10, 2013 at 6:26 PM

        @pandora: If by did something dumb, you mean the boarding call, that was Daniel. If you mean the faceoff infraction for using his hand that resulted in a penalty, that was called on Henrik, but another prime example of how bad some of the calls were against the Canucks. When was the last time you saw that called for anything other than an obvious contact of the hand? That was one were he used his stick to pull the puck back but his hand was right beside the puck. His hand didn’t give the puck the momentum to win the draw.

        Blow out game or close where the Canucks were leading into the final minutes, the imbalance in penalties can definitely affect momentum. It’s not hard to make an argument (as I did above) that having the penalties not so lopsided or having bad calls at such critical times would have made a difference in the outcome of at least two of the games, making the series 2-2. That makes the series totally different than what it ended up being.

        @eddy: My face is in the normal position, thank you. I’d suggest yours might by up somewhere else since you’d missed my point completely. I never said that wasn’t a penalty, in fact I said it was and that it was totally out of character to do so. My point was that Couture’s head snapped back instead of forward, the opposite reaction to contact on the back of the head. The same idea with his feet, it’s not the natural reaction unless you were embellishing – which Couture surely was.

        And again, I’ve never said the Canucks haven’t ever dove or never will going forward. I do say we don’t do it any more than other teams, but the press we get that we’re somehow the most prolific at it and far worse than anyone (including San Jose) is absurd. And to say we were really so much more undisciplined than San Jose that it deserved 14 more penalties and 20:40 more PP time when the next closest was just over 8 minutes at that point is beyond absurd, it’s asinine.

    • 19to77 - May 8, 2013 at 11:26 AM

      And as much as the bulk of those were legitimate calls, it’s pretty hard to doubt that there were some phone calls from the head office factoring in.

  13. kovertmileman - May 8, 2013 at 11:27 AM

    Im a huge sharks fan and watching the whole series most of those calls were bull and in games 1 and 2 canucks got away with a handful of penalties personally I think this call was horrible it seems like the refs went from not calling anything to calling everything

  14. sharksman - May 8, 2013 at 11:43 AM

    Bad call but not the reason the Sharks won

  15. colby7 - May 8, 2013 at 12:03 PM

    So what are the Canucks supposed to do? In 2010 Penalties were what killed them in the Playoffs, everyone calls them pesky and dirty. So they come back in 2011 a new team, play just like Detroit and make it to the finals. Boston crosschecks and mangles the Sedins, Canucks take no penalties and are called soft. Now in 2012 Canucks beef up[ (a bit, with Booth hurt and Roy coming in it’s hard to tell) and now we are back to being called for everthing and having 8 penalties a game ruin any chance of winning.

    This is why the Sedins have no clue if they are aloud to hit or not.

    The Bieksa crosscheck bugged me more then the penalty in ovetime. Just a basic crosscheck behind the Home net in the final 5 mins… Brutal.

  16. joeyashwi - May 8, 2013 at 12:06 PM

    It was a good hit that looked bad. The only thing consistent about the officiating playoff wide is its inconsistency. That being said, even when calls went my Wild’s way all night last night they still couldn’t take advantage of it. Ultimately players win or lose games.
    As far as the call, I have to chalk it up to karma. The Bertuzzi and Cooke days have finally caught up to them.

    • imleftcoast - May 8, 2013 at 1:13 PM

      It’s worse than inconsistent. It’s consistently inconsistent in a pattern benefitting certain teams on certain nights. An independent third party needs to look into it and a possible connection to gambling and organized crime. Something is amiss.

  17. dtownbeatdown - May 8, 2013 at 12:26 PM

    Listen, as a die hard hater of the Canucks… that was a garbage call. Seems to be a trend with these refs this year in all of the games. They let the guys play for the entire 3 periods looking the other way when penalties should be called. But then in overtime they call some B.S. penalty like this. The NHL really needs to take a look at the refereeing in hockey.

    I am a Detroit fan, and I was at the game the other night, there were so many time Detroit should have gotten a penalty but they didn’t, but when the game was on the line they would get called for a garbage penalty. It is like the refs try to make up for missed calls, or like when a player gets hit if he gets right back up its fine but if he acts hurt… welp then theres a penalty. No consistency anymore.

    I am not trying to be bias in anyway, I think a lot of hockey fans would agree the refereeing needs to be looked at in detail.

    • elvispocomo - May 8, 2013 at 1:44 PM

      Yup, been saying that all year that refereeing has been bad to horrible across the league this year.

  18. shutyourfivehole - May 8, 2013 at 12:57 PM

    Sharks fan. Borderline call. What gets called should not vary from period to period. That one call did not lose the game for Vancouver. They did that over 4 games. Vancouver killed off many SJ penalties over the series. They just got beat. Maybe now would be a good time to work on their well-deserved reputation as whiners and poor sports.

    • elvispocomo - May 8, 2013 at 1:46 PM

      Stay classy, San Jose.

      Geez, coming from a team with a history of choking in the playoffs, you’d think you wouldn’t be so ready to throw stones after winning a series.

      I know, I know, not all San Jose fans are this bad.

      • pandorasdadca - May 8, 2013 at 7:52 PM

        “Stay classy, San Jose”? From Vancouver? Don’t you guys have a riot to start?

      • elvispocomo - May 9, 2013 at 12:01 PM

        The irony is thick today, so thick I can taste it.

        Oh look, someone made a video (best part starts just before 4min) about San Jose’s class:

        At least we know there’s more than one San Jose fan (or maybe just a San Jose supporter/Canuck hater) that lacks class.

  19. blkeskimo1785 - May 8, 2013 at 2:10 PM

    Well, at least this officiating crew won’t be moving on to the next round, thanks to all of these egregious (or sometimes, lack thereof) calls.

    • elvispocomo - May 9, 2013 at 12:04 PM

      One can only hope…

  20. nhstateline - May 8, 2013 at 2:34 PM

    As a Bruin fan, I have no love for the Canucks (but Vancouver is a nice place) but this call was awful. I wouldn’t care if that was a game in the regular season, no way was that a penalty. On the other hand, it only led to the end of their season because of other things that had happened over four games so it didn’t really decide the series, it just led to the end of it.

  21. lordshipstanley - May 8, 2013 at 3:06 PM

    Am I the only one who noticed Vigneault walk off the ice and shake no one’s hand? Classless loser. No matter the outcome, you shake hands with the entire team after a series is over.

    • valoisvipers - May 8, 2013 at 3:20 PM

      Normally the coaches just shake hands with the other coaches, not the players.

  22. mrpickled - May 8, 2013 at 4:02 PM

    Two girls…… No cup!

  23. lordshipstanley - May 8, 2013 at 4:03 PM

    Except for the fact that the assistants were in the line but not AV.

    • colby7 - May 8, 2013 at 4:18 PM

      Maybe he needed a new throat lozenge after screaming at the ref about the blown call? I seen him quickly shake hands with McLellan (Who had stood up for him in the media) and some of the assistants.

      AV knows his time is up and he didn’t want it to end that way.

    • kitshky - May 8, 2013 at 4:32 PM

      Exactly. The assistants, not the Head Coach.

      Was that your first hockey game?

  24. hockeydon10 - May 8, 2013 at 5:03 PM

    They must have changed the reffing rules or something.

    It used to be that the ref down low — the one you see below the goal line — was instructed to watch the puck carrier and any defenders around the puck. The center ice ref was instructed to watch everything else.

    That said, I’m glad the Canucks are done. Teams very often have a problem with the long break after a sweep, so here’s hoping the Sharks are flat for the next round.

  25. gnazarov - May 8, 2013 at 5:05 PM

    I hate sticking up for the Sedins or anything Vancouver related, but yeah, that was a horrible call, especially to call it at that point in the game.

Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. P. Kane (2081)
  2. P. Kessel (1523)
  3. M. Richards (1335)
  4. N. Backstrom (1234)
  5. M. Giordano (1137)