|
 |
comedyhour
Knee-Slider
Registered: Mar 2016
Location:
Posts: 1 |
Did Ben Hebert refuse to shake Brad Jacobs hand after loss?
Sure looked like it to me.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
03-09-16 09:32AM |
|
|
| |
|
CurlingGroupie
Knee-Slider
Registered: Mar 2016
Location:
Posts: 2 |
No, I think he did shake hands. I posted the following to the 2016 Brier thread; I rewatched my recording again after posting this earlier this morning and I'm almost certain now that Hebert shook hands.
"I also noticed it but when I rewound my recording, I saw something else too. After Koe's last shot finished, Ben Hebert was clearing rocks out of the house. As he moved out of camera frame, his hand extended as if he was preparing to shake hands. Both Brad Jacobs and Ryan Fry were standing on the back boards off camera. I'm going to give Ben the benefit of the doubt and say that he shook hands on the back boards out of camera frame, then scooted back to shake hands with the Harndens and then scooted off the ice.
I'm not the biggest Hebert fan in terms of his sportsmanship, but on my review I think he did shake hands. I could be wrong."
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
03-09-16 10:13AM |
|
|
| |
|
bennybeam
Harvey Hacksmasher
Registered: Feb 2015
Location:
Posts: 98 |
Don't think so--at least based on seeing jacobs and kennedy having words after the game. And I'm not totally convinced I'd shake hands with jacobs as well. Final note---TSN did --as per usual when there is conflict---a horrrible job at addressing it. Why can't they ever have an opinion or at the very least ask the tough questions at the 5th end break. Did the rocks have to go back? Fry looked like he wanted to talk about it and immediately brad said 'put them back'--why not explore this?
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
03-09-16 10:19AM |
|
|
| |
|
prairie guy
Swing Artist
Registered: Jan 2011
Location: Southern Sask.
Posts: 364 |
Oh I'm thinking Brad would have put the same effort into shaking Benny's hand if the outcome had been reversed.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
03-09-16 10:30AM |
|
|
| |
|
ngm
Swing Artist
Registered: Feb 2011
Location:
Posts: 272 |
quote:
Originally posted by bennybeam
Final note---TSN did --as per usual when there is conflict---a horrrible job at addressing it. Why can't they ever have an opinion or at the very least ask the tough questions at the 5th end break.
Just because the gang of Johnny-pee-pants gossips here at CurlingZone thinks there was some difficult decision to be made, in fact there was not. Jacobs et al. did nothing wrong. There was no controversy to address.
Burn the rock, normally that means remove it from play. The scenario isn't even controversial in B flight day ladies league play.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
03-09-16 10:35AM |
|
|
| |
|
bennybeam
Harvey Hacksmasher
Registered: Feb 2015
Location:
Posts: 98 |
Don't think so my friend. There was clearly a game-changing conversation going on after that mishap and instad of getting Russ Howard's opinion I got a 10 minute interview with the miniter of sport LOL
I get it--you curling folks like to keep it vanilla. But I would have prefer to get some insight into the rules and what and who had the decision to do what. Nothing to do with being all TMZ--just an interested viewer looking for some insight into what happened. It was obvious from the facial expressions of Laing and the body language of all the others that something significant happened. SO surreal to just watch play continue as if nothing happened.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
03-09-16 10:46AM |
|
|
| |
|
kwojtalik
Hitting Paint
Registered: Apr 2015
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 180 |
a burned rock is a burned rock, remove it from play period end of discussion
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
03-09-16 11:52AM |
|
|
| |
|
LMXcurls
Knee-Slider
Registered: Mar 2015
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 6 |
If he didn't, two wrongs don't make a right.
If he did, I'm sure it was frostier than the ice at the local curling club.
We claim sportsmanship is one of the pillars of curling, so I'd really like to hope that in that vein, a handshake took place, even if it was a terse one.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
03-09-16 11:57AM |
|
|
| |
|
curlerbroad
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2668 |
quote:
Originally posted by ngm
Just because the gang of Johnny-pee-pants gossips here at CurlingZone thinks there was some difficult decision to be made, in fact there was not. Jacobs et al. did nothing wrong. There was no controversy to address.
Burn the rock, normally that means remove it from play. The scenario isn't even controversial in B flight day ladies league play.
No the rules for Burned rocks have changed, you have 3 choices now! If it was burned after the far hogline, close to the house, you have some options...curling is not a simple game.
__________________
Well Behaved Women Don't Make History.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
03-09-16 03:04PM |
|
|
| |
|
irishrose
Harvey Hacksmasher
Registered: Dec 2005
Location:
Posts: 48 |
I was watching that game and from what I saw Ben Hebert did not shake hands with Jacobs and he was pretty sour looking as he went by.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
03-09-16 05:39PM |
|
|
| |
|
On The Nose
Drawmaster
Registered: Apr 2014
Location: In the House
Posts: 608 |
quote:
Originally posted by LMXcurls
If he didn't, two wrongs don't make a right.
If he did, I'm sure it was frostier than the ice at the local curling club.
We claim sportsmanship is one of the pillars of curling, so I'd really like to hope that in that vein, a handshake took place, even if it was a terse one.
^ I disagree. A phony handshake is not sportsmanship, it's insincerity and hypocrisy.
__________________
"It is easy in the world to live after the world's opinion; it is easy in solitude to live after our own... but the great man is he who, in the midst of the crowd, keeps with perfect sweetness the independence of solitude." ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
03-10-16 03:34AM |
|
|
| |
|
On The Nose
Drawmaster
Registered: Apr 2014
Location: In the House
Posts: 608 |
quote:
Originally posted by CurlingGroupie
No, I think he did shake hands. I posted the following to the 2016 Brier thread; I rewatched my recording again after posting this earlier this morning and I'm almost certain now that Hebert shook hands.
"I also noticed it but when I rewound my recording, I saw something else too. After Koe's last shot finished, Ben Hebert was clearing rocks out of the house. As he moved out of camera frame, his hand extended as if he was preparing to shake hands. Both Brad Jacobs and Ryan Fry were standing on the back boards off camera. I'm going to give Ben the benefit of the doubt and say that he shook hands on the back boards out of camera frame, then scooted back to shake hands with the Harndens and then scooted off the ice.
I'm not the biggest Hebert fan in terms of his sportsmanship, but on my review I think he did shake hands. I could be wrong."
^ No... I saw Hebert shaking hands standing on the carpet behind the House, too - and I was about to post the same thing as you posted. But then I took a closer look, and saw that he wasn't shaking hands with any of the 4 Northern Ontario players back there, he was shaking hands with two people wearing Northern Ontario jackets who appeared to be the coach and 5th player.
__________________
"It is easy in the world to live after the world's opinion; it is easy in solitude to live after our own... but the great man is he who, in the midst of the crowd, keeps with perfect sweetness the independence of solitude." ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
03-10-16 03:38AM |
|
|
| |
|
Western Newbie
Hitting Paint
Registered: Sep 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 116 |
quote:
Originally posted by On The Nose
^ I disagree. A phony handshake is not sportsmanship, it's insincerity and hypocrisy.
All handshakes at the beginning and end of a game are a farce then. It is not a sincere wish to have the other team win. It is hypocritical to wish that. Rather you are shaking to acknowledge Good game. That is sportsmanship.
One team wins. One loses. That is life in sports. I have never met anyone who is happy to lose. When there is so much on the line tempers flare. Bad behaviour shows.
It is only a game.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
03-10-16 03:51AM |
|
|
| |
|
On The Nose
Drawmaster
Registered: Apr 2014
Location: In the House
Posts: 608 |
quote:
Originally posted by Western Newbie
All handshakes at the beginning and end of a game are a farce then. It is not a sincere wish to have the other team win. It is hypocritical to wish that. Rather you are shaking to acknowledge Good game. That is sportsmanship.
^ Of course.
I don't know what you're getting at here. At the beginning of the game, we typically wish each other a "good game", or "good curling" - not "I hope you win". And so there is no insincerity or hypocrisy here - I can sincerely wish that someone has a good game, and at the same time hope that my team has a slightly better one, and wins.
quote:
Originally posted by Western Newbie
One team wins. One loses. That is life in sports. I have never met anyone who is happy to lose. When there is so much on the line tempers flare. Bad behaviour shows.
It is only a game.
^ Yes, and in typical circumstances, I fully agree on handshakes before and after the game, in sincerity.
But the game to which we are referring - Northern Ontario Vs. Alberta at the Brier the other night - was not a typical game. In that game, Brent Laing burnt a rock on an important shot that was made... and the Jacobs team decided to negate that shot. There was controversy about that incident. And so if Hebert genuinely felt that the Jacobs team did something cheap and wrong in negating the shot - which was the turning point in the Jacobs win - then it would be hypocritical and phony of him to shake hands with them.
So if Hebert indeed did not shake hands, and if it was for this reason, I feel that he is perfectly within his right, and that not shaking hands is better than being a phony and shaking hands insincerely.
__________________
"It is easy in the world to live after the world's opinion; it is easy in solitude to live after our own... but the great man is he who, in the midst of the crowd, keeps with perfect sweetness the independence of solitude." ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
03-10-16 04:10AM |
|
|
| |
|
Western Newbie
Hitting Paint
Registered: Sep 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 116 |
quote:
Originally posted by On The Nose
^ Of course.
I don't know what you're getting at here. At the beginning of the game, we typically wish each other a "good game", or "good curling" - not "I hope you win". And so there is no insincerity or hypocrisy here - I can sincerely wish that someone has a good game, and at the same time hope that my team has a slightly better one, and wins.
^ Yes, and in typical circumstances, I fully agree on handshakes before and after the game, in sincerity.
But the game to which we are referring - Northern Ontario Vs. Alberta at the Brier the other night - was not a typical game. In that game, Brent Laing burnt a rock on an important shot that was made... and the Jacobs team decided to negate that shot. There was controversy about that incident. And so if Hebert genuinely felt that the Jacobs team did something cheap and wrong in negating the shot - which was the turning point in the Jacobs win - then it would be hypocritical and phony of him to shake hands with them.
So if Hebert indeed did not shake hands, and if it was for this reason, I feel that he is perfectly within his right, and that not shaking hands is better than being a phony and shaking hands insincerely.
In the TAnkard article it is clear team Jacobs followed the recommendation of the referee when they asked for help in what to do. It was not just their choice to make a choice that benefits them but they sought expert advice. So Ben's response is unsportsmanlike because he knows what the decision process was. It was not simply I want to win so I am going to do this, but rather the advice based on the rules is to do this so I will and it resulted in bonus points.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
03-10-16 03:25PM |
|
|
| |
|
Western Newbie
Hitting Paint
Registered: Sep 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 116 |
quote:
Originally posted by On The Nose
^ Of course.
I don't know what you're getting at here. At the beginning of the game, we typically wish each other a "good game", or "good curling" - not "I hope you win". And so there is no insincerity or hypocrisy here - I can sincerely wish that someone has a good game, and at the same time hope that my team has a slightly better one, and wins.
^ Yes, and in typical circumstances, I fully agree on handshakes before and after the game, in sincerity.
But the game to which we are referring - Northern Ontario Vs. Alberta at the Brier the other night - was not a typical game. In that game, Brent Laing burnt a rock on an important shot that was made... and the Jacobs team decided to negate that shot. There was controversy about that incident. And so if Hebert genuinely felt that the Jacobs team did something cheap and wrong in negating the shot - which was the turning point in the Jacobs win - then it would be hypocritical and phony of him to shake hands with them.
So if Hebert indeed did not shake hands, and if it was for this reason, I feel that he is perfectly within his right, and that not shaking hands is better than being a phony and shaking hands insincerely.
In the TAnkard article it is clear team Jacobs followed the recommendation of the referee when they asked for help in what to do. It was not just their choice to make a choice that benefits them but they sought expert advice. So Ben's response is unsportsmanlike because he knows what the decision process was. It was not simply I want to win so I am going to do this, but rather the advice based on the rules is to do this so I will and it resulted in bonus points.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
03-10-16 03:25PM |
|
|
| |
|
On The Nose
Drawmaster
Registered: Apr 2014
Location: In the House
Posts: 608 |
quote:
Originally posted by Western Newbie
In the TAnkard article it is clear team Jacobs followed the recommendation of the referee when they asked for help in what to do. It was not just their choice to make a choice that benefits them but they sought expert advice. So Ben's response is unsportsmanlike because he knows what the decision process was. It was not simply I want to win so I am going to do this, but rather the advice based on the rules is to do this so I will and it resulted in bonus points.
Regardless of what the Tankard article said, or what Jacobs claimed... Jacobs was heard saying "Put them (the rocks) back" immediately following the shot in question. This certainly gave him no time to 'consult' with anyone, or to hear various opinions on what is the best thing to do, before stating his wish that the shot be negated completely.
__________________
"It is easy in the world to live after the world's opinion; it is easy in solitude to live after our own... but the great man is he who, in the midst of the crowd, keeps with perfect sweetness the independence of solitude." ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson
Last edited by On The Nose on 03-11-16 at 01:33AM
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
03-11-16 01:30AM |
|
|
| |
|
Hack Weight
Hitting Paint
Registered: Dec 2014
Location: Alberta
Posts: 131 |
Someone mentioned this, but the rule when the stone is touched by the throwing team, after the far hog line, allows the non-offending team to:
A) remove the stone and replace all the other stones
B) leave all stones where they came to rest
C) reasonably replace the stones where they reasonably believe they would come to rest had the stone not been touched
First off, I wish the rule was more black/white. If it simply was, "the stone is removed and all rocks must be replaced", then there's no controversy. I feel the non-offending team (NO in this situation) is put in a really tough spot as they did nothing wrong, but yet have to choose between looking like jerks and removing the stone or being 'nice guys' but hurting their chances to win the game.
And second, as others also mentioned, is it asking too much for the commentators to expand on the situation a bit? People love controversy in sports! Do Vic, Russ and Cheryl have to be so polite and vanilla that they refuse to acknowledge the truth of the situation? Play it up a bit!... "Ooh Hebert doesn't look too happy with NO's decision to remove the rock!"... "Jacobs didn't even consider letting the shot stand!"
My take: Hebert was angry that Jacobs insisted on the stones being replaced when it appeared the shot was made. Jacobs was perfectly within the rules to do what he did, even if the most sportsmanlike thing to do probably would be to let the shot stand. And even if you are mad at the guy (and even though post-game handshakes are mostly a farce anyways), you should always shake the other team's hands.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
03-11-16 01:59AM |
|
|
| |
|
On The Nose
Drawmaster
Registered: Apr 2014
Location: In the House
Posts: 608 |
quote:
Originally posted by Hack Weight
First off, I wish the rule was more black/white. If it simply was, "the stone is removed and all rocks must be replaced", then there's no controversy. I feel the non-offending team (NO in this situation) is put in a really tough spot as they did nothing wrong, but yet have to choose between looking like jerks and removing the stone or being 'nice guys' but hurting their chances to win the game.
Indeed, the non-offending team - which obviously has a vested interest in the shot, as they are involved in the game, is in a very clear conflict of interest position, where they are permitted to do what benefits them most, and to do so with absolute immunity. And, as the stakes at the elite level of curling continue to rise, more and more teams will choose the self-serving option of doing what benefits them the most, rather than the option which is the most fair. This is obviously NOT in the spirit in which the rule was conceived. It's ridiculous.
quote:
Originally posted by Hack Weight
And even if you are mad at the guy (and even though post-game handshakes are mostly a farce anyways), you should always shake the other team's hands.
I see absolutely no reason to be an outright hypocrite and shake the hand of a person one does not respect. Shaking hands is meant to be a sign of respect. It's never a good idea to pretend, or to be phony, just to 'look good'. If there is no respect, there should be no handshake, period.
__________________
"It is easy in the world to live after the world's opinion; it is easy in solitude to live after our own... but the great man is he who, in the midst of the crowd, keeps with perfect sweetness the independence of solitude." ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
03-11-16 02:25AM |
|
|
| |
|
bennybeam
Harvey Hacksmasher
Registered: Feb 2015
Location:
Posts: 98 |
quote:
Originally posted by On The Nose
Regardless of what the Tankard article said, or what Jacobs claimed... Jacobs was heard saying "Put them (the rocks) back" immediately following the shot in question. This certainly gave him no time to 'consult' with anyone, or to hear various opinions on what is the best thing to do, before stating his wish that the shot be negated completely.
And that's the rub. I watched it back a bunch of times and you could even see Fry's face looking a bit sheepish. I think even if Brad took a moment to discuss the matter with his team, most wouldn't have a problem with it. But that's not Brad, he's a win at all costs type of guy and so be it. He's still a premiere skip
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
03-11-16 09:02AM |
|
|
| |
|
Stumpy
Harvey Hacksmasher
Registered: Feb 2016
Location: Ontario
Posts: 46 |
I'm on the side that if you don't like the outcome, don't burn the rock. Laing broke the rules, not Jacobs.
Second, why is the burned rock that is leading to so much discussion? This happens all the time in elite level curling yet this is the one causing all the discussion? Jacobs certainly isn't the first guy to make this decision. In recent years we've seen Jennifer Jones do the exact same thing and no one complained.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
03-11-16 10:08AM |
|
|
| |
|
Rock Your World
Swing Artist
Registered: Jan 2011
Location:
Posts: 313 |
quote:
Originally posted by Stumpy
In recent years we've seen Jennifer Jones do the exact same thing and no one complained.
People on this site did complain
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
03-11-16 10:15AM |
|
|
| |
|
HerCurl
Harvey Hacksmasher
Registered: Mar 2016
Location: BC
Posts: 28 |
Did Hebert shake hands?
I can't fault NO for their decision. When there is a triple involved, any tiny deviation from the trajectory (and I certainly saw one), may mean the triple would not have been made. I found AB's response of "It doesn't matter where they were--he's drawing for 1" rather presumptuous, and when I heard someone on NO say "It does matter.", I thought BINGO!
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
03-13-16 08:07PM |
|
|
| |
|
Claire Marie
Harvey Hacksmasher
Registered: Jan 2014
Location: Kingston, Ont.
Posts: 81 |
Re: Did Hebert shake hands?
quote:
Originally posted by HerCurl
I can't fault NO for their decision. When there is a triple involved, any tiny deviation from the trajectory (and I certainly saw one), may mean the triple would not have been made. I found AB's response of "It doesn't matter where they were--he's drawing for 1" rather presumptuous, and when I heard someone on NO say "It does matter.", I thought BINGO!
Totally agree!!!!
__________________
Stick Chick
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
03-14-16 08:53AM |
|
|
| |
|
draway8
Harvey Hacksmasher
Registered: Jan 2014
Location:
Posts: 88 |
They definitely shared a handshake and a chuckle at the post-final ceremony.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
03-14-16 09:08AM |
|
|
| |
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is . |
 |
|
 |
|
|
| |
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
