Canada blows it AGAIN!!!

You know I am soooo flippin tired of these Gold medal game losses in the last three years. 2002 we had two 2-goal leads and we lost 5-4. Last year we have a 2-1 lead going into the 3rd. Now we have a 3-1 lead into the third and then Crosby and Getzlaf both miss chances that would have made it 4-1 which would have solidified a gold medal. I'm sorry too say but Fleury played horrible in that 3rd period. It was a disgrace. This was one of Canada's best teams ever and they cough it up like that in the end. It was disgusting. Mario Durocher should have told his boys that a two goal lead is the most dangerous lead to have in Hockey. IF we are the best in the world at Hockey, and no one says we aren't, then how in the hell do we give up 3 unanswered goals. We should have closed the deal off early in the 3rd. Canada is staring to getr very good at crying on the blueline after every Jr. tourney, they are good at that I'll say. I think thisd whole "Relax its just a game" thing has caught up to some people. There was absolutely no urgency to get a fourth goal. They should have been gunning for that. Anyways, we have got to stop losing these Jr. tourneys all of the time in choking fashion. What if this type of thing happens in the World Cup in September? It will be a one game elimination as well. What if Brodeur banks it off of Pronger in a Gold Medal game.

Oh, crap I hope something like that doesn't happen at the World Cup. I think we need to be positive and not bring "what ifs" into it.

You know I am soooo flippin tired of these Gold medal game losses in the last three years. 2002 we had two 2-goal leads and we lost 5-4. Last year we have a 2-1 lead going into the 3rd. Now we have a 3-1 lead into the third and then Crosby and Getzlaf both miss chances that would have made it 4-1 which would have solidified a gold medal. I'm sorry too say but Fleury played horrible in that 3rd period. It was a disgrace. This was one of Canada's best teams ever and they cough it up like that in the end. It was disgusting. Mario Durocher should have told his boys that a two goal lead is the most dangerous lead to have in Hockey. IF we are the best in the world at Hockey, and no one says we aren't, then how in the hell do we give up 3 unanswered goals. We should have closed the deal off early in the 3rd. Canada is staring to getr very good at crying on the blueline after every Jr. tourney, they are good at that I'll say. I think thisd whole "Relax its just a game" thing has caught up to some people. There was absolutely no urgency to get a fourth goal. They should have been gunning for that. Anyways, we have got to stop losing these Jr. tourneys all of the time in choking fashion. What if this type of thing happens in the World Cup in September? It will be a one game elimination as well. What if Brodeur banks it off of Pronger in a Gold Medal game.

Yeah. And what if I break a nail tonight? What the heck am I going to do? :cry:

It's a silver medal. Canada's record remains pretty damn good compared to other nations. Check it out and see for yourself.

Get. Over. It.

Well, if you look at the history of the tournament, Canada had a lot of lucky breaks and good fortune on its side.

Things tend to even out and the unfortunate thing for them is that things kind of evened out consecutively as they did. You win some, you lose some - there's certainly no shame in silver, I can tell you that.

Congrats to USA, they played an awesome tournement and they were diserving to be up there with Canada. But unfortunatly for them, they didn't won the game, Canada lost it. Canada was dominating and the game was theirs, but lucky goals cost them the victory.

I'm proud of our boys anyway, they played an awesome tournement and they gave us great holydays moment. Congrats to them all and let's hope that next year will be ours.

And btw, it is Canada 6th medal in a row, no bad, hey? :)

Well, I'm just glad they didn't lose to some guy pushing off the net....

Mario Durocher should have told his boys that a two goal lead is the most dangerous lead to have in Hockey.

Were you in Canada's dressing room during the 2nd intermission?

...Didn't think so.


IF we are the best in the world at Hockey, and no one says we aren't

The USA just expressed a huge beef with that notion, didn't they?

Canada isn't by far and wide the best nation in hockey anymore. It's not that we're getting worse, but other nations are getting better.

I thought that Canada played in a panic in the 1st and third periods, playing sloppily while trying to bring the play to the US. THe Americans just played steady and patient... I think better coached overall.

Look at it this way, in 2005 we won't have Meltdown Fleury in the nets.

Look at it this way, in 2005 we won't have Meltdown Fleury in the nets.


Yeah, I'm sure Canada was upset with the few great saves he made in this game. He absolutely robbed a guy of a goal.

Team effort, team sport. Novel concept, eh?

But unfortunatly for them, they didn't won the game, Canada lost it.
:shakehead
And if Montoya would have done the same thing as Fleury, Canada would have won because of their valiant effort? Yeah, I guess it's impossible for a team to "beat" Canada, Canada has to "lose" the game for any other team to win.
Sorry, but in the championship game if one team comes back from a 3-1 deficit to win, it's not because of "lucky goals."

Canada let up in the third and got beat, plain and simple.

Canada didn't blow it, the USA earned it. They're simply better.

Look at it this way, in 2005 we won't have Meltdown Fleury in the nets.

Yeah, I remember him costing you each of the past seven years...

Canada didn't blow it, the USA earned it. They're simply better.

nebulae is plural. ;)

:shakehead
And if Montoya would have done the same thing as Fleury, Canada would have won because of their valiant effort? Yeah, I guess it's impossible for a team to "beat" Canada, Canada has to "lose" the game for any other team to win.
Sorry, but in the championship game if one team comes back from a 3-1 deficit to win, it's not because of "lucky goals."

Canada let up in the third and got beat, plain and simple.


You echoed my sentiments perfectly. The U.S. was the better team today, and came back from two down in the 3rd to claim that title.

You echoed my sentiments perfectly. The U.S. was the better team today, and came back from two down in the 3rd to claim that title.

Agreed. Both teams were even physically but US had the edge mentally and that's what made the difference.

You echoed my sentiments perfectly. The U.S. was the better team today, and came back from two down in the 3rd to claim that title.

Again agreed.

I underestimated the American team. Props to them.

The US was a more mature team and I think they were better able to handle their nerves of this important game. I was concerned with the age of Team Canada. But, this team will be more experienced heading into next year and it will only be a matter of time before Canada wins another gold medal. Exhibit patience my fellow Canadians.

Further, many in Canada are being way too harsh on this junior team. Its not unjust for our country to expect perfection but when things don't go as planned, you gotta accept it and move on. It's not worth stressing over something that has happened.

Moreoever, I am really concerned about the morale of our junior players. Yes I think they'll get over this loss but I hope they don't suffer from any emotional scars that could result from such a tough loss. I'm especially worried about Fluery. He was way too hard on himself when he wasn't playing up to standards and I had a gut feeling the stress (lack of confidence) he was enduring would catch up to him and lower his level of play.

You know, believing in yourself is such a funny thing. It's usually fostered under the right circumstances and when a team/player has confidence, it/he/she tends to do better than when lacking it. So, why can't players just always believe in capabilities?

Anywayz, I have digressed. Sorry if you didn't like my philosophical point of view but its a opinion that I hold in high regard.

Oh and btw, Canada is above and beyond the best hockey nation in the world. Look at the recent championships we've won and look at our junior medal streak. As well, note how many awesome young players we have under 22 years old (Nash, Fluery, Horton for instance). Lets also not forget some of the Canadian ties on the US team (O'Sullivan, Parise, Murray). Heck, even O'Sullivan's parents were cheering for Canada! Canada, if its any consolation to those with the sour grapes, is the most influential hockey nation.

Canada didn't blow it, the USA earned it. They're simply better.


Yeah, but Fleury had a heck of an assist, eh. :joker:

Screw this "USA earned this" nonsense. Yes, they did. But when you're up 3-1 heading into the 3rd period and you lose in regulation you blew it, I don't care if it's the South Surrey Eagles facing the '76 Canada Cup team.

The game was Canada's to bury. The USA showed a resilience under pressure to come back that Canada could not match.

Screw this "USA earned this" nonsense. Yes, they did. But when you're up 3-1 heading into the 3rd period and you lose in regulation you blew it, I don't care if it's the South Surrey Eagles facing the '76 Canada Cup team.

The game was Canada's to bury. The USA showed a resilience under pressure to come back that Canada could not match.
Your last sentence says it all, which is why the American team EARNED the win. Sure Canada blew it, because they thought 45 minutes of hard play was enough, it wasn't. So, IMO the team who plays a full 60 minutes is the team DESERVING of the win. The American team played with nothing to lose, while the Canadians played to not lose with a two goal lead.

Just because Canada didn't bury the game when they SHOULD have doesn't mean the Americans didn't earn the win.

BES, you kind of are saying the same thing both ways. The USA earned it and part of the reason is that they kept working hard and helped make Canada make some mistakes and let up to allow them the win. It is the same thing. The USA earned the win by working hard and making Canada do things that had them blow a lead. Its the same thing to me mate.

The better team won the gold. Today. I feel that USA played better as a team but Canada had more talented players. I have to wonder how a three game series would have looked but that isn't the case here so it don't matter. The better team in this particular tourney won the gold. Canada was great, they lost today.

The team that I would be hating to be a fan of though would be the Russians. Ove had an average tourney and the team didn't look special at all. They got what they deserved for the type of play they showed. Anshankov had a dandy of a tourney though.

So, IMO the team who plays a full 60 minutes is the team DESERVING of the win.

The USA didn't play a full 60 minutes of hockey. The majority of the second period was controlled by Canada. What made the difference in the game, is that the USA did slightly more damage during their 40-45 minutes of good hockey....and part in thanks to a certain goaltender in a red jersey.

I really don't want to make excuses for Canada and suggest that the USA didn't earn the win, but if Fleury does something else with the puck on that play, we don't know who won the game.

It would have only made the score a tie. The way it looked to me, the USA had already gained all of the momentum and play by the time that bit had happened so, while we don't know what would have happened isn't that the same thing that can be said about every goal in every game?

I do agree though that both teams gave thier efforts off and on and that niether played a full 60 mins of brilliant hockey. It just turned out that since both played that way and Fluery made his mistake (s) (i would say) that it left the USA the better team today from my pov and that is what got them the win.

Oh, some have said that it isn't Fluerys fault and that since it is a team game that when Fluery had his mistake(s) that lead to USA goals does that mean that the whole team made mistakes in not scoring more and stopping the USA from scoring to help thier team win? An honest question, not having a piss. I am curious as I would normally agree that since it is a team game that no one player can win or lose it for you but, the goalie seems to be in a position to do exactly that for a team. Win it or lose it by either stellar or mistake filled play. Curious on your opinions.

Cheers mates.

Were you in Canada's dressing room during the 2nd intermission?

...Didn't think so.




The USA just expressed a huge beef with that notion, didn't they?

Canada isn't by far and wide the best nation in hockey anymore. It's not that we're getting worse, but other nations are getting better.

Absolutely. And hey, all the better to.

The more diversity and competition there is in world hockey, the better for Canada.

The days when Canada was the be all and end all of hockey with a few odd exceptions were boring. What's being the best, if you barely have to earn it? I'd rather see a whole new batch of nations win the WCJ, see the competition tighten up and then win it once in the next five years, then win every WCJ in the next half-decade by beating a weak field with one or two underdog contenders.

Being the best in sport dominated by one-nation reaks of American inward thinking with such sports as American football and basketball (no offense to the yankees here, but you guys do have a very self-sustained sporting culture).

Being the best in sport dominated by one-nation reaks of American inward thinking with such sports as American football and basketball (no offense to the yankees here, but you guys do have a very self-sustained sporting culture).

Nobody else plays American football. CFL aint the same game, and a lot of the players are Americans there anyway. NFL Europe is like 90-95% American players with NFL teams or trying to catch on.

Your NBA analogy though is a valid one. Personally I'd find us winning a gold medal with our best players more rewarding as the competition level in the world increases. Probably won't really see that for another 10-15 years though.

I'd love to see a baseball world cup though.
USA
Japan
South Korea
Cuba
Dominican Republic
Puerto Rico
Mexico
Venezuela

You could even see our little territory Puerto Rico, beat us there ;)

Look at it this way, in 2005 we won't have Meltdown Fleury in the nets.
Yeah, that'll help. Never mind wondering how the hell Kesler found himself all alone in front with half an hour to bat the puck in, or how O'Sullivan found so much room late in a tie game.

Team USA's chances came on mind-boggling defensive breakdowns, and I'm pretty sure MA Fleury didn't cause any of them. Canada absolutely collapsed in the 3rd.

But hey, giving the kid a gay little nickname and blowing it off will at least allow you to ignore the real problems and remain in denial about the rest of the team.

Congrats to USA, they played an awesome tournement and they were diserving to be up there with Canada. But unfortunatly for them, they didn't won the game, Canada lost it. Canada was dominating and the game was theirs, but lucky goals cost them the victory.

I'm proud of our boys anyway, they played an awesome tournement and they gave us great holydays moment. Congrats to them all and let's hope that next year will be ours.

And btw, it is Canada 6th medal in a row, no bad, hey? :)

BS. No one dominated the first period, in fact I would ventur ethat the U.S. took advnatage of the Canadiens nervousness quite a bit in the first. We will call it a tie. In the second period, Canada clearly had the edge, but they did get a magnificent save from MAF that would have put the game at 2 - 2. They later scored a goal and had some good PP chances including a 5 on 3. Edge Canada. The third period was all U.S.A. They came out to win, and took it to the Canadiens who couldn't handle the U.S. D-men pinching in, in the final attempts to score. Edge U.S.

In other words, Canda got outplayed in the only period that counts, the third period, and lost the game. They did lose the game, but they were also beat soundly by the U.S.A. Each team had good chances, the U.S. just came out on top. Quit being a sore loser, and whining that the Canadiens handed the gold to the U.S., because quite simply they didn't. THey were just outplayed when it counted.

The US was a more mature team and I think they were better able to handle their nerves of this important game. I was concerned with the age of Team Canada. But, this team will be more experienced heading into next year and it will only be a matter of time before Canada wins another gold medal. Exhibit patience my fellow Canadians..

It's amusing to me that age is being used as the reason Canada lost. Is that really why a two goal lead was given up in the 3rd?



Heck, even O'Sullivan's parents were cheering for Canada! Canada, if its any consolation to those with the sour grapes, is the most influential hockey nation.


First of all, who cares who John O'Sullivan cheers for. The guy is a loser plain and simple. Second, why would O'Sullivan's mom cheer for Canada? She's an American! Do you have any proof of this?

I am not sure why Canadians are so upset. Yes, you lost the game w/ a 2 goal lead in the 3rd, but the team did have a good tournament. You are dealing w/ 18 and 19 yrs. old (w/ exeption of the Crosby), they will make mistakes, shoot, even pros make mistakes on a regular basis - guys have off games, periods and shifts. It happens.

Canada still won Silver. Not shabby at all. Congrats should go out to both teams on the tournament, not finger pointing.

I'm an American that didn't care too much who won the game. If anything I was rooting more for Richards & Carter than anything else.

IMO Canada was the better team for more of the game.

The US did a better job converting on their scoring chances.

Montoya was clearly better than Fleury, and not just because of the winning goal.


The US won because Fleury was not good, and because when they had their chances to blow the game open Tambellini, Paille, Crosby & Getzlaf (twice) couldn't finish. Otherwise it's a 4 or 5-1 lead and the game is over.

The US won because Fleury was not good, and because when they had their chances to blow the game open Tambellini, Paille, Crosby & Getzlaf (twice) couldn't finish. Otherwise it's a 4 or 5-1 lead and the game is over.

Same could be said for both teams. That is what a goalie is there for. It could have easily been 2 - 2 late in the second, rather than 2 - 1, 3- 1. Fleury played good saver for the last goal, as did Montoya. Thats the position they play. They are the most important piece on the ice, and if team A's goalie is better than team B's with comprable talent on the ice........i'm going to give team A the edge (the U.S. in this game) every time.

Same could be said for both teams. That is what a goalie is there for. It could have easily been 2 - 2 late in the second, rather than 2 - 1, 3- 1. Fleury played good saver for the last goal, as did Montoya. Thats the position they play. They are the most important piece on the ice, and if team A's goalie is better than team B's with comprable talent on the ice........i'm going to give team A the edge (the U.S. in this game) every time.


I disagree that Fleury was good save for the last goal.

I thought the 1st goal (wraparound) was soft. I also the the 3rd goal was very stoppable.

Being the best in sport dominated by one-nation reaks of American inward thinking with such sports as American football and basketball (no offense to the yankees here, but you guys do have a very self-sustained sporting culture).

Thats not entirely true. Football is certainly dominated by Americans. Everyone in the world loves football, we just like a different kind. I think lack of outside interest is why the NFL is dominated by Americans.

Basketball though is having greater numbers of Europeans enter the league every year. The days of the dream team are over. As is US domination.

Baseball has plenty of Japanese and Dominicans. Baseball isnt dominated by the US at all.

So really sports domination by one nation doesnt reak of American inward thinking at all.

Thats not entirely true. Football is certainly dominated by Americans. Everyone in the world loves football, we just like a different kind. I think lack of outside interest is why the NFL is dominated by Americans.

Basketball though is having greater numbers of Europeans enter the league every year. The days of the dream team are over. As is US domination.

Baseball has plenty of Japanese and Dominicans. Baseball isnt dominated by the US at all.

So really sports domination by one nation doesnt reak of American inward thinking at all.




Of course a lack of interest by those outside the U.S. in American football is why it's dominated by Americans! We have a Real Men of Genius sighting here folks! It's an American invented sport that has really never been exported, except to Canada, and the CFL is a variation. As for basketball, the Dream Team concept IS still alive, if the very best American players participate. Baseball is diverse, but the vast majority of MLB players are American, look up the statistics. You really don't know what you're talking about do you?

Yeah, I remember him costing you each of the past seven years...

Obviously you're going to be biased towards your own prospect. But what you're not acknowledging is the fact that Fleury was expected to be a difference maker in this tournament. Canada had a young team and Fleury was an NHLer on loan, a godsend. Instead, the team plays like a juggernaut throughout the whole tournament, masking the fact that Fleury has been inconsistent and at times shaky.

Hockey is a 60 minute game, but the USA won it with a 15 minute effort. Money goalies will let in all but the most important goals. You watch a guy like Brodeur at work, and he will never let in the backbreaking goal. Al Montoya demonstrated this in the USA nets. When Canada slipped for the first time in the tournament, Fleury couldn't bail his team out. I've seen great goaltending from guys like Marc Denis in this tournament, who bailed out his team when they needed it. I've seen Curtis Joseph hung out to dry by his team, and he's come out with 60 save wins. Basically the only time he was called upon to meet a serious challenge, he surrendered 3 goals in the last 15 minutes of play.

Last year, Fleury was great throughout the tournament. Against the Russians, he couldn't be the difference maker, surrendering two very quick goals late in the third.

Being a great goalie has a lot to do with timing: don't let in goals late in the third period. Against good competition, Fleury has folded twice late in games. He's still an elite goalie prospect with a lot of skill, but he has a lot of flaws to work out still.

I agree with the thinking that said that Fluery were supposed to be the difference maker in this tourney and as he has been called possibly the greatest young goalie of all time, I think that if he is to be called that the he *should have* been able to play up to those standards and didn't.

He isn't to blame totally for the loss, he was just supposed to be the ringer that really made team Canada be able to beat the less talented Americans and, in my opinion, the way he were mismanaged in Pitts by having to play in the NHL when he wasn't ready for it and therefore lost all of his great skills in an attempt to try and survive at the highest level of hockey in the world and that is why he struggled in the tourney and why it will take some time in the minors to undue to damage that were done in the NHL.

He is still a great young goalie but like many many before him who were rushed into service to play behind less than average teams only to lose thier confidence, he will need to go down now, and spend some time trying to regain the game that earned him the hype. After the way he played in this tourney, he looked less then average and certainly weren't the best goalie there.

I don't see any physical flaws in Fleury's game. The main problems I see with him is that he could be better positionally and rely less on his reflexes, and the biggest problem of all is his mental game. Rushing him to the pros has robbed him of the chance to refine the technical aspect of his game.

I'm not sure if a 'mental toughness' is what's missing, but he doesn't seem to be able to really focus and close out an important win. When Fleury was flopping around in the third period, he looked like he didn't know what he was doing. He didn't look like he was in control of the situation.

I don't blame Fleury entirely for the loss, but I think a lot of blame should be given to him because of what he was expected to do.

I don't blame Fleury entirely for the loss, but I think a lot of blame should be given to him because of what he was expected to do.

So, a lot of the blame should go to Fleury because of what *people expect*?

Yeah, that makes sense... :shakehead

What we're seeing here is a couple of anal-retentives who buy all the hype on every damn player on the planet and then are let down the MINUTE a player makes a mistake.

I'll wager a lot of the freaks who are moaning right now are the same people who had completely nonsensical expectations from Lehtonen last year, then started to cry when Fleury outplayed him, then appointed Fleury the new messiah.

It's sad.

Your last sentence says it all, which is why the American team EARNED the win. Sure Canada blew it, because they thought 45 minutes of hard play was enough, it wasn't. So, IMO the team who plays a full 60 minutes is the team DESERVING of the win. The American team played with nothing to lose, while the Canadians played to not lose with a two goal lead.

Just because Canada didn't bury the game when they SHOULD have doesn't mean the Americans didn't earn the win.

I agree, but this doesn't mean we should hold the Canadian team blameless for what happened in the third period. Absolutely the Americans deserve the win - but Canada should have deserved it.

Canada didn't blow it, the USA earned it. They're simply better.

:handclap:

So, a lot of the blame should go to Fleury because of what *people expect*?

Yeah, that makes sense... :shakehead

What we're seeing here is a couple of anal-retentives who buy all the hype on every damn player on the planet and then are let down the MINUTE a player makes a mistake.

I'll wager a lot of the freaks who are moaning right now are the same people who had completely nonsensical expectations from Lehtonen last year, then started to cry when Fleury outplayed him, then appointed Fleury the new messiah.

It's sad.

I've never been one to put Fleury on a pedestal.

I'm just saying as someone who is brought in to be a money goalie and a difference maker, Fleury failed miserably. It's not just the people who hype him, as a high draft pick and an NHLer on loan, he was supposed to excel. He failed to bail his team out, and that makes him a disappointment. He deserves a big piece of the blame.

today I will say congratulations to Team USA. A well deserved victory. They kept their cool & played "their" game.

Canada on the other hand showed their inexperience and layed back some and were not aggressive in the 1st 10 minutes of that 3rd period. Their nervouseness and lack of confidence showed in their miscues that led to the goals/breaks the USA got; the US buried the chances given. Canada got their chances and didn't bury them.

Fleury was not comfortable the whole tournament and this was widely observed; Durochers should have had the guts to put in our "backup" at any time.

Canada's forwards were by-and-large (excuse the pun) extremely impressive as a whole; next year looks very promising.

The US in summation played their game in the final stanza - Canada did not - "bad breaks will beat the team that doesn't make their own."

Very little difference between these two teams; both could have won. Kudos to both. Both 1st rate hockey nations.

Some great posts here, but many of you are missing one crucial point here as far as Team USA goes....chemistry. What I mean by this is that some of Team USA's "core players" are returning players, such as Zach Parise and Ryan Suter. They know each other well.

Also, Suter plays with Likens regularly on Wisconsin's power play, and they played together on Team USA's power play. Coincidence?

Brady Murray regularly plays with Zach Parise on UND's "Money Line" (aka "Brady Bunch Line"), again they were paired up in the WJC.

Now, because I'm not all that knowledgeable about who plays with which CHL team, I don't know how much "prior existing chemistry" there was on the Canadian squad.

Some great posts here, but many of you are missing one crucial point here as far as Team USA goes....chemistry. What I mean by this is that some of Team USA's "core players" are returning players, such as Zach Parise and Ryan Suter. They know each other well.

Also, Suter plays with Likens regularly on Wisconsin's power play, and they played together on Team USA's power play. Coincidence?

Brady Murray regularly plays with Zach Parise on UND's "Money Line" (aka "Brady Bunch Line"), again they were paired up in the WJC.

Now, because I'm not all that knowledgeable about who plays with which CHL team, I don't know how much "prior existing chemistry" there was on the Canadian squad.

chemistry, lots, as many of Canada's players had played for Canada's Under-17 and Under-18 program and had succeeded on the international stage. One more year of experience overall for the US on average did make a difference I would say though.

chemistry, lots, as many of Canada's players had played for Canada's Under-17 and Under-18 program and had succeeded on the international stage. One more year of experience overall for the US on average did make a difference I would say though.

Aside from international play, do any of them currently play on the same team? same line?

Aside from international play, do any of them currently play on the same team? same line?

on defense for the Red Deer Rebels in the Western Hockey League.

BS. No one dominated the first period, in fact I would ventur ethat the U.S. took advnatage of the Canadiens nervousness quite a bit in the first. We will call it a tie. In the second period, Canada clearly had the edge, but they did get a magnificent save from MAF that would have put the game at 2 - 2. They later scored a goal and had some good PP chances including a 5 on 3. Edge Canada. The third period was all U.S.A. They came out to win, and took it to the Canadiens who couldn't handle the U.S. D-men pinching in, in the final attempts to score. Edge U.S.

In other words, Canda got outplayed in the only period that counts, the third period, and lost the game. They did lose the game, but they were also beat soundly by the U.S.A. Each team had good chances, the U.S. just came out on top. Quit being a sore loser, and whining that the Canadiens handed the gold to the U.S., because quite simply they didn't. THey were just outplayed when it counted.

"Beat soundly"? I thought the US earned their breaks and deserved to win but "beat soundly"? Thats as silly as saying the third period is the only one that counts. (oh yeah, you said that to)

"Beat soundly"? I thought the US earned their breaks and deserved to win but "beat soundly"? Thats as silly as saying the third period is the only one that counts. (oh yeah, you said that to)
Shulda! Woulda! Coulda! Sixty minutes of hockey is required to win Championship Games. There is no ONE person to blame...shoulda let in less goals (Fluery) they woulda won the gold... shoulda scored more goals (offence) they woulda won the gold... shoulda controlled the game in their own end (defence) they coulda won the gold...shoulda played 60 minutes of hockey, not 40... they coulda won the gold...shouldn't have sat on the lead....but the Canadians still played great hockey for the most part and were in a position to take home the GOLD. Seems to me they thought they had the game going into the third...too complacent and no desperation until it was too late...oh well there's always next year.

Right said mate. Perfectly put. Hey mods, close the thread and let this be the final word on it. (;) )

Shulda! Woulda! Coulda! Sixty minutes of hockey is required to win Championship Games. There is no ONE person to blame...shoulda let in less goals (Fluery) they woulda won the gold... shoulda scored more goals (offence) they woulda won the gold... shoulda controlled the game in their own end (defence) they coulda won the gold...shoulda played 60 minutes of hockey, not 40... they coulda won the gold...shouldn't have sat on the lead....but the Canadians still played great hockey for the most part and were in a position to take home the GOLD. Seems to me they thought they had the game going into the third...too complacent and no desperation until it was too late...oh well there's always next year.

OK so you think the third period is sixty minutes, the rest I agree with and have already said, so all I'm getting from your rant is that you feel you had the game in control because the third period amounts to the whole game. Not taking anything away from the Americans, they played great and deserved to win as I have already said but your logic is stupid OR we were "SOUNDLY BEAT" you can take your pick.

Sixty minutes of hockey is required to win Championship Games.

I don't know what your arguing, but the States won the game based on fifteen minutes of great play. The American effort and Canadian meltdown contributed equally to the end result. It was Fleury's fault, it was the defenses fault, it was the forwards fault. Ok done.

I don't know what your arguing, but the States won the game based on fifteen minutes of great play. The American effort and Canadian meltdown contributed equally to the end result. It was Fleury's fault, it was the defenses fault, it was the forwards fault. Ok done.

The first period's play was even, if not in the advantage of the U.S. who were making a lot of good plays against a nervous Canadian team.

The second period was Canada's period, but the U.S. still played hard. They were robbed by MAF on several shots, one save (the dive backwards glove save) was absoutley amazing.

The third period was U.S.'s period. Canada played decent, but were out played by the U.S.

So I fail to see how anyone can claim that Canada outplayed the U.S., and only lost due to a meltdown in the thrid period.....The meltdown was just being outplayed by the better team. It was unfortunate for the Canadiens, but the fact of the matter is they did not dominate the game as they used to. They were up coming into the third, but they couldn't handle the pressure and the better team in the end. The third period is the most important period in the game. The U.S. just had their best period when it counted the most.