HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > International Tournaments
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
International Tournaments Discuss international tournaments such as the World Juniors, Olympic hockey, and Ice Hockey World Championships, as they take place; or discuss past tournaments.

Soviet Union beat Canada (4-3) 1991 Canada Cup

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-04-2013, 04:40 PM
  #101
hitmen19
Registered User
 
hitmen19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 707
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
When you say "Russia, the paper weight hockey nation," that puts the full weight of your opinions into context. I admitted repeatedly that the Russian hockey program, from 1994-2006, could not compete with Finland or Switzerland, much less teams like Sweden or the United States. But it looks like the nation you insulted by referring to it as a "paper weight" is showing some signs of life.

One indicator of hockey power is the number and quality of youth players in the pipeline. Look at Russian performance against Canada in the WJC in recent years. In 2011, Russia spotted Canada a 3-goal lead going into the 3rd period, then blew by the disoriented Canucks and poured in 5 goals to win the Gold Medal. In 2012, Russia jumped out to a 6-1 lead against Canada, winning once again to force Canada to compete in the Bronze bracket. In 2013, Canada ended up meeting the Russians yet again to fight for the Bronze Medal, and it was the Canadian best-on-best "Dream Team," featuring NHL superstar Ryan Nugent-Hopkins, who were sent home empty-handed.

By my calculations, during the Soviet era, the Soviets and Canada tied at 3-3 for best-on-best series wins.
First, let me know if the World junior counts or not going forward. When Canada wins 5 in a row, you say it doesn't count, but then it doesn't win for 4 years, but still gets 2 silvers and a bronze and all of a sudden it does. You tend to lose all credibility when you only use it for some years and not others.

Second, not once in any of my posts have I ever said soviet/russia players are not world class. They have easily produced the second most world class players, and they are closer to Canada's level then they are to the third place team, whoever that is. I consider malkin and datsyuk to be the 2nd and 3rd best players in the world, and kovalchuk top ten, sorry no ovechkin, he isn't there no more.

Third, my point is, USSR/Russia as a national team has not accomplished nearly as anything close to Canada when the best of each country is at the same tournaments. Canada's best won 76, 84, 87, 91, 04 and most importantly 2002 and 2010 gold medals. USSR/Russia has won 81, and............ oh yeah a 3 game 1979 challenge series against NHL allstars 2-1, not Canadian national team, and tied rendevouz again against nhl allstars not the Canadian national team. So you can try to belittle Canada's accomplishments all you want, and you can have the exhibition series all you want in your win total, but the fact of the matter is, USSR/Russia accomplishments don't measure up in the least. Go win the gold in Sochi, and you may get back into second place. The swedes and czechs have won a gold in the four best on bests. The usa has won 2 silvers. The fins have got a silver and 2 bronzes. You have had 1 silver, and 1 bronze, good for 6th place. Congrats on the silver, you guys deserved it

hitmen19 is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 08:47 PM
  #102
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,536
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
They were supposed to easily win those tournaments. Dick Beddoes of the Toronto Globe and Mail gleefully boasted that if the Team Canada didn't win EVERY game of the '72 Series by at least 10 goals, he would eat his column soaked in borscht. Bon appetit!
Many people under estimated how good the USSR were and the impact a lack of preparation and off season conditioning would effect Canada.

Mr Kanadensisk is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 08:51 PM
  #103
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,536
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
Where do I find an official definition of best-on-best. The IIHF Website? The IIOC Website? Why is that Canadians conveniently get a chance to make up the rules for best-on-best as they go along? Canada and the Soviets overwhelmingly dominated the Canada Cup and hockey in general - how is it when the two teams met, it wasn't best on best? Is it because Finland wasn't there? In Canada Cup competition, Finland was 3-16-2. Over 4 tournaments, Finland could only muster 3 wins, but because Finland wasn't entered in the Challenge Cup or Rendezvouz '87, they weren't best-on-best? I think the whole world sides with me on this one.
The Czechoslovaks were pretty good back then, the Swedes weren't bad either, even the US had some success if you remember 1980.

Mr Kanadensisk is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 09:01 PM
  #104
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
The Czechoslovaks were pretty good back then, the Swedes weren't bad either, even the US had some success if you remember 1980.
I agree with everything you said, but back in that era, Canada and Soviet Union were in a class by themselves.

Yakushev72 is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 09:02 PM
  #105
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hitmen19 View Post
First, let me know if the World junior counts or not going forward. When Canada wins 5 in a row, you say it doesn't count, but then it doesn't win for 4 years, but still gets 2 silvers and a bronze and all of a sudden it does. You tend to lose all credibility when you only use it for some years and not others.

Second, not once in any of my posts have I ever said soviet/russia players are not world class. They have easily produced the second most world class players, and they are closer to Canada's level then they are to the third place team, whoever that is. I consider malkin and datsyuk to be the 2nd and 3rd best players in the world, and kovalchuk top ten, sorry no ovechkin, he isn't there no more.

Third, my point is, USSR/Russia as a national team has not accomplished nearly as anything close to Canada when the best of each country is at the same tournaments. Canada's best won 76, 84, 87, 91, 04 and most importantly 2002 and 2010 gold medals. USSR/Russia has won 81, and............ oh yeah a 3 game 1979 challenge series against NHL allstars 2-1, not Canadian national team, and tied rendevouz again against nhl allstars not the Canadian national team. So you can try to belittle Canada's accomplishments all you want, and you can have the exhibition series all you want in your win total, but the fact of the matter is, USSR/Russia accomplishments don't measure up in the least. Go win the gold in Sochi, and you may get back into second place. The swedes and czechs have won a gold in the four best on bests. The usa has won 2 silvers. The fins have got a silver and 2 bronzes. You have had 1 silver, and 1 bronze, good for 6th place. Congrats on the silver, you guys deserved it
If you make your best effort to construct a point, I will respond to it.

Yakushev72 is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 09:03 PM
  #106
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,536
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zine View Post
Rarely does a non-Canadian say the Canada Cup was fair......and A LOT of posters hated the Soviets. Hell, even numerous Canadians on HF laugh at the Canada Cup.

But I suppose everybody has an anti-Canadian agenda, right?
Like I said, it's easy enough to check what someones agenda is on these boards.

Not everyone, but there are some. That's how it is when you are on top, it comes with the territory.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zine View Post
Was the Canada Cup entertaining hockey? Some of the best.
Was it an impartial tourney? Not in the slightest.
The Canada Cup was not perfect but it was the most impartial mens tournament in the period which it was held.

Mr Kanadensisk is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 09:19 PM
  #107
Jussi
I am siege face
 
Jussi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Finland
Posts: 43,486
vCash: 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
By my calculations, during the Soviet era, the Soviets and Canada tied at 3-3 for best-on-best series wins.
If you're really going to go down this sad road of rewriting and (mulling in general) history, then while taking the Rendezvouz 87 as a "best-on-best" tournament, please inform Jari Kurri and Esa Tikkanen that they switched nationalities in 1987.

Jussi is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 09:46 PM
  #108
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,536
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zine View Post
Imo, both teams were great...some years Soviets better, other times Canada, but essentially equal in terms of performance and talent.
I think you would agree that the Soviet system revolved almost entirely around their national team while the North American hockey establishment was as much or if not more focused on the NHL. I think even you are reasonable enough to admit that if Canada had focused on their national program in the same manner as the Soviets that Canada's national teams would have been MUCH MUCH better than anything they iced in the Canada Cups. Just imagine if Canada found its most optimal line combinations and had those guys play together all the time, developed systems to suit them, etc, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zine View Post
However, I would loved to have seen the Canadian reaction and performance in a regularly held "Russian Cup". Tourney played in Moscow, under Russian rules with Soviet hand-picked refs.
I'm 100% positive the opinions in this thread would be reversed.
You might be right, but to be fair Canada has never had the societal problems with cheating and corruption anywhere close to the level that it exists in Russia/USSR, so we're not really comparing apples to apples.

Mr Kanadensisk is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 11:53 PM
  #109
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jussi View Post
Oh come on, nobody (well, except Russians) takes Challenge Cup or Rendezvous as nothing more than exhibition games. They were in the middle of the NHL season, arguably bringing down the focus level, where as the latter was nothing else but a replacement for an NHL All-star game.
Are you saying that Gretzky, Lemieux, Messier, etc., were shiftless losers that didn't have the guts to stand up for their country and compete because it was the middle of the season? Maybe you're right. Its certainly a novel thesis about guys who may have gotten too much credit.

Yakushev72 is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 11:56 PM
  #110
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
I think you would agree that the Soviet system revolved almost entirely around their national team while the North American hockey establishment was as much or if not more focused on the NHL. I think even you are reasonable enough to admit that if Canada had focused on their national program in the same manner as the Soviets that Canada's national teams would have been MUCH MUCH better than anything they iced in the Canada Cups. Just imagine if Canada found its most optimal line combinations and had those guys play together all the time, developed systems to suit them, etc, etc.



You might be right, but to be fair Canada has never had the societal problems with cheating and corruption anywhere close to the level that it exists in Russia/USSR, so we're not really comparing apples to apples.
In fairness to Zine's point, Alan Eagleson was sent to prison for corruption, and he was the architect founder, owner and sole chief executive of the Canada Cup!

Yakushev72 is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 12:00 AM
  #111
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jussi View Post
If you're really going to go down this sad road of rewriting and (mulling in general) history, then while taking the Rendezvouz 87 as a "best-on-best" tournament, please inform Jari Kurri and Esa Tikkanen that they switched nationalities in 1987.
It was best of the NHL, which would include the best of all Canadians, Americans, Swedes, Finns and anyone else who was dominant in the league. Gretzky, Lemieux, Messier, Anderson, Coffey, and Bourque were all there.

Yakushev72 is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 10:19 AM
  #112
Mr Writer
Registered User
 
Mr Writer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,568
vCash: 500
This argument is going to be settled in a little less than a year from now! And lets face it, as they say in the deep south, "if you ain't got the grits to do it at home, then there ain't much good in ya!" Something tells me the home team in 2014 won't have the grits. Should be a blast! Can't wait.

Mr Writer is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 11:21 AM
  #113
hitmen19
Registered User
 
hitmen19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 707
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
I agree with everything you said, but back in that era, Canada and Soviet Union were in a class by themselves.
As individual talent, they were in a class by themselves. As national team results, Canada was, and still is in a class by themselves. I let the facts speak for themselves. 1976, 1984,1987,1991,Olympic Gold 2002, 2004, Olympic Gold 2010. vs 1981.

That is Case closed in a debate with Canada vs USSR/Russia

I think you should be arguing with the swedes, czechs, and the americans as to what country has the 2nd most impressive results. The swedes and the czechs each have a gold medal and a runner up canada cup. The usa has 2 silvers and a world cup. The soviets have 1 canada cup, 1 runner up canada cup and 1 silver medal. That is a tight battle for 2nd. Let the arguments begin who is second best.


Last edited by hitmen19: 03-05-2013 at 12:02 PM.
hitmen19 is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 12:50 PM
  #114
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hitmen19 View Post
As individual talent, they were in a class by themselves. As national team results, Canada was, and still is in a class by themselves. I let the facts speak for themselves. 1976, 1984,1987,1991,Olympic Gold 2002, 2004, Olympic Gold 2010. vs 1981.

That is Case closed in a debate with Canada vs USSR/Russia

I think you should be arguing with the swedes, czechs, and the americans as to what country has the 2nd most impressive results. The swedes and the czechs each have a gold medal and a runner up canada cup. The usa has 2 silvers and a world cup. The soviets have 1 canada cup, 1 runner up canada cup and 1 silver medal. That is a tight battle for 2nd. Let the arguments begin who is second best.
I have tried before, and it hasn't taken hold, but I'm going to try it again one more time. The Soviet Union and Russia are two entirely different countries. They existed in different eras, and they have vastly different geographic boundaries. I understand that you may not have taken much world history in school, and you may not keep track of what's going on in the world.

I have said repeatedly that Russia lost its capability to compete in international hockey between roughly 1994-2006. I have said that Russia fell behind all other major hockey countries, Canada included. I have said that Russia played poorly at the Olympics, using the last vestiges of hockey talent from Soviet times (Fedorov, Bure, Yashin, etc.). If you're starting to pick up a trend, its because I have been comparing Canada and the Soviets, not Canada and Russia. There are marked signs that Russia is on its way back, but there is still a way to go. Most Canadian fans assume that Sochi will be a sequel of Vancouver, but I would suggest that it would a mistake for the Canadian team to take the Russians as lightly as the fans seem to do.


Last edited by Yakushev72: 03-05-2013 at 12:52 PM. Reason: eliminate extra spaces
Yakushev72 is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 04:22 PM
  #115
hitmen19
Registered User
 
hitmen19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 707
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
I have tried before, and it hasn't taken hold, but I'm going to try it again one more time. The Soviet Union and Russia are two entirely different countries. They existed in different eras, and they have vastly different geographic boundaries. I understand that you may not have taken much world history in school, and you may not keep track of what's going on in the world.

I have said repeatedly that Russia lost its capability to compete in international hockey between roughly 1994-2006. I have said that Russia fell behind all other major hockey countries, Canada included. I have said that Russia played poorly at the Olympics, using the last vestiges of hockey talent from Soviet times (Fedorov, Bure, Yashin, etc.). If you're starting to pick up a trend, its because I have been comparing Canada and the Soviets, not Canada and Russia. There are marked signs that Russia is on its way back, but there is still a way to go. Most Canadian fans assume that Sochi will be a sequel of Vancouver, but I would suggest that it would a mistake for the Canadian team to take the Russians as lightly as the fans seem to do.
The soviet union had countries like Belarus, Latvia, Lithuania, and Kazakhstan, that were mixed in with the Russians, and still could not beat the Canadians. You might want to also check into the history class you are offering. The Canadian national team and the NHL allstars are not the same. When Canadian players play for the maple leaf, its with more patriotic will then when they play in a challenge cup exhibition series under the nhl logo. Thats why no one takes the north america vs the world allstar games as a victory, although if the world had won, im guessing you would try to. Since North America won 3 out of the 5 games against the world in the allstar format, if you want to use the challenger cup as a victory, im going to use those allstar games as one. They cancel each other out. Thanks for coming out

hitmen19 is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 05:01 PM
  #116
hitmen19
Registered User
 
hitmen19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 707
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
I have tried before, and it hasn't taken hold, but I'm going to try it again one more time. The Soviet Union and Russia are two entirely different countries. They existed in different eras, and they have vastly different geographic boundaries. I understand that you may not have taken much world history in school, and you may not keep track of what's going on in the world.

I have said repeatedly that Russia lost its capability to compete in international hockey between roughly 1994-2006. I have said that Russia fell behind all other major hockey countries, Canada included. I have said that Russia played poorly at the Olympics, using the last vestiges of hockey talent from Soviet times (Fedorov, Bure, Yashin, etc.). If you're starting to pick up a trend, its because I have been comparing Canada and the Soviets, not Canada and Russia. There are marked signs that Russia is on its way back, but there is still a way to go. Most Canadian fans assume that Sochi will be a sequel of Vancouver, but I would suggest that it would a mistake for the Canadian team to take the Russians as lightly as the fans seem to do.
its a tournament anybody can win, but the Canada will be the favourite, with possibly Sweden a 1b co favourite. The USA would be 3rd, and then the Russians as 4th by talent on paper. The home ice will shift it a little in the russians favour, and they might get to 3rd.

hitmen19 is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 05:06 PM
  #117
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hitmen19 View Post
The soviet union had countries like Belarus, Latvia, Lithuania, and Kazakhstan, that were mixed in with the Russians, and still could not beat the Canadians. You might want to also check into the history class you are offering. The Canadian national team and the NHL allstars are not the same. When Canadian players play for the maple leaf, its with more patriotic will then when they play in a challenge cup exhibition series under the nhl logo. Thats why no one takes the north america vs the world allstar games as a victory, although if the world had won, im guessing you would try to. Since North America won 3 out of the 5 games against the world in the allstar format, if you want to use the challenger cup as a victory, im going to use those allstar games as one. They cancel each other out. Thanks for coming out
Mr. Kanadensisk is a very interesting guy to exchange views with, mainly because he can get past the banal "we won, you didn't" mentality that you show in your posts, especially when Canada won by a single goal at the end of a multi-game tournament. That's embarrassing. If you are using your voice to represent Canada, show a little class and style. That's boring and requires no analytical skill or ability to express concepts.

In regard to the north american stars vs. the world all-stars, I don't have the slightest idea what you are talking about.


Last edited by stv11: 03-06-2013 at 03:32 AM. Reason: removed insult
Yakushev72 is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 05:09 PM
  #118
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hitmen19 View Post
its a tournament anybody can win, but the Canada will be the favourite, with possibly Sweden a 1b co favourite. The USA would be 3rd, and then the Russians as 4th by talent on paper. The home ice will shift it a little in the russians favour, and they might get to 3rd.
I would rather go in having Russia seeded 7th.

Yakushev72 is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 05:50 PM
  #119
hitmen19
Registered User
 
hitmen19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 707
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
Mr. Kanadensisk is a very interesting guy to exchange views with, mainly because he can get past the banal "we won, you didn't" mentality that you show in your posts, especially when Canada won by a single goal at the end of a multi-game tournament. That's embarrassing. If you are using your voice to represent Canada, show a little class and style. That's boring and requires no analytical skill or ability to express concepts.

In regard to the north american stars vs. the world all-stars, I don't have the slightest idea what you are talking about.
"You only won by a goal, so that is embarrassing" and "soviets won rendezvous because of goal difference"

I do realize you can't use facts to offer any credible defense, so you attack the messanger. And you do realize that hockey is about who won right? Detroit outscored pittsburgh in 2009 stanley cup finals in the 7 games, 17-14but pittsburgh won 4 games to 3 games. you don't see detroit saying, "yeah but we outscored you so your cup doesn't count", because it doesn't matter who outscored who over the 7 games, its who won the games. Do understand what that means, it means pittsburgh name is on the cup, not detroits. History doesn't care what the collective score was in those games. It means a team could have gotten destroyed 10-0 in game 1 of the a best of 3 cup final, but win game 2&3, by a score of 1-0 and 1-0, and you know what, it would mean the team winning the 2 games wins the cup, not the team outscoring the other team. So understand Canada won 87 Canada cup, whether it was close or a blowout, that is only for the losers to think about. Thanks for coming out. 33 years and counting for last soviet/russia best on best win


Last edited by stv11: 03-06-2013 at 03:34 AM. Reason: removed insult/edited quote
hitmen19 is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 05:56 PM
  #120
hitmen19
Registered User
 
hitmen19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 707
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
I would rather go in having Russia seeded 7th.
Of course you would, Russians never live up to expectations

hitmen19 is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 07:42 PM
  #121
hitmen19
Registered User
 
hitmen19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 707
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
Mr. Kanadensisk is a very interesting guy to exchange views with, mainly because he can get past the banal "we won, you didn't" mentality that you show in your posts, especially when Canada won by a single goal at the end of a multi-game tournament. That's embarrassing. If you are using your voice to represent Canada, show a little class and style. Try to elevate yourself beyond the schoolyard taunt approach. That's boring and requires no analytical skill or ability to express concepts.

In regard to the north american stars vs. the world all-stars, I don't have the slightest idea what you are talking about. If its something that makes you feel better about yourself, I support it from a therapeutic standpoint.
And ask the americans whether there was any difference in losing 5-2 as in 2002, or 2010, 3-2 in overtime. No, they lost and they admit as much and don't make excuses. I ve never met an american so far that tried to say, "well the usa only lost in ot so it was almost a tied olympics" 33 years and counting for the soviets/russia

hitmen19 is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 01:00 AM
  #122
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,536
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
In fairness to Zine's point, Alan Eagleson was sent to prison for corruption, and he was the architect founder, owner and sole chief executive of the Canada Cup!
Eagleson stole money and deserved what he got, no doubt about it. While he ran the NHLPA I don't think anyone would say he owned them or the Canada Cup. However my point all along has been that only the officials, not Eagleson were in a position to effect the outcome of games.

Eagleson's legacy will be that of a criminal which unfortunately will overshadow any of the good things he did in his life. People forget that he was a pioneer in having NHLers compete internationally, something that fans around the world now cherish. Who knows where we would be today had he not been around.

Mr Kanadensisk is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 03:17 PM
  #123
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
Eagleson stole money and deserved what he got, no doubt about it. While he ran the NHLPA I don't think anyone would say he owned them or the Canada Cup. However my point all along has been that only the officials, not Eagleson were in a position to effect the outcome of games.

Eagleson's legacy will be that of a criminal which unfortunately will overshadow any of the good things he did in his life. People forget that he was a pioneer in having NHLers compete internationally, something that fans around the world now cherish. Who knows where we would be today had he not been around.
If you Google "Alan Eagleson, Dag Olsson," you will bring up a link called "Name In The Game," from www.apnewsarchive.com. Check the entry for September 13, 1991. It is a story about the Swedish coach in the 1991 Canada Cup blasting Alan Eagleson for hiring Paul Stewart, an American, to referee games in the series. The Swedish coach called Stewart "a clown." Dag Olsson from Sweden, who refereed a number of important games in the Canada Cup over the years, including the final of the 1981 Canada Cup, is quoted as saying "It isn't the Canada Cup. Its the Alan Eagleson Cup!" Olsson was in a position to know, because Eagleson hired him to work in the series.

Olsson's comment documents what I have previously asserted, and that is that when a partisan for the host nation that owns the tournament is in the business of handpicking referees for the tournament, as in the case of the "Alan Eagleson Cup," its just an exhibition, and not a valid international tournament.

Yakushev72 is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 09:31 PM
  #124
Zine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 8,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
If you Google "Alan Eagleson, Dag Olsson," you will bring up a link called "Name In The Game," from www.apnewsarchive.com. Check the entry for September 13, 1991. It is a story about the Swedish coach in the 1991 Canada Cup blasting Alan Eagleson for hiring Paul Stewart, an American, to referee games in the series. The Swedish coach called Stewart "a clown." Dag Olsson from Sweden, who refereed a number of important games in the Canada Cup over the years, including the final of the 1981 Canada Cup, is quoted as saying "It isn't the Canada Cup. Its the Alan Eagleson Cup!" Olsson was in a position to know, because Eagleson hired him to work in the series.

Olsson's comment documents what I have previously asserted, and that is that when a partisan for the host nation that owns the tournament is in the business of handpicking referees for the tournament, as in the case of the "Alan Eagleson Cup," its just an exhibition, and not a valid international tournament.

Nice find.

When Eagleson instituted an across-the-board 'no European refs' policy for the medal round, his bias was exposed. He was not judging referees based competency and individual performance, he excluding an entire demographic of refereeing talent and handpicking North American referees who called the game in Canada's favor.


Last edited by Zine: 03-06-2013 at 09:49 PM.
Zine is online now  
Old
03-06-2013, 09:47 PM
  #125
Zine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 8,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
I think you would agree that the Soviet system revolved almost entirely around their national team while the North American hockey establishment was as much or if not more focused on the NHL. I think even you are reasonable enough to admit that if Canada had focused on their national program in the same manner as the Soviets that Canada's national teams would have been MUCH MUCH better than anything they iced in the Canada Cups. Just imagine if Canada found its most optimal line combinations and had those guys play together all the time, developed systems to suit them, etc, etc.
Disagree.

Canada routinely played with existing line combos from the NHL, so I doubt it would have substantially helped.
In hindsight, I think a strong focus on NT play hindered Soviets as much as it helped (a top heavy league watered down the competition for elite players; and as such they gained little experience in clutch situations, etc).

Regardless, Soviet WJC success was similar to the senor team's despite no strong emphasis on a junior NT. This is evidence that success was predicated on talent more so than chemistry and prep time.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
You might be right, but to be fair Canada has never had the societal problems with cheating and corruption anywhere close to the level that it exists in Russia/USSR, so we're not really comparing apples to apples.
I'm not so sure about that.....Canada very much so had a 'win at any cost' mentality during the Cold War.

When the most blatant act of cheating (Clarke's slash) was justified as a 'necessary evil', or a biased Canada Cup tournament (administered by a convicted cheater) was deemed impartial competition, it proves fair play took a backseat to winning.

In fact, seems to me that Canadian post-Cold War generations view these tournaments quite differently than their predecessors. Gone is the "we must defeat the evil Soviets at all cost" quasi-cheating mentality.

Zine is online now  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:56 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.