HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

The Russian Five

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-14-2006, 05:57 PM
  #26
chooch*
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 946
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by deathtoespn
I went to my first NHL game in 1985, but I fell in love with the game of hockey in February of 1980, on perhaps the darkest day in the history of Soviet Hockey (behind the death of Kharlamov and the awful plane crash that Bobrov mysteriously avoided being on). So it is ironic that I spend so much time and money on books, tapes, and DVD's on Soviet hockey almost 26 years later.

I was at the 1987 Canada Cup game between the Soviet National Team and Team USA in Hartford Connecticut in September 1987. I remember at the end of the first period, Chris Nilan or someone just ran somebody along the boards at center ice, the guy got up, picked up his stick and a nano-second later you could hear the puck hit his blade and it was directed right onto the tape of another Soviet player entering the zone at 100mph. It was the most amazing thing I ever saw--that player who had just been run and made that pass was Vladimir Krutov. I was flabbergasted.
If you want evidence of the absolute genius and courage of Vladimir Krutov, I have a few more examples, but pick up Anatoly Tarasov's book and read the chapter on the three hockey speeds. Krutov is one of two players (the other Kharlamov) who was ever capable of attaining all three and I have some examples on tape.

1983 Central Red Army vs. Minnesota North Stars. In this game, from the second period on, Krutov was unstoppable. The goals he scored in this game, the passes he made were unbelievable. Cheap shotted in front of the net several times, once after scoring a goal, Krutov was interviewed after the game and when asked about the North Stars play he respectfully looked at the camera and said "these guys are tough! all tough guys! I enjoyed playing here tonight!"
That entire tour Krutov was simply the best player on the ice.

1987 Canada Cup finals, games one and three, Krutov emerged as the unacknowledged genius behind the KLM. Everything at top speed; passes, shots--his wrists just exploded when he shot the puck. The only player I've seen in his class as far as the wrist shot is Brett Hull. The goal he scored in game one was a rocket, and he did it all with just his wrists.

Larionov, Makarov, Fetisov, Kasatonov, all superb players in their own right, all went on to have success in the NHL. Krutov did not, the culture shift was just too much for him. When people criticize him because he got too out of shape, like he was some glutton or fool or immature man-child, they really reveal more about themselves than they do about Krutov. I spoke with Bob Mcammon, his coach when he was at Vancouver and the first question I asked him was: "what happened with Krutov? Was there any way he could have come back for a second season?" and Bob Mcammon (great man) just wistfully smiled and said: "John, he was done."

Valery Kharlamov was magical. He was like this gift that came down from heaven to show us all what it really means to be beautiful and graceful and courageous. Krutov was a Kharlamov disciple, but from a different mold and built for a different era. In my mind (and in Tarasov's as well) the two will be forever linked because they were courageous, humble hockey masters who inspired everyone who ever saw them play. They taught us, hey man, THIS IS POSSIBLE if you develop the skill and are born with the courage.
They say that you must be born with a gift to play in the NHL, and I believe that: but these two men should not be judged by what they did or did not do in the NHL.
Red Ace has some good footage. Shoot him an email if you want to see these great players in their prime.
Lovely post - I too remember vividly a goal wristed by him as he stepped over the blueline and the D backed up in 87 (or 85?) in one of those club series beating a Bruins(?) goalie the puck exiting the net as fast as it entered. What he would have done on a Western Conference gogo team in the early 1980's. 100 goals a year?

chooch* is offline  
Old
01-14-2006, 06:47 PM
  #27
KariyaIsGod*
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,140
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chooch
Lovely post - I too remember vividly a goal wristed by him as he stepped over the blueline and the D backed up in 87 (or 85?) in one of those club series beating a Bruins(?) goalie the puck exiting the net as fast as it entered. What he would have done on a Western Conference gogo team in the early 1980's. 100 goals a year?
Why does every post you make have to knock Wayne Gretzky?

KariyaIsGod* is offline  
Old
01-18-2006, 04:43 AM
  #28
deathtoespn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 78
vCash: 500
Green Unit had class

One thing you notice when you watch the old footage of the Soviet National Team or the UCKA Central Red Army Team, is that when any of these five players scored a goal, especially a big goal, they never raised their sticks or engaged in any fist-pumping, chest-thumping celebration.

Two players in particular, who would immediately put a stoic face on and keep their arms to their sides, were Valery Kharlamov and Vladimir Krutov; unlike Russian player Ilya Kovalchuk who acts like an imbecile after every goal he scores, disrespecting the memory of Valery Kharlamov in the process. How so?

Valery Kharlamov wore the number 17, and according to Kings of The Ice: A History of World Hockey Ilya "Kovalchuk wears number 17 as a tribute to the late Russian star Valeri Kharlamov." (page 1010)
Tribute? After every goal Kovalchuk scores he explicitly and demonstrably shows everyone who ever saw Kharlamov exactly that he lacks the class and grace that Kharlamov was revered for.

I can already feel the torrent of excuses and rationalizations: oh, he plays in a different era! or, Celebrations add color to the game! (really? so then the game of hockey is less interesting when folks don't celebrate goals wildly and disrespect their opponents and the game of hockey?)
Hockey is plenty colorful and interesting without showy-self aggrandizement. It is a team sport
Which is precisely why graceful players like Kharlamov and Krutov did not engage in any extra-hockey behavior in an attempt to draw more attention to themseves: they scored the goal--after their teammates got them the puck. thanks guys.
But I guess people nowadays need to show off.
If only their self-esteem was higher.

deathtoespn is offline  
Old
01-18-2006, 06:51 AM
  #29
Archijerej
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Poland
Posts: 1,049
vCash: 500
Exactly deaththoespn! Durakchuck wearing #17 is kinda annoying for me too.

Archijerej is offline  
Old
01-19-2006, 09:45 AM
  #30
RedAce
Registered User
 
RedAce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: New York, NY
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 533
vCash: 500
I totaly agree with you deathtoespn!

RedAce is offline  
Old
01-19-2006, 09:23 PM
  #31
chooch*
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 946
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by deathtoespn
One thing you notice when you watch the old footage of the Soviet National Team or the UCKA Central Red Army Team, is that when any of these five players scored a goal, especially a big goal, they never raised their sticks or engaged in any fist-pumping, chest-thumping celebration.

Two players in particular, who would immediately put a stoic face on and keep their arms to their sides, were Valery Kharlamov and Vladimir Krutov; unlike Russian player Ilya Kovalchuk who acts like an imbecile after every goal he scores, disrespecting the memory of Valery Kharlamov in the process. How so?

Valery Kharlamov wore the number 17, and according to Kings of The Ice: A History of World Hockey Ilya "Kovalchuk wears number 17 as a tribute to the late Russian star Valeri Kharlamov." (page 1010)
Tribute? After every goal Kovalchuk scores he explicitly and demonstrably shows everyone who ever saw Kharlamov exactly that he lacks the class and grace that Kharlamov was revered for.

I can already feel the torrent of excuses and rationalizations: oh, he plays in a different era! or, Celebrations add color to the game! (really? so then the game of hockey is less interesting when folks don't celebrate goals wildly and disrespect their opponents and the game of hockey?)
Hockey is plenty colorful and interesting without showy-self aggrandizement. It is a team sport
Which is precisely why graceful players like Kharlamov and Krutov did not engage in any extra-hockey behavior in an attempt to draw more attention to themseves: they scored the goal--after their teammates got them the puck. thanks guys.
But I guess people nowadays need to show off.
If only their self-esteem was higher.
Players who played with that kind of class and almost never whooped it up were:
Lafleur, Yzerman, Lemieux, Goulet.

Others, especially from the 80's, were like monkeys hopping around on the ice unashamedly jumping into defencemen's arms after scoring meaningless goals.

I have to ask you the key question: had the Soviets came to the NHL in 1980 instead of 1990 and had a chance to participate in that ridiculous scoring era, how many records would they hold? Most goals in a season (Krutov?), most points in a season (Larionov?) etc etc?

Especially the players born around 1960.

chooch* is offline  
Old
01-19-2006, 11:08 PM
  #32
Chinaski*
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Russia
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 245
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by deathtoespn
One thing you notice when you watch the old footage of the Soviet National Team or the UCKA Central Red Army Team, is that when any of these five players scored a goal, especially a big goal, they never raised their sticks or engaged in any fist-pumping, chest-thumping celebration.

Two players in particular, who would immediately put a stoic face on and keep their arms to their sides, were Valery Kharlamov and Vladimir Krutov; unlike Russian player Ilya Kovalchuk who acts like an imbecile after every goal he scores, disrespecting the memory of Valery Kharlamov in the process. How so?

Valery Kharlamov wore the number 17, and according to Kings of The Ice: A History of World Hockey Ilya "Kovalchuk wears number 17 as a tribute to the late Russian star Valeri Kharlamov." (page 1010)
Tribute? After every goal Kovalchuk scores he explicitly and demonstrably shows everyone who ever saw Kharlamov exactly that he lacks the class and grace that Kharlamov was revered for.

I can already feel the torrent of excuses and rationalizations: oh, he plays in a different era! or, Celebrations add color to the game! (really? so then the game of hockey is less interesting when folks don't celebrate goals wildly and disrespect their opponents and the game of hockey?)
Hockey is plenty colorful and interesting without showy-self aggrandizement. It is a team sport
Which is precisely why graceful players like Kharlamov and Krutov did not engage in any extra-hockey behavior in an attempt to draw more attention to themseves: they scored the goal--after their teammates got them the puck. thanks guys.
But I guess people nowadays need to show off.
If only their self-esteem was higher.
You are yourself an imbecile. People are different, and who are you to judge them? Oh yeah you are deathtoespn. Notorious hockey player.

Chinaski* is offline  
Old
01-20-2006, 12:43 AM
  #33
vitogor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Minnesota
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 3,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by deathtoespn
One thing you notice when you watch the old footage of the Soviet National Team or the UCKA Central Red Army Team, is that when any of these five players scored a goal, especially a big goal, they never raised their sticks or engaged in any fist-pumping, chest-thumping celebration.

Two players in particular, who would immediately put a stoic face on and keep their arms to their sides, were Valery Kharlamov and Vladimir Krutov; unlike Russian player Ilya Kovalchuk who acts like an imbecile after every goal he scores, disrespecting the memory of Valery Kharlamov in the process. How so?

Valery Kharlamov wore the number 17, and according to Kings of The Ice: A History of World Hockey Ilya "Kovalchuk wears number 17 as a tribute to the late Russian star Valeri Kharlamov." (page 1010)
Tribute? After every goal Kovalchuk scores he explicitly and demonstrably shows everyone who ever saw Kharlamov exactly that he lacks the class and grace that Kharlamov was revered for.

I can already feel the torrent of excuses and rationalizations: oh, he plays in a different era! or, Celebrations add color to the game! (really? so then the game of hockey is less interesting when folks don't celebrate goals wildly and disrespect their opponents and the game of hockey?)
Hockey is plenty colorful and interesting without showy-self aggrandizement. It is a team sport
Which is precisely why graceful players like Kharlamov and Krutov did not engage in any extra-hockey behavior in an attempt to draw more attention to themseves: they scored the goal--after their teammates got them the puck. thanks guys.
But I guess people nowadays need to show off.
If only their self-esteem was higher.
I loved your first post, but completely disagree with this one. Just because Kovalchuk has his own temperament and personality doesn't mean that he is disrespecting Kharlamov or anybody else. I'm not a big Kovalchuk fan, but I love the fact that he doesn't hide anything, he lets you see it all- the passion, the emotion, the cockiness, all of it. And you are wrong about the different era thing, it does make a big difference. Back in the days of the Soviet Union, any show of emotion was frowned upon. It was considered embarassing to stand out of the crowd and celebrate a personal achievement. Now it's a different country and a different culture, you will see more and more Kovalchuks and Ovechkins replacing Kharlamovs and Krutovs. If you can't accept it, maybe you'll be better off sticking to the old tapes.

vitogor is offline  
Old
01-20-2006, 09:05 AM
  #34
Snap Wilson
Registered User
 
Snap Wilson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,838
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by deathtoespn
One thing you notice when you watch the old footage of the Soviet National Team or the UCKA Central Red Army Team, is that when any of these five players scored a goal, especially a big goal, they never raised their sticks or engaged in any fist-pumping, chest-thumping celebration.
Living under a totalitarian regime tends to diminish one's enthusiasm.

Snap Wilson is offline  
Old
01-20-2006, 01:20 PM
  #35
deathtoespn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 78
vCash: 500
ahh, the personal attacks!

What would this board be without the personal attacks against a sane, rational argument? I am not going to engage in this nonsense, but I will make my argument a little clearer for the rest of the folks.

If a person has to brag, show-off, or otherwise try to show-up or embarrass another individual, what need are they trying to fulfill? If a person had a healthy self-image and positive self-esteem, there would be no need to engage in behavior that would humiliate another person because they are already confident in their self-worth and don't have to humiliate others in order to feel good about themselves. What other people think of mature people with healthy self-esteem is irrelevant in determining what they think about themselves.
Now to Ilya Kovalchuk.
He made a choice to wear #17 as a tribute to a player, Valery Kharlamov, who through his actions on the ice, became a symbol of grace, dignity and humility--no matter what system of government he lived under. He had respect for his opponents and for the game of hockey. He never celebrated--he let his play and the results speak for themselves, as all dignified people do.
Ilya, while "paying tribute" to Kharlamov, does exactly the opposite. He goes out of his way to brag, show off, and show up his opponents. "Show emotion"? "Be himself" "Reveal all"? Kharlamov showed emotion by playing hurt, by being courageous on the ice, by winning the puck in the corner and making a play--he played an emotional style on the ice, but he never had to scream and point and act like an imbecile (notice I did not say he is an imbecile) like Kovalchuk to show his emotions. Kharlamov showed his emotion when it was meaningful, not, like Kovalchuk, when it is meaningless to the outcome of a game.
So because it is a different era now, this means it is OK to show-up your opponents and engage in activity to draw attention to yourself after you score a goal? Um, how so? Because something was disrespectful 20 or 30 years ago means that it is no longer disrespectful because more people do it?
Monkey see, monkey do, makes everything OK now?
One more thing. I don't tune in to a hockey game to see Ilya Kovalchuk or any other hockey player for that matter, reveal all of himself to us. I tune in to watch the best players in the world display their skills--which is why the NHL altered some rules and changed others.
Attackt the argument, not the person. It's a sign of maturity.
Thanks!


Last edited by deathtoespn: 01-20-2006 at 01:51 PM.
deathtoespn is offline  
Old
01-20-2006, 01:26 PM
  #36
Chinaski*
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Russia
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 245
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by deathtoespn
What would this board be without the personal attacks against a sane, rational argument? I am not going to engage in this nonsense, but I will make my argument a little clearer for the rest of the folks.

If a person has to brag, show-off, or otherwise try to show-up or embarrass another individual, what need are they trying to fulfill? If a person had a healthy self-image and positive self-esteem, there would be no need to engage in behavior that would humiliate another person because they are already confident in their self-worth and don't feel threatened by other people. What other people think of them is irrelevant in determining what they think about themselves.
Now to Ilya Kovalchuk.
He made a choice to wear #17 as a tribute to a player, Valery Kharlamov, who through his actions on the ice, became a symbol of grace, dignity and humility--no matter what system of government he lived under. He had respect for his opponents and for the game of hockey. He never celebrated--he let his play and the results speak for themselves, as all dignified people do.
Ilya, while "paying tribute" to Kharlamov, does exactly the opposite. He goes out of his way to brag, show off, and show up his opponents. "Show emotion"? "Be himself" "Reveal all"? Kharlamov showed emotion by playing hurt, by be courageous on the ice, by winning the puck in the corner and making a play--he played an emotional style on the ice, but he never had to scream and point and act like an imbecile (notice I did not say he is an imbecile) like Kovalchuk to show his emotions. Kharlamov showed his emotion when it was meaningful, not, like Kovalchuk, when it is meaningless to the outcome of a game.
So because it is a different era now, this means it is OK to show-up your opponents and engage in activity to draw attention to yourself after you score a goal? Um, how so? Because something was disrespectful 20 or 30 years ago means that it is no longer disrespectful because more people do it?
Monkey see, monkey do, makes everything OK now?
One more thing. I don't tune in to a hockey game to see Ilya Kovalchuk or any other hockey player for that matter, reveal all of himself to us. I tune in to watch the best players in the world display their skills--which is why the NHL altered some rules and changed others.
Attackt the argument, not the person. It's a sign of maturity.
Thanks!
To have argument with who ? So, you mean if Kharlamov would have jumped from the top of the skyscraper, Kovalchuk while paying tribute should have followed him?
There is no argument. You don't have anything to argue or debate about. But while you don't like to be personally attacked, why do you attack someone who you don't even know? If you ready to call someone an imbecile, be ready to be called an imbesile. End of discussion.
Calling an imbecile a person, is not a sighn of maturity. Remember that mature one.

Chinaski* is offline  
Old
01-20-2006, 01:54 PM
  #37
deathtoespn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 78
vCash: 500
where did I say that? Read Closer, then respond

I never called anyone an imbecile. If you pay close attention to my words, you'll see "act like an imbecile" and whoa--!! even "(notice I did not call him an imbecile)."
While I appreciate your response, your argument would come off better if you actually read mine and referred to things I actually said as opposed to what you think I said.

deathtoespn is offline  
Old
01-20-2006, 02:00 PM
  #38
Snap Wilson
Registered User
 
Snap Wilson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,838
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by deathtoespn
What would this board be without the personal attacks against a sane, rational argument?
I wasn't making a personal attack. Please don't construe it as such. I was just saying that the idea of Kharlamov doing chest-thumping, high-fiving celebrations given the environment that he played in is patently absurd since there isn't any way it would have been tolerated. That being the case, the absence of excessive goal celebration isn't an indication, in and of itself, of his grace or character.

You're entitled to your opinion of Kovalchuk. I don't entirely disagree with it, but it's a different time. As to whether he's worthy enough to honor Kharlamov's number, I find the notion of that ridiculous, and if you gave it some thought, you would too. How Kovalchuk chooses to honor Kharlamov is a personal thing. I wear #4 whenever I play pickup hockey, and I'm not fit to carry Jean Beliveau's jockstrap.

Snap Wilson is offline  
Old
01-20-2006, 02:05 PM
  #39
Chinaski*
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Russia
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 245
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by deathtoespn
I never called anyone an imbecile. If you pay close attention to my words, you'll see "act like an imbecile" and whoa--!! even "(notice I did not call him an imbecile)."
While I appreciate your response, your argument would come off better if you actually read mine and referred to things I actually said as opposed to what you think I said.
Well, he doesn't act like imbecile either. I think that's not maturity to call someone to be acting like an imbecile, when he does not. He is a differen person, there is nothing bad the way he behaves. It's completely opposite. I can aprreciate the way Kharlamov celebrated his goals and his conduct on the ice as much as I appreciate Kovalchuk's.

Chinaski* is offline  
Old
01-20-2006, 02:15 PM
  #40
Siberian
Registered User
 
Siberian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Saint Pierre
Country: France
Posts: 3,539
vCash: 500
While I enjoyed reading the original message on Krutov I was highly turned off by the remarks regarding Kovalchuk. No, I am not fan of Kovalchuk because I know he is one of the most overrated Russian players in the history of hockey, and his numbers are inflated by the playing time he receives in Atlanta, but this comment was way off-line when he compared on ice behavior of Kovalchuk and Kharlamov. There is so many reasons explaining why they acted like they did.

BTW, on a side note, this is exactly why hockey is considered boring by many americans is because it is hard to find exciting a game where players are not excited themselves. There is nothing wrong with a good excitement shown on the ice, absolutely nothing.

Siberian is offline  
Old
01-20-2006, 02:23 PM
  #41
deathtoespn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 78
vCash: 500
pay tribute, not lip service, or change the number

Again, I appreciate your response. But let me be clearer if I can.
OK, Valery Kharlamov, through his actions on the ice, his courage, his enormous skill, his creativity and finally his success, transformed him into something more than just a hockey player. He became an icon for beauty, grace and dignity both in North America and The Soviet Union. He wore the number 17.

Now Ilya Kovalchuk, a Russian born professional hockey player (notice the distinction between him and you--he's out there on the stage for all the world to see--whereas you play for fun and mostly for yourself and friends) comes out and say that he is going to wear Kharlamov's number as a way of "paying tribute to him" (page 1010 Kings Of The Ice: A History Of World Hockey )
When you pay tribute to a person, you honor their best attributes, no? You act like they would have acted under similar circumstances, you respect how they approached and played the game, while putting your stamp on it to be sure, but that does not mean obliterate everything they stood for in one fell swoop.
Go to the books written by Tarasov and Dryden and Shero and Lawrence Martin and you'll realize that Kharlamov was a humble person, a respectful person, and that had little to do with forces outside of himself , like the governement and even the culture.
Ilya Kovalchuk does not exude any of these characteristics. He engages in conduct that Kharlamov would never engage in. His post-goal celebrations are self-indulgent and actually embarrassing; he is extremely self-centered; definitely holds on to the puck too long at times; and finally, there was the whole Sidney Crosby pointing episode. This is how he shows his emotion.
Kharlamov showed his emotions by playing hurt, never giving up, always playing at 100 mph, and respecting his teammates, opponents and the game. Finally, Bobby Clarke found no other way to put an end to this display of skill and courage, but to slash him and break his ankle. Kharlamov never retaliated, he simply took it like a man.
Jean Beliveau did the same thing. I respect your choice to wear number 4, but alas, you aren't performing on the world stage and have not come out and been quoted in a hockey history publication stating that you chose to wear that particular number to pay tribute to JB.
If Ilya wants to continue to disprespect his opponents and do things on the ice that Kharlamov would never do, go ahead! Just take the number 17 off. To not do so is disrespectful and quite frankly, distasteful.

deathtoespn is offline  
Old
01-20-2006, 02:30 PM
  #42
Snap Wilson
Registered User
 
Snap Wilson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,838
vCash: 500
DeathToe, in what book does Dryden comment on Kharlamov? Is it The Game? Did I just miss it?

Needing to catch up on some hockey reading,
MoneyP

Snap Wilson is offline  
Old
01-20-2006, 02:35 PM
  #43
Siberian
Registered User
 
Siberian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Saint Pierre
Country: France
Posts: 3,539
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by deathtoespn
Again, I appreciate your response. But let me be clearer if I can.
OK, Valery Kharlamov, through his actions on the ice, his courage, his enormous skill, his creativity and finally his success, transformed him into something more than just a hockey player. He became an icon for beauty, grace and dignity both in North America and The Soviet Union. He wore the number 17.

Now Ilya Kovalchuk, a Russian born professional hockey player (notice the distinction between him and you--he's out there on the stage for all the world to see--whereas you play for fun and mostly for yourself and friends) comes out and say that he is going to wear Kharlamov's number as a way of "paying tribute to him" (page 1010 Kings Of The Ice: A History Of World Hockey )
When you pay tribute to a person, you honor their best attributes, no? You act like they would have acted under similar circumstances, you respect how they approached and played the game, while putting your stamp on it to be sure, but that does not mean obliterate everything they stood for in one fell swoop.
Go to the books written by Tarasov and Dryden and Shero and Lawrence Martin and you'll realize that Kharlamov was a humble person, a respectful person, and that had little to do with forces outside of himself , like the governement and even the culture.
Ilya Kovalchuk does not exude any of these characteristics. He engages in conduct that Kharlamov would never engage in. His post-goal celebrations are self-indulgent and actually embarrassing; he is extremely self-centered; definitely holds on to the puck too long at times; and finally, there was the whole Sidney Crosby pointing episode. This is how he shows his emotion.
Kharlamov showed his emotions by playing hurt, never giving up, always playing at 100 mph, and respecting his teammates, opponents and the game. Finally, Bobby Clarke found no other way to put an end to this display of skill and courage, but to slash him and break his ankle. Kharlamov never retaliated, he simply took it like a man.
Jean Beliveau did the same thing. I respect your choice to wear number 4, but alas, you aren't performing on the world stage and have not come out and been quoted in a hockey history publication stating that you chose to wear that particular number to pay tribute to JB.
If Ilya wants to continue to disprespect his opponents and do things on the ice that Kharlamov would never do, go ahead! Just take the number 17 off. To not do so is disrespectful and quite frankly, distasteful.
I think most of the points you listed above are ridiculous. Kovalchuk wearing Kharlamov's number does not have to act exactly like Kharlamov. You will never truely know why Soviet players did not really show their emotions on the ice: maybe it was because their winning % was that high, so they stopped caring, maybe it's because they had such orders from their coaches, maybe hockey was just a tough job for them to waste their energy on something else? That was a very different society Kharlomov lived in. So please stop your baseless bashing of Kovalchuk, he can do whatever he wants on the ice and this was nothing but funny what happened between Kovalchuk and the overhyped kid.

Siberian is offline  
Old
01-20-2006, 02:49 PM
  #44
deathtoespn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 78
vCash: 500
"baseless bashing"? On the contrary, my friend

First things first.
Ken Dryden comments on Kharalmov in both his published diary of the 1972 Summit Series and "Home Game" a great book that was based on a CBC documentary.

To the other gentleman, yes, you are correct up to a point about Ilya being allowed to do whatever he wants to on the ice. Perhaps you forgot that he cannot slash, spear, dive, etc, as nobody is allowed to do whatever they want on the ice. If you take a look at the NHL rule book you will realize that YOURS IS a baseless statement, with all due respect.

Second, Kovalchuk's antics on the ice are well documented by The Hockey News and other publications. The "pointing" incident is far from funny: it's really a rather pathetic sight to see one insecure hockey player try to embarrass another hockey player. Scott Mellanby (20 year NHL veteran) has gone on the record, (in an interview with Phil Esposito and Todd (forgot his last name) on "In The Crease" on XM Radio last week) saying that he did not agree with Ilya because NHL players deserve respect and showing up an opponent has no place in the game of hockey. So to label my well-founded criticisms of Ilya's disrespectful behavior as "baseless" is not correct--but you can believe whatever you like: just don't call it the truth.

deathtoespn is offline  
Old
01-20-2006, 02:58 PM
  #45
Chinaski*
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Russia
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 245
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by deathtoespn
First things first.
Ken Dryden comments on Kharalmov in both his published diary of the 1972 Summit Series and "Home Game" a great book that was based on a CBC documentary.

To the other gentleman, yes, you are correct up to a point about Ilya being allowed to do whatever he wants to on the ice. Perhaps you forgot that he cannot slash, spear, dive, etc, as nobody is allowed to do whatever they want on the ice. If you take a look at the NHL rule book you will realize that YOURS IS a baseless statement, with all due respect.

Second, Kovalchuk's antics on the ice are well documented by The Hockey News and other publications. The "pointing" incident is far from funny: it's really a rather pathetic sight to see one insecure hockey player try to embarrass another hockey player. Scott Mellanby (20 year NHL veteran) has gone on the record, (in an interview with Phil Esposito and Todd (forgot his last name) on "In The Crease" on XM Radio last week) saying that he did not agree with Ilya because NHL players deserve respect and showing up an opponent has no place in the game of hockey. So to label my well-founded criticisms of Ilya's disrespectful behavior as "baseless" is not correct--but you can believe whatever you like: just don't call it the truth.
The point incident is funny. And it was a good thing. Canadian media made him a bad boy of the league a long time ago. He is the player you like to hate. He is not politically correct, and I am proud of him.
And as I stated before, should Kharlamov decided to jump from the roof, should Kovalchuk, just because he is wearing his number do the same?

Chinaski* is offline  
Old
01-20-2006, 03:10 PM
  #46
Siberian
Registered User
 
Siberian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Saint Pierre
Country: France
Posts: 3,539
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by deathtoespn
First things first.
Ken Dryden comments on Kharalmov in both his published diary of the 1972 Summit Series and "Home Game" a great book that was based on a CBC documentary.

To the other gentleman, yes, you are correct up to a point about Ilya being allowed to do whatever he wants to on the ice. Perhaps you forgot that he cannot slash, spear, dive, etc, as nobody is allowed to do whatever they want on the ice. If you take a look at the NHL rule book you will realize that YOURS IS a baseless statement, with all due respect.

Second, Kovalchuk's antics on the ice are well documented by The Hockey News and other publications. The "pointing" incident is far from funny: it's really a rather pathetic sight to see one insecure hockey player try to embarrass another hockey player. Scott Mellanby (20 year NHL veteran) has gone on the record, (in an interview with Phil Esposito and Todd (forgot his last name) on "In The Crease" on XM Radio last week) saying that he did not agree with Ilya because NHL players deserve respect and showing up an opponent has no place in the game of hockey. So to label my well-founded criticisms of Ilya's disrespectful behavior as "baseless" is not correct--but you can believe whatever you like: just don't call it the truth.
Oh my, your messages get more ridiculous by every minute. In which rule book does it say that Ilya can not point at 18 year old who took a dumb penalty? Scott Melanby's book? Who the heck is Scott Mellanby? 20 years in NHL and nobody really knows him! It's because of these Mellanbies, whose quantities dominate in NHL, no one gives a da mn about NHL.

Take Kovalchuks, goal celebrating Ovechkins and "taunting" Malkins away from this league and you and up with hundreds of Mellanbies and empty arenas.

This is way off-topic here, clearly you have an agenda against Kovalchuk and that's why you started it here.

Siberian is offline  
Old
01-20-2006, 04:03 PM
  #47
deathtoespn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 78
vCash: 500
Please read closer if you want to criticize, OK?

First off, the comment Siberian made was that Kovalchuk can do anything he wants to on the ice--a ridiculous comment, since not a single player in the NHL is allowed to do anything he wants to on the ice.
Second: if the Referrees saw what Kovalchuk did and wanted to, they easily could have given him a ten-minute misconduct--he probably got off with a warning, I don't know that, but I do know he could have and should have got ten-minute misconduct.
Millions of people love the NHL in the USA, and you need players like Scott Mellanby to win championships and lead teams to the playoffs: just ask the fans in Philadelphia, Florida, and everywhere else the man has played. Don Waddell gave Mellanby a contract because he must make the playoffs this season and Ilya is just not enough. How many times has Ilya led his team to the NHL playoffs? Just the facts, Sir.

Third, like I said in my post, if you go on the record stating that you are wearing the same number as a revered hockey icon who symbolized grace, beauty and class in order to pay tribute to that icon, then you should respect their memory and approach the game in a similar fashion--while putting your stamp on it to be sure--which is precisely what I wrote in the earlier post but which you fail to cite in your response.
If Ilya wants to engage in "bad boy" (what exactly does that mean? How does being infamous promote the game of hockey?) behavior, I would have no problem with his mindless displays of ego as long as he took the number 17 off of his jersey.
To quote the late Valery Kharlamov
"It is important for an athlete . . . to always look at himself with impartial assessment, to look at himself, not with admiration, but with the stern eye of a critic." (The Red Machine page 131)

Of course the two are two different individuals! The problem is that Ilya chose to wear number 17, and he chose number 17 precisely "as a tribute to Valery Kharlamov." Therefore, if you are going to "pay tribute" to a specific man/icon, then you should go out of your way to comport yourself in a way similar, and not antithetical to, the player whose memory you are paying tribute to. Very important distinction.
Finally, the argument "if Kharlamov jumped off a building . . . " is not really an argument at all. Every person has choice: even the most un-educated person understands that, so I'm not going to dignify this poor attempt at an argument.

Ilya made a very public choice of taking #17. He used the word "tribute." You don't only pay tribute with your words: you pay tribute with your actions. Kovalchuk is not humble; he is not graceful; he does not respect his opponents, and he goes out of his way to show-up his opponents after every goal he scores, these are his on-the-record actions, they are irrefutable: Kharlamov did none of these things--how exactly is Ilya paying tribute here?
He's not.
He is making a reputation FOR HIMSELF of being a self-aggrandizing show-off who fails to respect other NHL players. I did not give him this reputation: he made this all himself. Remember this when you post a response.

deathtoespn is offline  
Old
01-20-2006, 04:26 PM
  #48
Archijerej
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Poland
Posts: 1,049
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chinaski
He is not politically correct, and I am proud of him.
Listen. It's a matter of taste, really. I have other definition of "political incorrectnes", "personality" etc. I agree with deathtoespn, for me Kovalchuk, while extremely talented, is a self-centered, disrespectfull kid who's antics are dumb and discrasefull. And I'm saying this as a long time Russian hockey fan. Sure, he can wear #17, sure, he does not have to act exactly like Kharlamov, but for those who believe, that a hockey player is defined not only by his skills, but also mentality, attitude, sportmanslike bahaviour, seeing Kharlamov's number on his jersey is annoying. I got a feeling that this "political incorrectnes" is as much overused and misused as "political correctnes". Often a common rudeness is seen as some sign of "personality". But again, it's a matter of taste. I can bet, that you feel the same way aboutr Don Cherry for example. For you he's simply a racist (maybe rightfully so) for other "politically incorrect".


Last edited by Archijerej: 01-20-2006 at 04:31 PM.
Archijerej is offline  
Old
01-20-2006, 04:33 PM
  #49
gamera
Registered User
 
gamera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Kovalchuk Army HQ
Country: Vietnam
Posts: 6,476
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to gamera Send a message via AIM to gamera Send a message via MSN to gamera Send a message via Yahoo to gamera
I think you are reading FAR too much into the fact that Kovalchuk wears the #17. Yes, he said it is in tribute to Kharlamov, but I don't agree that it means he must act in every way like Kharlamov did, and I don't think Ilya meant it that way, either (of course, I'm not him, so I wouldn't know - this is just my opinion). I think he wanted to wear it because he's his favorite player, nothing more, nothing less.

It's a game. It's supposed to be FUN. Ilya has a great time out there and he shows it. I honestly believe (and there is no way anyone can prove this to be right or wrong) that Kharlamov would have done the same if he lived in the current society.

Ovechkin & Kovalchuk are both very emotional players and I think it adds to the excitement of the game. When Kharlamov played, excitement was frowned upon....(another poster explained this and I agree wholeheartedly)

If I want to get fired up, all I have to do is watch Slay's video montage of Ovechkin and all his awesome goals, hits, and celebrations and boom !, I'm in a good mood! (btw, if they showed that on MTV we'd have alot more NHL fans in the USA!)

gamera is offline  
Old
01-20-2006, 04:58 PM
  #50
deathtoespn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 78
vCash: 500
fun for who exactly?

first off, Valery Kharlamov played the game with emotion and if you look at the footage, this is crystal clear. Is celebrating after scoring a goal the only way to show emotion on an ice sheet? Don't think so.
Is disrespecting your opponent by engaging in showy self-aggrandizement the only way to have fun on an ice sheet? Same answer. And are the players being shown up having fun while Ilya celebrates?
Like I have said, Ilya does not have to mimic Kharlamov's every action in order to respectfully pay tribute, but to approach the game and his opponents in a similar fashion. Very big difference here folks--I really wished you grasp this.

Kharlamov created excitement where ever he played, and his style was never discouraged, but rather was encouraged and admired by the folks who lived under communism as well as the folks who were lucky enough to escape it. He was the biggest hockey star in the 1970's in the USSR, where public shows of emotion were indeed discouraged; so what? If you read what Tarasov wrote in "The Road To Olympus" he said this was done to honor and respect his opponents, whom he considered "colleagues."
I find NHL hockey to be full of excitement and it certainly does not need players showing up their opponents to appeal to anyone; exactly how does embarrassing your opponent on the ice add excitement to the game of hockey? I don't watch the game to see what happens after a player scores a goal: I watch to see the skills and teamwork that went into the creation of that goal, as do most HOCKEY fans. Celebrating a goal the way Kovalchuk does has nothing to do with the game of hockey. Emotion does have to do with the game of hockey, but not the way Kovalchuk chooses to display it.
On the ice, you don't show up your opponent, and just because more people do this now than they did 30 years ago does not make it right or any less disrespectful, I mean, what kind of logic says that if enough people continue to do the wrong thing that it suddenly becomes the right thing?

So go ahead Ilya, and make a spectacle of yourself to quell the insecurity you feel inside. But have the class to take the number 17 off of your jersey.


Last edited by deathtoespn: 01-20-2006 at 05:15 PM.
deathtoespn is offline  
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 10:05 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.