HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Soviet players in top 10 of all time- do they belong there?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-24-2006, 05:35 PM
  #126
Zine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 8,842
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClassicHockey View Post
It may not be pertinent to your area of discussion but I don't disregard what happened before the 70's. In my mind, it shows how Canada was disadvantaged.
But we all agree Canada was disadvantaged pre-1970ís. Youíre preaching to the choir, thereís no need to bring it up. It was never the issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClassicHockey View Post
You were the one who put such a strong emphasis on home crowds. I'm saying its not as big a factor as you think. You show no proof.
Címon, donít you think itís a bit ridiculous to argue this point? You honestly need proof that shows playing in front of a home crowd gives a team an extreme advantage?

Alright, I'll bite: Last year 27 out of 30 NHL teams had a better home record than away record. There it is - cut and dry. In fact, this shouldn't even be an issue.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ClassicHockey View Post
Maybe you can tell me this. What rules were in the Canada Cup that were so different than what the Russians were playing?

I'm trying to think of some. Maybe the centre red line. What else? Please list all these different rules for me.

You've provided nothing to back your claim..
This whole time you've been talking about the disadvantages the Canadians put up with playing in europe (2 man system, larger ice, home crowds & culture, biased referees, etc, etc,). Yet when the situation is reversed it's not a big deal for the Russians to overcome? C'mon.....that homerism at its best. Lets call it like it is; no matter the outcome, both teams were at a huge disadvantage playing away from home.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ClassicHockey View Post
If you don't mind, I like to know who I'm debating with. It makes a difference. You know I'm from Canada. Where are you?

You just need to be more specific without the general accusations.
I'm from the US. XploD looks like he's from Sweden. So, at least on my part, there's no nationalistic homerism. At least your not dealing with some of the insane Russian posters on this board. I think I'm being pretty objective.

Zine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-24-2006, 09:51 PM
  #127
ClassicHockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 591
vCash: 500
You really didn't answer the questions. I would like specific examples to give your claims some value but you can't think of any.

I'm very aware of International rules as opposed to NHL rules and if you thought about it, you would realize that after the 1972 Summit series, there is very little difference - the larger ice surface being the exception. That's why you didn't answer the question.

I feel that you don't have a good enough grasp of the politics and the ineptitude of European refereeing during the 60's & 70's. Yes, I mention the 60's. How can you conveniently eliminate a decade when the real differences between the two systems was at its height?

You are sticking to the Canadian referees being biased. It seemed to me that you didnt' experience International hockey in the 60's. Maybe you weren't old enough and that isn't your fault. But do you remember the 1972 series at all? The two West German referees were incredibly biased. Just watch the first few minutes of Game 8 for a crash course.

But you are sooooo wrong when you say the Soviets didn't respond to a challenge. The debacle of the non use of pros when Canada pulled out of the Worlds in 1970 was one such instance. And some believe the 1976 Canada Cup was another.

The one time since 1954 that the Russians didn't send their best was in 1976 and its a catasrophe. Its miniscule compared to the many times Canada was prevented from sending its best. I don't know how anyone can debate that.

I've run up against other European hockey fans who have an axe to grind and jealous over any Canadian success in International hockey. Each time, the person I was debating with didn't have a true understanding of the history of International hockey and politics. International hockey did not start in the 70's. Look up a character named Bunny Ahearne and start from there.

To finish this off with you. The Canada Cup was started because the World Championships had no legitimacy because Canada wasn't competing. I think that was the original question.

Its a simple as that.



Quote:
Originally Posted by XploD View Post
Yeah you're right, it shows how Canada was disadvantaged before the 1970's.


I didn't put a strong emphasis on that, if it came across that way then I apologize. I didn't think I needed to show proof of how playing in front of a home crowd is an advantage, I just thought it was common knowledge.

International rules vs NHL rules, you don't know the difference? You also said yourself that the refs allowed a lot more in NA than in Europe.

Neutral refs vs North American refs. That's the thing. The WC's wasn't played entirely with Soviet refs and again, that's why it would've been a better gauge than the CC's had you sent your best players. If the WC's was played on Soviet locations with Soviet referees, then it would've been the same thing as the CC. So neutral location + neutral refs in an international tournament is always better than Canadian location + Canadian refs don't you think?


I know that, it doens't change anything though. You still didn't send your best players. The Soviets did, yes you had a reason, but just as the Olympics were on when the NHL was on before, now you have what's called an Olympic break so that every country can send their best players to the Olympics. Basically the same thing as it would've been if the NHL would've made a break for the WC's. As I said, I don't blame you for it, but it still doesn't change the fact that the Soviets did take on a challenge which you never did, and again ALL OF THIS comes down to me being bugged off by the comment that cyclops made on the previous page:



Already addressed.

ClassicHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-24-2006, 10:02 PM
  #128
ClassicHockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 591
vCash: 500
I was responding to the claim that the Russians were disadvantaged because the Canada Cup iwas n Canada. I just don't believed it was major factor.

A visiting NHL team playing in Philadelphia in the 70's is at a disadvantage because of the crowd.
If you read what I wrote, I didn't say the crowds in Europe were a problem. The European press tried to inflame things. The main problem was the inept refereeing and the rules of the time. I'm talking years before the Canada Cups when there actually was a difference.

Again, if you read what I said, you will see that I am saying that there was hardly any differences in the rules by 1976. Isn't that what the question was? That the 1976 Canada Cup was so biased in favour of Canada because of the rules?

Can someone please tell me what rules existed at the Canada Cup that was a disadvantage for the European teams?

You do appear to be objective. I am too. But this notion of the World Championships having legitimacy was too much for me to ignore.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Zine View Post
But we all agree Canada was disadvantaged pre-1970ís. Youíre preaching to the choir, thereís no need to bring it up. It was never the issue.



Címon, donít you think itís a bit ridiculous to argue this point? You honestly need proof that shows playing in front of a home crowd gives a team an extreme advantage?

Alright, I'll bite: Last year 27 out of 30 NHL teams had a better home record than away record. There it is - cut and dry. In fact, this shouldn't even be an issue.




This whole time you've been talking about the disadvantages the Canadians put up with playing in europe (2 man system, larger ice, home crowds & culture, biased referees, etc, etc,). Yet when the situation is reversed it's not a big deal for the Russians to overcome? C'mon.....that homerism at its best. Lets call it like it is; no matter the outcome, both teams were at a huge disadvantage playing away from home.




I'm from the US. XploD looks like he's from Sweden. So, at least on my part, there's no nationalistic homerism. At least your not dealing with some of the insane Russian posters on this board. I think I'm being pretty objective.

ClassicHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-25-2006, 04:17 AM
  #129
XploD
Registered User
 
XploD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 3,242
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClassicHockey View Post
I'm very aware of International rules as opposed to NHL rules and if you thought about it, you would realize that after the 1972 Summit series, there is very little difference - the larger ice surface being the exception. That's why you didn't answer the question.
As said, I included the officiating standards (which you brought up yourself) when I said "rules".
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClassicHockey View Post
I feel that you don't have a good enough grasp of the politics and the ineptitude of European refereeing during the 60's & 70's. Yes, I mention the 60's. How can you conveniently eliminate a decade when the real differences between the two systems was at its height?

You are sticking to the Canadian referees being biased. It seemed to me that you didnt' experience International hockey in the 60's. Maybe you weren't old enough and that isn't your fault. But do you remember the 1972 series at all? The two West German referees were incredibly biased. Just watch the first few minutes of Game 8 for a crash course.
I'm not talking about the damn 60's. Everyone here agrees with what you're saying about everything before '76 so why do you keep bringing it up like we haven't already acknowledged it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClassicHockey View Post
But you are sooooo wrong when you say the Soviets didn't respond to a challenge. The debacle of the non use of pros when Canada pulled out of the Worlds in 1970 was one such instance. And some believe the 1976 Canada Cup was another.
When did I ever say that?


Quote:
Originally Posted by ClassicHockey View Post
The one time since 1954 that the Russians didn't send their best was in 1976 and its a catasrophe. Its miniscule compared to the many times Canada was prevented from sending its best. I don't know how anyone can debate that.
They weren't prevented from sending their best after 1976 and that's the whole point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClassicHockey View Post
I've run up against other European hockey fans who have an axe to grind and jealous over any Canadian success in International hockey. Each time, the person I was debating with didn't have a true understanding of the history of International hockey and politics. International hockey did not start in the 70's. Look up a character named Bunny Ahearne and start from there.
Again, we're not talking about the same era here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClassicHockey View Post
To finish this off with you. The Canada Cup was started because the World Championships had no legitimacy because Canada wasn't competing. I think that was the original question.

Its a simple as that.
The discussion isn't about (and never was about) why the Canada Cup started.

This whole post is you talking about international hockey pre-1976 which I never said anything about. I agree with you on the pre-1976 stuff and I've done it all along. So it's totally meaningless to keep bringing it up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClassicHockey View Post
I was responding to the claim that the Russians were disadvantaged because the Canada Cup iwas n Canada. I just don't believed it was major factor.
But you believe it was a major factor when Canada were facing the same thing in Europe? This is exactly what his point is and this is my biggest problem with you. You display too much homerism to be taken objectively.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClassicHockey View Post
A visiting NHL team playing in Philadelphia in the 70's is at a disadvantage because of the crowd.
If you read what I wrote, I didn't say the crowds in Europe were a problem. The European press tried to inflame things. The main problem was the inept refereeing and the rules of the time. I'm talking years before the Canada Cups when there actually was a difference.

Again, if you read what I said, you will see that I am saying that there was hardly any differences in the rules by 1976. Isn't that what the question was? That the 1976 Canada Cup was so biased in favour of Canada because of the rules?
Neutral locations + neutral refs vs non-neutral locations + non-neutral refs. What would you prefer at any given moment?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClassicHockey View Post
Can someone please tell me what rules existed at the Canada Cup that was a disadvantage for the European teams?
Already addressed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClassicHockey View Post
You do appear to be objective. I am too. But this notion of the World Championships having legitimacy was too much for me to ignore.
Nobody is saying the WC's had legitimacy when judging the nations at the time (post-1976) but that's because Canada didn't send their best.

WC's would have been a slightly better tournament (post-1976) to judge Canada vs Soviet than the CC because of the neutral refs and neutral locations. Of course, the very best scenario would have been if they both would have taken on the challenge of sending their best overseas to play, but as it is now, only Soviet did just that and that's why I didn't like cyclops comment.


Last edited by XploD: 09-25-2006 at 05:39 AM.
XploD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-25-2006, 07:29 AM
  #130
hdw
Registered User
 
hdw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Stockholm
Country: Sweden
Posts: 6,498
vCash: 500
Can't anyone take a step back and think?

It's very hard to compare the heroes of old from any side.

Europan and NA hockey has been quite different games until quite recently.

Different rink size, different rules, different officiating.

NA hockey was far more gritty, physical and pwerful, euro hockey was faster and more technical.

If you took the best NA players from days yonder and dropped 'em on a euro rink, with euro style officiating (it's not the nationality of the judges, it's the way they read the rules) and the NA team spend half the game in the penalty box or being circled by the euros.

If you took the best European players from days yonder and dropped 'em on a NA rink, with NA style officiating, the euros would be run over by a freight train and spend most of the time taking cover.

The Olympics until last years has been silly, since it has been limited to 'amateurs', including east european teams all employed by the army and playing on the 'spare time' while all the best NA players has been out since they where pros.

IIHF WC is still not a true WC, since it's played while the best NHL players are still in playoff (it's getting more even by the years, since more of the best euros are playing in NA).

Canada/World Cup was likewise tilted due to earlier mentioned differences in how the game was played in Europe and in NA.

It's only the last three Olympics that can be seen as neutral competitions.

But they are still 'cup' style, they don't capture the impact of a long grinding season or even a best in 5/7 playoff run.

All that said, I'd say that it's basicly impossible to compare my boyhood hero and greatest fear on the rink, Alexander Ragulin, with Bobby Orr.

They played too different games with different rules on different rinks in different leagues.

IN(nv)HO

hdw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-25-2006, 09:38 AM
  #131
ClassicHockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 591
vCash: 500
Ok, I'm going to say this:

I appreciate the fact that you never got nasty and rude in the discussions.

When I first commented I thought you had some historical knowledge of International hockey and you showed you know generally what happened but not specifically.

We need to set the record straight.

The 1976 Canada Cup was sanctioned by the IIHF with all member nations agreeing to the rules and standards.

The tournament was played under International Rules (although by that time there wasn't much of a difference).

The games were refereed with neutral officials throughout.

In fact, the final game between Czech and Canada was refereed by Dahlberg of Sweden who called back two goals that Canada scored.

I'm moving on.

ClassicHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-25-2006, 10:46 AM
  #132
XploD
Registered User
 
XploD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 3,242
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClassicHockey View Post
The tournament was played under International Rules (although by that time there wasn't much of a difference).
Maybe you're right. I've always thought it was played under NHL rules.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClassicHockey View Post
The games were refereed with neutral officials throughout.

In fact, the final game between Czech and Canada was refereed by Dahlberg of Sweden who called back two goals that Canada scored.
Dahlberg and Karandin refereed 2 games each. All other games were refereed by North American referees, hardly what I would call neutral in an international tournament set up by the NHL.

XploD is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 02:27 PM.

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.