1974 Canada/Soviet Summit

[cam042686]

I wouldnt have even dignified Dombrowski's call nor the man himself in giving him the opportunity to reverse his decision, recant. Wouldnt have wanted to have even have had a conversation with him for fear of being charged with Assault Causing Bodily Harm.... no Sir. Best you walk away and no shame in that. Anyone "branding" Team Canada as quitters for doing so can just eat my shorts. Dont really care. Obviously no sense of honor, integrity. Not playing games under corrupt officials. Not happenin. Taking my Rolls Royce & going home. But good luck with that. Call us when you wanna get real. Embarrassed the Hell out of them & worth the forfeiture. The minute a games integrity is Hijacked like that its over in my book. Everythings then questioned.

I sure can't argue with you here!

Craig Wallace

 

[VMBM]

I'm sure you can get the Series reversed in Canada's favour, if you try hard enough; after all, it was only 4-1-3 (W-L-T) for the Soviets.

 

[cam042686]

I'm sure you can get the Series reversed in Canada's favour, if you try hard enough; after all, it was only 4-1-3 (W-L-T) for the Soviets.

The Soviets were the better team. I can admit that. But if you look at the results game by game you see a different story.

Game 1 - 3-3 tie. Canada controlled play and the Soviets escaped with a tie as Tretiak stood on his head. Frank Mahovlich missed on a breakaway with 35 seconds to go.

Game 2 - Canada wins comfortably 4-1.

Game 3 - Soviets win comfortably 8-5.

Game 4 - Canada blows a 5-2 lead and game is tied 5-5. Coodoos to the Soviets for not giving up.

Game 5 - Soviets clearly dominate and win 3-2. The only reason the game isn't 7-2 or 8-2 is Gerry Cheevers stood on his head and came up with one of the best games of his career.

Game 6 - Read my account of the call on Bruce MacGregor in my book "The Forgotten Summitt." http://www.amazon.com/Forgotten-Sum...79164956&sr=1-1&keywords=the+forgotten+summit

Referee Dombrowski threw this game. You cannot rationally argue otherwise. This was out and out cheating. Up to the call it is a close, evenly played game. Soviets "win" 5-2.

Game 7 - Canada controls play through most of the game. With 1:32 left in the 3rd and the game tied 4-4 "all hell breaks loose." Referee Tom Brown blows the whistle. The Canadians storm around the time keepers bench saying the clock ran for 4 seconds after the whistle. (Down to 1:28.) Brown orders 2 seconds put back on the clock. Timekeeper says that can't be done. Brown then orders 2 seconds to be put on the penalty box clock. That clock is to run for 2 seconds when play starts and then the main clock. Team Canada yells for 2 more seconds. Brown refuses. Play starts. Then in the final 2 seconds Bobby Hull takes a pass from Paul Henderson and beats Tretiak. The red and green lights both go on! Referee Brown rules the goal doesn't count. The game ended before the goal was scored. Replays show this is an error. Bobby Hull clearly scores before the green light comes on. Canada should have won 5-4.

Interesting facts here.

I. As Canada protested the clock running on, the Soviet's were smirking. Was the "fix in" here? (Why did Mikhailov go over and talk to the timekeeper before the 3rd period start?)

2. This was the only game were the 10th of a second clock didn't work. If it works Hull's goal counts.

3. The horn announcing the end of the period didn't sound at the end of the 3rd. Why not if the period was over?

4. The lights were not synchronized as in North American rinks. In North American rinks when the green light goes on the red cannot be turned on. Not the case here.

Anyway if Hulls' goal counts now Game 8 was meaning. As it was both teams didn't dress their best for Game 8.

Craig Wallace

 

[cam042686]

Here is an account from Sports Illustrated on the 74 Summit.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1089046/index.htm

Craig Wallace

 

[VMBM]

Speaking of Viktor Dombrovski, the Finns have an ax to grind with him as well, as he disallowed a goal by Finland (Hannu Kapanen) in the game vs. USA in the 1976 Olympics; USA won 5-4 and it cost Finland the bronze. That most certainly was only a bad decision, though, as the call had no effect whatsoever in regard to Soviet Union.

In 1979, Dombrovski was the ref in the 2nd game of the Challenge Cup. Now, the Canadian commentators are already BEFOREHAND all but determined that he is going to do a bad job in the game. Then after the first period they are sort of applauding, because at one point Dombrovski didn't give a penalty to an NHL player, even though in their minds, the player would've deserved it, heh. I find that a bit, eh, funny and strange. Anyway, I don't remember anyone claiming that Dombrovski decided the game (and anyone saying that should be shot, of course).

This YouTube clip shows the sometimes, should I say, overhysterical reaction to European refs and their calls by the Canadian media...

 

[Den]

Here is a question though. What do people in Russia say about this series?

Most people, even many fans, don't know it happened

 

[Sentinel]

A pretty cool moment. Kharlamov and Hull interviewed after Game 1

I see flaws about the translation though. I would translate the word "корректно" that Kharlamov used to describe Canada's play as "gentlemanly," not "correctly." And others.

 

[jkrx]

I have often felt that if I was Billy Harris I would have pulled my team of the ice in Game 6. And we would not have gone back out there until Dombrowski walked me though the rule book and explained his call against Bruce MacGregor, based on the rule book. And if he wouldn't explain the call then we'd leave. I realize Team Canada and the WHA would have been branded as "quitters" but Dombrowski was an out and out cheat. No matter how well Team Canada played Dombowski wasn't going to let them win that game.

Craig Wallace

Pretty ironic if Canada had walked out of that game after the heavy barrage of excrements thrown at the soviet from canadian players, fans and media after the Flyers game wouldn't you think? I don't know why people believe that Canada would've won the series or the game if not for that obviously bad call. But then again we are talking about people who agreed with the announcers that getting penalties for slashing a player over his legs and back was a bad call.

 

[Sentinel]

No kidding. Having watched a couple of those games, I thought the refs were actually very forgiving of Canada's rough stuff.

 

[VMBM]

Pretty ironic if Canada had walked out of that game after the heavy barrage of excrements thrown at the soviet from canadian players, fans and media after the Flyers game wouldn't you think? I don't know why people believe that Canada would've won the series or the game if not for that obviously bad call. But then again we are talking about people who agreed with the announcers that getting penalties for slashing a player over his legs and back was a bad call.

Well, saying that Dombrovski was not going to let Canada win sounds a bit too much, as USSR were leading 3-2 and were on a power play, when the Vasiliev incident happened, and there was still plenty of time left. But I haven't watched the game for a while, so I can't say that much about it now.

Also, in game seven, were the Soviets really that desperate and saw already beforehand (i.e. Mikhailov talking to the timekeeper before the start of the 3rd period) that they were going to lose in the closing moments, if they didn't cheat? It's an interesting story, and I'm sure they knew in their hearts that the goal by Hull should've counted, but... I don't know. Maybe they also felt that they were now 'even', especially since it was the same ref, who had disallowed the obvious goal by USSR in game 2.

 

[cam042686]

Well, saying that Dombrovski was not going to let Canada win sounds a bit too much, as USSR were leading 3-2 and were on a power play, when the Vasiliev incident happened, and there was still plenty of time left. But I haven't watched the game for a while, so I can't say that much about it now.

Also, in game seven, were the Soviets really that desperate and saw already beforehand (i.e. Mikhailov talking to the timekeeper before the start of the 3rd period) that they were going to lose in the closing moments, if they didn't cheat? It's an interesting story, and I'm sure they knew in their hearts that the goal by Hull should've counted, but... I don't know. Maybe they also felt that they were now 'even', especially since it was the same ref, who had disallowed the obvious goal by USSR in game 2.

You are correct - the Soviets were ahead 3-2 and on a power play when the infamous call was made. If Dombrowski follows the rule book the call should have been:

1. Minor to Vasiliev that he had already signaled.
2. Five minute major for fighting to Vasiliev and game misconduct.
3. 10 Minute major to Vasiliev for throwing the first punch.

Thus the penalty to Mark Howe which Canada was serving is nullified and then they have over 10 minutes of power play time to try and tie the game. Instead Dombrowski gives Vasiliev and MacGregor 5 minute roughing majors. That leaves Canada another player short - death on that big ice! (How is MacGregor given a roughing major when he didn't drop his gloves or throw a punch?

Even up to this call Dombrowski hadn't called a single penalty against the USSR resulting in a Team Canada power play- and he wouldn't until the game was settled in the 3rd period. He wasn't going to let Canada win.

It's too bad as the Soviets were the better team - they didn't need a referee to cheat to help them win.

Craig Wallace

 

[Pominville Knows]

Those canadian jerseys are gorgeous.

 

[jkrx]

You are correct - the Soviets were ahead 3-2 and on a power play when the infamous call was made. If Dombrowski follows the rule book the call should have been:

1. Minor to Vasiliev that he had already signaled.
2. Five minute major for fighting to Vasiliev and game misconduct.
3. 10 Minute major to Vasiliev for throwing the first punch.

Thus the penalty to Mark Howe which Canada was serving is nullified and then they have over 10 minutes of power play time to try and tie the game. Instead Dombrowski gives Vasiliev and MacGregor 5 minute roughing majors. That leaves Canada another player short - death on that big ice! (How is MacGregor given a roughing major when he didn't drop his gloves or throw a punch?

Even up to this call Dombrowski hadn't called a single penalty against the USSR resulting in a Team Canada power play- and he wouldn't until the game was settled in the 3rd period. He wasn't going to let Canada win.

It's too bad as the Soviets were the better team - they didn't need a referee to cheat to help them win.

Craig Wallace

In game 3 I dont believe there was single call on a soviet until they took the lead... Canada tried to cheat?

 

[cam042686]

In game 3 I dont believe there was single call on a soviet until they took the lead... Canada tried to cheat?

You are incorrect here. In the first period the only penalties called were against Team Canada. Andre Lacroix at 5:02, Rick Smith at 13:25, and Mike Walton at 19:16.

Just after Bruce MacGregor scored a short handed goal at 14:58, Alexander Maltsev was pulled down on a breakaway by Pat Stapleton. Now Maltsev got a shot off which Team Canada goalie Don McLeod saved. Yet Victor Dombrowski ordered a penalty shot - a clear violation of the rules! The rule book is clear. In this situation if the offensive forward gets a shot off there is no penalty shot. Dombrowski as he was prone to do, ignored the rule book and ordered the penalty shot. The only rationale being was in Game 2, Mike Walton was pulled down on a breakaway by Valery Vasiliev (before he got a shot off) and a penalty shot was awarded. I guess Victor Dombrowski was "evening things up."

Craig Wallace

 

[cam042686]

Talking about Dombrowski and his officiating here are the penalty stats from Games 3 and 6 that he worked.

Game 3

First Period
Andre Lacroix - 5:02
Rick Smith 13:25
Mike Walton 19:16

Second Period
Al Hamilton 3:26
John McKenzie 5:49
Victor Kuznetsov 5:49
Vladimir Shadrin 8:16
John McKenzie - 13:24
Yuri Lebedev 13:24

Third Period
Victor Kuznetsov - 12:20
Vladimir Lutchenko - 18:56

Canada had one power play when the game was still in doubt - the penalty against Shadrin when the game was tied 2-2. By the time Dombrowksi sent Kuznetsov off in the 3rd the Soviets were up 7-2.

Game 6

First Period
Marty Howe 0:53
Rick Smith 16:38
Marc Tardif 16:38 (misconduct for questioning Smith's penalty.)

Second Period
Mark Howe 12:22
Valery Vasiliev 12:44
Bruce MacGregor 12:44

Third Period
Rick Smith 10:54
Valery Kharlamov 10:54
Yuri Lebedev 15:04
Marty Howe 15:04

Hmm does the above resemble neutral officiating?

Another point - when Dombrowski called penalties against the USSR they were usually called in "tandem" with a call against Team Canada. So the stats would reflect calls against the USSR but the reality was somewhat different. (Coach Ron Ingram of the San Diego Mariners pointed this out after the Soviet Nationals beat San Diego 6-3 in January 1977.) He said that was Dombrowski's pattern in the 74 series and in the games we worked during the Nationals tour of the WHA in 1976-77.

Craig Wallace

 

[Anderson9]

After the final whistle of the game 6 it wasn't actually a "brawl" between Rick Lay ang Valeriy Harlamov it was simply an unprovoked assault that really made one feel actually ashamed of not of the whole squad itself but for whole Canadian Hockey. I will never forget that feeling of defatigation at the sight of that mean brutal and vicious assault that took place minutes after Kharlamov scored a real beauty of a goal, on the fly, having worked himself free of a molesting defender. The only words I had for Ricky Ley he was a creeping classless skunk. The opinionated Soviet announcer, Nikolai Ozerov, who never missed a chance of bringing cold war in the game.... at the time of the assault ... he stayed SILENT! As if to say, we Russians play ice hockey, what kind of game do you ever expect from the Canadian brutes is beyond my comprehension, HE SOUNDED SO RIGHT.

 

[Sentinel]

Hmm does the above resemble neutral officiating?

Craig Wallace

Has it ever occurred to you that Canadians were simply gooning it up and were a dirtier team? Soviets were better and didn't need to resort to dirty play, like WHA did.

 

[cam042686]

After the final whistle of the game 6 it wasn't actually a "brawl" between Rick Lay ang Valeriy Harlamov it was simply an unprovoked assault that really made one feel actually ashamed of not of the whole squad itself but for whole Canadian Hockey. I will never forget that feeling of defatigation at the sight of that mean brutal and vicious assault that took place minutes after Kharlamov scored a real beauty of a goal, on the fly, having worked himself free of a molesting defender. The only words I had for Ricky Ley he was a creeping classless skunk. The opinionated Soviet announcer, Nikolai Ozerov, who never missed a chance of bringing cold war in the game.... at the time of the assault ... he stayed SILENT! As if to say, we Russians play ice hockey, what kind of game do you ever expect from the Canadian brutes is beyond my comprehension, HE SOUNDED SO RIGHT.

While you cannot defend what Rick Ley did at the end of Game 6 (how can one defend assault?) there are always two sides to a story. As Jim Coleman the long time Canadian sports writer pointed out, the first punch thrown in Summit 74 wasn't by a Canadian - it was by Valery Vasiliev in his unprovoked attack on Bruce MacGregor. (How did Nikolai Ozerov announce that?) As well, while it doesn't excuse what Rick Ley did, Brad Selwood told me Kharlamov speared Ley just before the final horn sounded to end the game. (Other media reports stated Kharlamov waited until the horn sounded, then tapped Ley on the back, pointed at the score board and laughed at him.)

During Game 6 Kharlamov played super, and made Ley look really bad on a number of plays. I think Ley lashed out at the end, and again what he did was wrong - fighting is always wrong - but there was another side to it.

Craig Wallace

 

[VMBM]

After the final whistle of the game 6 it wasn't actually a "brawl" between Rick Lay ang Valeriy Harlamov it was simply an unprovoked assault that really made one feel actually ashamed of not of the whole squad itself but for whole Canadian Hockey. I will never forget that feeling of defatigation at the sight of that mean brutal and vicious assault that took place minutes after Kharlamov scored a real beauty of a goal, on the fly, having worked himself free of a molesting defender. The only words I had for Ricky Ley he was a creeping classless skunk. The opinionated Soviet announcer, Nikolai Ozerov, who never missed a chance of bringing cold war in the game.... at the time of the assault ... he stayed SILENT! As if to say, we Russians play ice hockey, what kind of game do you ever expect from the Canadian brutes is beyond my comprehension, HE SOUNDED SO RIGHT.

Bobby Clarke in 1972, Rick Ley in 1974, Ed Van Impe in 1976, Wilf Paiement et co. in the 1977 WC... in the early days of the 'hockey's Cold War' there always seemed to be that kind of crap... and very often it would be Valeri Kharlamov at the receiving end. Also, hitting after the play is stopped, hitting the goal-scorer after a goal (e.g. Khomutov in the 1987 CC finals), what the hell is that?

Russians were no angels too, but they were ALMOST that compared to Canadians. Or at least a lot more subtle, heh.

And since there has been so much ifs, buts and maybes, as far as WHA's Team Canada is concerned, here are a couple of Soviet 'what if's':

game 1

What if the ice isn't "wet and sticky", does Mikhailov score on the breakaway in the beginning of the 3rd period - which makes it 4-2 - and thus, do the Soviets win the game? (I know Canada dominated the 3rd period, but so what?)

game 2

What if Petrov's goal in the early 3rd period counts - which makes it 2-3 - can the Soviets come back? (again, I know the Soviets hardly even deserved a tie, let alone a win, but so it goes sometimes)

I'm sure I can come up with more, if needed.

 

[cam042686]

Has it ever occurred to you that Canadians were simply gooning it up and were a dirtier team? Soviets were better and didn't need to resort to dirty play, like WHA did.

If you read my posts and my book on the series you will see that I do say the Soviets were the better team. And yes the Canadians played a rougher style so they would normally take more penalties. But as I said in my book, it wasn't so much the penalties Dombrowski called against Canada (although the call on MacGregor was outrageous) it was he refused to make calls against the USSR. For example in the 3rd period of Game 6 Yuri Lebedev charged across the ice, left his feet and leaped at Serge Bernier driving him into the boards right in front of Dombrowski. No call was made against Lebedev. Just before Vasilev attacked MacGregor he punched Ralph Backstrom in the face right in front of Dombroswki. Again no call was made.


http://www.amazon.com/Forgotten-Sum...80476788&sr=1-1&keywords=the+forgotten+summit

 

[cam042686]

Bobby Clarke in 1972, Rick Ley in 1974, Ed Van Impe in 1976, Wilf Paiement et co. in the 1977 WC... in the early days of the 'hockey's Cold War' there always seemed to be that kind of crap... and very often it would be Valeri Kharlamov at the receiving end. Also, hitting after the play is stopped, hitting the goal-scorer after a goal (e.g. Khomutov in the 1987 CC finals), what the hell is that?

Russians were no angels too, but they were ALMOST that compared to Canadians. Or at least a lot more subtle, heh.

And since there has been so much ifs, buts and maybes, as far as WHA's Team Canada is concerned, here are a couple of Soviet 'what if's':

game 1

What if the ice isn't "wet and sticky", does Mikhailov score on the breakaway in the beginning of the 3rd period - which makes it 4-2 - and thus, do the Soviets win the game? (I know Canada dominated the 3rd period, but so what?)

game 2

What if Petrov's goal in the early 3rd period counts - which makes it 2-3 - can the Soviets come back? (again, I know the Soviets hardly even deserved a tie, let alone a win, but so it goes sometimes)

I'm sure I can come up with more, if needed.

No doubt about it, the various versions of Team Canada were no angels and they certainly seemed to "have it in" for Valery Kharlamov. What Clarke did to him in 72 was an absolute disgrace. Any Canadian with an ounce of ethics hangs their head in shame at sharing nationality with Clarke.

The Soviets were no angels however. Boris Mikhailov kicking Gary Bergman in Game 7 of 1972 was beyond belief. Rick Smith told me he nearly lost his mind in Game 4 of the 74 Summit when Mikhailov viciously speared Gerry Cheevers in the back of leg and then laughed at him. He really hurt Cheevers with that and Smith told me if that occurred in the NHL or WHA he would have attacked Mikhailov for that.

I do mention the sticky ice and Petrov's goal in Game 2 being disallowed in my book. Tom Brown the referee in Game 2 blew that call and it could have turned things around.

Craig Wallace

 

[Killion]

Any Canadian with an ounce of ethics hangs their head in shame at sharing nationality with Clarke.

... ah, not so fast there. I consider myself (a Canadian) to be ethically & morally centered, and I certainly dont "hang my head in shame" because of Clarkes' slash on Kharlamov nor any other atrocities any member of Team Canada 72 nor any other version & the players that followed thereafter may or may not have committed. You have to look at these thing properly & put them into context. The context of the era & times, from socio political to sport and beyond just hockey itself. You'd had years of Cold War frustrations. East vs West. Transcended just hockey. The Russians every bit as dirty as Canada though I will say the Canadians definitely started much of it. You cant hold them up to todays standards & then excoriate their wicked play as that is exactly how the game was played from Junior through Pro at that time. What Clarke & Ley, all of them were brought up with.

Didnt matter if your name was Boris or Brian to Bobby Clarke or Ricky Ley, either tactically or in retribution you, the opponent, were goin down. Cant beat you with skill? We'll beat you by hook or by crook and if that means getting down & dirty so be it. Thats the way hockey was in Canada back then. Or if evenly matched in talent & some guy breaks The Code? Drop em. Nothing new in targeting the opponents top player or players and if you can, put him out of the game. Thats just the way it was & still is with some. Why should I or any other Canadian feel shame for that? I dont think so. Was it right what Clarke et al did? Of course not & had the Russians been playing by North American rules & standards shouldve been a bench clearing brawl with Clarke being sent off on a stretcher. But to feel "shame" for what members of Team Canada did if your a Canadian or "shame" for what some of the Soviet era players did if your a Russian? I dont think so. No reason to be putting that hair shirt on & forever Crucifying the actors involved. The past is a strange place, they do things differently back there.

 

[cam042686]

... ah, not so fast there. I consider myself (a Canadian) to be ethically & morally centered, and I certainly dont "hang my head in shame" because of Clarkes' slash on Kharlamov nor any other atrocities any member of Team Canada 72 nor any other version & the players that followed thereafter may or may not have committed. You have to look at these thing properly & put them into context. The context of the era & times, from socio political to sport and beyond just hockey itself. You'd had years of Cold War frustrations. East vs West. Transcended just hockey. The Russians every bit as dirty as Canada though I will say the Canadians definitely started much of it. You cant hold them up to todays standards & then excoriate their wicked play as that is exactly how the game was played from Junior through Pro at that time. What Clarke & Ley, all of them were brought up with.

Didnt matter if your name was Boris or Brian to Bobby Clarke or Ricky Ley, either tactically or in retribution you, the opponent, were goin down. Cant beat you with skill? We'll beat you by hook or by crook and if that means getting down & dirty so be it. Thats the way hockey was in Canada back then. Or if evenly matched in talent & some guy breaks The Code? Drop em. Nothing new in targeting the opponents top player or players and if you can, put him out of the game. Thats just the way it was & still is with some. Why should I or any other Canadian feel shame for that? I dont think so. Was it right what Clarke et al did? Of course not & had the Russians been playing by North American rules & standards shouldve been a bench clearing brawl with Clarke being sent off on a stretcher. But to feel "shame" for what members of Team Canada did if your a Canadian or "shame" for what some of the Soviet era players did if your a Russian? I dont think so. No reason to be putting that hair shirt on & forever Crucifying the actors involved. The past is a strange place, they do things differently back there.

We can agree to disagree here. I am an advocate of the style of hockey preached by Father David Bauer and Billy Harris in 1974. That is "we will try to win but not at any price."

I think what Clarke did, cheapened our victory as we will never know if we would have won that series facing a healthy Kharlamov. (Ron Ellis was doing a good job checking him so there is a good chance we would have. But Clarke made sure we'd never know for sure.) It was also stupid to do this as imagine the screams of anguish if the Soviets responded and say broke Phil Esposito's leg.

Craig Wallace

 

[Den]

... ah, not so fast there. I consider myself (a Canadian) to be ethically & morally centered, and I certainly dont "hang my head in shame" because of Clarkes' slash on Kharlamov nor any other atrocities any member of Team Canada 72 nor any other version & the players that followed thereafter may or may not have committed. You have to look at these thing properly & put them into context. The context of the era & times, from socio political to sport and beyond just hockey itself. You'd had years of Cold War frustrations. East vs West. Transcended just hockey. The Russians every bit as dirty as Canada though I will say the Canadians definitely started much of it. You cant hold them up to todays standards & then excoriate their wicked play as that is exactly how the game was played from Junior through Pro at that time. What Clarke & Ley, all of them were brought up with.

Didnt matter if your name was Boris or Brian to Bobby Clarke or Ricky Ley, either tactically or in retribution you, the opponent, were goin down. Cant beat you with skill? We'll beat you by hook or by crook and if that means getting down & dirty so be it. Thats the way hockey was in Canada back then. Or if evenly matched in talent & some guy breaks The Code? Drop em. Nothing new in targeting the opponents top player or players and if you can, put him out of the game. Thats just the way it was & still is with some. Why should I or any other Canadian feel shame for that? I dont think so. Was it right what Clarke et al did? Of course not & had the Russians been playing by North American rules & standards shouldve been a bench clearing brawl with Clarke being sent off on a stretcher. But to feel "shame" for what members of Team Canada did if your a Canadian or "shame" for what some of the Soviet era players did if your a Russian? I dont think so. No reason to be putting that hair shirt on & forever Crucifying the actors involved. The past is a strange place, they do things differently back there.

Ehh... This is good writing. I'll copy it as a template for justification of unjustifiable Come time , and Crosby is taken out by a sharpened coin thrown from the stands in Sochi: I'll switch some names here and paste it

 

[Killion]

We can agree to disagree here. I am an advocate of the style of hockey preached by Father David Bauer and Billy Harris in 1974. That is "we will try to win but not at any price."

I think what Clarke did, cheapened our victory as we will never know if we would have won that series facing a healthy Kharlamov. (Ron Ellis was doing a good job checking him so there is a good chance we would have. But Clarke made sure we'd never know for sure.) It was also stupid to do this as imagine the screams of anguish if the Soviets responded and say broke Phil Esposito's leg.

Craig Wallace

Ya Im not going to try & defend Bobby Clarke, that was a despicable thing to do, absolutely HOWEVER it was not outside the norm of the serious Junior through Pro ranks of that era, previously through the history of the game itself, part of the culture of the game in Canada when you were coming up. You did "win at all costs" & that absolutely included deliberately targeting the oppositions best players by running your mouth at them, with the body, putting them right through the boards if possible.

Clarke was an elite player who made room for himself with his stick which he wielded like a scalpel or a baseball bat as the circumstances dictated. Beyond potty mouth to boot. Total Guttersnipe. Language that would peel paint. Got in peoples heads. Very effective. Malicious, viscous little Woody Woodpecker. Absolutely. A product of the time & era, the prevailing environment & attitudes. Pro's & up & comer Junior, indeed the entire hockey establishment had no time for the utopian philosophies of a Lloyd Percival, Carl Brewer, Father David Bauer or a Billy Harris. You went out there to WIN and usually borderline controlled Mayhem was the name of the game if you found yourself overwhelmed. The Code strictly enforced if & when any player took it to far or cheap shotted someone.

Two handers behind the play, an Eddie Shack type jumping on a players back or knocking him silly, elbows up in front of the net or corners was all part n' parcel of the game & if you didnt like it get off the ice. This wasnt "shinny". Hockey was & still is to some extent a Blood Sport. You tacitly accepted that when you moved on from amateur. That ya, there were guys out there who were psycho & wouldnt think twice about taking you right out of the game given a chance. The Russians didnt play like that, understand it, but tell ya what? They learned real fast. I rember watching the 72 Summit and being disgusted with Canada to the point that after about Game 3 I stopped watching, only returning to watch the final 2 games. Out of shape discombobulated Canucksters Gooning it up because they were getting beat to the puck, losing control, resorting to the lowest common denominator.

At the time and in retrospect I felt it wouldve served the game far better had Canada simply iced the Montreal Canadiens under Pollock with some additions & deletions to their existing line-up. Though Sinden had had international experience, never felt he was the right choice, much less employing the services of John Ferguson. You kidding me? You wanna stage a "friendly" with that guy & Sinden behind the bench, influencing player selection, strategies & tactics? Dont think so. At the NHL level, minor-pro or Junior sure, great guys. Brilliant. But not on the international stage. No Siree Bob... all that being said, what happened happened. I just dont think its right to continue to crucify Clarke or a guy like Rick Ley, nor any of the Soviet players who committed fouls in the heat of the moment some 40yrs ago.... was the first real meeting between the then reigning hockey super powers and Russia had to earn its stripes. They did so magnificently, and the game is better for it. In fact, never mind the final score, in so many respects they were the actual winners of the 72 Summit.