McMetal
Writer of Wrongs
- Sep 29, 2015
- 14,161
- 12,191
Well, if they lose in OT, then you cannot make that argument because they lost the game. You can't say "He won gold so he succeeded" when he didn't win gold. Then it would be very appropriate to ask what he could have done differently to turn that silver into a gold.Man, these are some of the worst arguments. So keeping Makar as the 6th/7th defenseman when he leads the entire team in points the game prior, is playing solid defense on both the right and left side, while Bean and Clague struggle almost very game, Foote struggles to move the puck every game, Fabbro and Mete are banged up, and it's 1-1 and you're scoreless on the PP in the gold medal game, unable to get shots on net, and it was the right decisions simply because that was his plan before the tournament even started?
So you're arguing that not adjusting your strategy despite overwhelming evidence that you should is a good decision? Supported only by the fact that Timmins made a great play with less than two minutes in the third period of the gold medal game? If they lose in OT how do you make that argument?
Hockey is a team sport, and the accomplishments players value most are team awards. This tournament, despite what you seem to think, was a team event. Team Canada was run by Hockey Canada, and I hate to break it to you, but they DO NOT CARE about anything besides winning gold. Not player development, not draft position, not appeasing NHL teams or fanbases. I don't know why you seem to think Ducharme has an obligation to use the players you think he should use in the pursuit of his one and only job.