jasonponty
Registered User
- Oct 24, 2008
- 51
- 0
Roy's exclusion puzzles me.
It is puzzling indeed. The only explanation I've ever read is an assertation that Avalanche GM Pierre Lacroix made in June 1996: "It was a clique thing, Sather and some of his pals... Sather got a couple of his favorites on there, but forgot about the best in the world."
The last game was probably the best game I've ever personally attended (even though the wrong guys won!), it was played at such a high level.
You rave about "skill" and then post videos of line brawls and high stick incidents? Insane indeed... Thank god more and more people realise that it's sport, not war, so that this kind of, ehm, animosity has vanished from the international scene.
Russia defeated Slovakia (7-4) and Finland (5-0), hardly a sign that they didn't care.
Good riddance, the one-game format is better.As it seems unlikely that the Olympics would ever move away from a single-game elimination final and since the same format was used in the 2004 World Cup, it could very well be that the 1996 tournament is the last time we will ever see a best-on-best series between countries.
True, and in fact Germany did not even finish bottom in their group and thrashed the Czech Republic, but the fact remains that the World Cup was invitational. It would be taken more seriously if it had actual rules to determine who makes it and who does not.3. They were the top eight teams in the world at the time.
The Czechs were terrible, they lost 7-1 to Germany who really shouldnt have even been there. Hasek was missing and that was a big part of the reason, also Jagr never really had an impact at international level.
Thank you, and yes this would have helped. Sweden Russia in one pool and USA Canada in the other. That way there would have been some parity (instead we got...parody).
Good riddance, the one-game format is better.
I was very young when this Tournament was going on can someone fill me in on how Sakic fresh off one of the greatest playoffs ever was held to only 2g and 2a in 8games?? Was it fatique? Does anyone remember who his linemates were and what his ice time was that tournament????
He centered a line with Eric Lindros and Brendan Shanahan, I think.
what was the incentive for players to show up and care?
what was the incentive for players to show up and care?
Absentees already mentioned: Mario Lemieux (back issues), Paul Kariya (abdominal muscle strain), Ray Bourque (declined invitation), Patrick Roy (not invited? not interested?). Then you've got the players who pulled out just before the World Cup tournament started:
Allan MacInnis: Attended training camp and played in exhibition games, but had to pull out late in August due to an infection that reportedly caused him lose 12 pounds weight in one week.
Ron Francis: Attended training camp and played in exhibition games, but decided to pull out with his effectivity limited due to an injury (rib? knee? I've read different causes). Francis stated: "If it was the NHL playoffs, you'd play with it, but you don't know how effective you'd be."
Defense:
Coffey, Stevens, Niedermayer, Desjardins were no brainers. With Bourque and MacInnis missing, Rob Blake and Adam Foote slipped into the lineup, while Ed Jovanovski (20), Lyle Odelein (28) and Sylvain Côté (30) acted as substitutes. The inclusion of Odelein was labeled as a "mystery" even back in 1996.
Offense:
Gretzky was past his prime and Lemieux was sorely missed, but the depth is impressive nevertheless: Messier, Sakic, Yzerman, Lindros, Fleury ... the roster speaks for itself.
It was good but the two conferences were unequally divided:
The top 3 teams (including Russia) were in the "North American" pool, whereas the rest were in the European pool.
I mean #3 (NA pool) Russia beat #2 (Euro pool) Finland 5-0, there was a huge gap in talent difference. The Czech Republic would have been romped in the North American pool so badly, in fact they had a -13 goal differential in 3 games in the Euro pool.
The Euro pool teams went 0-3 in the playoffs and were outscored 12-3. Sweden basically got a buy into the semis and were an OT goal away from playing for the championship.
In hindsight yes it was very uneven.
But I'd venture it wasn't as clearcut before the tournament. The Euro pool had the reigning World Champions (Czechs), the 1995 World Champions (Finland) and the reigning Olympic Champions (Sweden). On paper, this was the pool with the most success in the years leading up to the tournament.
Also, the US hadn't really established itself as a real contender up to this point. There was usually of a top 4 consisting of Can, Cze, Swe and Rus, followed by the US and Finland. In the middle of the 90s the US and Finland caught up. Both pools had two of the traditional top 4 countries.
Good riddance, the one-game format is better.