Oh please...

[McGuillicuddy]

Let me first say that I do think it is very unfortunate that the Russia goal was not counted last night. I don't think you will find any Canada fans that like to see a game tainted by that kind of event. We want to win, yes, but we want it to be done fairly. However, reading Malkin's comments after the game, he is either just a kid letting off steam after an emotional loss, or he is a complete idiot:

"We were ready that the referee might not be on our side," said Malkin".

(from http://www.tsn.ca/world_jrs/news_story/?ID=149593&hubname=world_jrs)

At this level, and in this day and age, refs are never on anybody's side. Ever. They are professionals. Anybody who thinks that a referee makes a conscious decision to be biased against a particular team is either stupid or paranoid. Like everybody else in the world, referees try to be the best they can be at their jobs, and that means to call it as they see it. It is not in the best interest of a referee's career to be biased at any time!! That is not to say that they are always correct, because we know that's not true. But anybody who thinks that refs are "out to get" you, or are "against" you, is just looking for excuses.

Click to read more...

 

[Phanuthier*]

Wow, if anyone ever wondered why Russia lost, this is why. They were probably too busy crying about the goal that they forgot to play the game.

At the end of the game I had tears in my eyes," said defenceman Andrei Zubarev.

Just a day earlier Zubarev had said that historically the Russians were more skilled than Canada. Khudobin had even boasted Russia would "dominate" Canada.

Goaltender Anton Khudobin was so distraught he tossed his glove, stick and mask at the Russian bench. Several team officials had to console him.

Coach Sergey Mikhalev argued that a disallowed goal could have swung the game in Russia's favour.

"This goal would have had an outcome on the game," said Mikhalev. "Team Canada would have had to play differently."

You still had half a game, coach.

"We were ready that the referee might not be on our side," said Malkin. "Of course it didn't help our motivation. Nonetheless, we fought back and tried our best."

Umm, captain, isn't it your job to talk to the ref?

Did you know it was in, Malkin? If you didn't, how would the ref know?

Defenceman Alexei Emelin said the loud, soldout crowd of 18,630 intimidated the Russians in what was a physical, high-energy game. The Candians hit everything in red, disrupting the flow of the Russian attack like boulders in a river.

... and you didn't figure that out when you lost 8-1?

 

[Oilers1*]

You know, I blame this on the coach. He should have had the players fired up and ready to overcome some adversity after that goal was disallowed. . . not ready to use it as an excuse if they lost. I'm a Canada fan and I honestly didn't see the Russians being truly dangerous after that point.

 

[Metallian*]

I honestly didn't see the Russians being truly dangerous after that point.

Which is the argument that that goal killed them

 

[McGuillicuddy]

Which is the argument that that goal killed them

Yes, but that is their own fault! You don't just pack up and go home after a bit of adversity with half the game to go! Do you honestly believe that Brent Sutter's squad would have self-destructed so thoroughly if faced with a similar situation? No way.

 

[Metallian*]

It is a mental killer though, you have to admit. They came out strong in the 1st and somehow ended up down 2 goals. They came out strong in the second and score, only for it to not be counted. Then right after they take a stupid penalty, and get scored on again.

It's enough to make anyone depressed.

 

[quat]

unfortunately this kind of response is entirely too human. Instead of taking a lesson from your "failure", one looks for things to be rigged against one's efforts. It breeds a culture of defeat, and feeds unhealthy emotions like anger and hatered.

If one accepts that, well, perhaps I could have worked a little harder, or perhaps taken a different approach then things would be different... and next time I'll have to be ready to broaden my approach and simply keep trying, then how can one really feel like a failure?

If it's something beyond your control, or as suggested, in the hands of another all powerful manipulator... well then, how can you not but feel foolish and weak? One is admitting you can never win in such a senario.

I watched the whole game, and it was certainly clear to me that the Russian squad was a far more talented group of players. Overall they were faster, stronger and had more skills. They weren't afraid of physical play, yet when they ran into some good goaltending and had a couple of break downs in their own end, you could see them begin to doubt themselves.

It's unfortunate for them that they let that happen, because they were easily the domant team in the first period. The Canadian squad only held there own by playing exceptional positional, physical hockey.

How many times in the first did I watch the Russian forcheck force turnovers? They were passing extremely well and skating like fiends.

Not to diminish what Canada did at all, because they played one of the best team games I've ever watched. They simply did not stop skating both ends of the ice as well as playing the body. One certainly got the sense that this team would play at this tempo almost the whole game.

I really knew the Russian guys were done when they had three men skating hard into the Canadian end, only to take a slap shot just inside the blue line... against a hot goalie...

One surmises that the Russians were simply not "prepared" to give the necessary effort, and by this I mean by the coach.

Talent will only take you so far, and when you are competing at anything at this level, without the necessary effort, you simply won't win.

Think about how much the Russian kids could take from this game if their coach and they, honestly assessed the game. Well, it seems that they're not going to learn anything from losing this game, and that is an even bigger loss in my eyes.

 

[quat]

It is a mental killer though, you have to admit. They came out strong in the 1st and somehow ended up down 2 goals. They came out strong in the second and score, only for it to not be counted. Then right after they take a stupid penalty, and get scored on again.

It's enough to make anyone depressed.

Somehow? You mean like the goal fairy delivered them to the wrong team?

Man, that Russian squad had enough top level talent to win this game. So what they got down a couple of goals... the dissalowed one should have (and did), light a fire under their asses. The game isn't just about goal scoring... it's not just a shoot out. It's preventing them as a team.

The only way the Russians didn't stack up was on defence, or rather, their defensive game. Losing 8 - 1 gave their coach and most of their players an obvious example of what they needed to fix. If those guys spent a little time practicing which man to take in a variety of situations, they wouldn't have had the first two goals go in. ie They simply didn't play smart enough to win.

Any goal scored against your team is going to be deflating if you allow it to be. Why give up? It's not like guys like Malkin can't score a hat-trick in a period and a half.

It's doing a huge disservice to your team and the players to dismiss a loss as beyond their control. It's a losing attitude.

 

[McGuillicuddy]

No doubt it can be deflating to have that happen to you. And the game would obviously have been different had the goal counted. My beef, however, is with the assertion that the referees can be "against" you in this tournament. It is not in the best interest of ANY referee's career to be seen as biased in any fashion. Perceived impartiality is of paramount importance to a referee's success. No referee cares about the outcome of a WJHC game more than they do about the welfare of their career (and thus their income and, in turn, their families!). Anybody who thinks otherwise is a complete and total idiot, and likely a budding conspiracy theorist.

(yes, I know this post is similar to one I made in another thread, but that post is buried on page 3465354 or whatever, so I wanted to make it again :p. So sue me ).

 

[Slay]

The reason that Canadians changed the referee already means that they wanted his benevolence. So basically the first one who questioned referee was Canadian side and probably Sutter himself. IMHO the referee didn't made a good job. And I am not talking about missed goal. I didn't like what kind of job he done especially in the 1st period. His bias or unprofessionalism stood out to me (few missed calls and few "fantom" calls).

About the missed goal. Referee knew there was a goal since he contacted with someone on the phone but he ignored everything. It all ruined the game, mental killer as it was already mentioned here. Canada very well deserved this victory but the referee left bad sediment from his job.

 

[Zine]

No doubt it can be deflating to have that happen to you. And the game would obviously have been different had the goal counted. My beef, however, is with the assertion that the referees can be "against" you in this tournament. It is not in the best interest of ANY referee's career to be seen as biased in any fashion. Perceived impartiality is of paramount importance to a referee's success. No referee cares about the outcome of a WJHC game more than they do about the welfare of their career (and thus their income and, in turn, their families!). Anybody who thinks otherwise is a complete and total idiot, and likely a budding conspiracy theorist.

(yes, I know this post is similar to one I made in another thread, but that post is buried on page 3465354 or whatever, so I wanted to make it again :p. So sue me ).

I agree, I don't think any referee is going to be outright 'biased'.

But, to be fair, Team Canada didn't lobby to change the scheduled game referee for no reason. They're proposed American ref would have been more used to Canada's style of play, and probably more leanient on calls than the Swedish ref. If all the refs are the same, why did Canada lobby for this change?

Either way, Canada deserved the gold last night. But it goes to show that, even if not overt, refs can have an important say in the outcome of a game -- particularly in international events when teams play such different 'styles' of hockey.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

It was a stupid comment after an emotional game. I am not sure if there is much more to the story. But it was a very stupid comment.

 

[McGuillicuddy]

The reason that Canadians changed the referee already means that they wanted his benevolence.

No! Absolutely not correct. Canada wanted a referee that would permit a physical style of hockey, and not one that would call every incidence of contact as in some earlier games in the tournament. That is very, very different from bias or "benevolence".

The referee was American. Did you not see the outrage on these boards after the treatment of Team USA by the fans in Vancouver?! Do you really think an American would want to make these same fans happy by skewing his officiating, and furthermore going against his training and sense of fair play instilled in all professional referees?! No way. Absolutely not.

You're trying to justify yourself by saying that the system was against you but that is simply not true.

 

[McGuillicuddy]

If all the refs are the same, why did Canada lobby for this change?

Please note, at no point did I ever imply that all referees are the same. Only that at this level they do not have a bias against any particular team.

 

[Team_Spirit]

Anton Khudobin looks like a winner , Patrick Roy jr . Id take him on my team any day!

 

[Panopticon]

I regret that I stayed up until 5am to watch this game. It was the weakest I've seen in the tournament. 90% of Canadas hits were illegal (hands/elbows to the head, feet off the ice and few of them could've easily been boarding calls), 3 or 4 of their 5 their goals were crappy (when Finland scores goals like that they are called "trash goals" by everyone) and Russia and their Malkins were even more disappointing.

And now I understand why Jack Johnson elbowed Downie and believe him when he said Downie embellished it. Downie was on his knees or face 70% of the time and 25% of the time he was yapping his mouth. Annoying guy.

But this call, a clear goal being disallowed just because the referee can't admit he made a mistake earlier, really made me regret my decision to watch this game...

 

[Panopticon]

No! Absolutely not correct. Canada wanted a referee that would permit a physical style of hockey, and not one that would call every incidence of contact as in some earlier games in the tournament. That is very, very different from bias or "benevolence".

That's actually just pretty sad. Why can't every team choose a ref that suits their style of play?

 

[McGuillicuddy]

But this call, a clear goal being disallowed just because the referee can't admit he made a mistake earlier, really made me regret my decision to watch this game...

I'm pretty sure the referee couldn't do anything about it. Play continued for 2 more whistles, which was the fault of both the Russian players/coaches and the referee. Once the play is restarted after a whistle I don't think the rules allow you to go back and take time off the clock.

 

[Misos Milakos*]

Bottom line, you lose 5-0, look at yourself in the mirror, because that is all you have to blame. YOU LOSE RUSSIA. Sorry, to see Malkin never get his WJC gold, and it's back to square one again for team Russia. Expect Canada to take it again next year.

 

[Mihai]

Lets talk about a game that has video judges. Why do they exist ? Lets just put one ref in the game, as the rest are paid no to watch the game. It takes someone 2 mins to see if its a goal or not ?

What measures will IIHF take against the refs ? Nothing. On iihf.com they dont even say a word about the russian goal.

Personally i vote for no more video judge or goal judge.

 

[kov]

STOP THE PRESSES!!!!


Teenagers saying stupid stuff? Wow, I'm speechless.

But I do wonder about one thing: what's the excuse for the rest of us who are over 20-years old?

 

[Slay]

No! Absolutely not correct. Canada wanted a referee that would permit a physical style of hockey, and not one that would call every incidence of contact as in some earlier games in the tournament. That is very, very different from bias or "benevolence".

While it could be the first and the main reason but in the end it appeared to me that there was some bias or unprofessionalism. He missed few moments and reacted on some questionable moments. Now he is picky, then next moment he is not so picky. Hitting was fine to me by the way.

He is a clip with few moments from the 1st period. He missed highsticking but reacted on basically diving or simple falling, plus there were some clutch and grab moments that were ignored. h ttp://rapidshare.de/files/10507842/wjc2006.wmv.html

 

[Gutchecktime]

I regret that I stayed up until 5am to watch this game. It was the weakest I've seen in the tournament. 90% of Canadas hits were illegal (hands/elbows to the head, feet off the ice and few of them could've easily been boarding calls), 3 or 4 of their 5 their goals were crappy (when Finland scores goals like that they are called "trash goals" by everyone) and Russia and their Malkins were even more disappointing.

There's a simple solution to that you know. As soon as you figured out it was a boring game you could... and brace yourselves, I know this is thinking outside of the box here... TURN OFF THE TV!



No one is holding a gun to your head here. Don't like it. Don't watch it.

A goal is a goal. And so called "trash goals" result from hard work. Finland always works their arses off and deserves any good things that come from that. Same with Canada.

I love, by the way, how you point out questionable Canadian calls but fail to mention the amount of non-calls in Russia's favour, ie. Blunden getting absolutely mauled in front of the net... not once, not twice but AT LEAST 3 times, including Khubodin chopping at his back and another Russian player having him in a headlock.

Your post seems like a pathetic attempt to take away from Canada's win.

 

[Slay]

Play continued for 2 more whistles, which was the fault of both the Russian players/coaches and the referee. Once the play is restarted after a whistle I don't think the rules allow you to go back and take time off the clock.

I believe it was just 1 whistle. Game started as nothing happened because noone noticed the goal but on the very next pause in the game the referee talked to someone on the phone and then talked with the Russian team and then continued the game as nothing happened.

 

[Rick Middleton]

STOP THE PRESSES!!!!


Teenagers saying stupid stuff? Wow, I'm speechless.

But I do wonder about one thing: what's the excuse for the rest of us who are over 20-years old?

I blame Gee Wally.