GDT: Pre-Competition • Dec. 23 • Canada vs. Sweden • 3-5 final

Status
Not open for further replies.

Djurgardsjavel

Registered User
Oct 29, 2010
62
0
Valhalla
Hey Sweden?

Thank you for the wake up call. We had hit the snooze button there for a bit, but we're awake now.


Merry Christmas
Team Canada

Merry Christmas!

Hey, Team Canada, have some of this delicious roofie spiked eggnog. :x): We offered Visentin and Huberdeau some last night and they seemed to really like it. Skål! :cheers:

//Tre Kronor
 

OttawaRoughRiderFan*

Guest
Reading this thread makes me lol. Its a PRE-TOURNEY GAME.

It's what we do here. What else is there to do, visit with our families?:D

Yes... Thank you...

**

What I don't understand is this... If Russia or the U.S. or Sweden were to lose an exhibition game every Canadian fan would be cutting them slack and making excuse.

We would hear... "Just wait til the real games start. Then they will be great."

But because it is our own... well, heaven forbid we not rip them apart.

It is an exhibition game. It is a time to experiment - try new lines, try a goalie you are not sure about. That is what we did.

Is Sweden a talented fast team? Yes. Will we have to change our game to beat them if we meet later in the tournament? Yes.

But minus the 15 minute meltdown, we were the better team.
 

OttawaRoughRiderFan*

Guest
I also read these same type of posts at the beginning of the Olympics...

Remember we had to go to OT against the Swiss???

Remember we lost to the Americans???

Remember how "useless" Crosby was early in the tournament???

How did that turn out?
 

OttawaRoughRiderFan*

Guest
Can someone explain to me why in the world you would want to meet one of your main rivals in the tournament in exhibition game right before a tournament?

What is there to gain compared to what's there to lose, mainly unnecessary injuries?

I just don't understand it, why not play some local team or something to work details.

I disagree. I am glad we played such a strong team. This loss may be the best thing in the world for us.
 

OttawaRoughRiderFan*

Guest
Too many fans only started watching the WJR's during our (recent) 5 year run when we NEVER lost. They don't remember before that when Canada losing a game at the WJR's was not unexpected.

I hope Canada wins Gold for 2 reasons...

1) Because I am Canadian;
2) To see some of these posters eat crow.
 

WayneBruce

Registered User
Jun 16, 2011
1,267
1
Yes... Thank you...

**

What I don't understand is this... If Russia or the U.S. or Sweden were to lose an exhibition game every Canadian fan would be cutting them slack and making excuse.

We would hear... "Just wait til the real games start. Then they will be great."

But because it is our own... well, heaven forbid we not rip them apart.

It is an exhibition game. It is a time to experiment - try new lines, try a goalie you are not sure about. That is what we did.

Is Sweden a talented fast team? Yes. Will we have to change our game to beat them if we meet later in the tournament? Yes.

But minus the 15 minute meltdown, we were the better team.

Thought sweden was the better team for the first 2 periods.
 

OttawaRoughRiderFan*

Guest
Thought sweden was the better team for the first 2 periods.

I disagree. I thought Canada was better (and up 1 goal) until Visentin melted down in the last 5 minutes of the 1st.

I also thought, after Wedgewood came in half way thru the 2nd, Canada came to life and was the better team.

In the 3rd, Canada was the better team.
 
Oct 18, 2011
44,114
9,862
I disagree. I thought Canada was better (and up 1 goal) until Visentin melted down in the last 5 minutes of the 1st.

I also thought, after Wedgewood came in half way thru the 2nd, Canada came to life and was the better team.

In the 3rd, Canada was the better team.
Wow yet somehow they lost? they weren't the better team last night at all
 

wings5

Registered User
Jan 6, 2008
7,443
931
Wow yet somehow they lost? they weren't the better team last night at all

I know! I'm thinking were we watching the same game here? Sweden was all over the Canadians flying by them in the neutral zone and making them run around in their own end, only in the third was that happening less when Canada finally started to push back. But their skills and speed were clearly evident and above ours last night.
 

OttawaRoughRiderFan*

Guest
Wow yet somehow they lost? they weren't the better team last night at all

I know! I'm thinking were we watching the same game here? Sweden was all over the Canadians flying by them in the neutral zone and making them run around in their own end, only in the third was that happening less when Canada finally started to push back. But their skills and speed were clearly evident and above ours last night.

I disagree. Again, we were up 1-0 with 5 minutes left in the 1st.

In the 2nd, even the TSN analyst commented on how well Canada started playing once Wedgewood took over.

I stand by my post.
 

Fehr Time*

Guest
Sweden was certainly the better team last night. If the Swedish goalie let in a couple of softer goals I am sure Canada fans would not allowing Swedish fans to use that excuse as to why they lost. Canada had issues containing Sweden`s speed to the outside, and looked disjointed in their own end at times. Twice in the 3rd period alone Canada nearly turned the puck over to the Swedes right in front of their net and were lucky Sweden did not capitalize.
 

OttawaRoughRiderFan*

Guest
Sweden was certainly the better team last night. If the Swedish goalie let in a couple of softer goals I am sure Canada fans would not allowing Swedish fans to use that excuse as to why they lost. Canada had issues containing Sweden`s speed to the outside, and looked disjointed in their own end at times. Twice in the 3rd period alone Canada nearly turned the puck over to the Swedes right in front of their net and were lucky Sweden did not capitalize.

IMO...

1) None of Canada's 3 goals were weak...

The first one was a beauty. The 2nd was batted out of the air. The 3rd was short handed, stick side.

At LEAST 2 of Sweden goals would have been easily stopped by a stronger goalie and one was an EN.

2) Sweden's goalie played really well and stopped many strong Canadian chances. How many great chances did our goalies stop? I remember Wedgewood stopped one. The rest of the shots were easy saves.

3) Did Canada play a great game... NO! But I believe that minus the 15 minutes at the end of the 1st period until the middle of the 2nd, we outplayed Sweden.

Sweden won and, as a result, was the better team - if I said we were the better team I mis-spoke. BUT(!), IMO, for the majority of the game we outplayed them.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Frank Bascombe

Registered User
Apr 28, 2010
349
0
IMO...

1) None of Canada's 3 goals were weak...

The first one was a beauty. The 2nd was batted out of the air. The 3rd was short handed, stick side.

At LEAST 2 of Sweden goals would have been easily stopped by a stronger goalie and one was an EN.

2) Sweden's goalie played really well and stopped many strong Canadian chances. How many great chances did our goalies stop? I remember Wedgewood stopped one. The rest of the shots were easy saves.

3) Did Canada play a great game... NO! But I believe that minus the 15 minutes at the end of the 1st period until the middle of the 2nd, we outplayed Sweden.

Sweden won and, as a result, was the better team - if I said we were the better team I mis-spoke. BUT(!), IMO, for the majority of the game we outplayed them.

Canada was only better in the third, when they played all out and smelling blood. Thing is, it's impossible to play like that for 60 minutes, so to say that the 3d period showed Canada's "real" game is somewhat misguided.
 

scdn

Registered User
May 27, 2009
306
0
I don't understand people saying Connolly is not playing well. He is playing well defensively and gets counter-attack rushes started with good passes up the ice. That's why he gets so many 2nd assists.
 

ORYX

Registered User
Mar 2, 2008
1,622
0
So the postcount matters in scrolling this thread?

Would the wise thing to do if you are tired of all the so-called "whining" be to stop reading the thread, and find one in which you deem to contain less "whining", instead of posting a comment, which is in fact contradictory to what you are stating?

Afterall, with 3 posts in your entire HF career, you certainly are contributing to positive conversation instead of just whining about posts you don't like right?

Well played sir/madam, well played.

As for Visentin, the guy flat out sucks. To those saying we shouldn't harp on him, okay you are IMO correct to some degree.

I mean, he has sucked all season long, and I'm not just going by his stats, I have seen him play live a handful of times in the OHL, and he has been HORRIBLE positionally, has no confidence in his game, and you can see that reflected in his body language and posture after a goal.

I don't care that he was the goalie LAST year, THIS year he shouldn't be the goalie. He isnt one of the two best, and it isnt fair to HIM that he's being tossed in there. You can't blame him for that, what do you want him to say, sorry I dont want to? I suck compared to these guys at ice hockey, but if Hockey Canada called me, you can bet I wouldn't say no :laugh:
 

Aaaaaaaaaaaaa

Registered User
May 16, 2009
12,252
1,585
Too many fans only started watching the WJR's during our (recent) 5 year run when we NEVER lost. They don't remember before that when Canada losing a game at the WJR's was not unexpected.

I have not missed a game since 1990. I was in Saskatoon in 91 when John Slaney scored to win gold and have been a diehard ever since.

I have seen the amazing (2005 Team Canada - our best team ever) and our worst (1992 - blech).

We are capable of losing for sure, but every year we produce a team that SHOULD compete as long as they are well coached and disciplined.

I don't think we EVER expect to lose.
 

fredligh

Registered User
Jan 3, 2011
1,186
56
Iceland
Would the wise thing to do if you are tired of all the so-called "whining" be to stop reading the thread, and find one in which you deem to contain less "whining", instead of posting a comment, which is in fact contradictory to what you are stating?

Afterall, with 3 posts in your entire HF career, you certainly are contributing to positive conversation instead of just whining about posts you don't like right?

Well played sir/madam, well played.

As for Visentin, the guy flat out sucks. To those saying we shouldn't harp on him, okay you are IMO correct to some degree.

I mean, he has sucked all season long, and I'm not just going by his stats, I have seen him play live a handful of times in the OHL, and he has been HORRIBLE positionally, has no confidence in his game, and you can see that reflected in his body language and posture after a goal.

I don't care that he was the goalie LAST year, THIS year he shouldn't be the goalie. He isnt one of the two best, and it isnt fair to HIM that he's being tossed in there. You can't blame him for that, what do you want him to say, sorry I dont want to? I suck compared to these guys at ice hockey, but if Hockey Canada called me, you can bet I wouldn't say no :laugh:
Didnt know i was restricted to flame people, i will come back when i have 200-300 posts :handclap:
 

Locks

Registered User
May 28, 2005
949
448
I don't understand people saying Connolly is not playing well. He is playing well defensively and gets counter-attack rushes started with good passes up the ice. That's why he gets so many 2nd assists.

I don't think he played badly but I think that people say that cause he was not an impact player like Schwartz, Galagher and Stone and that what people could expect from a returnee 6th over-all pick and a guy who has played in the NHL. But maybe the expectations are just unrealistic and we should just expect a solid contribution without being one of the go to guys.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad