WC SF: May 20 GDT - Canada vs. Sweden

[Pepper]

So it's okay to cross-check Crosby in the face becaue of what Cory Cross did nine years ago?

The Soviets were kicking Canadian players in 1972, so should someone take Ovechkin's head off?

Gary Suter two-handed Andrei Lomakin in the face in 1987, should someone two-handed Kessel in the face?

Where the hell did I say anything makes Hannula's cross-check ok???

 

[Nihilism]

Let's not forget that that the 3 cheapest stunts pulled at the World Championships in the last 10 or so years have been performed by Canadians.

What else did you mean by that than? You're obviously hinting at the fact Canadians IN THE PAST <-------------- have a rep of taking liberties with the other teams best players. Even if that were true, why should Crosby pay the price?

That question is not only directed toward you, but to all these Sweds and Canadian-haters who have yet to make an intelligent argument on this subject. Either they're blinded by "patriotism" or by there hatred for Canada.

 

[Pepper]

I already said the x-check was vicious and deserved the 5+game he got for it, what else do you need?

 

[Vikke]

Nihilism: I seem to remember that pretty much every Canadian fan supported Rob Niedermeyer's brutal checking from behind/boarding on Peter Forsberg, which in my eyes was far worse than a cross check to the chin.

However, I think it was stupid by Hannula, stuff like that has no place in hockey and he deserved the 5+game and the suspension.

 

[MMX]

The Soviets were kicking Canadian players in 1972, so should someone take Ovechkin's head off?

Comments like this make we wonder if you actually watch any USSR-Canada games, and not only in 72, but in the 70s and 80s as well. Just mind-boggling.

 

[JamieG]

What does anything that happened in the past have to do with it? Bobby Clarke 34 years ago has nothing to do with the conduct of this Swedish club year 2006.

To try to justify this goon tactic by bringing up things in the past is just trying to make excuses. Did I justify Bobby Clarke or anything in the past? Not at all and I never would.

But the fact is this Swedish team has players they choose, who would intentionally try to injure the best player. And for those trying to excuse the rest of the Swedes? What about their conduct? Laughing and smiling on the bench because Crosby was hurt?

That's not exactly condemning the act of one player like I was alluding to earlier. It's a goon tactic and the Swedish team may very well win but they disgraced themselves and the game of hockey by intentionally trying to injure the star player just because it gave them a better chance to win a game. This Swedish team should be ashamed of themselves, period.

 

[Paxton Fettel]

owned!

 

[Freudian]

What does anything that happened in the past have to do with it? Bobby Clarke 34 years ago has nothing to do with the conduct of this Swedish club year 2006.

To try to justify this goon tactic by bringing up things in the past is just trying to make excuses. Did I justify Bobby Clarke or anything in the past? Not at all and I never would.

But the fact is this Swedish team has players they choose, who would intentionally try to injure the best player. And for those trying to excuse the rest of the Swedes? What about their conduct? Laughing and smiling on the bench because Crosby was hurt?

That's not exactly condemning the act of one player like I was alluding to earlier. It's a goon tactic and the Swedish team may very well win but they disgraced themselves and the game of hockey by intentionally trying to injure the star player just because it gave them a better chance to win a game. This Swedish team should be ashamed of themselves, period.

Show me one clip of the swedish bench laughing. This is something that the canadian coach invented in his head and people like you take it as truth.

But please go on. I am starting to enjoy people going on about Sweden of all countries as the new version of the Broad Street Bullies. Anyone with a clue realize how idiotic the idea is, but it sure it entertaining.

 

[Vikke]

Yeah, why the hell would the Swedes be smiling when Hannula draws a 5 minute major penalty AND Canada reduces the lead to two goals late in the 2nd period? Stop making up things or show me a clip of it.

 

[yarre]

Show me one clip of the swedish bench laughing. This is something that the canadian coach invented in his head and people like you take it as truth.

But please go on. I am starting to enjoy people going on about Sweden of all countries as the new version of the Broad Street Bullies. Anyone with a clue realize how idiotic the idea is, but it sure it entertaining.

I would like to see a clip of that also, sounds like a lie from the canadian coach.

 

[GuloGulo]

What does anything that happened in the past have to do with it? Bobby Clarke 34 years ago has nothing to do with the conduct of this Swedish club year 2006.

This swedish club? This swedish player, you mean? And he got the suspension, no representative on team sweden has objected the decision.

To try to justify this goon tactic by bringing up things in the past is just trying to make excuses. Did I justify Bobby Clarke or anything in the past? Not at all and I never would.

But the fact is this Swedish team has players they choose, who would intentionally try to injure the best player. And for those trying to excuse the rest of the Swedes? What about their conduct? Laughing and smiling on the bench because Crosby was hurt?

A fact? Why would they use Hannula who's been among the best players in the tournament. Why not injure Crosby right off the draw? Why not injure him for reals instead of this cheesy *** attack? And Habscheid saying Team Sweden was laughing and smiling doesn't make it a fact. Not that it's a huge issue anyway. The bench is seeing a whole different game than TV viewers.

That's not exactly condemning the act of one player like I was alluding to earlier. It's a goon tactic and the Swedish team may very well win but they disgraced themselves and the game of hockey by intentionally trying to injure the star player just because it gave them a better chance to win a game. This Swedish team should be ashamed of themselves, period.

Once again you make a team out of one singular player, who incidentally has little rap of being dirty in the first place - in fact the entire team is pretty much spotless when it comes to misconducting behaviour (outta my head Kenny J is the worst offender of them all, you figure out how dirty a squad it is).

You want a royal apology from the Court in Stockholm or what?

 

[Art Vandelay]

What does anything that happened in the past have to do with it? Bobby Clarke 34 years ago has nothing to do with the conduct of this Swedish club year 2006.

AFAIK the only one who has mentioned Clarke is your pal Nihilism.

To try to justify this goon tactic by bringing up things in the past is just trying to make excuses. Did I justify Bobby Clarke or anything in the past? Not at all and I never would.

Who has justified it? Your making things up.

But the fact is this Swedish team has players they choose, who would intentionally try to injure the best player. And for those trying to excuse the rest of the Swedes? What about their conduct? Laughing and smiling on the bench because Crosby was hurt?

The laughing bit was something the canadian coach made up, or he's the only one who saw it in the entire arena.

That's not exactly condemning the act of one player like I was alluding to earlier. It's a goon tactic and the Swedish team may very well win but they disgraced themselves and the game of hockey by intentionally trying to injure the star player just because it gave them a better chance to win a game. This Swedish team should be ashamed of themselves, period.

Were Canadians ashemed of R. Niedermayer? NO! they ****ing applauded that hit.
Swedes on the other hand admit right away that Hannula had a major braincramp and did something stupid.

Swedes were also supposed to be ahamed of themselves for throwing the game against Slovakia in the Olympics and ashamed for supposedly not supporting our team before these World Champs. Seems we're always supposed to be ashamed when Canada LOSE.

 

[Chimpradamus]

It kind of sucks and is totally beyond the sport to see your best player taken out with a dirty hit, doesn't it? Remember that the next time you applaud some Niedermayer goon who deliberately takes out Forsberg and gets away with it. Forsberg's career and perhaps dignity of life could have ended that night.

Hannula's cheapshot was nothing compared to Niedermayer's cheapshot.

How some Canadians assume this was planned by Hannula and perhaps even the Swedish coaching is beyond me. Hannula has no history of delivering cheapshots or dirty hits. He is one of the top goalscorers for Sweden this tournament, delivering a hattrick against USA in the QF. He doesn't receive that many penalty minutes in the Swedish League where he plays. And why would Sweden deliberately attack Crosby when in control of the game?! And why the hell would they let a goalscorer do the work?! Absolutely nothing fits in with the picture. The fact that some Canadians think it was deliberate and planned says more about them and their sense of hockey than about anything else. It's a little bit like in football when Italy got furious for the 2-2 game between Sweden and Denmark in 2004. Look where the corrupt Italian football is today.

Instead, Hannula almost cost us the game. The hockey commentators on TV thought Hannula might have been been really frustrated because he was one of the players to blame for the goal. He had the chance to clear the puck in the zone, but screwed up and that's probably why he was so focused on clearing Crosby away from the goalie.

 

[Ola]

Hannula got a suspension, a well deserved one. No matter what Canada did in the past I think Canada, Sweden, Russia and everyone else recognizes the need to protect the stars from head injurys. We pretty much lost a generation of mega stars because idiots like CAMPBELL AND BETTMAN didn't do that. Thats sickening and have hurt the game tremendously.

Show me one clip of the swedish bench laughing. This is something that the canadian coach invented in his head and people like you take it as truth.

But please go on. I am starting to enjoy people going on about Sweden of all countries as the new version of the Broad Street Bullies. Anyone with a clue realize how idiotic the idea is, but it sure it entertaining.

Agreed Marc H. brought it up on the press conferance and BÃ…G said he should show proof of it. Then Marc went crazy and left the PC. I watch a replay of the game this morning and from the pictures shown of the swedish bench, and there where many of them, I didn't see one smile. Everyone looked pretty shaken up to tell the truth. That Marc H. seems to be interested on getting the attention away from his failure and blame it on something else.

 

[SChan*]

This Swedish team should be ashamed of themselves, period.

so every canadian team before year 2005 should feel ashamed of themselves?

hypocrite.

 

[lolife]

Mmmm.. In all his eagerness to protecting the goalie, the checking hit all wrong, no doubt about that. I can even give you that he (Hannula) might very well have gotten more desperate in protecting the goalie, if (big if there) he even acknowledged that it was Crosby poking at the goalie. It happens, and he got a deserving personal punishment.

But to suggest it was a deliberate from Hannula, and a tactic from Team Sweden coaching, that's just plain insulting. Compared to, well, other teams, that has never been a part of our play. NEVER. But it is like they say, you judge other on the basis of yourself.

Your're (JamieG) just wants to put blame. Chill out and go swallow that bitter taste down with a good beer and a good meal. Have worked for me.


To finish this post off... I have to admit I personally haven't liked North American hockey very much through the years. Way too much play on players, and less hockey (it is of course debatable what hockey is meant to be in the first place, though ). I guess it's pretty natural, but I have liked european hockey much more, especially Czech and Russian/Soviet hockey when they're on a roll.

But in recent years, I've come to see much more play with the puck than traditionally from Canada. Still very forward, but more smarter, quicker, playing the puck. Kind of a mix of european and north american hockey. Maybe I'm all wrong in this conclusion. But I personally am finding it much more fun to watch. Keep it up!

 

[mcphee]

That's why people don't feel sorry for Crosby and Canada. Hannula behaved like a Canadian and I don't like it but since the victim was Canadian I don't think it's such a big deal.

I love generalizations, they tend to be like Monty Python's 'spot the looney' skit. What's that word when you stereotype a group of people ? Ahh forget it, probably doesn't apply.

The game has changed, it's changed in the NHL and internationnaly, I thought. Teams everywhere do what they can to win, if they have the stomach for it. The Swedish player reacted to Crosby scoring. Was there a directive to 'get the kid', I doubt it. Was there mention of lay the body and the lumber on, probably not in those words, yeah probably. That's the nature of sport, don't let one player beat you. The NHL is trying to get that out of the game. The cross check may have been reactionnary, so who knows, a guy would get from 3-5 games and life goes on.

In the 3rd period, there were a few head shots ignored, a bit of face washing, that you seldom see anymore in the NHL. The ref imo, did a poor job in reacting to some things as the game's emotion got higher. It happens though. if Forsberg was leading a young team, with no chance to win if he wasn't neutralized, most countries would find a way.

It's the 'holier than thou' stuff from both fan groups that's amusing. Crosby wasn't taken down with sniper fire, Canadians don't roam orphanages beating young children.

Were the Swedes laughing on their bench ? I don't know. If a few were it means that those particular guys are jackasses, probably raised by parents who might have been siblings. It says nothing about anyone other than the jackass in question. Dale Hunter pulled a similar move on Turgeon, in 93[?], it means the same thing, Dale Hunter's a coward and jackass just like the guy yesterday.

 

[KariyaIsGod*]

so every canadian team before year 2005 should feel ashamed of themselves?

hypocrite.

Really?

Why don't you point out some of this supposed goonery instead taking the typical Euro-hockey anti-Canadian stance, despite it having no foundation.

And remember, Todd Bertuzzi and Bobby Clarke are not Canada...

 

[Chimpradamus]

DrMoses, you clearly missed his point.

 

[KariyaIsGod*]

DrMoses, you clearly missed his point.

Perhaps.

I didn't bother to read the whole thread.

Reading Swedish posters trying to defend a blatent cheapshot with intent to injure is rather pointless.

 

[octopi]

The slashes were not dangerous, the Czech player said it himself. Danderous or not, I was highly embarrassed and still am until this day.

That Czech player was Jiri Fischer BTW.

 

[Art Vandelay]

Perhaps.

I didn't bother to read the whole thread.

Reading Swedish posters trying to defend a blatent cheapshot with intent to injure is rather pointless.

Had you bothered read the thread you would have seen that us swedes havent defended Hannula, infact we were the first ones to call the hit out as dirty and some of us (not me) dont want to see Hannula play om the national team again, ever.

 

[Pepper]

Reading Swedish posters trying to defend a blatent cheapshot with intent to injure is rather pointless.

Who here was defending the blatant cheapshot from Hannula? I haven't read the whole thread but to me it seems like everyone called it a cheapshot and said 5+game+suspension was the right call.

 

[lolife]

I have, sort of.

It was a dirty hit, a foolish decision from an eager player, and he got a fitting punishment for it. But some of you are suggesting it was with intent to injure, that he actually was out to injure Crosby specifically. I'm saying that's cheap, on your part.

 

[KariyaIsGod*]

I have, sort of.

It was a dirty hit, a foolish decision from an eager player, and he got a fitting punishment for it. But some of you are suggesting it was with intent to injure, that he actually was out to injure Crosby specifically. I'm saying that's cheap, on your part.

He brutally crosschecked arguably the best offensive player in the world, right in the face during the most important game of the tournament at that point.

What else would it be?