A history of racist incidents (and false alarms) in hockey...

tjcurrie

Registered User
Aug 4, 2010
3,930
143
Gibbons, Alberta
Racism and xenophobia...this whole thread seems to run in cirlcles. Others make a clear distinction (and rightfully so) between the two things, but others seem to think they are basically the same.

I'm European born and I don't see Cherry racist at all. Sure, he's a bigot and nationalist and probably xenophobic, but it's more comic relief than anything else. Don Cherry is a kind of Bill O'Reilly of the Canadian hockey. A provocation and blatant nationalism is his brand, but it does not make him a racist.

Besides, those stereotypes and generalizations what Cherry is making about hockey players are more or less based on facts, especially from old school NHL perspective which Cherry clearly represents. There are also some tough, but less skilled "heart and soul" players in Europe, but they have a hard time making it to the NHL, since Canadian junior leagues and American minor leagues are full of Canadian stock of that particular breed type of players. While the gap is no longer nearly as wide as it once was, European junior hockey is still based more on a puck possession (the soccer influence) while Canadian junior hockey is more physically oriented. So it's a cultural thing, not a racial in a slightest way.

Other thing to consider. It is actually more or less accepted for a white guy to spread ethnic slurs and stereotypes about other white guys. It's not mature or good behaviour by any means, but it's not serious offense like the racism is. Just like nobody really cares when black people are using the n-word amongst themselves.

It don't see any proof that racist incidents are common in hockey, especially when considering that the hockey is still a very much "a white mans sport" - not only by it's reputation, but by the fact that vast majority of the professional hockey players in the world are white.

Good post.

We all know Cherry actually has a huge heart too so it's not like he's some evil person sitting there spewing a bunch of hate, he speaks only in the context of hockey so people should really stop being so sensitive.
 

Dom

Registered User
Aug 6, 2006
673
1
For example, black men are faster then white men right? Hold on, that racist! Right? Well........is it? Look at the fastest men in the world at the Olympics down the line. Then look at the men who are racing in the final 100m race. They come from Kenya for example, not Norway. A person who doesn't know any better thinks that is racist. An enlightened person sees it for what it is, factual. You can flip flop that by using Figure Skating if you want.

Saying that black men are generally faster than white men is not racist
Taking a random black man and a random white man and saying the black man is faster than the white one without having seen them run is prejudiced and racist.
 

tarheelhockey

Offside Review Specialist
Feb 12, 2010
84,985
137,358
Bojangles Parking Lot
Saying that black men are generally faster than white men is not racist
Taking a random black man and a random white man and saying the black man is faster than the white one without having seen them run is prejudiced and racist.

I think it's a better illustration of the point if we talk about personality characteristics. Judging someone to be fast is often a simple matter of looking at their physical qualities (if the black man is thin and muscular, I'm betting on him in a race because he's plainly an athletic guy), whereas real malignant prejudice and racism comes into play when you make a judgment about him as a human being.
 

overpass

Registered User
Jun 7, 2007
5,254
2,736
Not a one from either country. Kenya is actually renowned for producing distance runners.

People of West African descent dominate sprinting and people of East African descent (including Kenyans) dominate distance running. Big Phil was a little off on the details but his overall point stands, although it really doesn't have much to do with hockey.

IMO the major issue with real, harmful, mean-spirited racism in hockey is racism towards aboriginal Canadians. The Canada-Euro issue is mostly a culture clash between a different set of values and attitudes or a perception of such, not racism.
 

Ketzlaf

Registered User
May 7, 2010
1,575
0
Montreal
Exactly.

As well, a banana was thrown at him twice during the game, only one hit the ice. It happened to Kevin Weekes and Anson Carter too so its not just an isolated incident.

And I hate how Canadians give Don Cherry a free pass. If he were a southern guy from the United States saying the same things, everyone in Canada would dismiss him as an out of touch, redneck, racist.

But because he mentions how great Canadians are, and has an exaggerated Canadian accent, he gets a free pass.

Imagine if a southern white guy said ``tattoos in the NBA...its all for black guys, they should ban them...`` what would happen to him?

Many Canadians don't give Cherry a free pass. He is in fact an out of touch racist redneck. He is more interested about crying the deaths of the military than discussing hockey. His hockey knowledge consists of calling every one born west of Quebec ''a good kid'' and fapping to big hits and fights.
 

amnesiac

Space Oddity
Jul 10, 2010
13,599
7,362
Montreal
Probably because it really isn't that big a deal. It was blown out of proportion by politicians, regardless of who said it.

yes it went too far with the politicians and whatnot, I said that, but the issue at hand was just "swept under the rug" by the NHL and fans for that matter, as if to say it wasnt a big deal, as you say. But why? Because it wasnt the N-word? Because it wasnt racially degrading? So its ok to speak against an ethnic group but not a race? I dont see the logic. And acutally Doan settled with Coderre last year if I remember correctly. So MAYBE Doan did say it after all?

Bottom line is that something was said, and most (anglophone) fans and hockey personalities were more concerned about defending Doan than figuring out who said the slur. To me they just didnt care much about it since it involved the french and not another race (for example). Thats what my observations were speaking as an anglophone in Montreal. I think that was as pathetic as the whole parliament thing afterwards, personally.

Well, given that in European sports coverage ethnic stereotypes are basically accepted and used all the time, they should be used to it. It's never nice to be on the receiving end of ethnic stereotyping, but truth is that Europe generally is much less sensitive to it than North America.

That may be true, but its not exactly justification for him to behave the way he does on national TV. Would you really want your kids to grow up with those kinds of prejudiced views? I just think its sad to see CBC keep employing a guy like this based on ratings alone, when were all aware of how politically incorrect he is about so many issues. Besides the prejudiced views on hockey players, hes ALWAYS promoted fighting and big hits, even today when its ending players' careers, and then flip flops when a serious injury occurs and is hypocritical about the issue.

Not to mention hes also a huge Leafs homer who wont stop talking about them and players like Kadri every week when theyre not even a contending team. And then for some reason he keeps criticizing a great young star like Subban on his hated rival (not saying its because of his race),when hes the EXACT kind of young player Cherry should adore. I guaratee if he were a Leaf he would think hes GOD. (Im not a Habs fan btw, these are just my observations).

The latter is besides the point, but whether you like him or not, its just not right to put a guy like that on TV for the $ he generates, hes just a horrible person to look up to. Theres no way a (smart) parent including the CBC president would want their kids watching and learning from him every week.
 
Last edited:

Hanji

Registered User
Oct 14, 2009
3,155
2,641
Wisconsin
Cherry seems to appeal to those who are insecure about Canada's dominance within the hockey world. And hockey being Canada's game, that element has always been prevalent.
There's nothing wrong with being proud or flaunting your achievements; but it's very wrong to denigrate other nations and/or players.
FWIW, you don't see that type of negative sporting commentary in the US, especially in regards to other nationalities.
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
What it doesn't do is prove that that depth had anything to do with them winning (correlation /= causation). If it's so important how did the Pens and Wings win without it?

I personally think the Wings had pretty good depth. Of course, they weren't a Canadian-laden team in 2008. Regardless though, when you go through two months of hockey and 4 grueling playoff rounds you need complimentary support. The Pens had top end talent of course, but also decent depth that spring. Most of their team was North American however.

i have counted only 1 out of the team's 5 most important players as canadian: patrice bergeron.

8 out of 10 of the top scorers for the Bruins in the 2011 playoffs were Canadian. It doesn't get much more dominant than that on a Cup winning team.

on the other hand, who famously didn't have that extra something when it counted? canadian olympian roberto luongo. obviously there were others, some european, some canadian. but by my count, only two players on the canucks consistently performed in the finals like it was the finals, one was canadian (lapierre) and the other was danish (hansen).

The Canucks had three Canadians among their top 10 playoff scorers. 2 Americans and 5 Europeans. This is drastically different than the Bruins. I'm not trying to nitpick at all, nor am I suggesting that you don't need a dose of European talent to balance things out, but the more you look into it the less "prejudice" it seems when you are talking about championship teams having more than the NHL average amount of Canadians on their team.

And yes, Luongo has proven to not be a great playoff performer. We know this. He is Canadian. There are Canadian players as well that can mail it in just like there are some Euros who were very trustworthy in the postseason. However, as is often the case it is the opposite. There was a thread a long ways back about the scarce number of Russians who have been playoff legends. We all know how great some Russians have been since they entered the NHL in 1989 but the drop off of greatness in the regular season to the postseason is alarming and hard to ignore. This is the perception
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
Saying that black men are generally faster than white men is not racist
Taking a random black man and a random white man and saying the black man is faster than the white one without having seen them run is prejudiced and racist.

Of course. Obviously the race is won on the field, not on paper. But my point was being, that stereotyping is often something that comes from years and years of factual information. Stereotyping often gets confused with racism and it is far from it. At the very worst, stereotyping is passing judgement too early, but you still may not be wrong with the end result either.
 

Iain Fyffe

Hockey fact-checker
Cherry seems to appeal to those who are insecure about Canada's dominance within the hockey world. And hockey being Canada's game, that element has always been prevalent.
This is probably true, I think. Many people think of hockey as "Canada's game" in the possessive sense, and are uncomfortable with the fact that we no longer stand alone in the game.
 

sawchuk1971

Registered User
Jun 16, 2011
1,489
498
The worst thing happened in Chicago -- a player gave me an intentional butt end, knocked my two front teeth out, broke my nose, and made a racial remark. It wasn't the racial remark that made me angry, but the butt end. I fought back, both the benches cleared, and there was an all-out brawl." The sight of a black man retaliating against the brutality of a white man was an incendiary sight in the United States in 1961. "I was escorted to the Bruins' dressing room and remained there for the entire game," says O'Ree, with the chill of fear still in his voice, "because they thought there was going to be an attempt on my life."
the player who did this was Eric Nesterenko .........
 

tarheelhockey

Offside Review Specialist
Feb 12, 2010
84,985
137,358
Bojangles Parking Lot
8 out of 10 of the top scorers for the Bruins in the 2011 playoffs were Canadian. It doesn't get much more dominant than that on a Cup winning team.

This is true from a statistical angle, but it's a bit misleading.

Boston's top 9 scorers were all forwards. Basically they had an all-Canadian forward group except for Krejci, and their top-9 were the leading scorers on the team by default. The one guy who wasn't Canadian, Krejci, led the team in scoring and GWG as their first-line center.

Tied for their the defensive scoring lead were Tomas Kaberle (Czech) and Dennis Seidenberg (German). Of course, the Slovak Chara was by far and away their best blueliner once you get past the scoring stats. To be brutally honest, the only Canadian defenseman who played particularly well for them in the playoffs was Ference. Boychuk was a turnover machine and McQuaid was simply the least important guy in the group. For a team that relied VERY heavily on its defensive unit, it seems relevant that 3 of their top 4 defensemen including their captain were European.

If there's one thing Boston relies on more than its defensemen, it's their goalies. Tim Thomas is American and Tuukka Rask is Finnish.

Again, you're right as a matter of fact that 9 of their top 10 scorers were Canadians, but I think the better way to frame that argument is that their forward group was distinctly Canadian in character while their blue line and goalies were more of a mixed bag.
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
This is true from a statistical angle, but it's a bit misleading.

Boston's top 9 scorers were all forwards. Basically they had an all-Canadian forward group except for Krejci, and their top-9 were the leading scorers on the team by default. The one guy who wasn't Canadian, Krejci, led the team in scoring and GWG as their first-line center.

Tied for their the defensive scoring lead were Tomas Kaberle (Czech) and Dennis Seidenberg (German). Of course, the Slovak Chara was by far and away their best blueliner once you get past the scoring stats. To be brutally honest, the only Canadian defenseman who played particularly well for them in the playoffs was Ference. Boychuk was a turnover machine and McQuaid was simply the least important guy in the group. For a team that relied VERY heavily on its defensive unit, it seems relevant that 3 of their top 4 defensemen including their captain were European.

If there's one thing Boston relies on more than its defensemen, it's their goalies. Tim Thomas is American and Tuukka Rask is Finnish.

Again, you're right as a matter of fact that 9 of their top 10 scorers were Canadians, but I think the better way to frame that argument is that their forward group was distinctly Canadian in character while their blue line and goalies were more of a mixed bag.



Not arguing with that, however, when was the last time all but one of the forwards on a Cup champ was Canadian? I'm thinking off the top of my head that it's the 1993 Habs (Leclair). No one including myself is going to deny that Chara was a key piece to their team. However we all know Kaberle was not a big factor at all. But as a whole, the Bruins are littered with Canadians.
 

octopi

Registered User
Dec 29, 2004
31,547
4
This is true from a statistical angle, but it's a bit misleading.

Boston's top 9 scorers were all forwards. Basically they had an all-Canadian forward group except for Krejci, and their top-9 were the leading scorers on the team by default. The one guy who wasn't Canadian, Krejci, led the team in scoring and GWG as their first-line center.

Tied for their the defensive scoring lead were Tomas Kaberle (Czech) and Dennis Seidenberg (German). Of course, the Slovak Chara was by far and away their best blueliner once you get past the scoring stats. To be brutally honest, the only Canadian defenseman who played particularly well for them in the playoffs was Ference. Boychuk was a turnover machine and McQuaid was simply the least important guy in the group. For a team that relied VERY heavily on its defensive unit, it seems relevant that 3 of their top 4 defensemen including their captain were European.

If there's one thing Boston relies on more than its defensemen, it's their goalies. Tim Thomas is American and Tuukka Rask is Finnish.

Again, you're right as a matter of fact that 9 of their top 10 scorers were Canadians, but I think the better way to frame that argument is that their forward group was distinctly Canadian in character while their blue line and goalies were more of a mixed bag.

Okay, Boston had a high Canadian contingent. But every Wings team that has won the Cup in our lifetime had a huge Russian/Swedish/Czech prescence. Hockey is big in Canada and 60% (or more?) of NHLers are Canadians.So obviously, a lot of NHL teams are going to have a large Candian representation....

PS, a lot of European guys end up in the KHL and SEL.
 
Last edited:

Dennis Bonvie

Registered User
Dec 29, 2007
29,209
17,565
Connecticut
Saying that black men are generally faster than white men is not racist
Taking a random black man and a random white man and saying the black man is faster than the white one without having seen them run is prejudiced and racist.[/QUOTE]

I'd call it an educated guess. Nothing to do with racism.
 

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,590
15,951
not to beat a dead horse, but is it still an educated guess when a guy screening applications for a statistician job thinks to himself "men are better than women at math" because, statistically speaking, men test higher in math?

or, less innocently, is it still an educated guess when that same guy screens out the female applicants because there are just too many to go through and, statistically speaking, the job is probably not going to go to a woman?

at what point does an "educated guess" become something else? where do we draw that line?
 

BobbySmithFan

Registered User
Jun 17, 2011
250
0
Hollywood North
A well known face is good for the game. A non-robotic voice is good for the game. He isn't wooden, which is a good thing. Jeremy Roenick, Brett Hull and even Mike Milbury with their honest approaches are good for the game, refreshing even. I think it is that type of resentment about Cherry that has somehow kept him out of the Hall of Fame as a builder



That's 3 out of 6 but you sure don't use a very big sample size do you?

Since 1965 all but 5 of the Conn Smythe winners have been Canadian. Yeah, yeah, there wasn't Europeans in the NHL in 1965. Okay let's be fair and start it from 1990 then. 16 out of 21 since 1990 have been Canadian. Two Americans, a pair of Swedes and a Russian. That's about 80% since the European explosion. Not bad.

Just for the record too, this isn't to say that there haven't been some Europeans and the odd American who are great playoff performers. Of course not. But this does tie into the belief that there is an underlying level that Canadians can often reach. Call it tradition, call it something in our blood, I don't know but maybe its just the never-say-die attitude and never quitting until the whistle blows. Maybe its the more physical gritty game in the postseason but whatever it is I think there is a good reason why the Stanley Cup winners are so often littered with Canadian players.

Even post lockout:
Canes - lots of Canadians. Best players were Ward, Staal, Stillman and BrindAmour
Ducks - heavy, heavy Canadian prescence. Basically a Canadian team with Selanne and Pahlsson
Red Wings - heavy on the European talent, best players were non-Canadian
Penguins - heavy on the North American talent with Gonchar and Malkin as Russians
Hawks - Very high Canadian percentage
Bruins - Almost all the team was Canadian

Now these are recent examples and you know as well as I do the further we go back in the NHL the more Candian-central it gets. So we're talking about 4 Cup winning teams being almost exclusively Canadian. The other (Pens) had more Americans than usual and a couple of Euros and the other was the Red Wings a very Euro-laden team.

So I tdon't think its discriminating to suggest that when the chips are down a Canadian team has a better chance at finding a way to win. Ask the 2011 Canucks.


Ridiculous!

The Sedins were bad in the finals...and Lucic was invisible for them as well.

But the Sedins had a good playoff offensively, and Kesler was an animal playing on a messed up hip that needed to be surgically repaired to get the Canucks to the Final, and to a game 7.

And you know what? American Kesler shut down a Canadian Joe Thornton, Canadian Patrick Marleau, and Canadian Dan Boyle was pretty ineffective when the Canucks beat the Sharks in 5.

And who shut down the Sedins? An American and a European. Thomas and Chara were the best players for Boston.

Plus you have to consider SIGNIFICANCE. If the Canucks had won game 7 of the final, you can't say "they won with Tanner Glass, therefore every team needs a kid from Saskatchewan to win a cup." Tanner Glass played 2 minutes a night.

So the press box Canadian (likely because they represent over 60% of all NHL players) doesn't mean you need more Canadians to win.

20% of players in the NBA currently are from outside the U.S. Yet the teams that win are usually more than 20% American. So can we conclude that you need more Americans to win an NBA Championship? So how do you explain Nowitzki?

Actually, in last year's NBA finals, the Miami Heat and Dallas Mavericks had a combined total of 3 American-born white basketball players. So I guess if you got a white boy from the USA, you aren't going to win???


This is all xenophobic, nationalistic B.S. Let's face it, as Canadians, we don't really have a space program, we don't have an empire, we don't have any international significance politically, so the thought of us possibly NOT being the best at this one thing scares the crap out of us.

There is no scientific study that Canadians have something "in their blood." After all, Canadians are made up of different races. How is a kid who grows up in Vancouver more driven to win the Stanley Cup than a kid who grows up in Minnesota? I'm FROM Vancouver and I don't think that could be the case, nor could ever be proven.

Do you think Brazilians want the World Cup more? Do you think that British Born players in the English Premier League want the FA CUP more than the other Euros who play in that league? You think Mariano Rivera or the Puerto Rican Alex Rodriguez doesn't want the World Series as much as an American, because more Americans have won it? Do you think Steve Nash is not driven enough to win an NBA Champion, because being Canadian makes The Stanley Cup "in his blood"?? This is ridiculous.

The Stanley Cup, I hate to say this, is not sacred. Its a sports trophy. Winning a sports trophy means winning the playoffs. That's what it means in the KHL, the Swedish Elite League and the NHL. And usually, the team that is the best, that gels, and has some luck along the way will win. Nationality has NOTHING to do with it.


Corellation/Causation????

I could show you that more Americans=NBA Championships and More Canadians=Stanley Cup Championships too.

But to suggest it means that those players are more driven than other players of different nationalities? Show me one peer-reviewed scientific study that proves it please.
 
Last edited:

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,590
15,951
FYI: wayne simmonds apparently just was mic'd calling sean avery two words that begin with F, the second one being a homophobic slur.

the thread on the main board is horrifying (and seemingly filled with 12 year olds).
 

jcbio11

Registered User
Aug 17, 2008
2,785
457
Bratislava
Ridiculous!

There is no scientific study that Canadians have something "in their blood." After all, Canadians are made up of different races. How is a kid who grows up in Vancouver more driven to win the Stanley Cup than a kid who grows up in Minnesota? I'm FROM Vancouver and I don't think that could be the case, nor could ever be proven.

Didn't want to quote the whole thing, but good post. This "it's in our blood" nonsense is beyond ridiculous.

Also big phil, about that thread about Russians not being good playoff performers from long time ago - wouldn't you agree that Malkin and Ovechkin ***** that thread? Both are just wonderful and special playoff performers. I guess they have something in their blood too :sarcasm:
 

Kyle McMahon

Registered User
May 10, 2006
13,301
4,352
Ridiculous!

The Sedins were bad in the finals...and Lucic was invisible for them as well.

But the Sedins had a good playoff offensively, and Kesler was an animal playing on a messed up hip that needed to be surgically repaired to get the Canucks to the Final, and to a game 7.

And you know what? American Kesler shut down a Canadian Joe Thornton, Canadian Patrick Marleau, and Canadian Dan Boyle was pretty ineffective when the Canucks beat the Sharks in 5.

And who shut down the Sedins? An American and a European. Thomas and Chara were the best players for Boston.

Plus you have to consider SIGNIFICANCE. If the Canucks had won game 7 of the final, you can't say "they won with Tanner Glass, therefore every team needs a kid from Saskatchewan to win a cup." Tanner Glass played 2 minutes a night.

So the press box Canadian (likely because they represent over 60% of all NHL players) doesn't mean you need more Canadians to win.

20% of players in the NBA currently are from outside the U.S. Yet the teams that win are usually more than 20% American. So can we conclude that you need more Americans to win an NBA Championship? So how do you explain Nowitzki?

Actually, in last year's NBA finals, the Miami Heat and Dallas Mavericks had a combined total of 3 American-born white basketball players. So I guess if you got a white boy from the USA, you aren't going to win???


This is all xenophobic, nationalistic B.S. Let's face it, as Canadians, we don't really have a space program, we don't have an empire, we don't have any international significance politically, so the thought of us possibly NOT being the best at this one thing scares the crap out of us.

There is no scientific study that Canadians have something "in their blood." After all, Canadians are made up of different races. How is a kid who grows up in Vancouver more driven to win the Stanley Cup than a kid who grows up in Minnesota? I'm FROM Vancouver and I don't think that could be the case, nor could ever be proven.

Do you think Brazilians want the World Cup more? Do you think that British Born players in the English Premier League want the FA CUP more than the other Euros who play in that league? You think Mariano Rivera or the Puerto Rican Alex Rodriguez doesn't want the World Series as much as an American, because more Americans have won it? Do you think Steve Nash is not driven enough to win an NBA Champion, because being Canadian makes The Stanley Cup "in his blood"?? This is ridiculous.

The Stanley Cup, I hate to say this, is not sacred. Its a sports trophy. Winning a sports trophy means winning the playoffs. That's what it means in the KHL, the Swedish Elite League and the NHL. And usually, the team that is the best, that gels, and has some luck along the way will win. Nationality has NOTHING to do with it.


Corellation/Causation????

I could show you that more Americans=NBA Championships and More Canadians=Stanley Cup Championships too.

But to suggest it means that those players are more driven than other players of different nationalities? Show me one peer-reviewed scientific study that proves it please.

IMO Canadian and American players are a little more driven to win a Stanley Cup than Europeans, generally speaking. The Stanley Cup is the pinnacle of the sport to anybody that grew up in North America.

In Europe, an Olympic gold medal is seen as the pinnacle by some players. I've always believed that the Europeans will have that extra bit of drive in international tournaments as compared to North Americans because of this.

So no, there is nothing genetic or "in their blood" about this, simply a matter of growing up in different cultures with differing amounts of emphasis placed on certain accomplishments.
 

Canadiens1958

Registered User
Nov 30, 2007
20,020
2,773
Lake Memphremagog, QC.
Profiling

not to beat a dead horse, but is it still an educated guess when a guy screening applications for a statistician job thinks to himself "men are better than women at math" because, statistically speaking, men test higher in math?

or, less innocently, is it still an educated guess when that same guy screens out the female applicants because there are just too many to go through and, statistically speaking, the job is probably not going to go to a woman?

at what point does an "educated guess" become something else? where do we draw that line?

What you describe as an "educated guess" has all the qualities of profiling which in many instances has been ruled illegal. Police profiling by race or gender being examples.

It becomes illegal when rights and/or opportunity are denied to the individuals so profiled.
 

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,590
15,951
What you describe as an "educated guess" has all the qualities of profiling which in many instances has been ruled illegal. Police profiling by race or gender being examples.

It becomes illegal when rights and/or opportunity are denied to the individuals so profiled.

yes, i know that. i've certainly undergone enough sensitivity training workshops in both canada and the united states to have the legal point driven home. but my question, which was rhetorical, was more about where do we as individual moral people draw the line for ourselves?

IMO Canadian and American players are a little more driven to win a Stanley Cup than Europeans, generally speaking. The Stanley Cup is the pinnacle of the sport to anybody that grew up in North America.

In Europe, an Olympic gold medal is seen as the pinnacle by some players. I've always believed that the Europeans will have that extra bit of drive in international tournaments as compared to North Americans because of this.

So no, there is nothing genetic or "in their blood" about this, simply a matter of growing up in different cultures with differing amounts of emphasis placed on certain accomplishments.

well, i don't think anyone, even don cherry, would take "in their blood" literally. isn't anyone who says "in your blood" talking about how you were brought up/trained, rather than russian people being biologically or genetically predisposed to playing badly in the stanley cup playoffs? (hence, not racism.)

but what you say is very reasonable kyle. i think for certain european players of the older generation (some, maybe not a lot, definitely not close to all), this may be true. roman cechmanek almost certainly. pavol demitra maybe? i've heard the argument made about mats sundin, but i will abstain from making a comment.

my thinking is, if you made it to the NHL, you have to be a highly competitive and extremely proud individual, no matter how naturally gifted you are. so i doubt there are too many guys who have trouble getting up for stanley cup playoff games, regardless of nationality. at the very most, i'd accept that some number of europeans, for whom the cup may not be as culturally life or death as the olympics or WC, might be more predisposed to letting their intensity flag a bit if things are going badly and they have supreme national glory at the world championships waiting back home.

i also think that for the current generation of european players, they grew up wanting to win the cup as badly as the kid from moose jaw. they grew up watching NHL playoff games, they want to win the trophy that nik lidstrom won or that dominik hasek won or datsyuk, or lehtinen, or whoever.

beyond that, i would defer to what C1958 said upthread about the "long grind" of canadian minor hockey, vs. the european youth system. don't know for sure about the US system, but i think i've heard they are also short seasons-- but that probably depends if you grew up playing minnesota or massachussetts, or in texas or california, e.g.
 
Last edited:

Mc5RingsAndABeer

5-14-6-1
May 25, 2011
20,184
1,385
And this moron still has a job on CBC. :shakehead

Not only that, but he was one of the 10 finalists for greatest Canadian. :facepalm:

You can just see Ron MacLean squirm every time Cherry starts talking about Europeans or French-Canadians. Another poster nailed it - Cherry just appeals to the those without class and plays that role well.

OP said:
The Ottawa 67's, Kevin Weekes's junior, had three black players. One player on an opposing team said, `Hey, ref, how are we going to start the game today? Are we going to do a jump ball?'
I can see how this could be a friendly joke and not a racist remark, depending on the context.
 

Canadiens1958

Registered User
Nov 30, 2007
20,020
2,773
Lake Memphremagog, QC.
Self - Interest

yes, i know that. i've certainly undergone enough sensitivity training workshops in both canada and the united states to have the legal point driven home. but my question, which was rhetorical, was more about where do we as individual moral people draw the line for ourselves?



well, i don't think anyone, even don cherry, would take "in their blood" literally. isn't anyone who says "in your blood" talking about how you were brought up/trained, rather than russian people being biologically or genetically predisposed to playing badly in the stanley cup playoffs? (hence, not racism.)

but what you say is very reasonable kyle. i think for certain european players of the older generation (some, maybe not a lot, definitely not close to all), this may be true. roman cechmanek almost certainly. pavol demitra maybe? i've heard the argument made about mats sundin, but i will abstain from making a comment.

my thinking is, if you made it to the NHL, you have to be a highly competitive and extremely proud individual, no matter how naturally gifted you are. so i doubt there are too many guys who have trouble getting up for stanley cup playoff games, regardless of nationality. at the very most, i'd accept that some number of europeans, for whom the cup may not be as culturally life or death as the olympics or WC, might be more predisposed to letting their intensity flag a bit if things are going badly and they have supreme national glory at the world championships waiting back home.

i also think that for the current generation of european players, they grew up wanting to win the cup as badly as the kid from moose jaw. they grew up watching NHL playoff games, they want to win the trophy that nik lidstrom won or that dominik hasek won or datsyuk, or lehtinen, or whoever.

beyond that, i would defer to what C1958 said upthread about the "long grind" of canadian minor hockey, vs. the european youth system. don't know for sure about the US system, but i think i've heard they are also short seasons-- but that probably depends if you grew up playing minnesota or massachussetts, or in texas or california, e.g.

Basic self-interest should be the driving force. You want to hire the best person for the job, be treated by the best medical professionals,
enjoy the best of everything in life. If people want to deny themselves certain advantages then it is their loss.

In the USA the seasons are equally long as Canada when it comes to youth hockey. Tournaments, state championships, off season elit hockey with unfederated teams flying across three time zones to participate in weekend tournaments.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->