I never knew Maurice Richard had issues with the league...
- Thread starter Isles Junkie
- Start date
Very good film. Probably more true to history than many film biographies but there are still some "improvements" made to the story.
As to French-Canadians hearing ethnic slurs onthe ice, it still goes on and some folks are still upset by it. What Shane Doan did or didn't say to/about an all Quebec-born on-ice officiating crew in Montreal a few years ago still gets a lot of local blood up. Heck it even politicians got into the act. Then the lawyers got involved.
As to French-Canadians hearing ethnic slurs onthe ice, it still goes on and some folks are still upset by it. What Shane Doan did or didn't say to/about an all Quebec-born on-ice officiating crew in Montreal a few years ago still gets a lot of local blood up. Heck it even politicians got into the act. Then the lawyers got involved.
Isles Junkie
Registered User
mitchdisaster
Threadkiller
Bear of Bad News
Your Third or Fourth Favorite HFBoards Admin
- Sep 27, 2005
- 13,580
- 27,264
mitchdisaster
Threadkiller
jkrx
Registered User
- Feb 4, 2010
- 4,337
- 21
Apparently French-Canadians are off-limits, and yet, many Canadians don't seem to have a problem making fun of European players
Fish on The Sand
Untouchable
The NHL was founded on a tradition of racism as evidenced by prominent figures such as Conn Smythe and Foster Hewitt and continuing to this day in the form of Don Cherry.
I've never bothered to look it up, but in the movie Conn Smythe offers Mrs Richard (50, or 500,000) just to sign with the Leafs.
In a scrum against Boston, a ref was holding on to Maurice when a Bruins player punched him. He got free, punched the ref out. Maurice got suspended, the Bruin player got nothing.
I wasn't a live when Maurice played, Richard and other French Canadians were heavily discriminated against. A real touching moment is when Dick Irvin makes an announcement in French.
I'm not French, or quebecois fyi.
jkrx
Registered User
- Feb 4, 2010
- 4,337
- 21
Well, it has been vice-versa too. Like when Keane said he didnt want to learn french when becoming captain of Montreal Canadiens. It's definitly not a one way street.
Don't take the movie at face value. It was made by Richard fans who only portray one perspective on reality.
The fact is, there is no evidence anywhere of "phantom assists" being awarded to Gordie Howe to deny Richard a scoring title.
When such an important point in the movie is distorted like that, how can you really take the rest at face value? The movie borders on a propaganda piece in some ways.
The fact is, there is no evidence anywhere of "phantom assists" being awarded to Gordie Howe to deny Richard a scoring title.
When such an important point in the movie is distorted like that, how can you really take the rest at face value? The movie borders on a propaganda piece in some ways.
Moobles
Registered User
- Mar 15, 2009
- 2,555
- 0
A lot has changed since then and various forms of discrimination were rampant back then in the league. I remember reading that Willie O'Ree (first black player to be called up to the NHL) said he always got the worst fan treatment when he played in Toronto and Montreal. It wasn't just anglo-NHL hates franco-Quebec, issues of identity were (and arguably are still) pretty widespread throughout the league.
Last edited:
no evidence? I'm sure some games were televised. It would take a systematic study of all the games, but you can't say there's no evidence before anyone has even looked.
I have asked others who assert there were "phanton assists" to come up with some evidence in the past and nobody has ever been able to produce any.
Fabrications from Richard fans, most likely.
You're probably asking for the impossible. I doubt many people have copies of Howe's old games lying around.
it's not unbelievable though... you tack on a third assist here and there...
Not unbelievable for some two-bit beer league. I highly doubt NHL officials would tack on unearned assists - that is a pretty serious assertion and without evidence, it is simply drivel spread by Richard fans. What would there possibly be to gain for the NHL to commit this type of fraud?
How would fans in Montreal even come up with this theory? In the 50s, hardly any games were televised - where would they have gotten their evidence? Fact is, they had no evidence. They liked to play the victim and used that victim mentality to spread a myth.
Without evidence, the "phantom assist" theory is simply BS.
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
Agreed. Or there would have been an outcry at the time... unless we assume Montreal fans' fanaticism is a new thing? Lol
Hockey Outsider
Registered User
- Jan 16, 2005
- 9,185
- 14,582
The “Gordie Howe phantom assists†argument doesn’t stand up to any serious scrutiny.
Gordie Howe won six Art Ross trophies: 1951, 1952, 1953, 1954, 1957 and 1963. I’m assuming no Richard supporters can question three of those Art Ross trophies: 1952 (Richard finished 15th), 1957 (6th) and 1963 (out of the top twenty). Let’s look at the other three Art Ross trophies.
In 1951, Howe led the league in scoring with 86 points; Richard was second with 66 points. Howe led the league in scoring by 20 points – if Howe “stole†the Art Ross from the Rocket, he would have had to earn at least 21 phantom points in 70 games. That’s close to one phantom point every three games. I’m not saying it’s impossible, but I think it’s highly unlikely for Howe to get that many phantom points without anyone noticing.
In 1953, Howe led the league in scoring with 95 points – at the time that was the single season all-time record. Howe’s linemate Ted Lindsay was second with 71 points; Richard was third with 61 points. Howe is a staggering 34 points ahead of Richard, in a 70 game season. If Howe “stole†the Art Ross, he would have needed basically one phantom point everyone two games. Again, nothing is impossible, but Howe’s margin of victory is so enormous that it would be virtually impossible to create that many phantom points, without everyone noticing.
In 1954, Howe led the league with 81 points; Richard was second with 67 points. Howe would have needed 15 phantom points (in 70 games) to steal the Art Ross. That’s just under one point every four games. Once again, I can’t say it’s impossible, but it seems highly improbably that Howe could earn so many phantom assists without arousing a lot of suspicion.
In summary: Richard finished out of the top five in scoring during three of Howe’s six Art Ross trophies. For the other three, Howe finished so far ahead of Richard that a couple of phantom points here and there would make no difference. If the league gave the scoring title to Howe, they would have had to give him a phantom point every two, three or four games, for the length of the entire season – I think it’s nearly impossible to give one player so many fake points without anybody noticing.
is there any reason the art ross would be stolen from maurice richard, but not from beliveau or geoffrion? or any other elite from any other period?
i have only heard this idea of the art ross being stolen from richard in reference to gordie howe. but richard was never close to howe in scoring when howe won the art ross.
richard was much closer to winning the art ross in '45 (lach by 7p), '47 (bentley by 1p) and '55 (geoffrion, suspension, by 1p).
i have only heard this idea of the art ross being stolen from richard in reference to gordie howe. but richard was never close to howe in scoring when howe won the art ross.
richard was much closer to winning the art ross in '45 (lach by 7p), '47 (bentley by 1p) and '55 (geoffrion, suspension, by 1p).
bigotry is an appropriate word.
I always thought richard is a bit overrated. Hull and Beliveau have more impressive 'individual resumes'. Even stan mikita has more hardware than him and mikita's era of 1961-1970 was way more competitive than 1944-mid 50's.
MontrealHabitant
Registered User
You can't compare generations like that. Difference of equipment, lifestyle etc.
As for the NHL, it was a "bigotry fueled" league for a very long time - until the late 60's and 70's when things started to turn around - (What has happened in the 60's that could potentially change that ? Hmmm think about it HFBoards, here's a tip, it's related to a 17 minutes speech)
Funny as it might sound, the "revolution" of the 60's would eventually lead to the demise of the constant domination of the Montreal Canadiens dynasty's, particulary in the 80's. Which isn't surprising because well, the Montreal Canadiens we're simply not the only ones anymore drafting Quebec born players (OK the Canadiens never we're truly "alone" using that talent pool - but teams didn't really start drafting Quebecers until the 60's/70's - (Capitalism was bound to overtake Bigotry/Racism, I mean let's be honest here, owners care about their pockets, not the color/language of the players).
As for the life story of Maurice Richard, most of it is actually true (the bigotry, prejudice etc) - but I agree over one thing, there hasn't been conclusive proof that Howe was awarded phantom assists, it sucks for Howe though because he is pretty much seen as a nobody in Quebec even nowadays (For those who hadn't noticed that during the 100th year of the Club celebrations, poor guy lol)
All in all, Americans should simply read up on the subject and base their opinion on their personal findings - because truthfully Maurice Richard was/is worshiped in Quebec - so obviously the opinion is biased. But so is the opinion of Ontario and the rest of Canada (Alberta etc) and well, primary in west Canada which simply is the closest thing to Conservatives/Republicans - and without meaning to group everybody in the same pot - bigots usually are on the right of the political sphere
.
LeBlondeDemon10
Registered User
Ad
Upcoming events
-
Game 5 Texas Stars @ Milwaukee Admirals - Series tied 2-2Wagers: 4Staked: $455.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
Game 4 Florida Panthers @ Boston Bruins - Florida leads series 2-1Wagers: 8Staked: $28,756.00Event closes
- Updated:
-
-
Game 4 Denver Nuggets @ Minnesota Timberwolves - MIN Leads Series 2-1Wagers: 3Staked: $1,335.00Event closes- Updated: