Let's Watch - 1972/9/02 - USSR vs Canada - Game 1 at Montréal

[Fenway]

If you had to pick one game that changed hockey this match has to be considered.

Previous installments:
1959/4/7: Boston Bruins vs Toronto Maple Leafs
1960/4/7: Montreal Canadiens vs Toronto Maple Leafs
1963/4/18: Toronto Maple Leafs vs Detroit Red Wings
1963/12/7: Toronto Maple Leafs vs Chicago Black Hawks
1965/4/1: Montreal Canadiens vs Toronto Maple Leafs
1966/4/14: Toronto Maple Leafs vs Montreal Canadiens
1968/3/10: Chicago Blackhawks vs Toronto Maple Leafs
1974/5/5: Philadelphia Flyers vs New York Rangers
​

Click to read more...

 

[alko]

According to newspapers, this lost was something brutal for Canadian folks, wasn't it?

 

[Fenway]

According to newspapers, this lost was something brutal for Canadian folks, wasn't it?

Complete shock. The US headline from the Boston Globe captured the feeling after the game. It wasn't that Canada had lost that stung it was how badly they had. I was at that game ( drove up from Boston ) and the buzz around the city was most were expecting Canada to win the series easily and many were walking an 8-0 sweep.

One memory I have is that a delay as a pane of glass had to be replaced and Team Canada was lounging around the bench but the Russians were doing wind sprints.

 

[alko]

This is also cool:
... more stories and photos on pages 28, 29, 50, 53, 54, 55, 56.

That 7 pages. How many did this newspaper had pages at all?

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I remember watching and rooting hard for Canada. Because they scored so quickly and then made it 2-0, it appeared Canada was taking it easy on the Soviets, as we were all told this would be a mismatch.

Watching it now its clear that, even when down 2-0, the USSR team was better.

 

[Fenway]

That was a horrible weekend to be in Montreal - My brother called the hotel at 4 AM to see if I was alive

Sinden was very cocky before the game

Boston and New England watched the games with the same fervor as Canadians - The Bruins were the defending Cup champs and the games got huge ratings even with the Munich Olympics and a Red Sox pennant race as competition.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

That was a horrible weekend to be in Montreal - My brother called the hotel at 4 AM to see if I was alive

View attachment 367835

Sinden was very cocky before the game

View attachment 367836


Boston and New England watched the games with the same fervor as Canadians - The Bruins were the defending Cup champs and the games got huge ratings even with the Munich Olympics and a Red Sox pennant race as competition.



View attachment 367839
View attachment 367837

Sinden was cocky?

The Soviet coach:

"I hope Mr. Sinden gives us a good practice so we can win the world championship again and these games can be of use to us."

 

[Fenway]

I remember watching and rooting hard for Canada. Because they scored so quickly and then made it 2-0, it appeared Canada was taking it easy on the Soviets, as we were all told this would be a mismatch.

Watching it now its clear that, even when down 2-0, the USSR team was better.

One thing that was overlooked was the Soviets were in training all summer for this competition and Canada's training camp by comparison was a joke with players more concerned about golf than hockey.

What changed that night was Canada would never take the Soviets lightly again.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

One thing that was overlooked was the Soviets were in training all summer for this competition and Canada's training camp by comparison was a joke with players more concerned about golf than hockey.

What changed that night was Canada would never take the Soviets lightly again.

It was overlooked because the consensus (on this side of the Atlantic) was that the Soviets were completely inferior to the Canadian pros.

And your premise is correct, that one game changed everything.

 

[Fenway]

Sinden was cocky?

The Soviets did their homework. They went as far as to install video equipment at their embassy in Ottawa to tape Hockey Night in Canada to study the NHL. By comparison, Canada knew little about them.

Of course, the Canada Cup would follow with some of the greatest hockey that has ever been played. The Soviets won the CC in 1981 but they were on a mission after what had happened in Lake Placid the year before. The 1987 CC Final was about as good as the game can be.

 

[Professor What]

I can't help but wonder if that early 2-0 lead wasn't bad for Canada. They were already dealing with ridiculous expectations, with people going on about how they were going to whitewash the Soviets 8-0, and that goal right out of the gates, and then a second one when they really weren't playing well might have only served to reinforce those expectations and maybe even create some additional panic when the wheels came off. I really feel like they would have been better served to have had to worked harder for those early goals.

 

[VMBM]

I don't need to rewatch it - or at least I don't want to

It's certainly a legendary game and the start of the most intriguing international hockey rivalry ever (I really like the USSR vs Czechoslovakia rivalry too). And it's like Kharlamov immediately became a legend in this game, Tretiak too.

I have to say, though, that the hockey played in the game is absolutely horrible, and yes, I'm taking it into consideration that it was played almost 50 years ago. There were actually some really good games played in the series (imo G3 and G8 are the best and true classics), but this isn't one of them. I'd say that even the Soviets are not playing awfully well, certainly not on defense; they are just somewhat lucky that Team Canada wasn't truly able to capitalize on their mistakes... and well, after his initial shakiness, Tretiak played a very good game. It's occasionally downright puzzling to watch that even when the Canadians are having a 2 on 1 or something, it ends with a player taking a slapshot, without any passing involved and Tretiak making a fairly easy save. The Russians were certainly the forerunners when it came to passing, especially on (potential) scoring plays.

BTW, the game was still fairly even around the midway of the 3rd period; only when Mikhailov scores the 5-3 goal, it's all Soviets after that; the Canadians had nothing left in the tank.

 

[alko]

Regarding Tretjak. Read somewhere, that Plante gave him some on-ice training before this tournament. He was (Plante) afraid, otherwise it will be a shock for him (Tretjak). Is that true?

 

[Theokritos]

Regarding Tretjak. Read somewhere, that Plante gave him some on-ice training before this tournament. He was (Plante) afraid, otherwise it will be a shock for him (Tretjak). Is that true?

He didn't give him on-ice training, but he had a talk with him and gave him some advice because he felt pity with what Tretyak was in for.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I don't need to rewatch it - or at least I don't want to

It's certainly a legendary game and the start of the most intriguing international hockey rivalry ever (I really like the USSR vs Czechoslovakia rivalry too). And it's like Kharlamov immediately became a legend in this game, Tretiak too.

I have to say, though, that the hockey played in the game is absolutely horrible, and yes, I'm taking it into consideration that it was played almost 50 years ago. There were actually some really good games played in the series (imo G3 and G8 are the best and true classics), but this isn't one of them. I'd say that even the Soviets are not playing awfully well, certainly not on defense; they are just somewhat lucky that Team Canada wasn't truly able to capitalize on their mistakes... and well, after his initial shakiness, Tretiak played a very good game. It's occasionally downright puzzling to watch that even when the Canadians are having a 2 on 1 or something, it ends with a player taking a slapshot, without any passing involved and Tretiak making a fairly easy save. The Russians were certainly the forerunners when it came to passing, especially on (potential) scoring plays.

BTW, the game was still fairly even around the midway of the 3rd period; only when Mikhailov scores the 5-3 goal, it's all Soviets after that; the Canadians had nothing left in the tank.

I only watched the first period and did not think it was horrible hockey at all.

There were a couple of 2 on 1 chances for Canada that ended with slap shots. They were both by Mahovlich, not known for his playmaking.

 

[Fenway]

I don't need to rewatch it - or at least I don't want to

It's certainly a legendary game and the start of the most intriguing international hockey rivalry ever (I really like the USSR vs Czechoslovakia rivalry too). And it's like Kharlamov immediately became a legend in this game, Tretiak too.

I have to say, though, that the hockey played in the game is absolutely horrible, and yes, I'm taking it into consideration that it was played almost 50 years ago. There were actually some really good games played in the series (imo G3 and G8 are the best and true classics), but this isn't one of them.

BTW, the game was still fairly even around the midway of the 3rd period; only when Mikhailov scores the 5-3 goal, it's all Soviets after that; the Canadians had nothing left in the tank.

It was very warm in Montreal that day and the Forum was not air-conditioned.

Team Canada was gassed at the end and maybe that is why I remember the USSR doing wind sprints while a pane of glass was replaced.

One thing about the tape is telling - the shock in Foster Hewitt's voice as everything fell apart.

I have seen the US broadcast which was handled by the Bruins TV station WSBK and syndicated to other stations and play by play announcer Fred Cusick and analyst John Pierson knew 10 minutes in the USSR was very, very good.

The games' broadcasts were produced by Hockey Canada, using experienced hockey commentators from Canadian television networks. In English, CBC Television (CBC) and CTV Television Network (CTV) split the coverage, with CTV carrying games one, three, five, seven and eight, while CBC aired games two, four, six and eight. Foster Hewitt called the play-by-play and former player Brian Conacher was the color commentator for all of the games. At the request of the broadcasters, Hewitt came out of semi-retirement to be part of the broadcast. In French, all games were broadcast on SRC and the broadcast team was Rene Lecavalier and former player Jacques Plante for the games played in Canada, and with SRC's Richard Garneau for the games played in Moscow - Garneau was already in Europe, having covered the 1972 Summer Olympics. For the eighth game, it was estimated that 16 million Canadians watched the match. (A year earlier, the national census had counted 21,963,000 Canadians.)

A partnership between Bobby Orr Enterprises and Harold Ballard bought the broadcast rights from Hockey Canada for $750,000. The bid, negotiated by Alan Eagleson, who, at the time, was both Orr's agent and a Hockey Canada director, outbid McLaren Advertising, producers of Hockey Night in Canada, which had offered $500,000. Ballard-Orr realized a profit on the series of $1.2 million.

The series was picked up by some U.S. television stations The telecasts of games one through four were produced by WSBK (Channel 38) in Boston and called by Bruins' announcers Fred Cusick and John Peirson. After efforts by WSBK to get rights to the four games in Moscow broke down, a last-minute deal by Boston public television station WGBH-TV allowed it to broadcast the CBC/CTV feed of games five through eight and to make the telecast available to PBS stations in several American cities, mostly those who had NHL, minor-league, or major college hockey teams. WGBH fed the Canadian telecasts; games six, seven, and eight were seen on WGBH and PBS on a tape-delay in prime-time.

The Soviet play-by-play was done by Nikolai Ozerov. In the style of that time, the Soviets did not televise anything during the pre-game, intermissions or post-game. During the intermission, the screen went black, with classical music playing quietly. After the games, the broadcast simply ended and Soviet television networks returned to regular programming

 

[VMBM]

I only watched the first period and did not think it was horrible hockey at all.

To each his own.

There are some terrific individual efforts (and even good team play from the Soviets), but to me the play looks awfully sloppy.

If you haven't watched the aforementioned (by me) game 3 and 8 of the series, I think you're in for a treat; much better hockey imho.

There were a couple of 2 on 1 chances for Canada that ended with slap shots. They were both by Mahovlich, not known for his playmaking.

There's one by Rod Gilbert (on 2 on 1 with Ratelle) in the 2nd period too. Never mind playmaking, they both could still make a some kind of pass, right? Or at least use a wrister in those kinds of situations. I know that the Canadian scouting falsely informed them that Tretiak 'sucked' (or however it was put), so maybe there was some "let's test this kid with big slappers" mentality...

 

[Fenway]

If you haven't watched the aforementioned (by me) game 3 and 8 of the series, I think you're in for a treat; much better hockey imho.

We will get to that

Game 2 in Toronto it appeared Team Canada had been awoken and they won easily



but it was Game 3 in Winnipeg we knew this would be a war



and then came Game 4 in Vancouver

 

[Fenway]

For a historical perspective, this farce happened at the Munich Olympics in basketball at the same time

 

[reckoning]

- The legend is that Canada was out classed from start to finish, but the reality is that this was a one-goal game close to the middle of the third, and Canada could have won it had Dryden come up with a few stops on shots he should have had. I thought Canada played much worse in Game 4 than in this one.
- Not to say that Canada wasn't a disappointment here though. Aside from Dryden, I'd rate Awrey, Hadfield and Redmond as Canada's worst players in this game. Their best player was probably Peter Mahovlich.
- Phil Esposito played a fine game, but those long shifts are ugly near the end.
- There is a stark difference between the Park-Bergman pairing and the Awrey-Seiling one. The first one seems to be able to get the puck out of the defensive zone quickly, the other one can't.
- There was a 17 skater limit for these games, Sinden wanted four lines, so he went with only 5 defencemen. After the outcome here, he made sure to dress 6 defencemen in the rest of the games.
- Only two players in Canada's lineup (Clarke and Berenson) were from expansion teams.
- The NHL team with the most players in this game was the Rangers with five. Of those 5, only Brad Park remained in the lineup for Game 2.
- At the end Brian Conacher makes the comment "Canada has to find a way to get Bobby Orr into the lineup". There was no chance of that happening so soon after his surgery, but luckily for Canada help would be on the way in the form of Serge Savard.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

- The legend is that Canada was out classed from start to finish, but the reality is that this was a one-goal game close to the middle of the third, and Canada could have won it had Dryden come up with a few stops on shots he should have had. I thought Canada played much worse in Game 4 than in this one.
- Not to say that Canada wasn't a disappointment here though. Aside from Dryden, I'd rate Awrey, Hadfield and Redmond as Canada's worst players in this game. Their best player was probably Peter Mahovlich.
- Phil Esposito played a fine game, but those long shifts are ugly near the end.
- There is a stark difference between the Park-Bergman pairing and the Awrey-Seiling one. The first one seems to be able to get the puck out of the defensive zone quickly, the other one can't.
- There was a 17 skater limit for these games, Sinden wanted four lines, so he went with only 5 defencemen. After the outcome here, he made sure to dress 6 defencemen in the rest of the games.
- Only two players in Canada's lineup (Clarke and Berenson) were from expansion teams.
- The NHL team with the most players in this game was the Rangers with five. Of those 5, only Brad Park remained in the lineup for Game 2.
- At the end Brian Conacher makes the comment "Canada has to find a way to get Bobby Orr into the lineup". There was no chance of that happening so soon after his surgery, but luckily for Canada help would be on the way in the form of Serge Savard.

Agreed, Don Awrey was badly overmatched.

 

[VMBM]

Regarding game 3...

While Kharlamov's performance in game 1 is probably usually considered his best in the series, in my opinion it's the 3rd game where he shines the most. Yes, he scored 'only' one goal (compared to those two in g1) and there might be somewhat less truly eye-catching individual plays, but he created much more scoring chances to his linemates (Maltsev and Mikhailov in this game) than in game 1, and showed terrific playmaking throughout. I've seen it claimed that Kharlamov wasn't much of a factor after game 1, but that is just nonsense.

Mikhailov was excellent in the first 4 games - and better than Kharlamov in games 2 and 4 - but where did he lose his goal-scoring ability in Moscow?

 

[57special]

The tactics and training that the Soviets used were ahead of their time, and you can see their influence to this day. It took a long while for it to take hold in NA due to the smaller rinks and what was allowed(clutch and grab, fighting, hooking) in the 80's and 90's.

I recall seeing a Soviet team come over and play the Midget(15-16yo) Champs in Verdun in 1974 or thereabouts. The Soviets completely outclassed the Canadians. Even their warmups were completely different...the Canadians in their static lines shooting one by one at the goalies, the Soviets in a hodgepodge, dodging and weaving around one another, constantly in motion, passing to puck to one another, using their feet to receive passes(common now, unusual in Canadas at the time).

I will say that if Orr had been able to play it would've made a big difference. He was the best hockey player in the world, and completely capable of playing 30-35 minutes while dominating the puck. Hull would've made less of a difference, but he was still a force.

 

[The Panther]

In my opinion, the USSR was never been better in any area of hockey than Canada... except perhaps at the level of the most elite 12-or-so players around 1979 or something.

The early-1970s Soviets were clearly better conditioned than Canadian players in September (that's what happens when you're in the army) and played a puck-possession style better than Canadian players. But beyond that... nothing.

If you were to take the best, say, 50 players at any point in history, Canada is deeper and better.

In all the Canada Cup tournaments, the best Canadian players (and often the very best were missing, like Orr and Lemieux) had two weeks or whatever to form a "team" and play out of season. That's a massive handicap every time. When we're looking at close series that Canada lost -- in 1981 for example --, if the Canadian unit had had three years to play together every week, live, travel, and practice together every day, then I'm not sure these short series would have even been that close.

Since the playing field has been levelled in the modern era, and the best Russian players are also now made-up hodge-podge of individuals from various teams and countries in the Olympics with little time to form a cohesive team, the Russians have won... nothing.

 

[Namba 17]

One thing that was overlooked was the Soviets were in training all summer for this competition

Wrong

View attachment 367840
They went as far as to install video equipment at their embassy in Ottawa to tape Hockey Night in Canada to study the NHL.

Wrong.

Some stereotypes about Soviet hockey and SS-1972 and the reality