- Status
Gemini
Registered User
- May 12, 2011
- 235
- 38
Uh, when you win the Stanley Cup, you don't win it for the NHL. You win it for yourself. (You don't really even win it for the team because you really couldn't care less about that team if you were to face them in the finals next year. Jerseys and teammates come and go.)
And why is representing your country in sports such a huge honor that it should be considered more important than proving to yourself that you're the best (the whole point of sports)? I don't agree at all with the attitude that says that an individual should prove his worth to his country. If anything it's the other way around, particularly in the case of Russia, the subject of this topic. Howabout Russia starts proving that it's worth having Ovechkin, Malkin etc. and not vice versa?
Please, we lost one game on CANADIAN soil, yes, Canada was better by any means, but to say that Russians didn't care is ignorant
Remember we defeated you best on best in 2006
Oilslick941611
Registered User
Who are you to define what should be important for players? Each player has his own motivations and targets. Some may think that it's more important to make money and go to KHL instead of trying to get to some 4th line in NHL with less ice time and smaller salary. NHL may not even be their target because of the playing style which leaves little room for skill. Those may have target in KHL and in international competitions.
Ice hockey is a team sport and Stanley Cup is a team prize. Player may just be some injury replacement in playoffs in 4th line and get the SC even though he's been in the team to fill the roster. Maybe the SC isn't a huge fulfillment for a that kind of player. At least it wouldn't be my dream to play almost all regular season in AHL then some games in playoffs to get the ring. It'd be more important to contribute on ice and work for that team prize whole season.
NHL is just business. Ice hockey is just a way to get money from fans' pockets to the owners. Even a 2-week olympic break every four years is difficult to arrange because of money. A 82-game regular season is played to maximize the income and then half of the teams make to the bonus income phase: playoffs. Players are just raw material which is traded like cattle from owner to owner.
Olympic hockey isn't about business or money, it's about sports. It may be difficult for some to understand that. It's not about who can buy best players and make team win some team prize like some mercenaries. In the olympics players play the sport because of their passion and their will to represent their country without getting money from it. Same applies to WHC.
Sens91
Registered User
- Mar 16, 2011
- 586
- 0
I want to see your alternative Nagano roster
One look at the two rosters (1998 and 2006) and its pretty easy to see why we did so poorly. Too slow on the big ice. Canada's playing style now (Stamkos, Crosby, Giroux, Doughty, Keith) much more able to play on a bigger ice surface than Rob Blake, Adam Foote, Shane Doan, Todd Bertuzzi and Ryan Smyth. Tell me you don't see the difference.
Sens91
Registered User
- Mar 16, 2011
- 586
- 0
Then who are you to define what's important to North Americans? I tell you, EVERY single kid growing up in Canada dreamed of scoring the Stanley Cup winning goal in game 7, not winning the WHC Gold.
Bash us all you want, proclaim that your the best, but it's the jealousy that you have towards a country that has hockey in its blood that enables you to bash Canada and it's players when they lose a tournament, and when we win, you silence yourselves entirely.
Last edited:
I haven't been defining that. North Americans can give importance to whatever they want, but the point is that their values aren't more right or wrong than what Europeans think is important. You and every other Canadian may think that SC is the ultimate prize of ice hockey. Still it's just one opinion. I'm not telling that you should give higher value to WHC, I'm just reminding what's the difference between international tournaments and NHL.
Sens91
Registered User
- Mar 16, 2011
- 586
- 0
The SC and Olympics have pretty well the same importance in my eyes. And exactly, we can give more importance to whatever we want, but does that mean you should bash Canadian teams in something that is relatively unimportant to Canadians?
And yes Yamagushi, we are so jealous that we've won 2 golds in 3 Olympics. How'd Russia do? Oh wait...
Do you still think I am from Russia? Ridiculous kid.
To be honest, Canada won in Vancouver simply because they played at home. Still, US beat Canada in regulation in their first game at group stage, then lost the final in overtime. Not very convincing. Canada surely would have been stuffed by the Yanks on neutral ice
Gemini
Registered User
- May 12, 2011
- 235
- 38
This only proves my point that players value the Stanley Cup as a personal achievement. In the examples you gave, the 4th liner/replacement would not feel like having contributed to winning the Cup. No wonder some players who'd only be small fish in the NHL have decided to go for the KHL instead, a smaller pond where their skills matter more.
Nice attempt to criticize capitalism. Of course the NHL is a business which is also why it's by far the best hockey league there is. National pride is no replacement for good management and profit-seeking behavior (one reason why some teams representing non-traditional hockey markets have won the Cup lately; lots of room for profit).
Besides, why would you think that these international tournaments are more about the sports than the business-oriented NHL? You might as well claim that international tournaments are more about nationalist chest-pounding than about the sports. Besides, business > nationalism.
I think you didn't understand my point. Even though you may be sure you know what's important in hockey, it doesn't go like that. It's just your opinion. I just tried to remind that SC may not be ultimate goal for all, and still they're not wrong or irrational. I also mean that Canadians are not wrong if they think SC is important.
How in the world can you say Canada won because of home ice? Remember Salt Lake City at all?
Frank the Tank
The Godfather
On the contrary, Russia cared almost too much, which is what made Canada's victory over them so sweet. Prior to the 2008 WHC Russian hockey had little to be proud about. Then Team Russia won the 2008 WHC in Quebec City over Canada in OT, ending a long championship drought. Certain Russian players dug up a "lucky loonie" from center ice after winning; Ovechkin wore half of it on a chain around his neck (obviously a sign of one who cares about a WHC victory). Skip a year later and Russia claims back-to-back WHC in 2009. Numerous Russian fans, media members, and players declared that this began a new era of Russian dominance led by Ovechkin, Malkin, KHL players, and Bykov that would culminate in winning gold in 2010 on Canadian soil. The threads detailing such claims can be found a few years ago on this same International Hockey Forum.
Once the Russian players arrived in Vancouver they complained about the athlete's residences (TVs on the floor? the humanity!) and the food (Morozov complained that they were forced to eat at McDonalds). All of this was a plot to distract the Russian hockey players. Ovechkin and Malkin ignored the North American media requests (e.g., Ovechkin constantly walking right past North America reporters to the Russian ones after practice). It was claimed that such behavior allowed the Russian players to focus completely on the game. As a Team Canada fan, I was nervous. The Russians seemed very intent on winning and Canada had to deal with the intense pressure of the home media and fans. Then the quarter-finals happened.
2014 will be different and I imagine the Canadian players will have their own "hardships" to deal with as they play hockey abroad. No doubt Team Russia will be extra focused to win gold on their home soil, but will this extra focus (and pressure as home team favorites) help or hinder (as it did in 2010).
Angry Little Elf
My wife came back
It's cultural and historical backround, simple as that. Nothing much to write home about. We can sit here and argue for months yet this is not gonna change in the foreseeable future. Europeans and esp. Russians will never care for SC more than for international events. Period. We, fans, are well aware that NHL>WHC in terms of the amount of talent involved, but take it as it is: whenever our national team is on the ice, we get excited and are proud when they win.
Now for the Olympics. Our Canadian friends can brag all they want about how they bravely grabbed olympic victories here and there while the ex-soviet hockey infrastructure lay in ruins. The Vancouver'10 QF disaster doesn't make the Russians as inferior to Canada as you try to convince yourselves and the whole hockey world. Yes, today you're #1, we can give you that, but the margin is so tiny (and it gets ever tinier) that your guys can fail horribly in Sochi and even die-hard CAN fans wouldn't be overly surprised (the same goes for team Russia and its fans). We all know that, you know that, the entire goddamned galaxy knows that. Please stop this useless discussion and just wait for 2014.
Though whatever happens in Sochi will hardly change anything I'm afraid, and these idiotic CAN><RUS threads will rage on even if Canada (or Russia) loses like 20-0.
Oh God... Sorry for the wall of text and clumsy English
svartgul
Hata Löven
Sentinel
Registered User
Canada did better than any other nation in the past four Olympics. That's a fact. The Canadian players and fans cared about their victories very deeply. But they seem to belittle the importance of international hockey every time they lose.
In my eyes, international hockey trumps league hockey any day. In IIHF you can't buy or trade your players. You are who you are, you play for your country, and not a Ranger one day, a Devil next day, and an Islander next.
And I don't think that talk of WHC not being best-on-best is right. When the WHC playoffs started, there were 4 teams left in the SC playoffs, with only a handful of athletes with a shot at the national team. For Canada who claims they can ice 4-5 squads of equal strength, this is certainly no excuse.
In my eyes, international hockey trumps league hockey any day. In IIHF you can't buy or trade your players. You are who you are, you play for your country, and not a Ranger one day, a Devil next day, and an Islander next.
And I don't think that talk of WHC not being best-on-best is right. When the WHC playoffs started, there were 4 teams left in the SC playoffs, with only a handful of athletes with a shot at the national team. For Canada who claims they can ice 4-5 squads of equal strength, this is certainly no excuse.
Most people in Europe don't know what the Stanley Cup playoffs are. But they all know about the UEFA Champions League.
It all depends on where you come from.
It all depends on where you come from.
- Status
