What was the greatest tournament win by a men's team other than Canada?

[New User Name]

This is Hawerchuk tripping Bykov in a "game winner" of Lemieux. Bykov was covering Lemieux, but the trip left Lemieux open:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYTosg69rr8&feature=related

and some people would have called that a dive on Bykov.

Seems he embellished it....at least to me.

 

[Jussi]

Here is my final word about the reffing in 1984 and 1987. Nationalist rednecks are the only people who can call that reffing fair. The video I posted demonstrates the "quality" of reffing perfectly in the finals. For example the "winning" goal by Lemieux was a direct result of Bykov being tripped by Hawerchuk. Without that infraction Lemieux would not get open. Just a horrible, horrible non-call by a CANADIAN "professional" referee.

To those who claim "mistakes happen", well, in these finals Canada was always benefiting from these referee "mistakes" and non-calls.

The Soviet Union was the winner of 1984 and 1987 Canada Cups, as they were the better team (especially in 1984) and they would have won each time with inpartial refs, even in North America and with NHL rules. The Soviets were just better. You have to accept that.

Do you really consider 1984 and 1987 as victories for Canada????

And this why you should not pay any attention this persons posts (ignore function is useless since someone will quote him). This man/boy is a born and bred Finn that for some reason idolizes anything Russian/Soviet. He's well known by the Finnish posters here as "The Original Jags" on the Finnish equivalent of HFBoards, jatkoaika.com, where he's received numerous infractions and been banned entirely once. For some reason he was reinstated, but has been banned from posting in non-hockey sections there due to his misogynistic, jew hating, anti-USA/Canada posts and his general lack of debate skills. He will not admit to being wrong, when clearly shown he is, he disappears from the thread for a while and ignores the posts completely and changes point. In his mind, Russia can do no wrong (he even blamed Finland for starting the Winter War). They only lose in hockey because of biased officiating, never because someone was better. You can imagine he wasn't around much during the Canada-Russia quarterfinal at Vancouver.

You have been warned folks.

 

[Peter25]

and some people would have called that a dive on Bykov.

Seems he embellished it....at least to me.

So Bykov would take a dive in that situation? Did that look like a dive? Are you out of your mind?

 

[Peter25]

And this why you should not pay any attention this persons posts (ignore function is useless since someone will quote him). This man/boy is a born and bred Finn that for some reason idolizes anything Russian/Soviet. He's well known by the Finnish posters here as "The Original Jags" on the Finnish equivalent of HFBoards, jatkoaika.com, where he's received numerous infractions and been banned entirely once. For some reason he was reinstated, but has been banned from posting in non-hockey sections there due to his misogynistic, jew hating, anti-USA/Canada posts and his general lack of debate skills. He will not admit to being wrong, when clearly shown he is, he disappears from the thread for a while and ignores the posts completely and changes point. In his mind, Russia can do no wrong (he even blamed Finland for starting the Winter War). They only lose in hockey because of biased officiating, never because someone was better. You can imagine he wasn't around much during the Canada-Russia quarterfinal at Vancouver.

You have been warned folks.

LOL. A Jew hating? What have you doped?

It is YOU who is banned from Jatkoaika, not me.


As for accepting a loss, I do it when it is against a better team and in an equal conditions. Canada Cup was a tournement designed to be won by Canada. The home ice, the rules, the schedule, and if necessary, the officiating.

The 1981 loss was a huge shock to Alan Eagleson, who by the way admitted of hating the Soviet Union as a country. I have no doubts that the refs were given certain "advices" how to blow their whistle.

We have to remember that this was a time of cold war, and winning in hockey was big, especially for Canadians. Most nations would cheat a bit in this situation, given an opportunity.

 

[Psycho Papa Joe]

So Bykov would take a dive in that situation? Did that look like a dive? Are you out of your mind?

That was a light tap. He was either very weak on his skates or he dove.

Like I said before, sometimes taking yourself out of the play while trying to buy a call, bites you in the ass.

 

[New User Name]

So Bykov would take a dive in that situation? Did that look like a dive? Are you out of your mind?

To me it looks like he embellished it.

 

[Peter25]

That was a light tap. He was either very weak on his skates or he dove.

Like I said before, sometimes taking yourself out of the play while trying to buy a call, bites you in the ass.

Even a "weak tap" to the skates can cause a player to fall down, and IS worth a penalty. You put your stick to the skates of an opposing player and the player falls down, that IS tripping. No excuses there.

 

[Peter25]

To me it looks like he embellished it.

In a position where he is covering Lemieux in a scoring change? No responsible player would do that, and as far as I know, Slava Bykov was as responsible a hockey player as any other player. He was a defensive center par excellence.

And looking at that video, it did not certainly look like a dive. Bykov fell down naturally after Hawerchuk INTENTIONALLY put his stick to Bykov's skates.

 

[Psycho Papa Joe]

And looking at that video, it did not certainly look like a dive. Bykov fell down naturally after Hawerchuk INTENTIONALLY put his stick to Bykov's skates.

Even a "weak tap" to the skates can cause a player to fall down, and IS worth a penalty. You put your stick to the skates of an opposing player and the player falls down, that IS tripping. No excuses there.

Are you even watching your own posted highlight? Hawerchuk's stick is nowhere near Bykov's skate. He lightly tapped him on the hip and Bykov went down like he had been shot. Like I said earlier, either he was very weak on his skates, or he dove. That loss is on Bykov's head, no one else.

Honestly, you have no credibility on this issue, since it's clear you haven't even watched the highlight in question.

 

[Jussi]

LOL. A Jew hating? What have you doped?

Don't kid yourself, the fellow Finns can dig up your posts from the closed Russia related threads from Vapaa keskustelu and see why you're not allowed to post there anymore.

See how he ignored the women hating, anti-USA/Canada and bad debate skills parts completely?

 

[New User Name]

Even a "weak tap" to the skates can cause a player to fall down, and IS worth a penalty. You put your stick to the skates of an opposing player and the player falls down, that IS tripping. No excuses there.

And if in the opinion of the official the player tries to sell it, it's a dive. I believe back then the refs would call neither and let them continue playing.

 

[Jussi]

Even a "weak tap" to the skates can cause a player to fall down, and IS worth a penalty. You put your stick to the skates of an opposing player and the player falls down, that IS tripping. No excuses there.

Zero Tolerance didn't exit in 80s. A LOT more was allowed back then.

 

[New User Name]

In a position where he is covering Lemieux in a scoring change? No responsible player would do that, and as far as I know, Slava Bykov was as responsible a hockey player as any other player. He was a defensive center par excellence.

And looking at that video, it did not certainly look like a dive. Bykov fell down naturally after Hawerchuk INTENTIONALLY put his stick to Bykov's skates.

skates?? Are we watching the same video?

 

[Peter25]

Are you even watching your own posted highlight? Hawerchuk's stick is nowhere near Bykov's skate. He lightly tapped him on the hip and Bykov went down like he had been shot.

You should excuse me as English is not my native tongue and when writing fast I will make an occasional mistake.

By "skates" I meant feet/legs. Hawerchuk intentionally - I repeat, intentionally - puts his stick to Bykov's legs which causes Bykov to fall down in a situation he is about to catch Lemieux. The way Bykov falls looks natural, no diving intentions.

Which experienced, responsible two-way center such as Slava Bykov would take a dive in that situation, when playing against Canada with a Canadian ref?

You must be kidding yourself.

 

[Peter25]

skates?? Are we watching the same video?

No skates, legs. It doesn't really change the facts. It was a legitimate penalty which should have been called. And it would have been called had Dag Olsson officiated this game.

 

[Peter25]

Don't kid yourself, the fellow Finns can dig up your posts from the closed Russia related threads from Vapaa keskustelu and see why you're not allowed to post there anymore.

Why don't you do that then? You are fully and permanently banned from Jatkoaika but you can still browse the forum.

Have your fun, sir.

See how he ignored the women hating, anti-USA/Canada and bad debate skills parts completely?

I noticed them but ignored them, because it is not worth my effort.

 

[New User Name]

No skates, legs. It doesn't really change the facts. It was a legitimate penalty which should have been called. And it would have been called had Dag Olsson officiated this game.

Well, there is nothing anyone can do about it now.
Back in that era in Canada, the game was officiated differently and on that particular play, at least to me, there was a trip/hook and a dive.
Refs back then wouldn't call either and let the play continue.
Today, they would call both.

Like I said, nothing anyone can do about it, too long ago, and nothing you say or I say will change anything.

You can believe the refs favoured Canada. I can believe the refs officiated the normal way they did in that era.

Bottom line is.....it is the way it is.

 

[Peter25]

And if in the opinion of the official the player tries to sell it, it's a dive. I believe back then the refs would call neither and let them continue playing.

Bykov did not try to "sell it". Look the way he falls down, it looks perfectly natural.

And EVEN IF Bykov was trying to sell it the ref should have called penalties to both Hawerchuk and Bykov. Tripping for Hawerchuk, unsportsmanslike misconduct for Bykov, and whistled the play off before Lemieux scored that "winning" goal. It was clearly a tripping.

 

[Peter25]

Well, there is nothing anyone can do about it now.

Actually there is. Admit that Koharski was not inpartial.

How could he be? His home country was playing against the hated commies in his home ice, before his home crowd, in a battle of the world hockey supremacy. Which patriotic Canadian would be inpartial in a situation like that?

Back in that era in Canada, the game was officiated differently and on that particular play, at least to me, there was a trip/hook and a dive.
Refs back then wouldn't call either and let the play continue.
Today, they would call both.

Even if there was an embellishment (which was not the case) the ref should have called the play off, since the trip caused a defending player to lose his man, and allowed the other team a crystal clear scoring opportunity.

You can believe the refs favoured Canada. I can believe the refs officiated the normal way they did in that era.

You can believe that but the facts are different.

I have no trouble with rough style of play, hitting etc. But the rules must be the same for both teams. A tripping is a penalty. A slash to the head from behind (what Propp did to Khomutov when Khomutov celebrated his goal) is an automatic match penalty. These things MUST be called by the book when BOTH teams commit them, not just when ONE team commits them.

 

[bruinforstanley]

It's been argued that not only is the 1980 USA Men's Hockey Gold Medal the greatest upset in Olympic history, it's been argued that it could be considered the greatest upset in all of sports.

Now that is quite a broad field to be even be considered.

With that said, it's without question in my mind, that the Miracle on Ice is the greatest tournament win ever, let alone more than any tourny Canada ever won.

 

[NyQuil]

As for accepting a loss, I do it when it is against a better team and in an equal conditions.

And this is precisely why the Olympics (prior to 1998) and World Championships don't count as well.

Thanks for helping me prove my point.

European refs, European ice, European fans, never being allowed to host, no professionals allowed...barriers to Canada competing on an even-keel were thrown up at every turn.

With that said, it's without question in my mind, that the Miracle on Ice is the greatest tournament win ever, let alone more than any tourny Canada ever won.

Exactly.

The US doesn't even really care about hockey, particularly in 1980, except as a fringe regional sport.

Whereas every tournament involving Canada becomes part of the zeitgeist and shared common experience as a nation, for the US, it requires something pretty outrageous to enter the general public consciousness.

 

[Macman]

Canada Cups were not major tournaments, and the Soviet Union won three of them (1981, 1984 and 1987).

Orwellian revisionism or what?

For someone who claims to believe they were minor tournaments, you sure get worked up about them -- even three decades later. I suppose the Olympics and world championships back then were "major" in your view?

The fact is Russia's record in best-on-best tournaments was dismal then and is even worse now. I guess it's easier to concoct conspiracies and blame boogey men than face the obvious conclusion.

 

[doakacola*]

In a position where he is covering Lemieux in a scoring change? No responsible player would do that, and as far as I know, Slava Bykov was as responsible a hockey player as any other player. He was a defensive center par excellence.

And looking at that video, it did not certainly look like a dive. Bykov fell down naturally after Hawerchuk INTENTIONALLY put his stick to Bykov's skates.

Dude, the 1980 Olympic loss to the USA, prevents the USSR from ever being considered
better than Canada from 1976-1987. That was the biggest choke in sports history Peter, there is no getting around it. The USA sank any claim to supremacy in that era for the USSR.

 

[Peter25]

And this is precisely why the Olympics (prior to 1998) and World Championships don't count as well.

They don't, I agree.

The problem is that the World Championships and the Olympics were played without North Americans pros, and those Canada Cups were played in conditions that favored Canada too heavily (especially schedule and officiating).

This is why I consider the Soviet victory in 1981 so impressive. Not because of inpartial reffing. Dag Olsson did a fine job in the final and was far better than the "professional" Koharski in 1987.

But the Soviet schedule in that tournament was just atrocious. They had to travel the most of any team in the tournament, and Canada was "surprisingly" the team that had to travel the least.

So, like I said, neither the Canada Cups or the Olympics were a true measurement of hockey supremacy (except the 1981 Canada Cup).

 

[Psycho Papa Joe]

Actually there is. Admit that Koharski was not inpartial.

How could he be? His home country was playing against the hated commies in his home ice, before his home crowd, in a battle of the world hockey supremacy. Which patriotic Canadian would be inpartial in a situation like that?

The Russians requested Koharski ref that game.