WJC: Greatest Collapse or Greatest Comeback

[New User Name]

I don't see how '72 is relevant. The Canadian mentality has, in my opinion, grown more cocky throughout the years - and so has the media, the CA-hockey establishment and so on. You have fed yourself with your success. I'm not saying that Canadians necessarily have these characteristics more than others (at least not radically), but they do display it more often and disrespectfully. IMO, that is.

Just in hockey maybe, certainly not overall.

 

[hammerwielder]

Did the "real" Russians just show up, a team that would by this logic beat a fully capable Canada unafflicted by collapse 15-0 every game just by playing their "real" game?

No one is saying every game would actually be 15-0. I expressly said I was using the device of logical extrapolation -- to wit, "by this logic" -- to demonstrate the fallacy in the pure comeback argument. Can't speak for shveik, whose post was the subject of the comment, but I believe he meant the same thing.

The point remains: If there is no diminution in the ability of the team holding the lead to play, and the change in circumstances results solely from the trailing team beginning to play as a team and with heart, it follows that, assuming the trailing team usually plays that way, as it should, the team will win games against the leading opponent by scores of 5-0, 6-1, 8-0, 11-1, 15-0 or similar blow-out margins.

That didn't happen here and hasn't happened in the past. Russia hasn't blown Canada out in a single game since the collapse (hmmm, was that really a comeback for the 'free world'?) of the Soviet Union. The blowouts have actually gone the other way, in Canada's favor, on multiple occasions. Yet, for certain advocates of the comeback theory, the games in which Russia got blown out get explained away on the ground the Russians had a lousy coach, not that Canada had a definitively better team in those matches.

The comeback advocates also fail to give appropriate consideration to the size and duration of the Canadian lead in this game. Canada not only led but had shut out the Russians 3-0 through the first 42 minutes. Canada had been the better team and were in control of their own destiny. The size and duration of the lead betrays the Russian supremacy argument which the comeback argument amounts to. The Russians could not have quickly scored 5 times in the context of the size and duration of the Canadian lead but for a collapse.

The resistance of opposing views here to reconciliation arises at least to some extent from the fact that Newtonian physics is at work in games: for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. However, the problem here for the comeback advocates is that the sheer size and rapidity of the change in the scoreboard here could have occurred only because there was a collapse. If Canada had continued to play the way they did for the first 42 minutes, given the relative parity of the teams it is extremely unlikely that Russia would have scored 5 unanswered goals in the last 18 to end the game. Or that Canada would have for that matter had the tables been turned.

 

[hammerwielder]

I don't see how '72 is relevant. The Canadian mentality has, in my opinion, grown more cocky throughout the years - and so has the media, the CA-hockey establishment and so on. You have fed yourself with your success. I'm not saying that Canadians necessarily have these characteristics more than others (at least not radically), but they do display it more often and disrespectfully. IMO, that is.

That is certainly not true of the Canadian hockey establishment or of knowledgeable fans. Guys like Nicholson up at Hockey Canada and anyone who has been involved in the management of Team Canada, like Gretzky and Yzerman and on and on. These guys have nothing but the greatest respect for the quality of the opposition at the world level. They don't believe for one minute that a Canadian win at that level is automatic. Quite the contrary, as they have both experienced the sting of losing.

There is an interesting documentary from last year about the selection of the Olympic team. It features footage from closed-door meetings in which the selection committee candidly discussed players, strategy, and opponents. Somebody would say well we better take player A if he's available because he has the wheels to keep up with so-and-so of whatever country and if we don't have him they'll kill us. There's plenty of respect and fear on display. Watch it if you can find it; it is most revealing and there is much candid expression of weaknesses that must be addressed in order to compete. If you find that group is cocky I'll give you 50 bucks.

As for your reference to '72, how can you say it's not relevant? It was recently voted the sporting event of the 20th century in Canada and remains the most important hockey competition Canada has ever been in. If hockey is religion in Canada, '72 is the god, or idol, or whatever. Everyone in the upper echelons of Canadian hockey lived through it and sees '72 as a reference point. Moreover, the last time I checked, Sinden was still senior advisor to the Bruins, a functioning executive at the NHL level. I doubt his views have changed.

In any case, '72 is actually more relevant to your assessment, not less. If you think the media is bad now, you should have seen it then. Dick Beddoes of the Toronto Globe and Mail said that if the Soviets won a single game of the series against the great Canadian pros, he would eat his hat. The morning after game 1, there was a picture in the paper of Beddoes enjoying a repast of chapeau on the city hall steps under the beaming face of the Soviet ambassador to Canada.

I qualified what I said in my post by limiting it to "good" analysis. I therefore did not include the dim-witted media, whose job by the way is to lure fringe hockey fans to their commercials or ads for coverage of the big games and therefore could care less what they say to achieve it. Nor did I include the average or fringe Canadian fans, who don't follow international hockey closely or are completely clueless about any hockey outside of the NHL. I'm as fed up with the "It's Our Game" signs as you are, they're embarrassing and offensive. However, if you became familiar with the Canadian psyche, you would see that these kinds of silly things are rooted in insecurity, not cockiness and arrogance.

Sorry for the long posts.

 

[RingWraith]

I would consider it a great comeback if the Russians faced any semblance of adversity whatsoever once they turned their collective switches to "on". Fact is Team Canada did nothing in response. Nothing. All due credit goes to Russia for getting it done and continuing to believe in themselves, but Canada made it easy. The road was paved in gold, dusted, and waxed.

 

[Evil Romano]

Just in hockey maybe, certainly not overall.

I'm not talking about anything other than hockey-related issues when it comes to Canada. IMO, every country - more or less- has its own negatively "diagnosed" feature. When it comes to foreign policies, we all know the US is on the front line. And Americans tend to behold themselves as Goliath in many ways (and I would assume it's the same within the sport industry, for example regarding Basketball). The Swedish parliament, and many of the people in the country, believe their "humane" view on society and solidarity is the best in the world. China usually propagate for their "superior" gymnastics and Olympic contributions. When it comes to soccer, some nations are more cocky than others; for instance, Italy, Brazil, Netherlands and so on. And when it comes to hockey - the best sport in the world - Canada happens to be the cocky and "We are the best"-kind of nation, and upon which the one other nations look with a bit of disrespect and dislike.

A lot of sentences just to say this: You just happen to be the peeve in terms of hockey competition, just as Brazil, Italy etc is within soccer; and America is considered worldwide.

That is certainly not true of the Canadian hockey establishment or of knowledgeable fans. Guys like Nicholson up at Hockey Canada and anyone who has been involved in the management of Team Canada, like Gretzky and Yzerman and on and on. These guys have nothing but the greatest respect for the quality of the opposition at the world level. They don't believe for one minute that a Canadian win at that level is automatic. Quite the contrary, as they have both experienced the sting of losing.

There is an interesting documentary from last year about the selection of the Olympic team. It features footage from closed-door meetings in which the selection committee candidly discussed players, strategy, and opponents. Somebody would say well we better take player A if he's available because he has the wheels to keep up with so-and-so of whatever country and if we don't have him they'll kill us. There's plenty of respect and fear on display. Watch it if you can find it; it is most revealing and there is much candid expression of weaknesses that must be addressed in order to compete. If you find that group is cocky I'll give you 50 bucks.

As for your reference to '72, how can you say it's not relevant? It was recently voted the sporting event of the 20th century in Canada and remains the most important hockey competition Canada has ever been in. If hockey is religion in Canada, '72 is the god, or idol, or whatever. Everyone in the upper echelons of Canadian hockey lived through it and sees '72 as a reference point. Moreover, the last time I checked, Sinden was still senior advisor to the Bruins, a functioning executive at the NHL level. I doubt his views have changed.

In any case, '72 is actually more relevant to your assessment, not less. If you think the media is bad now, you should have seen it then. Dick Beddoes of the Toronto Globe and Mail said that if the Soviets won a single game of the series against the great Canadian pros, he would eat his hat. The morning after game 1, there was a picture in the paper of Beddoes enjoying a repast of chapeau on the city hall steps under the beaming face of the Soviet ambassador to Canada.

I qualified what I said in my post by limiting it to "good" analysis. I therefore did not include the dim-witted media, whose job by the way is to lure fringe hockey fans to their commercials or ads for coverage of the big games and therefore could care less what they say to achieve it. Nor did I include the average or fringe Canadian fans, who don't follow international hockey closely or are completely clueless about any hockey outside of the NHL. I'm as fed up with the "It's Our Game" signs as you are, they're embarrassing and offensive. However, if you became familiar with the Canadian psyche, you would see that these kinds of silly things are rooted in insecurity, not cockiness and arrogance.

Sorry for the long posts.

The problem, I suppose, is that you have so many fans that you will always - no matter what - be the "cockiest" nation, simply because you have more noticeable fans screaming, acting disrespectful etc. Just look at the gold medal game (or any game for that matter) - 80 percent were Canadians. And although I did see a handful respectable fans, you can't fail to take notice to the ones who do act insulting and ban-mannered. Although not being a majority, they give you a bad reputation. But that's not really the issue, they're just fans. However, the other problem is your media. I do know you don't agree with me on this one, but the hockey establishment with its Canadian "moguls" and media icons, announcers, radio hosts etc, often act with a sense of overconfidence, bragging, "big-head"- and know-it-all attitude when it comes to other teams and their players.

You can't help to notice how self-aggrandized they seem. And of course other countries have this sort of "problem" as well - but it is more prevailing within the Canadian hockey. As always, IMO!

 

[Epictetus]

Comeback based on Russia's tourny.

 

[deve]

Comeback

 

[CBA]

I voted comeback... wow the poll is close after my vote... 128 collapse, 127 comeback never seen a poll this large so close

 

[New User Name]

I'm not talking about anything other than hockey-related issues when it comes to Canada. IMO, every country - more or less- has its own negatively "diagnosed" feature. When it comes to foreign policies, we all know the US is on the front line. And Americans tend to behold themselves as Goliath in many ways (and I would assume it's the same within the sport industry, for example regarding Basketball). The Swedish parliament, and many of the people in the country, believe their "humane" view on society and solidarity is the best in the world. China usually propagate for their "superior" gymnastics and Olympic contributions. When it comes to soccer, some nations are more cocky than others; for instance, Italy, Brazil, Netherlands and so on. And when it comes to hockey - the best sport in the world - Canada happens to be the cocky and "We are the best"-kind of nation, and upon which the one other nations look with a bit of disrespect and dislike.

A lot of sentences just to say this: You just happen to be the peeve in terms of hockey competition, just as Brazil, Italy etc is within soccer; and America is considered worldwide.




The problem, I suppose, is that you have so many fans that you will always - no matter what - be the "cockiest" nation, simply because you have more noticeable fans screaming, acting disrespectful etc. Just look at the gold medal game (or any game for that matter) - 80 percent were Canadians. And although I did see a handful respectable fans, you can't fail to take notice to the ones who do act insulting and ban-mannered. Although not being a majority, they give you a bad reputation. But that's not really the issue, they're just fans. However, the other problem is your media. I do know you don't agree with me on this one, but the hockey establishment with its Canadian "moguls" and media icons, announcers, radio hosts etc, often act with a sense of overconfidence, bragging, "big-head"- and know-it-all attitude when it comes to other teams and their players.

You can't help to notice how self-aggrandized they seem. And of course other countries have this sort of "problem" as well - but it is more prevailing within the Canadian hockey. As always, IMO!

Aren't fans of NHL teams cocky?

Philly fans come to mind a lot.

Pens fans at times.

The hate between Montreal and Boston fans is epic.

Toronto and Ottawa fans despise each other.

Fans of Crobsy vs Ovechkin would kill each other if given the chance it seems at times.

I recall USA hockey after the embarrassment in Boston in 1996 saying they were going to start a program to beat Canada. Is that being cocky?

I think too much is put into this "being cocky" thing. So some fans have "it's our game" signs, whoppee.....it is our winter national sport.

It's played by more Canadians than any other nation. (US a very close 2nd)

Something like 30% of the NHL's revenue comes from Canada.

Over 52% of the players are Canadian.

Canadian broadcasters pay millions to air games.

We're no different than any other nation. We're passionate about the game, as other countries are passionate about their games.

Ever seen the little league world series? Americans waving flags at a tournament of 11 and 12 year olds.

Yes, we're cocky, passionate, damn right nuts about our game.

I don't want it any other way.

The only thing I don't like is the Canadian heart is better crap.

 

[1912]

Aren't fans of NHL teams cocky?

Philly fans come to mind a lot.

Pens fans at times.

The hate between Montreal and Boston fans is epic.

Toronto and Ottawa fans despise each other.

Fans of Crobsy vs Ovechkin would kill each other if given the chance it seems at times.

I recall USA hockey after the embarrassment in Boston in 1996 saying they were going to start a program to beat Canada. Is that being cocky?

I think too much is put into this "being cocky" thing. So some fans have "it's our game" signs, whoppee.....it is our winter national sport.

It's played by more Canadians than any other nation. (US a very close 2nd)

Something like 30% of the NHL's revenue comes from Canada.

Over 52% of the players are Canadian.

Canadian broadcasters pay millions to air games.

We're no different than any other nation. We're passionate about the game, as other countries are passionate about their games.

Ever seen the little league world series? Americans waving flags at a tournament of 11 and 12 year olds.

Yes, we're cocky, passionate, damn right nuts about our game.

I don't want it any other way.

The only thing I don't like is the Canadian heart is better crap.

Ever seen a Bazilian hold up a "This is our game" sign at a WC game in soccer? Thought not. There is a difference in being passionate and just plain d-bag-arrogant.

 

[Sentinel]

Seriously, nobody from the "collapse" camp answered either of these two questions:

1. Did Finland, Sweden, and Canada all "collapse"? Three teams in one tournament against one team? Isn't it more statistically sensible to deem all of these games "Russian comebacks"?

There was an attempt by somebody to draw the difference between the Sweden game (2 goal handicap and 5 minutes to do it) and the Canada game (3 goal handicap and a period to do it), but I hope every reasonable person sees how ridiculous that argument is.

2. Insert Norway for Russia in the final game. If it was simply "Canada's collapse," and Cameron & Co broke out the champagnes too early, then Norway would have had no problem accomplishing the same feat, right?

Comeback. All the way.

 

[Sentinel]

Ever seen a Bazilian hold up a "This is our game" sign at a WC game in soccer? Thought not. There is a difference in being passionate and just plain d-bag-arrogant.

Amen. I think Brazilians are a little arrogant when it comes to soccer, but nowhere near Canadians in hockey.

 

[Sergei DRW]

Voted for comeback.
I don't know how people can vote for collapse when Igor Bobkov still had to make 22 saves. It's not like it was a one-way affair in the end of 2nd and 3rd.
This is a new generation of Russian players - their generation is as old as the new Russia, and the good thing they don't have any "quit" in them.

 

[Aaaaaaaaaaaaa]

Amen. I think Brazilians are a little arrogant when it comes to soccer, but nowhere near Canadians in hockey.

It seems like every thread in this section is just a vehicle for people to attack nationalities.

Time to end this garbage.

 

[Sentinel]

An excellent point about 22 saves by Bobkov. Canada certainly did not quit out of their own volition.

 

[Mr Atoz*]

It was karma for the canadians rooting for every US opponent. Good for you.

 

[wjhl2009fan]

It was karma for the canadians rooting for every US opponent. Good for you.

Really this has been going on for years this is nothing new in terms of canadians cheering aginst canada and the americans cheering aginst canada.

 

[ReginKarlssonLehner]

Comeback.

The question should be: Was it a Collapse on Canada's part?

Or a Comeback on Tarasenko and Kuznetsov part?

 

[Kenobody]

"Canada is not Finland."

What, really? Canada isn't Finland? My mistake.

When you talk about the greatest comeback/collapse (which is essentially the same thing) in WJC, the 1991 Finland/USSR game beats the 2011 gold medal game. For those who argue that a round robin game (the WJC before 1996 was just one big round robin, team with the best record got the gold) is nowhere near as important as the gold medal game, consider this: if USSR won that game, they would have clinched gold. By tying Finland, they played a second-seeded team Canada on the final day of the tournament, who beat them to win the gold (remember the Slaney goal? Yeah, it's from this tournament).

 

[torero]

While it was a great comeback, it only occurred because of the collapse.

the other way round ... the collapse occured only because of the comback !

when a glass is half full, i prefer seeing it half full ! than half empty ... the positive attitude !

as a result ... in life i am happy ! and i dare more than the others.

 

[Fryer]

Neither

Greatest Collapse or Greatest Comeback?
Neither.
I just finished watching the game - belatedly - and I must say that Russia dominated that game for far longer than last 20 min. The first period was barely a wash, then it was 40 minutes of russkies taken it to the maple leafers.
The fact that Russia did not manage to score until the 3rd period does not change anything. Much maligned at these boards Visentin had made a number of spectacular saves.
Canada was simply outplayed by a team that had equally great (if not better) talent, definitely banded together better through all the adversity in the 1/4-1/2 finals, and, ultimately, wanting it more.
There is no shame in that. There is a shame in incessant searching for scapegoats though.

 

[wjhl2009fan]

Greatest Collapse or Greatest Comeback?
Neither.
I just finished watching the game - belatedly - and I must say that Russia dominated that game for far longer than last 20 min. The first period was barely a wash, then it was 40 minutes of russkies taken it to the maple leafers.
The fact that Russia did not manage to score until the 3rd period does not change anything. Much maligned at these boards Visentin had made a number of spectacular saves.
Canada was simply outplayed by a team that had equally great (if not better) talent, definitely banded together better through all the adversity in the 1/4-1/2 finals, and, ultimately, wanting it more.
There is no shame in that. There is a shame in incessant searching for scapegoats though.

The 3rd period yes no question they out played canada the first 2 it was even.To say the russians dominated for more then 20 minutes no not really the first 2 as i said were about even.

 

[pashazz]

I don`t think thank we`ve (Russia) needed to use CHL players. Just because our KHL/MHL players is better. But Team Russia can use them (Yakupov, Hohlachev, etc), for example, in next U20 championship (just because they are best in their age).

OFF: I think that we (Russia) should make our national teams from KHL players only.

 

[wjhl2009fan]

I don`t think thank we`ve (Russia) needed to use CHL players. Just because our KHL/MHL players is better. But Team Russia can use them (Yakupov, Hohlachev, etc), for example, in next U20 championship (just because they are best in their age).

OFF: I think that we (Russia) should make our national teams from KHL players only.

That really worked well in the olympics.

 

[Cotepunchface]

comeback... Russia could have packed it in early like most would have. Canada played like trash in the 3rd but it was Russia's resilience that won the game.