Mestaruus
Registered User
- Apr 11, 2011
- 4,966
- 1,874
Various valid questions here, but any negative reference to the U20 tournament may be an overreaction. This is a game of moments and fine margins. Finland was 2-0 up in the semis and very narrowly lost 2-3; had they managed to get the W, regardless of the outcome of the gold medal game, everyone would speak of this tournament as a tremendous Finnish success. Likewise, the tournament would be regarded as relatively successful (albeit with a painful semifinal loss) had the bronze medal game ended a mere minute before it ended… Small margins.
Honestly, the bronze didn't matter that much. It was more about how everything happened.
It was a miracle that Finland was able to get that far (4th) with that kind of penalty killing. Literally every time there was a PP for opponent, opponent would score. The only question was, how many seconds it would take for the opposing team to score. Very often it took just 10-12 seconds. It was more of Finland's weakness than opponents' PP ability, because it was a repeating pattern game after game.
Add to that the fact that Finland's own PP was also below average. Usually a team can't go far with just even strength play.
Then there was the thing that the coaching staff wasn't able to coach second periods. Choosing the starting goalie wasn't so great either. #1 goalie with 1-4 record, while the back up goalie had 2-0 record, with one win against Sweden.
On top of this all, the Finnish press said during the tournament that this same head coach would be continuing next year. I don't think a single Finnish ice hockey fan wants to see that, except that coache's wife maybe.