Let's Watch: 1972 Summit Series, Game 4/8

[Big Phil]

Esposito was right for calling the Vancouver crowd out after this game. I do love that speech, and I like how Johnny Esaw just let Esposito roll with it. The question is how much did that speech motivate the team or the country? I think there is a bit of nostalgia when looking at this. Maybe much in the way we think of The "War of the Worlds" radio broadcast by Orson Welles. Sure it impacted some people who heard it, but I think it gets overrated just how many people heard it at the time. Ditto Espo's speech. Sure there would have been people watching on TV who were still watching the post game show that saw it. But even the players wouldn't have known word for word what Esposito said.

Here is an example. In 1992 Esposito said he never actually saw the footage of that speech until 1981 or 1982. He said people used to tell him when he was travelling across Canada about that speech but he had never really recalled what he said. These weren't the days of 24/7 sports news, or social media or cell phones or anything. I think it definitely touched some people for sure, but I think as time has gone on the speech is one of those things that we look at in hindsight as being important. And it still is a classic gem though.

 

[Theokritos]

The usual 50th anniversary bump.

 

[Fenway]

 

[Chairman Maouth]

I was there.

I was 10-years-old and attended game 4 in Vancouver. My uncle got us tickets just a few rows above the Russian bench. I don't remember exactly which row it was, but it was probably around rows 7 to 9 — some of the best seats in the house.

My uncle had previously played for the Hawks and Blues and had some influence in regards to acquiring tickets. I remember pestering him on day's previous and asking him if he might be able to score a couple tickets for he and I so we could go to the game together in Vancouver, never expecting that he might actually be able to do so. Initially, he told me, "No, we can't do that. I can't have you skipping football practice. Playing a sport is more important than being a sports spectator." Turned out the son of a bugger was playing poker with me and bluffing the entire time. He scored tickets not only for he and I, but for most of our immediate family — 6 tickets in total.

One of the more memorable things I recall about game 4 is, after the game ended, watching Johnny Esaw interview Phil Esposito, to my right and near the end of the ice. Esaw didn't need to wait long for Esposito to arrive for the interview. Esposito got there in a hurry. A lone piece of dark carpet contrasted with the white ice beneath it and connected the open gate/doorway at the end boards to where Esaw was standing, about halfway between the end boards and the blueline. The length of narrow carpet assumed the identity of a lifeline, which Esaw might be inclined to use for retreat should Esposito become so overwhelmed with anger that he might begin attacking anyone within arm's length. That, sadly, is probably regarded as the highlight of game 4. I couldn't hear what Esposito was saying, but the visual cues Esposito emitted indicated that he wasn't a happy man, and that Esposito may have wanted to hit a Vancouver spectator harder than he attempted to hit any Russian during game 4.

Another significant memory I have is that of the Russian jerseys. The numbers looked like they were cut from sheets of cloth by kids younger than I was, and using those old blunt-tipped safety scissors they used to give you back in elementary school. I couldn't get over the fact that my minor league hockey jersey was better made than those made for the Russian national team. If I would have been politically astute at that young age, perhaps I could have accurately predicted the inevitable fall of communism in the Soviet Union based on that, nearly 20 years later.

Briefly, back to the Esposito interview. I watched it that same evening of the game and it kind of pissed me off. As I said, I was there. I watched the game and I saw things which the television cameras did not. As a Canadian, I felt embarrassed. It was like the Russians frustrated the team we were all so proud of and to such a degree that Canada just didn't care anymore. Team Canada's attitude appeared to be more akin to that of beer league bullies and crybabies which a superior team was getting the better of, than a team which was the elite of the hockey universe, which they no longer appeared to be.

My Uncle Fred played in the NHL. I wanted to play in the NHL. I wanted to be exactly like Uncle Fred. It was my dream. Then, I personally saw the greatest collection of NHL players ever assembled playing like bums, and it crushed me. My entire identity was based on hockey, and that identity had just been exposed as being nothing more than a shitty disguise.

To sum up, the fans in Vancouver reacted to the product they saw on the ice, and that product wasn't very good. But the booing was also way overblown. I've heard people say our players were booed during the introductions. Total BS. The only time I recall hearing a smattering of boos was after the game was over and our players were leaving the ice. Did it also happen during the game? I don't recall for certain, but I think it may have also happened near the very end when the game was out of reach and the fans realized we were about to lose another game and be down in the series before heading to Moscow. And yes, I was also embarrassed that some people booed our team. You don't do that.

However, I also believe that the booing which did occur, may have been a wake-up call for Phil Esposito and all of Team Canada: "Boys, people say you're the best in the world, but you're not playing like the best in the world, and your fans recognizes this. You better get the f***ing lead out."

And they did.

 

[Fenway]

 

[Fenway]

 

[Chairman Maouth]

"I was almost ashamed to be a Canadian," said Bill Goldsworthy.

Canadians were ashamed of Bill Goldsworthy.

 

[Fenway]

 

[PrimumHockeyist]

"I was almost ashamed to be a Canadian," said Bill Goldsworthy.

Canadians were ashamed of Bill Goldsworthy.

Personally, I have a hard time buying how much Canadian fans should have been ashamed of BG. His 'sin' was getting penalties, I figure. If he had done the exact same things he did without getting penalized, he would have likely been applauded - were this an NHL game. The first four games of the Summit Series may have given us a glimpse into what we would later call political correctness, and pc's somewhat disingenuous aspects.

Nonetheless, since you were there you saw a bunch of stuff that the rest of us didn't.

Here's Sinden talking about BG hours after Game Two

Don't get me wrong, I never went for NHL goonery, but the fact is that management set the tone for how much violence is to be tolerated, what is normal and legal. Once the status quo is set, I really don't think it's a player's fault if they accept the terms, just because I loathed the extreme stupidity and would have preferred ice hockey that was more like the way it is played today.

To me, the apex of this mentality came, not in the 70s, which was bad but at least honest (I think). The worst came in the 00ze, by which time NHL fans were treated to fights by players who weren't even mad at each other. I'm so glad the way this played out. Fighting was allowed to remain, but teams began to recognized that four lines were essential. I hope hockey never loses its aggressive edge, but we're on such higher ground now.

Here's Harry Sinden writing about this theme after the Canada games. What a tangled web higher management weaves.

 

[Zine]

I was there.

I was 10-years-old and attended game 4 in Vancouver. My uncle got us tickets just a few rows above the Russian bench. I don't remember exactly which row it was, but it was probably around rows 7 to 9 — some of the best seats in the house.

My uncle had previously played for the Hawks and Blues and had some influence in regards to acquiring tickets. I remember pestering him on day's previous and asking him if he might be able to score a couple tickets for he and I so we could go to the game together in Vancouver, never expecting that he might actually be able to do so. Initially, he told me, "No, we can't do that. I can't have you skipping football practice. Playing a sport is more important than being a sports spectator." Turned out the son of a bugger was playing poker with me and bluffing the entire time. He scored tickets not only for he and I, but for most of our immediate family — 6 tickets in total.

One of the more memorable things I recall about game 4 is, after the game ended, watching Johnny Esaw interview Phil Esposito, to my right and near the end of the ice. Esaw didn't need to wait long for Esposito to arrive for the interview. Esposito got there in a hurry. A lone piece of dark carpet contrasted with the white ice beneath it and connected the open gate/doorway at the end boards to where Esaw was standing, about halfway between the end boards and the blueline. The length of narrow carpet assumed the identity of a lifeline, which Esaw might be inclined to use for retreat should Esposito become so overwhelmed with anger that he might begin attacking anyone within arm's length. That, sadly, is probably regarded as the highlight of game 4. I couldn't hear what Esposito was saying, but the visual cues Esposito emitted indicated that he wasn't a happy man, and that Esposito may have wanted to hit a Vancouver spectator harder than he attempted to hit any Russian during game 4.

Another significant memory I have is that of the Russian jerseys. The numbers looked like they were cut from sheets of cloth by kids younger than I was, and using those old blunt-tipped safety scissors they used to give you back in elementary school. I couldn't get over the fact that my minor league hockey jersey was better made than those made for the Russian national team. If I would have been politically astute at that young age, perhaps I could have accurately predicted the inevitable fall of communism in the Soviet Union based on that, nearly 20 years later.

Briefly, back to the Esposito interview. I watched it that same evening of the game and it kind of pissed me off. As I said, I was there. I watched the game and I saw things which the television cameras did not. As a Canadian, I felt embarrassed. It was like the Russians frustrated the team we were all so proud of and to such a degree that Canada just didn't care anymore. Team Canada's attitude appeared to be more akin to that of beer league bullies and crybabies which a superior team was getting the better of, than a team which was the elite of the hockey universe, which they no longer appeared to be.

My Uncle Fred played in the NHL. I wanted to play in the NHL. I wanted to be exactly like Uncle Fred. It was my dream. Then, I personally saw the greatest collection of NHL players ever assembled playing like bums, and it crushed me. My entire identity was based on hockey, and that identity had just been exposed as being nothing more than a shitty disguise.

To sum up, the fans in Vancouver reacted to the product they saw on the ice, and that product wasn't very good. But the booing was also way overblown. I've heard people say our players were booed during the introductions. Total BS. The only time I recall hearing a smattering of boos was after the game was over and our players were leaving the ice. Did it also happen during the game? I don't recall for certain, but I think it may have also happened near the very end when the game was out of reach and the fans realized we were about to lose another game and be down in the series before heading to Moscow. And yes, I was also embarrassed that some people booed our team. You don't do that.

However, I also believe that the booing which did occur, may have been a wake-up call for Phil Esposito and all of Team Canada: "Boys, people say you're the best in the world, but you're not playing like the best in the world, and your fans recognizes this. You better get the f***ing lead out."

And they did.

Ha! Funny you mention the number stitching on Soviet jerseys. It was downright comical at times.
Alas, propor decor finally entered the equasion in 1976 when Koho started supplying the team.

Thank god....

 

[Chairman Maouth]

Personally, I have a hard time buying how much Canadian fans should have been ashamed of BG. His 'sin' was getting penalties, I figure. If he had done the exact same things he did without getting penalized, he would have likely been applauded - were this an NHL game. The first four games of the Summit Series may have given us a glimpse into what we would later call political correctness, and pc's somewhat disingenuous aspects.

Nonetheless, since you were there you saw a bunch of stuff that the rest of us didn't.

Here's Sinden talking about BG hours after Game Two

View attachment 583810

Don't get me wrong, I never went for NHL goonery, but the fact is that management set the tone for how much violence is to be tolerated, what is normal and legal. Once the status quo is set, I really don't think it's a player's fault if they accept the terms, just because I loathed the extreme stupidity and would have preferred ice hockey that was more like the way it is played today.

To me, the apex of this mentality came, not in the 70s, which was bad but at least honest (I think). The worst came in the 00ze, by which time NHL fans were treated to fights by players who weren't even mad at each other. I'm so glad the way this played out. Fighting was allowed to remain, but teams began to recognized that four lines were essential. I hope hockey never loses its aggressive edge, but we're on such higher ground now.

Here's Harry Sinden writing about this theme after the Canada games. What a tangled web higher management weaves.


View attachment 583811

I think that's some solid insight. Thanks.

To Sinden's comments, ironically, Parise is another player for Team Canada who couldn't control his temper. I don't think an explanation is required.

But yeah and again, you took this where I didn't expect it to go, and you did it well.

I'll ask you one question though; do you think Sinden's comments in the final paragraph are accurate?

 

[PrimumHockeyist]

I think that's some solid insight. Thanks.

To Sinden's comments, ironically, Parise is another player for Team Canada who couldn't control his temper. I don't think an explanation is required.

Hi again. Personally, I'm not sure if 'control' his temper is the right assessment. Controlling his edge might be better, but I'm open to suggestions.

I remember in the 96 World Cup, how Canada or maybe just Claude Lemieux picked a fight with Keith Tkachuk at the start. If Lemieux initiated that exchange, which would hardly be suprising in his case, the decision was probably based on the perceived trade off, with KT more costly player to lose.

I'm not sure if JP didn't do a similar thing. Whether he did or not, his maniacal fervor did have a favourable outcome on the rest of the game. We all know that story, but I've included the Game 8 scoring summary as a reminder. The box describes that went down until and only until JP got kicked out of the game. Before he went nuts the game was already trending in Game 6's 31-4 PIM direction. Afterwards, thing were more balanced.

While I firmly believe that JP should have been kicked out of the game, I would say it is a gross oversimplification to say that his actions were 'based on a bad call'. For one thing, his reactions reflected similarly bad things that had gone on for a couple of weeks - things that were not caught on TV cameras, which Canadian viewers would learn about those things until after the series was over.

But yeah and again, you took this where I didn't expect it to go, and you did it well.

I'll ask you one question though; do you think Sinden's comments in the final paragraph are accurate?

I definitely think that Sinden is quite correct that many hockey players who could have been in the NHL but were not because of the violent atmophere that the NHL owners imposed on the league and culturally in North America by extension. As to the thing he said in the start of the last paragraph, I would say that that the NHL's level of violence occurs is foremostly a direct reflection of the NHL owners and their various decisions to allow or prohibit such behavior through how they have on ice officials apply rules.

Nor, I would say, do the NHL owners don't get to say that they aren't responsible because [their employees] 'the rules people handle all of that.' That would be like what the IIHF wrote, during René Fasel tenure: that the IIHF's decade-long hypocrisy on shamateurism was the fault of IOC. Click on the paragraph below to read the full article.



To come full circle with JP then, I see three layers going on that likely lead to his actions. There was the corrupt start to Game 8. There was that start's similarity to other problems that began in Moscow, allegedly through Soviet managment. But there was also, lingering in his subconscious somewhere, memories the corrupt managment of the IIHF and the IOC during that time which had been going on sometime in the 1950s, and this has nothing to do with Soviets flooding the ice, lying about referrees or, most egriously, stealing beer.

I'm saying that one can't divorce the IOC-IIHF element from the first two, if one wishes to understand why Canadian culture viewed the Summit Series as so meaningful. Whatever problems were going on in Moscow were too similar to the sh!t shows that IOC and IIHF hockey had become to not trigger that association. For more than a decade Canadians had been forced to watch the IOC and IIHF make farces out of their country's most cherished and greatest contribution to the world of sport. The IIHF turned their backs on their closest partner in order to kiss IOC ass, Canada, which had helped build the IIHF brand for many decades. That had to have taken a toll on Canadians who lived through saw and understood the 1954 to 1972 era, and quite possibly even if the Canadians in general weren't 'hockey people'. Shamateurism was bogus. But as that applied to ice hockey and Canadian culture, it was also personal.

This is why a true competition had come from the outside. The IOC and IIHF'y hypocrisy is why the Summit Series was created in the first place. While most see the Summit Series as a Cold War battle, I see it as that and more, in ways that directly pertain to past administrations of the IOC and IIHF.

 

[HuGort]

I just watched game 7. For first time in 20 years. Couldn't watch game 4.

 

[Chairman Maouth]

Hi again. Personally, I'm not sure if 'control' his temper is the right assessment. Controlling his edge might be better, but I'm open to suggestions.

I remember in the 96 World Cup, how Canada or maybe just Claude Lemieux picked a fight with Keith Tkachuk at the start. If Lemieux initiated that exchange, which would hardly be suprising in his case, the decision was probably based on the perceived trade off, with KT more costly player to lose.

I'm not sure if JP didn't do a similar thing. Whether he did or not, his maniacal fervor did have a favourable outcome on the rest of the game. We all know that story, but I've included the Game 8 scoring summary as a reminder. The box describes that went down until and only until JP got kicked out of the game. Before he went nuts the game was already trending in Game 6's 31-4 PIM direction. Afterwards, thing were more balanced.


View attachment 584256

While I firmly believe that JP should have been kicked out of the game, I would say it is a gross oversimplification to say that his actions were 'based on a bad call'. For one thing, his reactions reflected similarly bad things that had gone on for a couple of weeks - things that were not caught on TV cameras, which Canadian viewers would learn about those things until after the series was over.



I definitely think that Sinden is quite correct that many hockey players who could have been in the NHL but were not because of the violent atmophere that the NHL owners imposed on the league and culturally in North America by extension. As to the thing he said in the start of the last paragraph, I would say that that the NHL's level of violence occurs is foremostly a direct reflection of the NHL owners and their various decisions to allow or prohibit such behavior through how they have on ice officials apply rules.

Nor, I would say, do the NHL owners don't get to say that they aren't responsible because [their employees] 'the rules people handle all of that.' That would be like what the IIHF wrote, during René Fasel tenure: that the IIHF's decade-long hypocrisy on shamateurism was the fault of IOC. Click on the paragraph below to read the full article.

View attachment 584291

To come full circle with JP then, I see three layers going on that likely lead to his actions. There was the corrupt start to Game 8. There was that start's similarity to other problems that began in Moscow, allegedly through Soviet managment. But there was also, lingering in his subconscious somewhere, memories the corrupt managment of the IIHF and the IOC during that time which had been going on sometime in the 1950s, and this has nothing to do with Soviets flooding the ice, lying about referrees or, most egriously, stealing beer.

I'm saying that one can't divorce the IOC-IIHF element from the first two, if one wishes to understand why Canadian culture viewed the Summit Series as so meaningful. Whatever problems were going on in Moscow were too similar to the sh!t shows that IOC and IIHF hockey had become to not trigger that association. For more than a decade Canadians had been forced to watch the IOC and IIHF make farces out of their country's most cherished and greatest contribution to the world of sport. The IIHF turned their backs on their closest partner in order to kiss IOC ass, Canada, which had helped build the IIHF brand for many decades. That had to have taken a toll on Canadians who lived through saw and understood the 1954 to 1972 era, and quite possibly even if the Canadians in general weren't 'hockey people'. Shamateurism was bogus. But as that applied to ice hockey and Canadian culture, it was also personal.

This is why a true competition had come from the outside. The IOC and IIHF'y hypocrisy is why the Summit Series was created in the first place. While most see the Summit Series as a Cold War battle, I see it as that and more, in ways that directly pertain to past administrations of the IOC and IIHF.

Well, no one can ever accuse you of not being thorough.

I'm not sure about Sinden's contention that there were "a lot" of players who avoided the NHL because they were intimidated. I don't think many players with the talent and drive to make it so far that they were drafted, or were making the leap from college or university, then abandoned the dreams they had worked so hard to achieve because they were afraid of fighting. It could of happened in rare instances but, "a lot," I'm not buying that. Does it still happen, with the increased dollars that are now paid to NHL players? Again, I don't see that happening a lot. In fact, with the money they make now, even less so.

Regardless of what the instigating factors were, Parise and Goldsworthy left the impression that they were players who when faced with adversity, did not handle it well. Instead of handling adversity with maturity, they handled it with immaturity, breaking down into childish temper tantrums; stick swinging at players from behind, punching players in the back of the head from behind, and threatening a referee with a stick.

There were other instances of poor sportsmanship too, but I don't recall them specifically.

I seem to have backed myself into a corner, coming off as a guy who disliked Team Canada. That's not the case. Like many people, my initial frustration and disappointment turned to unbridled pride for the team and for my country by the time the series was over. Disliking the actions of a few players doesn't result in my disappointment in the team as a whole. Like many people, I believe the Summit Series was the greatest event in Canadian hockey history.

 

[Fenway]

Well, no one can ever accuse you of not being thorough.

I'm not sure about Sinden's contention that there were "a lot" of players who avoided the NHL because they were intimidated. I don't think many players with the talent and drive to make it so far that they were drafted, or were making the leap from college or university, then abandoned the dreams they had worked so hard to achieve because they were afraid of fighting. It could of happened in rare instances but, "a lot," I'm not buying that. Does it still happen, with the increased dollars that are now paid to NHL players? Again, I don't see that happening a lot. In fact, with the money they make now, even less so.

Regardless of what the instigating factors were, Parise and Goldsworthy left the impression that they were players who when faced with adversity, did not handle it well. Instead of handling adversity with maturity, they handled it with immaturity, breaking down into childish temper tantrums; stick swinging at players from behind, punching players in the back of the head from behind, and threatening a referee with a stick.

There were other instances of poor sportsmanship too, but I don't recall them specifically.

I seem to have backed myself into a corner, coming off as a guy who disliked Team Canada. That's not the case. Like many people, my initial frustration and disappointment turned to unbridled pride for the team and for my country by the time the series was over. Disliking the actions of a few players doesn't result in my disappointment in the team as a whole. Like many people, I believe the Summit Series was the greatest event in Canadian hockey history.

As a Bruins fan, I have a love/hate relationship with Sinden and I hope @Gee Wally will give his thoughts.

Sinden became GM of Boston immediately after Game 8 in Moscow and inherited a team shaken by defections to the WHA. The 1973 season ended badly when he gambled that Jacques Plante had one more playoff run.

But he rebounded and as GM the Bruins made the SCF in 1974, 1977, 1978, 1988 and 1990 but lost them all and there was also the 1979 SC semifinal

But Sinden made the roster moves that enabled Canada to win 3 of the 4 games in Moscow.

 

[PrimumHockeyist]

Well, no one can ever accuse you of not being thorough.

You have the delivery of the well polished diplomant, Mr Chairman.

I'm not sure about Sinden's contention that there were "a lot" of players who avoided the NHL because they were intimidated. I don't think many players with the talent and drive to make it so far that they were drafted, or were making the leap from college or university, then abandoned the dreams they had worked so hard to achieve because they were afraid of fighting. It could of happened in rare instances but, "a lot," I'm not buying that. Does it still happen, with the increased dollars that are now paid to NHL players? Again, I don't see that happening a lot. In fact, with the money they make now, even less so.

I lean the other way, and would think that there were at least a 'significant' numbers of players who backed out of a future in hockey because the violence level was too high. It's not something that a lot of guys would want to admit. Going the other way, I just read an article somewhere where Bobby Clarke said that everybody he speaks to about the Slash says he did the right thing. I don't doubt Clarke at all, but how many people would go up to him and say the opposite? How much do our reactions and non-reactions affect our perceptions of consent?

Regardless of what the instigating factors were, Parise and Goldsworthy left the impression that they were players who when faced with adversity, did not handle it well. Instead of handling adversity with maturity, they handled it with immaturity, breaking down into childish temper tantrums; stick swinging at players from behind, punching players in the back of the head from behind

The last part there is the kind of stuff that I think that the renunciants simply wouldn't be willing to put up with.

, and threatening a referee with a stick.

There were other instances of poor sportsmanship too, but I don't recall them specifically.

Like I wrote in your initial post, you had a privileged view of Game Four and would have seen a bunch of stuff that eluded the cameras. I don't doubt that you saw a lot of low-road stuff, and the kind of stuff that many Canadian hockey fans detested and, frankly, that made many (of course not all) Americans laugh at NHL hockey during this Slapshot era. I just don't blame guys who have been told by NHL owners and North American hockey culture at large, for all of their lives, that this is what they must do if they want to play in the NHL where such behavior is deemed acceptable and necessary at times.

I seem to have backed myself into a corner, coming off as a guy who disliked Team Canada. That's not the case. Like many people, my initial frustration and disappointment turned to unbridled pride for the team and for my country by the time the series was over. Disliking the actions of a few players doesn't result in my disappointment in the team as a whole. Like many people, I believe the Summit Series was the greatest event in Canadian hockey history.

If you are referring to antics in Vancouver, I would say that you make a great point of highlighting this subtheme within circa 70s North American hockey. Because of it, it was inevitable that some people would boo TC if they were going Philly on our esteemed guests. What I find most fascinating is how Game Four seems to have represented an intersection of a contemporary theme and an emerging one - North American 'goon' hockey and best on best international play.

As far as the latter goes, the first four games of the Summit Series was Canada's collective baptism.

We are the same age, btw, and I'll close by asking you this: since Game Four have you ever heard of Canadians booing our national teams? Mens, womens or juniors? I haven't. I guess young people would say it is so unthinkable to boo the national team that they never thought about doing it in the first place. I rather think they don't because Game Four.

A piece of trivia since this is Game Four - In 2007-08 I worked in the film industry as an extra part time I wound up being called to Caprica, a prequel to Battlestar Gallactica, for a shoot where the Canucks play. It was the day after Trevor Linden retired, and once I arrived they parked us in seats at centre ice for an hour or so. Then they moved us to one end of the arena, I was placed against the rail a few rows up along the exit where the zamboni goes. I found it quite amusing that they had given me a jersey to wear, because in the previous hour I had been thinking about TL's inevitable jersey retirement. They also gave me a white towel (see Roger Neilson) to wave, as the home team adjourned to their locker following a tough loss in some sporting match which I think was called pyramid, but am probably wrong.

So here's the thing: Our job was to boo our team, and as we went through the takes I kept thinking about how the scene was rather like what took place on the night of Game Four, especially since this was Vancouver. What I later found odd, was that we had done that shoot right behind the goal where, a year and a half later, Crosby would score the Golden Goal.

Talk about extremes, and art imitating life.

Pardon this indulgence, that's me in the upper-left corner, having my fifteen seconds... our Golden Goal hero is superimposed, of course . .

 

[Chairman Maouth]

You have the delivery of the well polished diplomant, Mr Chairman.

I lean the other way, and would think that there were at least a 'significant' numbers of players who backed out of a future in hockey because the violence level was too high. It's not something that a lot of guys would want to admit. Going the other way, I just read an article somewhere where Bobby Clarke said that everybody he speaks to about the Slash says he did the right thing. I don't doubt Clarke at all, but how many people would go up to him and say the opposite? How much do our reactions and non-reactions affect our perceptions of consent?

Sorry for the delay.

Interesting that people would say Clarke did the right thing. I disagree that he did the right thing, and although I haven't seen Bobby in decades, we were friends at one point — or maybe kind of a big brother—little brother relationship. Bobby taught me kindness, where he would take me, just a kid, for drives in his Mopar GTX and we'd go for popsicles during the hot summers, and against me on the ice he taught me brutality. I agree with this:

"I don't doubt Clarke at all, but how many people would go up to him and say the opposite?" — PrimumHockeyist

Like I wrote in your initial post, you had a privileged view of Game Four and would have seen a bunch of stuff that eluded the cameras. I don't doubt that you saw a lot of low-road stuff, and the kind of stuff that many Canadian hockey fans detested and, frankly, that made many (of course not all) Americans laugh at NHL hockey during this Slapshot era. I just don't blame guys who have been told by NHL owners and North American hockey culture at large, for all of their lives, that this is what they must do if they want to play in the NHL where such behavior is deemed acceptable and necessary at times.

Again, we agree.

We are the same age, btw, and I'll close by asking you this: since Game Four have you ever heard of Canadians booing our national teams? Mens, womens or juniors? I haven't. I guess young people would say it is so unthinkable to boo the national team that they never thought about doing it in the first place. I rather think they don't because Game Four.

No, I have not, since at least. I believe there were some smatterings of boos in Summit Series games previous to Vancouver though. I am not sure which arena(s) or even certain about this, but it is a memory I have. As you are aware though, the passage of time, the truth, and memories, are sometimes at odds with each other.

Fantastic story about Linden, Team Canada, Crosby, et cetera. How ironic is that you were actually hired to boo your team.

 

[PrimumHockeyist]

Sorry for the delay.

Interesting that people would say Clarke did the right thing. I disagree that he did the right thing, and although I haven't seen Bobby in decades, we were friends at one point — or maybe kind of a big brother—little brother relationship. Bobby taught me kindness, where he would take me, just a kid, for drives in his Mopar GTX and we'd go for popsicles during the hot summers, and against me on the ice he taught me brutality. I agree with this:

This is where things get really weird, and kind of relativistic. I definitely didn't approve of the slash, but have heard that Bobby Clarke was a great person and team leader. I really don't think it's my place to judge. However, I do wonder if he might change is way of thinking if, for example, another player slashed his son's or grandson's ankle and ended his career.

This recalls something I had mentioned about Claude Lemieux and Keith Thachuk, in relation to Parise's stick swining on Kompalla. In the real politik calculus of things, CL appears to have sought to take out KT, or that such a decision was made by the team or coaches prior. JP definitely took out 'bad' Kompalla, as the subsequenct penalties in Game 8 show.

Fantastic story about Linden, Team Canada, Crosby, et cetera. How ironic is that you were actually hired to boo your team.

Thank you, It really was ironic.

This kind of "art immitating life" thing turned out to be surprisingly common during my unheralded tour of Hollywood, which included one other hockey story.

A few months after we shot the Caprica pilot (where I appeared in the online version, btw, which was slightly different than the TV version), I got called out to UBC where they had built a new arena you must know about, which hosted all of the other Olympic hockey games that were not played in the Canucks arena.

This time I was asked to perform in the hockey movie Tooth Fairy staring Dwayne the Rock Johnson, and given a 'specialty' role, as the opposing team's head coach. It was pretty neat to think that a scrub beer-leaguer like myself would get to stand behind a bench where his favourite sport would be played at the 21st Winter Olympics. I later learned that we filmed that day on the 21st anniversary of the Gretzky-to-Lemieux goal of 1987, and that Crosby scored the Golden Goal on a national Tooth Fairy Day.

 

[Chairman Maouth]

This time I was asked to perform in the hockey movie Tooth Fairy staring Dwayne the Rock Johnson, and given a 'specialty' role, as the opposing team's head coach. It was pretty neat to think that a scrub beer-leaguer like myself would get to stand behind a bench where his favourite sport would be played at the 21st Winter Olympics. I later learned that we filmed that day on the 21st anniversary of the Gretzky-to-Lemieux goal of 1987, and that Crosby scored the Golden Goal on a national Tooth Fairy Day.

When taken in context with your previous comment about Crosby, I'm not sure if that's irony, coincidence, or a combination of both.

 

[PrimumHockeyist]

When taken in context with your previous comment about Crosby, I'm not sure if that's irony, coincidence, or a combination of both.

A combination I would say, but like I was saying this sort of thing seemed to happen a lot, too much to attribute to 'random' coincidences, imho. That's what made the Caprica gig especially fascinating, that Trevor Linden had just retired fit the pattern big time. I remember driving into the GM Place that morning, and hearing all that chatter on the radio. Then, to wind up being called to his place of work the following morning, and sit there, looking up at Stan Smyl's jersey, knowing that TL's would be next. One could feel Canucks Nation's collective consciousness already paying their respects.

By then I had seen this kind of thing going on in relation to my personal past, and then the unfolding present. Not always, but often enough to feel certain that something other than 'connect' the dots was going on. It was all so ominous. The booing definitely pointed to Vancouver's past and Game Four, TL the unfolding present. So, I was like, "Here we go again!" But I couldn't have seen how the same dynamic might relate to future things, so I didn't think about it at all. Then came the Golden Goal which, of course, totally dwarfed everything and later made 'future' sense out of the Caprica and Tooth Fairy shoots, which were done at the only two venues where Olympic Ice hockey was played in 2010. These coincidences inspired a rather novel form of curiosity on my part. Not sure if others will be interest, but I expect to have some essays on similar information done in a few days.

 

[PrimumHockeyist]

When taken in context with your previous comment about Crosby, I'm not sure if that's irony, coincidence, or a combination of both.

I'm rather surprised I didn't think about this anecdote earlier, since I keep coming back to this thread which is mainly about Game Four...

A few years ago I connected with Jon Montgomery online, whom Canadians fondly remember as the guy who won gold in Whistler and then swigged beer on his Hero's Return thru the village. Nice summary backstory here. People said that this changed the national mood, and I am inclined to agree. As had Esposito's speech following Game Four.

Jon, born in 79, hadn't been around during the Summit Series. So, in case he'd never thought of it, I shared my opinion that, as far as sudden national mood shifts go, his Swig was the closest thing since 1972 to Esposito's Speech after Game Four. The only thing I can think of that might resemble them, this way, was Gretzky's rant at 02 Salt Lake. But that one seemed somewhat calculated. Esposito's speech and JM's swig were spontaneous and straight from the heart

So, I mentioned this rather unique thematic connection to Jon, and he surprised me by sharing a piece of family trivia. To paraphrase Jon said,

"The Summit Series has always been a very big deal in our household. My oldest sibling was born when Paul Henderson scored his famous goal, on the same day Game Eight."

 

[Chairman Maouth]

A combination I would say, but like I was saying this sort of thing seemed to happen a lot, too much to attribute to 'random' coincidences, imho. That's what made the Caprica gig especially fascinating, that Trevor Linden had just retired fit the pattern big time. I remember driving into the GM Place that morning, and hearing all that chatter on the radio. Then, to wind up being called to his place of work the following morning, and sit there, looking up at Stan Smyl's jersey, knowing that TL's would be next. One could feel Canucks Nation's collective consciousness already paying their respects.

By then I had seen this kind of thing going on in relation to my personal past, and then the unfolding present. Not always, but often enough to feel certain that something other than 'connect' the dots was going on. It was all so ominous. The booing definitely pointed to Vancouver's past and Game Four, TL the unfolding present. So, I was like, "Here we go again!" But I couldn't have seen how the same dynamic might relate to future things, so I didn't think about it at all. Then came the Golden Goal which, of course, totally dwarfed everything and later made 'future' sense out of the Caprica and Tooth Fairy shoots, which were done at the only two venues where Olympic Ice hockey was played in 2010. These coincidences inspired a rather novel form of curiosity on my part. Not sure if others will be interest, but I expect to have some essays on similar information done in a few days.

Great stuff. Interesting.

I will never get over the Linden/Messier/Keenan/Quinn debacle. I can't put to words how I feel about Messier without getting into trouble. In my opinion, those were the darkest of Canucks years.

I traveled from the Comox Valley to Vancouver and took my dad to a game. It was early in Messier's tenure, I was still hopeful, and I paid for premium seats just so we could watch Messier coast for an entire game.

 

[Chairman Maouth]

I'm rather surprised I didn't think about this anecdote earlier, since I keep coming back to this thread which is mainly about Game Four...

A few years ago I connected with Jon Montgomery online, whom Canadians fondly remember as the guy who won gold in Whistler and then swigged beer on his Hero's Return thru the village. Nice summary backstory here. People said that this changed the national mood, and I am inclined to agree. As had Esposito's speech following Game Four.

Jon, born in 79, hadn't been around during the Summit Series. So, in case he'd never thought of it, I shared my opinion that, as far as sudden national mood shifts go, his Swig was the closest thing since 1972 to Esposito's Speech after Game Four. The only thing I can think of that might resemble them, this way, was Gretzky's rant at 02 Salt Lake. But that one seemed somewhat calculated. Esposito's speech and JM's swig were spontaneous and straight from the heart

So, I mentioned this rather unique thematic connection to Jon, and he surprised me by sharing a piece of family trivia. To paraphrase Jon said,

"The Summit Series has always been a very big deal in our household. My oldest sibling was born when Paul Henderson scored his famous goal, on the same day Game Eight."

I recall very well Montgomery and the beer. It was a great moment, and so Canadian.

Not much to add, except I'm smiling because you definitely have a knack for finding the parallels and putting them into thoughtful synopses.

 

[PrimumHockeyist]

I recall very well Montgomery and the beer. It was a great moment, and so Canadian.

Not much to add, except I'm smiling because you definitely have a knack for finding the parallels and putting them into thoughtful synopses.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Crosby's goal definitely redirected my attention along those lines, and inspired a considerable novel research. I was actually in the middle of that project when I took a major detour around a year ago, upon learning more about the Mi'kmaq First Nation's role in ice hockey. It's funny you mention that because I am nearly done with a presentation I am putting together on 'parallels" and whatnot. Not sure if people here would be interested, but let me know if you are and I'll forward the link when I generate it.

 

[PrimumHockeyist]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman...

Just posted - Introduction