GDT: Semifinal - May 20 - Canada (4) vs Russia (2)

[jj cale]

Of course, but I don´t have all the video material and working all the texts over the years would be too hardcore. I think easiest way to find out is for the NA-fans here to get out of the HFboards/NA-media bubble and come listen to the international crowd. Just have a look at IIHF's facebook comments for example and see for yourself what people think of Canada (except for the canadien fans themselves) and you will see that the kind of opinions that is in majority here is purely because of the huge advantage in numbers the NA-fans here have. I mean, as soon as anyone mentions a legitimate issue or opinion that isn´t in favour of NA-teams on these forums you get hostile comments instantly - but, those are often only from NA-fans themselves so it says little if I'm (or anyone else here) is right or wrong.

So a group of fans from european countries that are angry and sore losers over having lost to Canada over the years is your proof that there is a conspiracy by the IIHf to help Canada win games?

Wow!!! stop the presses!!

May I ask just what motive there would be for the powers that be to help Canada? Can you clarify the payoff with reputable media sources that give evidence to why you and yours are convinced this is so?

 

[Nino33]

Here is what I mean by sample size: Since 1998, when the NHL joined the Olympics, Russia and Canada have only played twice, and their respective head-to-head records are 1-1. Total goals are 7-5 in favor of Canada. How can you say that Canada has been better than Russia in the Olympics when head-to-head competition has been a draw? You aren't making any sense.

It's really odd to me that you think the poster makes no sense when I think it's you that makes no sense...Since 1998 there have been 5 best-on-best Olympics and Canada has won 3 times and Russia 0

Winning a best on best tournament makes you the best
The only reason you're going against this common sense view held by virtually everyone in the world is Russia hasn't won in decades and you're an extremely biased homer fan

If Russia had won the World's this year, would you have considered the US better than Russia because they won a meaningless round robin game?

I don't believe there's reason/logic in your views, just the most extreme bias/homerism

 

[Avs44]

Of course, but I don´t have all the video material and working all the texts over the years would be too hardcore. I think easiest way to find out is for the NA-fans here to get out of the HFboards/NA-media bubble and come listen to the international crowd. Just have a look at IIHF's facebook comments for example and see for yourself what people think of Canada (except for the canadien fans themselves) and you will see that the kind of opinions that is in majority here is purely because of the huge advantage in numbers the NA-fans here have. I mean, as soon as anyone mentions a legitimate issue or opinion that isn´t in favour of NA-teams on these forums you get hostile comments instantly - but, those are often only from NA-fans themselves so it says little if I'm (or anyone else here) is right or wrong.

In response to a request for evidence to back up a rather important claim, you provide...Facebook comments.


...

 

[Mehar]

Here is what I mean by sample size: Since 1998, when the NHL joined the Olympics, Russia and Canada have only played twice, and their respective head-to-head records are 1-1. Total goals are 7-5 in favor of Canada. How can you say that Canada has been better than Russia in the Olympics when head-to-head competition has been a draw? You aren't making any sense.

This is a joke post. You are living in your own fantasy world. Russia has no medals in the last three Olympics (LOL). We judge winners on the final results. Russia has not won a best on best tournament since 1981, and it is laughable that you think Russia is on par with Canada. Canada destroyed a stacked Russian team in 2010's Quarterfinals, and Russia lost to Finland in the 2014 QF's. Finland then lost to Sweden in the Semis, and Canada then beat Sweden for Gold in 2014. Finland and Sweden were better teams than Russia in 2014, and Canada would have smacked them just like in 2010 if they faced again in 2014. Too bad Russia had a quick exit in the QF's.

Canada just beat Russia in the Semis of the World Cup- but of course you think the World Cup is not best on best, but the World Championships are (LOL). All i have to say is it is been 36 years- since 1981, and Russia has failed in every best on best tournament since that. Keep living in your fantasy world. Zero Gold Medals since 1998, and Zero Medals the last three Olympics. Other than that- i guess everything is just rosy.

 

[Yakushev72]

This is a joke post. You are living in your own fantasy world. Russia has no medals in the last three Olympics (LOL). We judge winners on the final results. Russia has not won a best on best tournament since 1981, and it is laughable that you think Russia is on par with Canada. Canada destroyed a stacked Russian team in 2010's Quarterfinals, and Russia lost to Finland in the 2014 QF's. Finland then lost to Sweden in the Semis, and Canada then beat Sweden for Gold in 2014. Finland and Sweden were better teams than Russia in 2014, and Canada would have smacked them just like in 2010 if they faced again in 2014. Too bad Russia had a quick exit in the QF's.

Canada just beat Russia in the Semis of the World Cup- but of course you think the World Cup is not best on best, but the World Championships are (LOL). All i have to say is it is been 36 years- since 1981, and Russia has failed in every best on best tournament since that. Keep living in your fantasy world. Zero Gold Medals since 1998, and Zero Medals the last three Olympics. Other than that- i guess everything is just rosy.

You highlighted everything else, but you forgot to highlight where I said that Russia was the best team and dominated all 6 Olympic Games since 1998! Because I never said anything like that! What I said is that is if Canadians are going to claim that their Olympic team was better than Russia's, they should have to prove it on the ice, which they were unable to do in the 2 meetings that they had. Russia is one of the 3 big powers of hockey, and the fact that Canada only had to face them twice proves my point beyond a shadow.

For example, Russia had plenty of good hockey players in 2014 who were looking forward to a rematch with Canada. The fact that Canada was able to dodge that bullet was a luck factor that was every bit as responsible for a Gold Medal as head-to-head play.

My definition of a best on best is the first and only time it occurred: In the 1972 Summit Series - 8 games, home and home! That is why the Stanley Cup is a best of 7, and not a one-game winner take all.

 

[Neutral Hockey Fan]

You highlighted everything else, but you forgot to highlight where I said that Russia was the best team and dominated all 6 Olympic Games since 1998! Because I never said anything like that! What I said is that is if Canadians are going to claim that their Olympic team was better than Russia's, they should have to prove it on the ice, which they were unable to do in the 2 meetings that they had. Russia is one of the 3 big powers of hockey, and the fact that Canada only had to face them twice proves my point beyond a shadow.

For example, Russia had plenty of good hockey players in 2014 who were looking forward to a rematch with Canada. The fact that Canada was able to dodge that bullet was a luck factor that was every bit as responsible for a Gold Medal as head-to-head play.

My definition of a best on best is the first and only time it occurred: In the 1972 Summit Series - 8 games, home and home! That is why the Stanley Cup is a best of 7, and not a one-game winner take all.

Over the past 8 seasons, which NHL team has been better: Nashville or Chicago?

Careful how you answer. I have a good argument to make depending on who you feel is better

 

[Mehar]

You highlighted everything else, but you forgot to highlight where I said that Russia was the best team and dominated all 6 Olympic Games since 1998! Because I never said anything like that! What I said is that is if Canadians are going to claim that their Olympic team was better than Russia's, they should have to prove it on the ice, which they were unable to do in the 2 meetings that they had. Russia is one of the 3 big powers of hockey, and the fact that Canada only had to face them twice proves my point beyond a shadow.

For example, Russia had plenty of good hockey players in 2014 who were looking forward to a rematch with Canada. The fact that Canada was able to dodge that bullet was a luck factor that was every bit as responsible for a Gold Medal as head-to-head play.

My definition of a best on best is the first and only time it occurred: In the 1972 Summit Series - 8 games, home and home! That is why the Stanley Cup is a best of 7, and not a one-game winner take all.

LOL. What do you mean Canada dodged a bullet? Not Canada's fault that Russia choked again in 2014 QF's. I thought Sweden was better than Russia and Canada's toughest test; and Canada shut them down Sweden in the finals. Canada smacked down Russia in 2010 Qf's, and they would have done it again in 2014. The Russian defense was weak, and Canada would have steamrolled them again in 2014.

That is why i thought Sweden was Canada's toughest test in 2014, because of their defense and their goaltending. Sweden is better than Russia. The truth is that Russia dodged the bullet. If they would have met in Sochi- It would have been a repeat of the 2015 World Championships of hockey, where Canada smacked Russia 6-1 in the Gold Medal Game. What was your excuse then? Your excuse for Russia's loss in the 2016 World Cup of Hockey, was that it was a true not best on best. What was your reaction to the 2015 Gold Medal Game of the World Championships, when Canada finally sent a legit team for once and beat down Russia? Cry some more. However- i agree with you on one point, for a future Olympic Gold Medal Finals, i am for a best out of three (like they do in the World Cup of Hockey).

 

[JackSlater]

Over the past 8 seasons, which NHL team has been better: Nashville or Chicago?

Careful how you answer. I have a good argument to make depending on who you feel is better

Which team has been better since 2008 - Pittsburgh or Edmonton? No nest of seven series - impossible to tell!

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

Which team has been better since 2008 - Pittsburgh or Edmonton? No nest of seven series - impossible to tell!

I'm just glad the leafs won the season series against pittsburgh so we can safely say we were the better team this year

 

[XokkeyGuy]

Once again, could you even link to a respected hockey journalist who has the same opinion? As for the IIHF facebook comments I noticed that it is all Russians who have this opinion. That doesn't make it true.

So a group of fans from european countries that are angry and sore losers over having lost to Canada over the years is your proof that there is a conspiracy by the IIHf to help Canada win games?

Wow!!! stop the presses!!

May I ask just what motive there would be for the powers that be to help Canada? Can you clarify the payoff with reputable media sources that give evidence to why you and yours are convinced this is so?

In response to a request for evidence to back up a rather important claim, you provide...Facebook comments.


...

Why not, I mean, this is just an example of only North Americans here getting mad because you have someone that doesn´t agree with you.
There is a great reason for why europeans dont agree with your way of seeing things regarding ice hockey, but you think that huge amounts of NA-fans ganging up on a few europeans on HFboards makes up for what is right and wrong. That is why I recommend a fairly neutral spot like the iihf fb or such. Don´t play silly rhetorics at me - me suggesting the FB was in response to the fact that there are other opinions than those you see here. I already said that I won´t do huge research just to prove for those who have decided for themselves already what is right and wrong.

Get out of your bubble, people outside NA don´t agree with you and don´t have to. (mod)

 

[Rob]

Why not, I mean, this is just an example of only North Americans here getting mad because you have someone that doesn´t agree with you.
There is a great reason for why europeans dont agree with your way of seeing things regarding ice hockey, but you think that huge amounts of NA-fans ganging up on a few europeans on HFboards makes up for what is right and wrong. That is why I recommend a fairly neutral spot like the iihf fb or such. Don´t play silly rhetorics at me - me suggesting the FB was in response to the fact that there are other opinions than those you see here. I already said that I won´t do huge research just to prove for those who have decided for themselves already what is right and wrong.

Get out of your bubble, people outside NA don´t agree with you and don´t have to. (mod)

Once again. It is fine to have other opinions. Some people have the opinion that the moon landing was faked. It is another thing to have evidence to back up those opinions. Especially when you are making such a substantial claim like the IIHF fixes games in Canada's favor. So any articles from respected journalists on this matter would be appreciated.

 

[MXD]

Why not, I mean, this is just an example of only North Americans here getting mad because you have someone that doesn´t agree with you.
There is a great reason for why europeans dont agree with your way of seeing things regarding ice hockey, but you think that huge amounts of NA-fans ganging up on a few europeans on HFboards makes up for what is right and wrong. That is why I recommend a fairly neutral spot like the iihf fb or such. Don´t play silly rhetorics at me - me suggesting the FB was in response to the fact that there are other opinions than those you see here. I already said that I won´t do huge research just to prove for those who have decided for themselves already what is right and wrong.

Get out of your bubble, people outside NA don´t agree with you and don´t have to. (mod)

So your reply to "only NA think that way" is... basically "Europeans think the other way".

The word that comes to mind to describe this is : Funny.

 

[Yakushev72]

LOL. What do you mean Canada dodged a bullet? Not Canada's fault that Russia choked again in 2014 QF's. I thought Sweden was better than Russia and Canada's toughest test; and Canada shut them down Sweden in the finals. Canada smacked down Russia in 2010 Qf's, and they would have done it again in 2014. The Russian defense was weak, and Canada would have steamrolled them again in 2014.

That is why i thought Sweden was Canada's toughest test in 2014, because of their defense and their goaltending. Sweden is better than Russia. The truth is that Russia dodged the bullet. If they would have met in Sochi- It would have been a repeat of the 2015 World Championships of hockey, where Canada smacked Russia 6-1 in the Gold Medal Game. What was your excuse then? Your excuse for Russia's loss in the 2016 World Cup of Hockey, was that it was a true not best on best. What was your reaction to the 2015 Gold Medal Game of the World Championships, when Canada finally sent a legit team for once and beat down Russia? Cry some more. However- i agree with you on one point, for a future Olympic Gold Medal Finals, i am for a best out of three (like they do in the World Cup of Hockey).

I'll skip the "Nah, Na, Na, Nah, Na" portion of your post and say that I totally agree that the 2015 version of Team Canada was far better than Russia's team, and they proved it conclusively on the ice. But that is an excerpt of a single year, and it really says nothing about the overall quality of the national programs, as Canadians have always been most vociferous in pointing out. It was one year, and any other year, take this year especially as an example, it was a Russia "C" team vs. a Canadian "C" team, and there was no appreciable difference in quality between the teams.

 

[Yakushev72]

Which team has been better since 2008 - Pittsburgh or Edmonton? No nest of seven series - impossible to tell!

C'mon Jack, you're better than that. I'm not saying that Canada can't be No.1 until they have conclusively beaten Bulgaria. I'm saying that you can't call it best on best until the best teams have a chance, as in the Stanley Cup, to prove their worth over more than a single, sudden episode.

 

[XokkeyGuy]

So your reply to "only NA think that way" is... basically "Europeans think the other way".

The word that comes to mind to describe this is : Funny.

Once again. It is fine to have other opinions. Some people have the opinion that the moon landing was faked. It is another thing to have evidence to back up those opinions. Especially when you are making such a substantial claim like the IIHF fixes games in Canada's favor. So any articles from respected journalists on this matter would be appreciated.

I can give you a link to the alex jones channel if you wish, that is where this lunatic stuff belongs.

Lets then also agree that the 1972 olympic basketball final was won fairly by the USSR vs US in the final and had nothing to do with 3 of 5 of the refs being from the east bloc. It was just immature of the us atlethes not to accept their silver medals. Lets agree that referees and nationalities/loyalities has never ever had anything to do in sports anytime. This issue has never existed - why would it even be an issue? All games have always been fair, if you claim otherwise you are obviously a lunatic

 

[Neutral Hockey Fan]

C'mon Jack, you're better than that. I'm not saying that Canada can't be No.1 until they have conclusively beaten Bulgaria. I'm saying that you can't call it best on best until the best teams have a chance, as in the Stanley Cup, to prove their worth over more than a single, sudden episode.

I seee you've purposely skipped over my question to you, so I will ask again;

Which team has been better over the past 8 years; Nashville or Chicago? Thanks in advance for the response, as well as reasoning for your choice

 

[Yakushev72]

I seee you've purposely skipped over my question to you, so I will ask again;

Which team has been better over the past 8 years; Nashville or Chicago? Thanks in advance for the response, as well as reasoning for your choice

My answer to the question will be much more brief than that: I don't follow the NHL, so I really have no idea (I could guess Chicago though).

 

[Neutral Hockey Fan]

My answer to the question will be much more brief than that: I don't follow the NHL, so I really have no idea (I could guess Chicago though).

Chicago has 3 cups in that time. (Dynasty, clear best)
Nashville has 0. (Always losing early in the playoffs)

They've played each other twice in the playoffs.
Chicago won once.
Nashville won once.

Nashville has a 6-4 win/loss record in the playoffs vs Chicago

Nashville is Russia. Chicago is Canada.

You are right. Canada is much better. You just proved right all the people telling you your responses and reasoning are incoherent. Thank you

 

[Yakushev72]

Chicago has 3 cups in that time. (Dynasty, clear best)
Nashville has 0. (Always losing early in the playoffs)

They've played each other twice in the playoffs.
Chicago won once.
Nashville won once.

Nashville has a 6-4 win/loss record in the playoffs vs Chicago

Nashville is Russia. Chicago is Canada.

You are right. Canada is much better. You just proved right all the people telling you your responses and reasoning are incoherent. Thank you

They play 82 games to decide ceding in the playoffs, and then they have to win at least 4 out of 7 games to advance. What the hell are you talking about?

 

[Rob]

Lets then also agree that the 1972 olympic basketball final was won fairly by the USSR vs US in the final and had nothing to do with 3 of 5 of the refs being from the east bloc. It was just immature of the us atlethes not to accept their silver medals. Lets agree that referees and nationalities/loyalities has never ever had anything to do in sports anytime. This issue has never existed - why would it even be an issue? All games have always been fair, if you claim otherwise you are obviously a lunatic

There are plenty of journalists who think that game was unfair. However, you haven't produced a single article by a respected journalist to back up your conspiracy about the IIHF fixing games for Canada. Why not?

 

[Pestilence]

Yeah, but Switzerland is where the IIHF is based and the IIHF is in Canada's pockets. Referee bias.

Meanwhile, the Czechs have never forgiven Russia for 1968. Referee bias.

Russia invaded Finland in 1939. Referee bias.

The US is Russia's major rival. Referee bias.

Sweden and Russia clashed over submarine incidents for years. Referee bias.

Germany and Russia have fought numerous times throughout the 20th century. Referee bias.

Latvia was a reluctant part of the USSR. Referee bias.

Got to correct there... they tried, but didn't manage to invade Finland. Still a good reason for referee bias.

 

[jj cale]

Lets then also agree that the 1972 olympic basketball final was won fairly by the USSR vs US in the final and had nothing to do with 3 of 5 of the refs being from the east bloc. It was just immature of the us atlethes not to accept their silver medals. Lets agree that referees and nationalities/loyalities has never ever had anything to do in sports anytime. This issue has never existed - why would it even be an issue? All games have always been fair, if you claim otherwise you are obviously a lunatic

No, you belong in the lunatic ward if you think the IIHF has been conspiring to help Canada win gold medals. Why the hell would they do that? please explain?..........why would they favour little old Canada over everyone else?

Please explain Mr Jones.

 

[XokkeyGuy]

There are plenty of journalists who think that game was unfair.

Which ones? NA journalists in a time of cold war? How neutral.

No, you belong in the lunatic ward if you think the IIHF has been conspiring to help Canada win gold medals. Why the hell would they do that? please explain?..........why would they favour little old Canada over everyone else?

Please explain Mr Jones.

Starting reading through the comments.

 

[jj cale]

Which ones? NA journalists in a time of cold war? How neutral.



Starting reading through the comments.

I did, that is why i am calling you Mr Jones.