Comfortably Numb said:
I agree its a semantics argument. I just don't think cheering for someone to fail, because it is essentially a relative term,"pathedic and petty" as you put it. Unless you think everyone is petty and pathedic? Because we have concluded its an inherent part of human nature/
Just to elaborate my position, I think it's human nature to, I don't know, relish in the misfortunes of others (Alexander Pope has a great line about that in "An Essay on Criticism"), but, other than when we're feeling insecure about ourselves, I don't think many people actively hope others fail, or make fools of themselves, or whatever. Like if you see a guy walking down the street and he slips on a patch of ice and falls flat on his back, most people are going to laugh at him. If it looks really bad or if you realize he's hurt you won't laugh or will stop laughing, but if he just hurt his pride, I think most people would laugh (generally speaking, I think younger people laugh at more than older people because they are generally more robust, so the same person falling looks different to eyes of a 20 year old and a 50 year old). I think most psychologists would say that we laugh because we're happy it's not us and it covers up the anxiety we feel when we subconsciously put ourselves into the fallers place (it gives us a conscious feeling of superiority to cover our unconscious anxiety and feelings of inferiority). Like, I don't think there's anything inherently funny about someone falling down in and of itself. I might be wrong, but I also don't think many people just see random people on the street and hope they fall because that way that person looks like a clumsy fool, which would give anyone watching a sense of superiority (really an unconscious reaction against anxiety and inferiority).
I think the only time people actively or consciously hope for others to fail or make fools of themselves is when our feelings of inferiority are most present in our conscious minds, like in tests or tryouts or competing over a girl or the like, when it comes down to a few people and if you don't have a higher mark or you don't make the team or don't get the girl, you feel like failure. In those cases, when you're really the most vulnerable, I think a lot of people hope the other guy fails the test (so, at worst, you don't feel like a complete idiot for failing too), or screws up the tryout, or you hope that something happens to the guy or the guy does something so the girl thinks he's an idiot, so you get the girl.
So, to apply this to the case of the goalies, I think it's natural to root for your guy, and if the other goalies do happen to struggle, you are naturally going to be happy about it (at least until they make Team Canada, in which case they'll have your full support), but I don't think that it's natural to actively hope the other guys struggle, unless you have a sense of inferiority through your guy (your team, your players, often become a part of you, at least in a sense--at least that's what I think). If you're feeling inferior through your guy, then I think it's natural to hope the others fail, so your guy succeeds, which in turn gives you a sense of superiority through the player you're cheering for.
I don't know if you share this view, and I'm no psychologist, so I don't even know if it's a credible psychological view or just a bunch of unsubstantiated hot air, but that's the way I see things at least. So "pathetic" and "petty" might be too strong, but I definitely think there would be inferiority issues involved if someone actively hopes for someone else's misfortunes or struggles, and, depending on your outlook, it might be seen as pathetic or petty.
I made a general statement towards people who cheer for one of the goalies to suck during their league games, leading up to the tournament, just so their prospect can get in. I wasn't referring to you personally...why you chose to get on this crusade 
