Women's hockey GDT: USA vs. Sweden

[God Bless Canada]

Nice to see Sweden pull off an upset, instead of get upset, for a change.

This result is probably good for the game as a whole. Hopefully it's a signal that the Scandanavian nations are catching up, and we start to consistently see four teams that can contend for a world title. It's not going to help the Americans any right now.

Finland's a tough team. Canada knows better than to take them lightly. If Canada does underestimate them, Canada will lose. Finland led Canada 3-2 after two periods in the 2002 Olympic semi-final. When Canada won those world titles in the 1990s, they usually faced Finland in the semis, and those were generally decided by one or two goals. And if Canada does beat Finland (by no means a guarantee), they have to face an upstart Swedish team whose goalie just had the game of her life.

Didn't see the game, and I'm not as familiar with U.S. women's hockey as Canadian women's hockey. Did the U.S. take Sweden lightly? Or is this a reflection of a gap in the U.S. development pipeline, similar to what happened with the men's program for much of the 1990s?

 

[ColoradoHockeyFan]

Maybe, but the American women's team are a bunch of classless, arrogant, whiny cows. I am glad they lost.

See, if you had just posted this in the first place, and spared us the 58 different posts whining about US PP's, we could have gotten to your true feelings much sooner.

 

[oil slick]

There is a lot more to it than that.

Well the guy asked why is every non-American going for Sweden?

As a non-American, I cheer for the American men (when not playing Canada), so actually I don't think it is more than that.

 

[Nihilism]

Oh boo hoo. Sweden won, karma caught up the US, so deal with it

Jenny Porter looks like a man

 

[Bloggins]

See, if you had just posted this in the first place, and spared us the 58 different posts whining about US PP's, we could have gotten to your true feelings much sooner.

His comments are not the opinion of most Canadian fans.

 

[Chimpradamus]

Sweden has around 450 licensed female hockey players, Canada has about 225.000 - if my numbers are right. That's 500 Canadian players for every Swedish one. Heh.

 

[Slats432]

Well the guy asked why is every non-American going for Sweden?

As a non-American, I cheer for the American men (when not playing Canada), so actually I don't think it is more than that.

Actually, I wouldn't be disappointed to see a Finland-Sweden gold medal game. There has to be a gap closing in competition for this to be taken seriously.

This was step one.

 

[ColoradoHockeyFan]

His comments are not the opinion of most Canadian fans.

Oh, don't worry, we know they're not. I've been to Canada. There is obviously way, way more class north of the border than is being displayed by him.

 

[Force]

Hmm. I think its not heterosexual that the girls tournament doesn't have a quarterfinal.

 

[yarre]

WOOOOOOOOOOHOOOOOOOO! FREAKING SILVERMEDAL!

I have never been this excited about women's hockey, great game girls! I never thought they would tie the game when the US had a 2-0 lead. Amazing! Too bad about the final though, will probably be another landslide-win.

 

[Hashmark]

Well the guy asked why is every non-American going for Sweden?

As a non-American, I cheer for the American men (when not playing Canada), so actually I don't think it is more than that.

Oh, I think it's a lot more than that. I would say about 1/3 is anti-American sentiment based on jealousy of America's power, 1/3 is anti-Americanism due to American arrogance in sport and "politics", and 1/3 is the flag-stomping, and whining about the Candians scores.

The rest of the World loves to see the USA fail at anything. I know - I'm part of it!

 

[Bileur]

Sweden has around 450 licensed female hockey players, Canada has about 225.000 - if my numbers are right. That's 500 Canadian players for every Swedish one. Heh.

I heard it was more like 60000 for Canada.

 

[two out of three*]

Looks like America-Lite will take the Gold Medal this year with ease.

Kidding.

But the American Women could probably beat the Mens Kazakhstan team by more than the Mens US did.

 

[Telecaster]

Didn't see the game, and I'm not as familiar with U.S. women's hockey as Canadian women's hockey. Did the U.S. take Sweden lightly? Or is this a reflection of a gap in the U.S. development pipeline, similar to what happened with the men's program for much of the 1990s?

They (US) played good, this win was all about the goalies. Kim Martin was on fire and did it all. Maria R on attack was awesome. But mostly Kim in goal, she was amazing.

 

[Jarko2004]

Sorry, but these two teams are on a completely different level from Canada. Much as it would be good for the sport, Canada won't be in any close games this week.

 

[oil slick]

Actually, I wouldn't be disappointed to see a Finland-Sweden gold medal game. There has to be a gap closing in competition for this to be taken seriously.

This was step one.

9 out of 10 times America wins that game... so it's not like there is true parity... but i think 4 years ago, America wins that game 10 out of 10 times.

Steps in the right direction - even if Canada wins.

 

[Sonic Death Monkey]

Wohoo!! Great game by Sweden!

 

[usual suspects]

Nice to see Sweden pull off an upset, instead of get upset, for a change.

This result is probably good for the game as a whole. Hopefully it's a signal that the Scandanavian nations are catching up, and we start to consistently see four teams that can contend for a world title. It's not going to help the Americans any right now.

Finland's a tough team. Canada knows better than to take them lightly. If Canada does underestimate them, Canada will lose. Finland led Canada 3-2 after two periods in the 2002 Olympic semi-final. When Canada won those world titles in the 1990s, they usually faced Finland in the semis, and those were generally decided by one or two goals. And if Canada does beat Finland (by no means a guarantee), they have to face an upstart Swedish team whose goalie just had the game of her life.

Didn't see the game, and I'm not as familiar with U.S. women's hockey as Canadian women's hockey. Did the U.S. take Sweden lightly? Or is this a reflection of a gap in the U.S. development pipeline, similar to what happened with the men's program for much of the 1990s?

I only watched a portion of the game and the shoutout so I don't know for sure but I don't think the USA took them lightly as they played hard in the 1st period. The Sweden goalie was fantastic and stole the game. Now what I don't know is how the USA played in the 2nd period when the Swedes scored twice. Mayber the STates got the lead and let it slip away I don't know. Maybe someone else could comment. Overall though the Kim Martin stole the game.

 

[Gozer]

Given that Canada already beat them 8-1, I don't think it's likely. That wasn't the first game the US struggled through.

I would expect a closer game this time. The swedish ladies admitted that they didn't really fought as they should have in the first game.

 

[Nihilism]

His comments are not the opinion of most Canadian fans.

Uh oh

 

[McJadeddog]

holy crap!! i went to cbc.ca and saw the headline that sweden beat the US and was SHOCKED.... now, admittedly i dont follow womens hockey *that* closely, so this might not be as big of an upset as i think it is but its still a large upset nonetheless..... cbc is calling it "sweden's miracle on ice", is this accurate? is it really as big of an upset as US-russia was?

if anything this just shows how ridiculous 1 game eliminations really are..... is ther *anybody* in the entire world who really thinks sweden would have beat the US in a 7 game series? yeah i didnt think so.... these tournaments are all fine and dandy, but they dont really prove who the better team is, they only prove who the better team on that particular day.... for me to take these results seriously, a 3 game series would have to take place at the minimum

 

[usual suspects]

2 reasons. Cause everyone likes the underdog & for canadians, it makes for a way easier row to hoe. In fact, it virtually gaurantees Canada the gold.

It does not guarantee Canada anything. They need to beat Finland first. If they beat Finland then they will face a hot goalie and a team with tons of confidence. I still think Canada will win gold but it is not a guarantee. Ask the USA.

 

[ColinM]

Didn't see the game, and I'm not as familiar with U.S. women's hockey as Canadian women's hockey. Did the U.S. take Sweden lightly? Or is this a reflection of a gap in the U.S. development pipeline, similar to what happened with the men's program for much of the 1990s?

I don't claim to know alot about the U.S. women's hockey program but I thought this game was just a classic case of a hot goaltender winning a game all by herself. The Americans almost had twice as many shots on goal as Sweden did and was leading 2-1 at one point. As another poster mentioned there's not enough female players in Sweden to say that the Swedish program has caught up.

 

[oil slick]

It does not guarantee Canada anything. They need to beat Finland first. If they beat Finland then they will face a hot goalie and a team with tons of confidence. I still think Canada will win gold but it is not a guarantee. Ask the USA.

You must admit that our chances just improved a great deal.

 

[Predatore]

Attention
No politics on this board / in this thread!