| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Ryan Harper |
Posted - 02/23/2006 : 08:51:10
If people are looking for someone to blame, they should start with the players themselves. Going in to the tournament most people had a couple issues with Gretzky's player selections, but overall the team looked pretty good. The problem was the lack of effort - simple as that. No hitting, no passion, no emotion, nothing. |
| 9 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Ripley |
Posted - 02/26/2006 : 12:25:41
LOL!!!! |
| bablaboushka |
Posted - 02/26/2006 : 07:30:01
Wow I'm glad I'm not the only one! Guess the audio on your TV is a little slow! |
| Ryan Harper |
Posted - 02/25/2006 : 14:17:52
Are you joking Blade? I saw it once, thats all it took to see that the whistle went before the puck was in. |
| blade |
Posted - 02/24/2006 : 21:18:13
quote:
Originally posted by bablaboushka
Actually I watched it a few times and the whistle went before the puck was in,
Are you on glue? I've seen it several times and it was definitely in first. Maybe time is a little faster way out east. |
| bablaboushka |
Posted - 02/23/2006 : 13:09:41
Actually I watched it a few times and the whistle went before the puck was in, but the really amazing part was how quickly that whistle went. I bet 8/10 refs would have let the play go on for at least another second, in which case that goal would have counted.
Oh well, too late now and frankly I don't think it would have made a big difference in the grand scheme of things. Nevermind momentum, Canada just didn't have what it took to win, disallowed goal or not. |
| blade |
Posted - 02/23/2006 : 12:59:53
How come no one is talking about the goal that was called back for Canada. The replay clearly showed the puck in the net before the whistle went. Couldn't they go upstairs on that one? |
| leigh |
Posted - 02/23/2006 : 12:41:12
Yup. The guys you names above did not produce (add Bertuzzi). But to be honest I think if you redid the Olympics in 2 weeks, Canada's team could win, it's an electric team on paper and sometimes guys have "off" weeks. I don't think anyone can say it was lack of heart, those guys have nothing but heart. Chemistry, or lack of it, on the other hand was a big issue.
The men's international game currently has complete parity. It's good for hockey and my hat is off to the other nations, namely Finland, for building such strong programs. Canada has to face it, we don't dominate anymore. On any given day any of the top 6 nations could win this thing (Canada, US, Sweden, Russia, Finland, Czech)
My hat goes off to Brodeur, St. Louis and Doan. Personally I would not have chosen St. Louis or Doan but I sure will next time. These guys showed up every game and did their jobs!
Final note: Next time, more role players. And you can't overstate the importance of a guy like Lemieux. |
| bablaboushka |
Posted - 02/23/2006 : 11:01:11
A couple problems stand out:
1) Lack of chemistry. I don't think this is a weak argument because it is an obvious one. Most other teams have been playing together (talking about the international scale) for many years. Team Canada has only a few familiar buddies from their NHL teams. This however, is not an excuse.
2) Lack of production from the big guns. Obviously Gretzky was criticized for his selections, he would have been with any combination of players. But a big problem this tournament was with the guys who he COULD NOT have left off the team, namely Thornton, Heatley, Iginla, Nash, Gagne... These selections could not have been argued, but it's these guys with crazy high expectations that didn't deliver. |
| pucker |
Posted - 02/23/2006 : 09:00:32
Watching yesterday's game was like watching the Canucks. Effort? What's that? |
|
|
