| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| andyhack |
Posted - 05/04/2007 : 20:37:00
I've touched on this before but the '87 thread got me thinking about it again.
To me, '72 is the one that Canadians REALLY have to look themselves in the mirror about. Although it is absolutely true that the Soviets were very very very dirty, tricky, cunning, nada nada, nada with all types of ploys on and off the ice, ultimately the Canadians lowered themselves to an even worse level by Clarke going out and purposely injuring the Russian superstar, Kharlmohov. From all accounts, including the absurdly proud admission of Assistant Coach, John Ferguson, who encouraged Clarke to do it on the bench minutes before it happened, this appears to be a fact. To me Clarke going after Kharlmohov's ankle is one of the most, if not the most, shameful acts in the history of international hockey. All the bad stuff that the Soviets were doing did not excuse it because of what I like to call "the most underrated, underappreciated and important to remember expression in the history of mankind" and that is "Two wrongs don't make a right".
That was a wild series which had a lot of great exciting moments no question. Of course, I don't want to take away credit from some very classy guys that were on that team. But the Clarke thing always jumps back in my mind when I hear people like fly4apuckguy talk about "Canadian hockey".
Thoughts? Comments? Bomb threats? |
| 12 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| 99pickles |
Posted - 05/17/2007 : 02:16:58
Well I have watched the first couple games in the last couple days, including opening ceremonies (yeah I am a loser)  It is pretty surprising how quickly it gets rough, and how conniving the coaches get right away. Often, when missing a hit, a player will lunge out with thier skate or knee to catch at least a piece of the opponent. The Canadians seem to be more guilty of this. Both coaches (in game 2) continually change their lines before face-offs causing lengthy delays and arguments. I can't wait till I get to the fireworks !!
Also, the Canadians are clearly not playing like a team yet. Blind passes to no-one, one man rushes, frequent unforced offside plays. |
| PuckNuts |
Posted - 05/14/2007 : 13:42:40
quote:
Originally posted by Mikhailova
Best of eight...yeah that makes sense. You can't always have best of an even number; what if it's tied 4 games to 4? I thought Russians were supposed to be good at math...
The game was tied before Henderson scored the big winner, and the Russians were ready to claim victory on a goals for basis, as the series would have been tied...
Lead, follow, or get out of the way... |
| Mikhailova |
Posted - 05/14/2007 : 11:43:25
Best of eight...yeah that makes sense. You can't always have best of an even number; what if it's tied 4 games to 4? I thought Russians were supposed to be good at math... |
| 99pickles |
Posted - 05/14/2007 : 09:54:09
I accept it with a grain of salt that Bobby Clarke did what he did. He was likely not the only one out there for either country attempting to maliciously injure top players from the other team. Also, that brand of "old school hockey" was more acceptable during that era - and implemented more often too. But I still grimace when I think of his admission. It is more of a commentary on the era than it is about how dirty he was.
I truly believe that no series will ever come to equal that one. The political climate, the general belief of Canada's easy superiority before the sereies, the stunning realizations as the series progressed, the fighting/brawling/kicking/overall dispicable incidences, Espo's impassioned speach to Canadian viewers at a critical time in the series, the fact that we only won the series in the extra game that CCCP demanded to have added so that they could make more money out of the series (best-of-eight ??? thanx Russia), Eagleson being forceably removed etc...etc.. etc.. If someone had of written this as a story, it would have been too contrived to believe. And those are just the things that we outsiders know about. Image the inside scoop....
I think I'll watch my DVD's of this series this week and see what other players are on a seek-and-destroy mission on the ice. Why not - my Flames aren't playing anymore
Fantsatic topic andyhack |
| andyhack |
Posted - 05/14/2007 : 09:19:59
Pucknuts,
I basically agree with what you said in your post. I am a competitor like every one else here and I agree that the circumstances surrounding that series were extraordinary, making it hard for us to make judgments now. BUT, I don’t think that means we shouldn’t be able to look back now and acknowledge that we went too far in that series. Fly4apuckguy maybe would say I am overanalyzing your words, but I think there is an important qualification that needs to be inserted in your quote below.
"in the heat of a battle you do what ever it takes to win WITHIN REASON”
Fly4apuckguy – if you are reading.
Glad we can basically see eye to eye on some things anyway. I love Espo by the way, but it is just that type of comment of his that now, we have to look back on (Phil too) and say, hold it a second, it WAS NOT actually a war. Even factoring into the situation the extraordinary circumstances of the times, it was, if not “just a game”, certainly not “war”. If putting this message out there is deemed to be “condescending”, then, you know what, I’ll gladly take the label, because it is too important a thing not to say. Phil baby, I love ya but I don’t think you ever want to be saying “I would have been willing to kill the other guy” when talking about a hockey game.
In my opinion, the line between what is good old fashioned competitive/do all you can to win hockey and what can become a pretty dangerous incident in hockey is quite cloudy, and when you factor in the speed at which things are happening on the ice, I think the cloudiness becomes more like a thick fog (this belief of mine probably is what was behind my battle with fly4apuckguy on the Gretzky hit thread actually). The nature of hockey to a certain degree makes it almost by definition a dangerous game (hockey is actually lucky there haven’t been more really serious incidents), so we don’t need to elevate it to even greater dangers with actions like Clarkes, or for that matter, with the words from like Espo (though in Espo’s case I do understand that he was trying to put the series in a certain light to explain what it felt like to play in that series).
p.s. - and to tie in the Suter check on Gretzky, yes, we don’t need that either, but I just find it to be a little more towards the foggy side than say something like what Clarke did.
|
| PuckNuts |
Posted - 05/13/2007 : 14:26:05
It was a small war between Canada, and CCCP...
All I understood at the time was that we were going to play a communist country in hockey, it was the cold war at the time, all that happened came along so fast at that time we could not digest it all...
We sat around wonder how this other country would even stand a chance against our best. So we watched a very close series, that did have some very entertaining hockey, not the same as today mind you.
Some of the players, coaches, and fans took it amongst themselves to do what ever it took to win, Clarke included, the outcome was in our favour, but a very close one indeed.
It is easy now to listen to the interviews of the coaches, and players, and then cast a judgement on the whole concept, and outcome of the tournament, but in the heat of a battle you do what ever it takes to win. Just put yourself in the positions of the Canadian and Solviet players what would you have done to win for your Country, any more or any less may of had a different outcome...
Lead, follow, or get out of the way... |
| Mikhailova |
Posted - 05/13/2007 : 09:51:55
Yeah good point 67Leafs. I said in the 1987 thread that the reason for all the roughing and incidents was because of the Cold War. You can't blame Canada too much for some of those things; think about it. You're playing a game to determine the world champion against your political rival. Their country is the enemy of the entire western hemisphere. And to make it worse the ref seems to be punishing your team with penalties while letting them get off light. Would you get a little rough? Yeah. I sure would. That doesn't mean Clarke's and Parise's actions were acceptable, but there was more behind them than just a desire to play dirty hockey. |
| 67LEAFS |
Posted - 05/13/2007 : 09:38:19
It was a series that no script could have written better. Say what you will about what the combatants did and didn't do, but no one can imagine what this group of men went through on the World stage. What Clarke did was on raw emotion, a desire to win at all cost with no prisoners. This was "us" vs "them" in hockey...our sport...let them even try to beat us. I remember the pre-series hype how this was going to be a cake walk for Canada. It was going to be eight straight wins and hopefully we wouldn't rack up the score too bad. Six and a half minutes into game one it was two nothing Canada and I remember rolling around on the living room floor laughing in stitches thinking this was going to be a slaughter. Final score in that game USSR 7-Canada 3. The nation was in SHOCK....what the f#@k just happened? Our players had the weight of a country on their backs and reached down within and did "whatever" it took to win. I still get goosebumps whenever I see a clip of Henderson's goal.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YzHG88B8Qo
A great sportsmanship moment is at 6:59 of this clip, when after Henderson's goal Pete Mahovalich skate's over and gives a defeated Tretiak a touching "nice game" tap on the pads. The conqueror congratulating his opponent on a well fought battle. |
| Mikhailova |
Posted - 05/13/2007 : 08:06:54
quote:
Originally posted by fly4apuckguy
I can't remember who it was that lifted his stick like he was going to smash the ref's head in, but that is another bad memory.
That was Parise. |
| fly4apuckguy |
Posted - 05/12/2007 : 23:21:40
I think it was a "dirty" series, and although I am proud of the victory overall, I am not proud of some of the actions our people made on or off the ice. While thinking about this, I had visions of Eagleson being escorted across the ice, while the Canadian trainers were giving the Russian crowd the finger - not so good. I can't remember who it was that lifted his stick like he was going to smash the ref's head in, but that is another bad memory.
I will say this, though. It is difficult for me to frame that series into my experience, as I was very young when it took place, and as an adult, the Russians are not the enemies they were at that time.
In 1972, we HATED the Russians. Now, I might talk smack about Russian hockey and hockey players from time to time, but I don't hate them. But in 1972, they were not just hockey enemies, they were the political enemy as well. Not that this condones over-the-top violent behavior, but it might explain why it was looked at as acceptable behavior.
Phil Esposito once admitted that he would have killed one of their players to win that series. In that light, a broken ankle seems fairly minor. In his book, he went into even greater detail about how important is was to win that series at all costs.
I always get a kick out of oldtimers who say the game "is so dirty now" every time there is a Chris Simon or Bertuzzi type incident.
1972 - we view it as our greatest victory, but for my money, the Canada Cup1987 series was better. Even Canada Cup 1984 was a cleaner win. The 2002 Olympics were probably our finest hour in terms of winning with class.
As strange as you may find this, I actually agree with you on this one, andyhack. I believe that at that specific moment in history, what we did was accepted, but that doesn't mean it should have been.
BTW, if you go to the "Who was the dirtiest player ever" thread started by Willus, you'll notice I did not pick Ulfie, Kasparitis, or some other European or Russian. I picked Bobby Clark, primarily for the reason you have brought up here.
|
| andyhack |
Posted - 05/08/2007 : 20:23:07
The two different perspectives on this topic are interesting.
Kharlamov
"I am convinced that Bobby Clarke was given the job of taking me out of the game," said Kharlamov. "Sometimes, I thought it was his only goal. I looked into his angry eyes, saw his stick which he wielded like a sword, and didn't understand what he was doing. It had nothing to do with hockey."
Clarke
"If I hadn't learned to to lay on a two-hander once in a while, I'd never have left Flin Flon."
I gotta admit, when I saw this game as a little kid (in our Grade 3 classroom), I was actually kind of happy the Soviets lost their superstar. But I was 8.
I am not saying that Canada would have lost but for the Kharlamov incident or that we shouldn't be proud of what that Canadian team did overall. But, I do feel that as great and as important a victory as that was for Canada, the series, and that incident in particular, serves as a a symbol of a place where sports should NOT go, a place where sports become TOO important. The end did not justify those means.
Willus, Pucknuts, others? What do you think? Am I blowing this out of, or into, proportion? |
| Mikhailova |
Posted - 05/05/2007 : 07:33:25
The 1972 Summit Series was quite a spectacle. Both teams were dirty, but Bobby Clarke cracking Kharlemov's ankle takes the cake. There's always the "what if" scenario; what if Clarke didn't crack Kharlemov's ankle and he played in Game 8? He was a major part of the Soviets' line, would Canada still have won? My guess is yes; it's Canada, hockey superpower extraordinnaire, but that move by Clarke was still dirty, and the coach John Ferguson encouraging him to do it was not sportsmanlike. Not that the Russians weren't dirty either. And the ref Kompalla and the other West German ref were terrible officiators. They gave tons of penalties for Canada and very few to the Russians. Almost as if they were trying to throw the game. And then there was the Eagleson incident where the refs were deciding whether to count a goal for the Russians, and he stood up and protested and then the Russian police grabbed him and the Canadians swarmed them and tried to get them off their teammate. All in all, despite all the roughing and incidents, it was a great victory for Canada. When Henderson scored that goal with 34 seconds left and Canada won the series, the audience stood up and sang O Canada louder than ever before.
Here's the picture of the final score on the scoreboard:
[img]http://www.1972summitseries.com/photos/scoreboardfront.jpg[/img]
From http://www.1972summitseries.com/index2.html. It's a great site, you can watch Henderson's goal and read about all the games, players, etc. |
|
|
