From: mre@teal.Eng.Sun.COM (Michael R. Eisler)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey
Subject: Re: >FAQ
Date: 3 Sep 92 18:29:41 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mountain View, CA  USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: teal

In article <farenebt.715471463@craft.camp.clarkson.edu> farenebt@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Bri Farenell) writes:
>> 1991-92 World Junior Hockey Championships in Germany
>>                  W L T Pts  GF  GA
>> Gold    CIS      6 1 0  12  39  13
>> Silver  Sweden   5 1 1  11  41  24
>> Bronze  USA      5 2 0  10  30  22
>>         Finland  3 3 1   7  21  21
>>         Czech    3 4 0   6  28  24
>>         Canada   2 3 2   6  21  30
>[...]
>
>Aren't the Canadians the SELF-PROCLAIMED kings of hockey? Even with

Either you are ignorant or flame baiting. I'll assume the former.

>Lindros, the finished 6th. They haven't won an Olympic gold medal since

I believe Canada won the gold in World Junior the previous two years.
And I don't recall any Canadian in r.s.h. proclaiming Canada supreme
after those victories, although several non-Canadians did.

>1952. This was the first year that they won a medal AND finished higher
>than the Americans in the same Olympics. Do they have the best pros? Yes,

Huh? Canada has at least 6 gold medals in the Olympics, none of which
were shared with any country, and the U.S. was in several, if not all
of those tournaments. In fact, I recall reading in the 1988 Winter
Olympic Programme about a gold medal match between the U.S. and Canada
that was played outdoors. The rink was laid out so that one goal was on
the south, the other on the north.  The referee (not Canadian or
U.S.'er) asked each team captain their ages.  To surprise of both
captains, the referee awarded the southern end of the ice to the older
captain's team: the U.S. In other words, the Canadian's had to play
with the sun in their eyes for two periods, based on a totally
arbritrary, and obviously predetermined algorithm (like the ref didn't
already know which guy was older, or that the IIHF didn't know that a
N-S rink was unfair to one team). I don't recall what the margin of
victory was, although that same program mentioned several games between
the two countries that were quite close. And some that weren't.

Nonetheless, the U.S. has showcased some great talent in the 80s and
90s Olympics, the irony being that '80 gold medal team was not the most
talented of the four, and perhaps the least.

>but they are no longer the sole source of great pros. The Americans certainly

Is this supposed to be a news flash? There have been non-Canadian (not
necessarily U.S.'er) stars in the NHL for decades (eg. Borje Salming).

>proved their mettle at the Canada Cup this year. They didn't beat the
>Canadians but they weren't demolished either. 

The U.S. put on a great performance [Actually somebody pointed out to
me that members of the Chicago Blackhawks seem to shine in the series,
regardless of country]. Nonetheless they lost all 3 games played
against Canada: a team that lacked Bourque, Lemeiux(sp), and half of
Gretzky. Three guys that were absolutely required for Canada to squeak
by the USSR in '87.

Even if the U.S. had better pro's than Canada (which might happen if
trends continue), what is the point of belittling one country's
performances as compared to another? I've noticed your strident
.signature files in the past on this topic, and have concluded that you
must have an inferiority complex about the overall proficiency of your
country's hockey players. Is this perhaps a manifestation of the
little-league-baseball-parent syndrome? It might be healthier if you
decided to just enjoy the game, and blind yourself to which passport a
player is carrying.

	-Mike Eisler
	mre@Eng.Sun.Com