Re: Rod Gilbert in the 1977 World Championships
- Lloyd Davis <ldavis@...> wrote:
>True, Eagleson wasn't known for managing his emotionsEagleson was never any popular in Europe. He was regarded as an
>in the best possible way. And Esposito set the tone,
>for better and for worse. Espo's attitude going into
>the series may not be representative of the others.
>But in his book, he says he only went because he'd
>been told it would benefit the NHL players' pension
>fund. Of course, as with almost all other international
>hockey that the Eagle was involved with, it was an
>opportunity for Eagleson to steal from the players.
insensitive loudmouth. Regarding Espo, the sad and - I suppose -
unfair thing is that his cameo in Vienna in 1977 is what hockey
people in Europe remember him for. He had been heard of for years but
in those days few Europeans had the chance to watch NHL-games. It was
VERY seldom shown on TV in some countries and as we've been
discussing, NHLers hadn't been to the Worlds up til then.
>There may not have been a conspiracy, but thereThere are undoubtedly differences in the philosophy behind hockey in
>certainly was a clear difference of philosophy,
>in terms of how to play and how to officiate. I
>don't think it's fair to try to claim that one
>was better than the other, or cleaner. It's just
>a question of what players were used to -- whether
>it was a spear to the gut (or somewhere lower),
>or an invitation to drop the gloves.
Europe and North America, and I guess this is due to the slightly
different roots. In Europe, hockey has always been based on technical
skills like in soccer and - especially - bandy. In fact, the first
hockey players in Scandinavia and Russia (I'm not sure about the
Czechs and Slovaks) were bandy players who learnt the new game in the
years between the World Wars. Of course hockey has always been more
physical in North America and I wonder if this is due to similarities
with Football and Rugby?
On a side-note; Canada in Vienna 1977 wasn't "dropping the gloves",
they mainly used their sticks (which was the main reason of the
European critizism). Most penalties were slashings and hookings with
an occasional butt-ending and spearing.
>At the administrative level, I have heard enough peopleThis is another problem which may have to do with the existence of
>say that Canada was resented, that there must be something
>to it. This isn't just sour grapes from coaches or players
>who didn't get their own way. Gord Renwick, a classy
>individual and a smart administrator, knew he could only
>rise as high as the #2 job, that the presidency would
>never be his.
the NHL. Despite its name, it's not a national association but a
company which is stronger than any of the national associations
around the world. I mean, it clearly puts the CAHA in the shadow,
making the road open for Europe on the international level. On the
other hand, the best players available are employed by the NHL,
putting the international hockey association in the shadow as well.
I would like to see a truly international hockey association along
the lines of the soccer equivalent with good, regular competitions
between the nations (and companies) involved, with global rules and
rink sizes and so on. Why hasn't the Olympic rink become the
standard? And why are there no longer any games between clubs in the
NHL and clubs in Europe?