Hockey Den: The Premier Hockey Card and Memorabilia Destination
Visit us at www.hockeyden.net, watch the 06-07 ITG Heroes and Prospects box break, and enter to win your choice of any card from the break!
Facts: It was more than a hockey game. It was a war. It was not about goals. It was about ways of life. They weren’t fighting to win a game, they were there to battle for the ideals of their country. Missiles, tanks and guns were replaced with slapshots, bodychecks and swinging sticks. Players were soldiers for their people, marching ahead for the crest on the front of their jerseys, never focusing on the names on the back. Bones were broken, blood was shed. No, it was far from a game. It was war, plain and simple. And every man on the ice fought like it was nothing short of a battle for the very existence of the country whose flag they were born under and saw time and time again over their life with hand over heart….
For those not old enough to remember it is difficult to explain the exact political climate this series was played under. The Cold War was in its heights. In one corner, the Soviet Union, the big red bear, the communist superpower. They were a threat to the safety of the western society way of life, and given their nuclear armament, a literal threat to the very existence of this hemisphere’s existence. In the west, Canada and the US were the targets of Soviet disdain, viewed as countries of excess and capitalist greed, attempting political, ideological and military control of the countries surrounding the USSR in an attempt to overthrow Russia as a way of building a world supremacy based on Western values and goals. Even through this significantly simplified overview of the times it should be apparent that each side felt that their very survival was at stake. For a look at how serious the US was about it at the time, take a gander at what the school kids were treated to for their in-class video during the 60’s:
Politics also have a way of spilling over into other domains, and in the case of hockey it was no different. The issue at hand between Canada and Russia stemmed from the players sent to represent the latter country in international competition. Specifically, the mandate of tournaments such as the World Championships and the Olympics were to showcase competition between the amateur athletes of the participating countries. In the eyes of many, however, Russia was exploiting the structure. The argument was that while the players were amateurs in the sense that they did not play in a professional league, rather playing for the Red Army team via each player's enlistment in the Russian military, they were in fact professional players as they played for the team full time in fulfillment of their mandatory military enlistment, holding military titles and ranks only ceremonially as a way of maintaining that their vocation was not that of a hockey player. Furthermore, it was suspected that players received financial support via their involvement, implicitly rendering them ineligible for amateur classification. This was a suspicion, however, not an indisputable fact, and as such the Red Army's amateur status held.
Given the presence of a team of full time elite hockey players in amateur tournaments, it is no wonder that Russia dominated at this level. Among other countries crying foul was Canada, whose best players were in the NHL and therefore unable to, in their minds, demonstrate what they felt was a hockey truism: No one could match Canada's best. Given that the Canadians felt the amateur tournaments were a farce at best, they ceased involvement in both Olympic and World Championship tournaments in 1969.
At the same time there was an unyielding desire to set the Russians straight. Put that qualifier next to their international success: You may dominate amateurs but you were humbled by the play of Canada's best. Behind the scenes the stage was being set for the setting in which the Canadians were a consensus pick to do just that. Alan Eagleson, at that time a player agent, saw the opportunity of a lifetime. Why not have a tournament between the best of the Russians and the best of the Canadians (although with the exclusion of WHA players one could argue whether this actually happened) and finally end the questioning around who was the best? Well, at least that was the public question as everyone was confident such a tournament would be a drubbing by the canucks. But let's face it, this was not as much a hockey series as much as it was using hockey as a weapon in which the Russian way could be shown as inferior to that of the west. It was a metaphor for how North America felt about Russia: when all things are equal what you bring to the table ideologically doesn't measure up. Canadians got the opportunity they wanted when Eagleson was able to arrange the tournament. Four games in Canada, four in the USSR. September 1972. They got the opportunity, but the outcome was much different than anyone could have anticipated.
Hockey pundits and media shared a similar view heading into the tournament. A sample of some of the quotations exudes the confidence held by most of an oncoming Canadian massacre (credit to www.1972summitseries.com for the quotes):
"The NHL team will slaughter them in eight straight."
-Gerry Eskenazi, New York Times
"Canada will win handily: they might lose one in Moscow. Say 7-1."
-Milt Dunnel, Toronto Star
We might lose one in Russia. 7-1 for Canada."
-Claude Larochelle, Le Soleil (Quebec City)
"Canada's two goals a game better. It looks like 8-0 Canada."
-Foster Hewitt
"8-0 Canada - and that's also the score of the first game."
-Fran Rosa, Boston Globe
"Canada 7 games to 1."
-Mark Mulvoy, Sports Illustrated
Who could argue? We had Dryden and Esposito in net against some guy named Tretiak. You want Phil Esposito, the Mahovlich brothers, Cournoyer, Clarke, Henderson, Savard and Park or do you want some unknowns like Mikhailov, Kharlamov, Yakushev, Ragulin and Davydov? Many opinions changed between September 2nd and 29th of that year.
Game 1: Out to an early 2-0 lead, the consensus opinion of a Canadian sweep was in motion. Then the brick wall jumped out in front of them. Final score: 7-3 Russia.
Game 2: Opinion following the first game in Montreal was that the Canadians might have been a bit too relaxed going in, and that they would pull it together for game two in Toronto. Final: 4-1 Canada. Still, many raised concerns. This score did not reflect a Canadian domination by any means. And who was this Tretiak kid in goal?
Game 3: 4-4 tie in Winnipeg. Colour the population of Canada officially worried! The Russians come back from 2 goal deficits twice in the game, showing they won't just roll over.
Game 4: Vancouver. Russia wins 5-3 in relatively easy fashion. Team Canada booed by the fans, leading to this famous speech by Espo:
Effective as it was in temporarily placating the Canadian public, it also left people with a frightening prospect to consider during the 2 week break as the series shifted to Russian soil: If they're playing as hard as they can are we about to lose this series?
Game 5: The first in the Russian homeland. The final 4 games would be played in Moscow. The Russian team was winning with a 2-1-1 record coming into their home games. Canada needed to do something fast, and in game 5 they came out guns blazing. Cheered on by a contingent of 3000 Canadian fans who had traveled to support the team, the Canadians opened up a 4-1 lead in the game. This was not to hold, however, as the Russian "never say die" play reared its head again. Russia comes back to win the game 5-4. Canada's record is now 1-3-1. To win the tournament means winning all of the last three games. Cue the making of a legendary performance...
Game 6: Not only did the Canadians have to worry about the Russians in this game, but it also appeared that officiating was going to be a concern. Looking back approximately a week and a half before this game, Team Canada played two exhibition games against Sweden. Canada won the first 4-1 and tied the second at 4. Both games featured prominently the aggressive and physical style of play characteristic of the Canadian game, but one that was not appreciated by either the Swedes or the officials. Penalties were numerous, and brawls ensued in the second game, with perhaps the most serious result being the loss of Wayne Cashman for the remainder of the Summit Series after requiring 50 stitches on his tongue. The officiating staff for that first exhibition game? West Germans Josef Kompalla and Franz Baader. The referees for game 6 of the Summit Series? West Germans Josef Kompalla and Franz Baader. Penalties for Canada in game 6: 31. For Russia? Four.
This is not to say that all of the Canadian punishment was not warranted, as with their backs against the wall these Canucks were playing over the top. The extreme example of this came during this game, when assistant coach John Ferguson walked over to a young Bobby Clarke and suggested that Kharlamov, arguably the Russians biggest scoring threat, needed "a tap on the ankle". The "tap" came courtesy of Clarke's stick, breaking Kharlamov's ankle.
Canada came out on top this game, having shown a very different game than the Russians had become accustomed to from them, winning 4-1. Canada's second goal, the game winner, was scored by Paul Henderson.
Game 7: Lest we think the "tap" was the only controversial play in the series, fast forward to period three of game 7. In the midst of a scrum along the boards, future Soviet team captain Boris Mikhailov gave two strong kicks to the shins of Gary Bergman with his skate blades, escalating an already developing fight at the time.
Nevertheless, it was Canada who again brought the fight to the Russians, winning game 7 by a score of 4-3. Scoring the winning goal for Canada late in the third on a strong individual effort? Paul Henderson.
Game 8: Canada now has a record of 3-3-1. Before the game even starts, they feel at a disadvantage. West German referee Josef Kompalla is back for game 8 and makes his presence known, dolling out a number of soft penalties early in the game. One of his questionable calls results in a delay in the game, whereby after calling JP Parise on what was viewed as a marginal infraction, Parise's emotions got the best of him and he hauled back with his stick, almost taking a swing at Kompalla. Parise was subsequently ejected. Canada battled through however, and the score was 2-2 after one period.
The second period was one to forget, with the Russians going up 5-3. Having fought back this far though, the Canadians were not ready to pack it in. Third period goals from Esposito and Cournoyer evened it up, yet not without further controversy, as when the latter scored the goal judge did not turn on the light. Incensed, and believing the Russian officials were attempting to take the game away, he launched into a tirade across the arena from the Canadian’s bench trying beyond anything to get the officials to turn on the goal light. Soviet police attempted to subdue him, and quite possibly remove him from the area, prompting the team to bolt to the other side of the ice in his defense, with Peter Mahovlich going over to boards to face off with the police carrying only his stick! The players brought Eagleson across the ice to their bench, as he showered the crowd with a stream of middle fingers, something they consequently did not understand as the gesture had no meaning in Russia.
With the score tied and only minutes left to play, Soviet officials made it known to the Canadian organizers that if the game was tied, resulting in a 3-3-2 record for both teams, they would be declaring victory based on goal differential in the series.
Less than a minute left. Henderson calls Peter Mahovlich off the ice and sprints for the net. The rest is history….
Although Canada won the series, it was really a victory for both teams. The Russians, discounted from the get go, had brought the “Mighty Canadians” to the brink of defeat, something no one could have imagined. That in and of itself was one of the first movements towards significant involvement of players from outside of North America in the NHL. Yet it was still very much a slow movement due in part to resistance from the NHL owners as well as an inability for Russian players to leave their country to play in the NHL without defecting.
All this aside, however, I’m always left wondering how things might have been different had to series ended on a different note. I’ve gone on long enough though, and as such leave it in your hands to run with from here…
“WHAT IF...?” #10: Henderson Had Missed The Net In Game 8?
The implications for this one could be interesting. Creativity and passion are the name of the game in this exercise, and as usual I look forward to seeing what you have to say!
Remember to visit www.hockeyden.net, watch the 06-07 ITG Heroes and Prospects box break, and enter to win your choice of any card from the break!
________________________________________________________________________
Join the Discussion:
»