Quote:
Originally Posted by valo403
I wouldn't, we would have won a tournament that didn't include the best possible field, it would be a sham victory.
The injury comparison doesn't hold up, that's part of the game. Does Canada get a re-do on Nagano because Kariya was hurt?
|
No and thats the point.
We as Canadians obviously have a biased view of the Canadian team and its affect on the attitudes of the other teams. Whether the Canadians are considered the best by objectively looking at their team, that wouldn't take away from the medal winners I don't think. What if Canada was there and the eventual winner didn't have to go through Canada. Would there be an asterisk? Again, maybe in Canadian's eyes but certainly not in the winner's eyes. Canada winning gold is not a forgone conclusion, and IMO, not really anymore likely than any of the big countries winning. Goaltending could be an issue and lets not forget, Canada has not medaled in 2 of the last 4 Olympics.
To the point of the injury, OK so injuries happen. let's say for sake of the argument, that St Louis voluntarily sat out to in protest to the Flames giving up on him in his young career. Would we care? Im pretty sure Iginla would be waving his ring in St Louis face for the rest of his days, as would rest of Calgary.
I see the point and do agree than some might view it that way. But I think the potential impact is being overblown here.
I'm too young to remember the boycotts from before, but they have happened. The Soviets sat out the LA games, and maybe it hurt that one city economically, but it certainly didn't inact any sort of ideoligcal change to Communism amongst Americans or even in LA. It actually probably swung the other way with more animosity towars the other ideology. Does anyone consider any of the wins from those games to be in vain because the Soviets weren't there. I can't ever recall someone saying so.