Sweden with a population of 9 million is in Olympic Hockey final.
On the other side: Canada.
And if THAT wasnt scary enough; ok let us have three out of four judges from Canada...
Couldn't be any better in a swedish perspective!
Good luck Canada, and lets hope for a memorable fight!
I think I have to go and forwarn my neighbors before the game begins..
Sweden with a population of 9 million is in Olympic Hockey final.
Congratulations to Canada!
I take my hat of.
That was a lesson in how to play hockey.
Still really nice to see both Sweden and Finland in the top 3!!
And thank you cgreen for this thread.
I get a kick out of reading the Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet. There is very little about the actual game, no mention of who played well. Instead the sports section is focused on two issues. 1) 3 out of 4 officials being Canadian, which I consider a poor decision by the organizers, but had no influence on the game. and 2) that one of their better players, Backstrom, was not allowed to play for having used a banned substance, and the team was informed just before the game. There is even the suggestion that Canada somehow arranged this since "they always whatever it takes to win", quoting Tallinder, who plays in the NHL!!
So much whining. Players also get injured,. All teams have to face adversity.
In fact the Swedes were not in the game. Losing one player does not explain that. They were sloppy, and except for the first 10 minutes mounted very little in the way of offense. If Sweden had dominated, I can't imagine a Canadian newspaper spending so much ink on excuses. Most would have congratulated the Swedes on playing well.
Congratulations to the Swedes, Finns, Americans, and Canadians. I certainly enjoyed the last couple rounds of international hockey more than I had expected. I have previously likened Olympic play to that found during the NHL All-Star break (which I loathe) but surprisingly found a fantastic level of competition. As I was a young lad during the Lake Placid games it's going to take an awful lot to beat that feeling....
It is still amazing to me how these players can take up so much room on a larger sheet of ice. They are simply that good.
That being said. It will be nice to get back to the NHL schedule and some familiar line combinations! It will certainly be a hectic pace to the playoffs.
I agree with you.
Even if we had five Bäckström and four swedish officials on the ice, canada would have won anyway.
Bäckström is a good player, but he´s not Peter Forsberg.
But about Tallinders quoting, when you read it closer, he actually says
"we lost against a better team". He do say something about that canada do what ever it takes to win,
but I think Aftonbladet, like so many times before, hear what they want to hear.
As to the issue with Backstrom, I just spoke to Mark who played hockey internationally for Team Canada. He said that in any international tournament the players were constantly being told, in great detail which medications they could not take. I cannot understand that Backstrom could be in a situation where he could take a cold medicine that contained a banned substance. That is the fault of the Swedish organization.
Reading further it appears to be an allergy medicine that he has been taking for years and there is no problem in North America. It seems to me that the Swedish team should have asked everyone what medication they were taking and checked.
On the other hand the comments of Tallinder are really not acceptable
”Brukar vara så i Kanada...”
Och när Sportbladet möter Buffalo Sabres-backen Henrik Tallinder efter matchen riktade 35-åringen sina misstankar om att Kanada ansträngt sig för att stoppa Bäckström från spel.
– Jag vet inte vad Kanada håller på med eller hur de har fått reda på. Det var något med en astmamedicin som Bäckis brukar ta, säger han.
Men tror du att de har blivit tipsade?
– Jag vet faktiskt inte. Vi kan ju spekulera hur mycket som helst.
Är det inte lite märkligt?
– Jo, det är märkligt. Men vad det än krävs för att vinna. Det brukar vara så i Kanada.
I think someone should introduce "Ice-Rugby" to the Winter Olympics - that way countries like Britain, France, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa might have an outside chance of winning something! :-D
"Jag tror att Tallinder har rätt tyvärr. Тrots att Aftonbladet kvar och gnäller om det här, som är lite konstigt, brukar händer det överallt. "
I am sorry I am not aware of any example in hockey of teams conspiring to arrange for the doping suspension of opposition players. What exactly are you talking about?
Congrats to Canada on the win, figured they would take gold again but expected Sweden to have a better showing. I have to say I was very disappointed with our effort against Finland. However, it was great to see Selanne end his career on such a strong performance. Great player.
It must be really nice to be able to read so good swedish. In situations like this you can really get a better picture
of whats going on. No matter if its "just" hockey or some political situation somewhere. This is also one of mine biggest motivation to learn languages, to be able to do that, at least in 4-5 diffrent languages. (yes you can use google translate, but its really not the same thing).
Aftonbladet, however, have lost my respect many years ago, better places is (maybe) swedish televisions (svt.se) news site, or one of the other paper dn.se/svd.se
@Aray, yes great player. Teemu Selänne, olympic debut Albertville 1992.
Yes Selanne is an amazing genius and a remarkable person.
@cribbe Agreed that Aftonbladet is a sensationalist paper but I am disappointed in what Tallinder had to say and also the hype about the Canadian officials for the final, as if somehow the Canadians would use whatever means, fair or foul, to win. As Mats Sundin pointed out in another interview, the choice of Canadian officials would have no impact on the game, and if anything these officials would probably go overboard in favouring Sweden to avoid being accused of favouring Canada.
In any case it was not a wise idea to have all officials from one of the competing countries in my view, but that was the decision of the organizers, not a Canadian plot.
Here is an article from a national Canadian paper on the Backstrom situation. It seems that Backstrom has a lot of sympathy amongst hockey circles, not only in Sweden.
ad Steve: Interesting article.
On a different note, is "an historic night" just a typo or is there a rule I'm missing that says that you use "an" in front of "historic"?
As far as I know you use "an" only in front of vowels (if pronounced as such) or words where the first consonant is not pronounced (such as in "honour").
I'd say "an" is optional in front of a word beginning "h". (No idea whether there's a rule about it!)
(...) I'd say "an" is optional in front of a word beginning "h". (No idea whether there's a rule about it!) (...)
Ah, ok, I did not know that. Thank you.
I would have always said "an honour" but "a historic moment", just as I say "a unification process", but "an understatement".
Live and learn (or "one lives and learns" as you probably say in the UK ;-))
Now that I think about this I'm not sure whether this isn't rather arbitrary: I don't think anyone would ever say "an hill", for example. But "an hotel", "an historic moment" would be fine. Could we say "an hippopotamus"?? Mmm...perhaps...
Really? You would say "an hotel"? I have never heard that before. But there is a first time for everything, I guess....
I would say either "a hotel" or "an hotel" depending on my general mood (or on sentence rhythm, etc..)
I guess the safe approach is to stick to "a" - that way you'll never be wrong ;-)
I say both "a hotel" and "an hotel" depending on the context, but I have no idea of the rule.
I've been trying to think of words that start with "hi," and I think I would always precede it with "a."
A hippo, a hippy, a histogram, a history, a hijacking.
ad Jay and David: I just found this article (or: I HAVE JUST found - for Jay ;-)):
I would have always considered "an historic" to be completely wrong. With the English language you obviously can never be quite certain....