MovieChat Forums > Red Army (2015) Discussion > AKA The Illusion of Russian Superiority

AKA The Illusion of Russian Superiority

posted 10 years ago by bdavis-5
47 replies | jump to latest

At least I hope that is in the thesis of this doc.

I am glad that it is said in the trailer that their hockey team represented the peak of what the Soviet Union achieved. I am glad because Team Canada beat them over and over and over again. I used to be a little embarrassed that many Canadians felt that our games with them were also ideological clashes between communism and freedom, but I am proud of that now precisely because this doc apparently shows that's how the Russians saw it.

The Soviet national team was a full-time, permanent, de facto professional organization which the entire authoritarian hockey system was carefully designed to feed and nurture. It racked up Olympic medals and world championships because the former were strictly amateur tournaments in which Communist professionals were technically permitted and Canada could send only castoffs from the concurrent NHL playoffs to the latter.

Team Canada was an ad hoc outfit of idiosyncratic, professional enemies thrown together from many different NHL teams about every 4 years, kind of like the superheroes in The Avengers movies are assembled. There was no permanent national team of the best players: Europeans should understand the implications of this better now that many of their best players also play in the NHL. They had about 3 weeks to get to know each other and prepare before a Summit Series or Canada Cup would start. Want to guess which team of heroes won in 1972, 1976, 1984, 1987, 1991? There was one exception in 1981, which I understand Russians feast on as if all the other defeats didn't count.

Russia was not the best then, and even Finland has been better since the professional era started in the Olympics in 1998. Canada was the best and has still been the best since 1998 (although she is not as dominant as before). For those Russians who have been living in the illusion of their past glory, I hope that this truth about their cherished legends hurts their pride. The very best teams that their evil superpower empire could create were continually beaten by rag-tag collections of individuals who had never played together from a minor free country that had a tenth of their population.

Oh, and I saw during the Sochi Olympics that the Russians have an old hockey song proudly declaring that "hockey is not for cowards". I laughed: Soviets always played with helmets and didn't fight.

[–] looking4ahandout 10 years ago

Wow. That says a lot more about your own insecurities than anything about hockey or Red Russia.

[–] bdavis-5 10 years ago

Perhaps I should appreciate the free psychoanalysis, but I don't think it is insecurity. I'm just boasting as a Canadian (who is also an American citizen) because I suspect that this documentary is a hagiography of Soviet hockey players. If I am wrong and this is actually a balanced, unbiased documentary, then I will gladly apologize. In the meantime, I'm just having a little fun setting the record straight.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Callie36 9 years ago

Oh so that's why you're so smug...

You must not know many Canadian hockey fans, they all display this level of insecurity. As a hockey fan, this idea of "uber polite Canadians" is foreign to me, as I certainly don't see it in hockey fans.

[–] bdavis-5 9 years ago

You must not know many Canadian hockey fans, they all display this level of insecurity.

Another psychoanalyst. I don't know. I"m not an expert, but that's a vast generalization, and I don't feel insecure, personally. I'm just setting the record straight. I wouldn't care about showing that Canada was the best if I had not seen so many Russians boast about being the best at hockey (at least in the past) and so many Europeans and (more importantly) Americans assume that it was true.

Is that insecurity? Perhaps, but it feels like annoyance, and it feels justified. Those Team Canada representatives earned their many hard-fought victories over the USSR in the 1970s and 1980s, and their accomplishments must be defended by their fellow countrymen. Otherwise, they will be forgotten because of louder, foreign, self-interested propaganda.

Furthermore, anyone who makes a strong argument must be prepared to be unfairly dismissed by some who don't like the argument as a sufferer of some psychological disorder that even includes the entire group to which he belongs. It makes the world easier for them to accept.

[–] gah123 10 years ago

hockey is all canadas got. it wishes it was america but fails miserably. its a sad, pathetic joke of a country.

looking forward to seeing this movie.

[–] sweiland75 10 years ago

Typical Yankee superiority complex.

[–] osp80 9 years ago

yankee? he's talking about canada.

is your anti americanness so strong it extends to canada too?

[–] bdavis-5 10 years ago

Perhaps this is true, or perhaps not, but it doesn't change the truth of what I've written.

By the way, I expect that US Hockey will have surpassed Hockey Canada in 20 years. It has nearly caught up already.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] bdavis-5 9 years ago

I Guess you missed the world Juniors this year

No, we saw and heard what we could on TSN and TSN radio (it made me a fan of Sam Reinhart), and saw what we could of the Olympics last year. We loved it, loved Canada's wins over Russia and the USA - I'm part American, but I cheer for Canada when it comes to hockey.

However, reply to this in 20 years and we'll see what has happened.

[–] cheesido 10 years ago

I'm not sure I follow, they were superior for decades and in terms of Ice hockey world championships and winter olympic ice hockey gold medals managed to achieve in 50 years what Canada achieved in a 100 years.
To be honest you sound like a butt hurt, angry hater. They weren't only good at ice hockey like Canada, they have been champions in every other worldwide popular sport: soccer, basketball, tennis, volleyball, gymnastics, swimming, track, weightlifting you name it. Was that an illusion too?

Oh, and I saw during the Sochi Olympics that the Russians have an old hockey song proudly declaring that "hockey is not for cowards". I laughed: Soviets always played with helmets and didn't fight.

I guess no sportsman shouldn't use any kind of protection otherwise they are cowards, you keep laughing but i'm not sure you understand what bravery is.

If you're expecting to see a bunch of humiliated russians I think you have seen one too many cold war american movies. You seem to look at russians as emotionless evil robots whose only goal is to destroy western civilization when in reality they are people like you and me with the same problems, struggles and conflicts every human has. Grow up man!

[–] bdavis-5 10 years ago

I'm not sure I follow, they were superior for decades and in terms of Ice hockey world championships and winter olympic ice hockey gold medals managed to achieve in 50 years what Canada achieved in a 100 years.

This is not precisely true, but it misses my point. The only way to judge which country was the best is by the results of the tournaments in which the best players played. Before 1998, those were not the Olympics and world championships in which the Soviets/Russians were so successful. That is why gave this thread that title.

You seem to look at russians as emotionless evil robots whose only goal is to destroy western civilization when in reality they are people like you and me with the same problems, struggles and conflicts every human has.

No, I certainly respect Russians as human beings and hockey players, and I appreciate their accomplishments and courage. I object to idolizing them. My counter is to point out that the history of Canadian hockey has even more accomplishments, more courage, and more interesting stories. And who will do that when hockey on film is predominantly about American and, now, Russian stories?

Grow up man!

I appreciate the encouragement, but it is difficult to sound mature when debating what is essentially a kid's game.

[–] trent-tw 10 years ago

Thank you for stating that. I was getting sick and tired of reading all of these tools pointing fingers and putting down other's countries. This whole country allegiance thing gets out of hand and stupid so fast. I'm an American. I love my country. But my love for my country does not in turn make me dislike other countries. What if one of the above posters were born in the country that they were making fun of? The fact that the majority of people constantly differentiate themselves from others upon what country they are from..seems incredibly immature to me. Or perhaps I am just too much of an idealist.

[–] jayehawk 10 years ago

Excellent reply, smcguiver.

Sports today are altered drastically from what they were in the 70's. Training is virtually non-stop now, just as the Russians were even back then. Our biggest stars would routinely take the off-season to relax and returning to training camps a few pounds overweight was expected.
Guy Lafleur was a chain-smoking superstar that could out-skate most of the competition during his day. Can you imagine that in a competitive team sport today?
Say what you want about their social philosophy, but the Russians from the era of this documentary deserve some credit for the evolution to the way the modern game is approached.

[–] bdavis-5 10 years ago

I hope that I am not embarrassment to Canada, but I agree with the rest of this post.

However, nothing I wrote contradicted it. Indeed, it supports what I was pointing out: the Soviet Union applied the power of its evil, oppressive, Communist state to becoming the best hockey nation in the world, put its national pride and prestige on the line, and Canada still beat it with a bunch of hairy chain-smokers who spent their summers heaving beer bottles and steaks in Cottage Country. If those specially selected, scientifically trained, Red Army soldier-athletes get to be celebrated on film, then what about the relatively undisciplined, fun-loving, ordinary, free civilians who were called upon to be national heroes to beat them every four years? They certainly would be celebrated on film, over and over again, if they had been American (re: Miracle on Ice).

[–] cheesido 10 years ago

the Soviet Union applied the power of its evil, oppressive, Communist state(...)specially selected, scientifically trained, Red Army soldier-athletes

LOL you're making it sound like Rocky IV... Dragoooo!!!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-8hOKNbtxg

[–] bdavis-5 10 years ago

Hey, just because Rocky IV showed something similar doesn't mean that what I wrote isn't true. I expect that this documentary shows it. The Red Army players really were selected at any early age by a Communist state that really was evil and oppressive, and they really were scientifically trained athletes who really were, officially, soldiers.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] bdavis-5 10 years ago

The Russians displayed skill and spirit on the ice, two things you can't win without.

Yes, but they didn't win, Team Canada won. And after the first 4 games of the 1972 Summit Series, Team Canada were the underdogs, not the USSR. The spirit of the Canadians in making their comeback in Moscow is legendary, but only in Canada because no one else is interested in celebrating it.

I am not against giving the Soviets and Russians their due. For example, I give them this: they proved by the 1960s that they were the best in Europe. It is just that the fact that they were still second-best to Canada until the USSR ended should be remembered.

Furthermore, it should not be surprising that the Soviets made such rapid progress in their hockey development. Canada's hockey development before the 1970s was undirected apart from rule changes that were introduced by the NHL and various independent associations. There was no elite, permanent national team. It was a grassroots game that was informally passed down from father to son. The Soviet empire, on the other hand, made a centralized, bureaucratic project out of it after World War II, almost as if it were the space programme. In hindsight, it is remarkable that little Canada would produce ad hoc teams in the 1970s and 80s that were better than the elite sporting machine created by the tyrannical government of a nation 10 times Canada's size in which hockey was also its most popular sport.

Just sayin', because if Canadians don't no one else will.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] bdavis-5 10 years ago

Everybody in Canada expected a 8-0 sweep, or perhaps 7-1 if the Soviets got lucky. That was part of what made the 1972 Summit Series the greatest series of games between two countries in the history of team sports, at least insofar as I am concerned.

[–] gah123 10 years ago

canada needed to break the ankle of russias best player to win. bobby clarke will go down in history as a loser for it (and the lindros saga too). canada can celebrate cheating to win. but it just highlights what a sad country canada really is.

[–] bdavis-5 10 years ago

There are several unfounded assertions here. However, first let me admit that the Clarke slash on Kharlamov was morally wrong and indefensible.

canada needed to break the ankle of russias best player to win.

How do you or anyone else know that Team Canada would not have won without that? The best evidence that I know of suggests that slashing Kharlamov in Game 6 was unnecessary. After Kharlamov's spectacular 2-goal performance in Game 1, Coach Harry Sinden assigned the speedy forward Ron Ellis to shadow him. The result was that Kharlamov scored exactly 1 short-handed goal and 3 assists from Game 2 to Game 6.

Thus, writing in his journal after Game 6, Sinden didn't think that it was necessary to take Kharlamov out because Ellis had essentially done that already.

Furthermore, in the opinion of many informed Canadians at the time, the best Soviet player was actually Yakushev.

bobby clarke will go down in history as a loser for it

Winning the 1972 Summit Series, 2 Stanley Cups as Flyers captain, NHL MVP and the 1976 Canada Cup argues against any loser label. He won lots, even though he wasn't gentlemanly doing it.

canada can celebrate cheating to win. but it just highlights what a sad country canada really is.

But, as shown above, Canada likely didn't have to cheat to win. Even if it could be shown that Team Canada had to cheat to win in 1972, then beating Russia and the rest in the best-on-best tournaments of 1976, 1984, 1987, 1991, 2002, 2004, 2010 and 2014 rather makes up for all that sadness.

[–] Nikitn 9 years ago

bdavis can't you go and bitch about your fantasies about the USSR, evil empire delusions etc. somewhere else? Does everybody really ALWAYS have to drag in whatever deranged political views they have when discussing Russian sports?

[–] bdavis-5 9 years ago

They shouldn't in sports nowadays. I don't like doing that either. But it was the Russians who dragged their deranged political views into their sports in the Soviet era. That was why the Red Army hockey system was established after WW II.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] carry-4 9 years ago

Cant we just agree that hockey in the NHL sucks? Like Fetisov says, it's simple, IMHO, extremely simple

[–] jayehawk 9 years ago

No, we cannot agree to that. What an odd thing to say.

[–] carry-4 9 years ago

Dumping the puck in the zone and going after it is an odd way to look at hockey ... and simple

[–] jayehawk 9 years ago

Is that all you think happens?

[–] carry-4 9 years ago

No, but it is the gist

[–] GuyOnTheLeft 9 years ago

Yup, dump and chase...super boring.

--------
My top 250: http://www.flickchart.com/Charts.aspx?user=SlackerInc&perpage=250

[–] GuyOnTheLeft 9 years ago

I was sort of with you until that last bit. You think it's laudable to play without helmets and fight? Pfffft.

--------
My top 250: http://www.flickchart.com/Charts.aspx?user=SlackerInc&perpage=250

[–] bdavis-5 9 years ago

You think it's laudable to play without helmets and fight? Pfffft.

Of course it's laudable because courage is laudable. My point was that playing that way took more courage than whatever courage that old Russian hockey song boasts about.

I don't say that everyone should play that way. There are different ways to play the game, and each has its own merits. Which way one chooses should be a matter of personal or cultural preference.

[–] GuyOnTheLeft 9 years ago

"Courage is laudable". Yes, when it involves something like rushing into a burning building to save a kid. If you are the one who set the fire, then stayed inside until the last moment to show how brave you are? No.

--------
My top 250: http://www.flickchart.com/Charts.aspx?user=SlackerInc&perpage=250

[–] bdavis-5 9 years ago

If you are the one who set the fire, then stayed inside until the last moment to show how brave you are?

If one really thinks about this burning building analogy, it actually supports my contention. Hockey is only a kid's game, but courage is not limited to the act of saving lives.

When a man tells himself that playing without a helmet and fighting is not really courageous, he is just trying to give himself a pretext to chicken out of doing it. And the hockey coach of my young daughter, who is a tough, high-scoring, highly skilled, 16-year-old Canadian girl who fights in her Select leagues (although helmets are mandatory now), would likely laugh at him if she weren't too polite.

I do hope that this attitude is the most typical European one because that fact would reinforce my biased sense of moral superiority over them when it comes to hockey.