Miracle in Turin

TURIN--It will go down as the most important game in the history of women's hockey.

Now, you see, there are three.

With criticism of the women's game having hit new heights during the past week because of a series of lopsided scores, it may well be that Sweden's absolutely shocking 3-2 shootout victory over the United States this evening at the Palasport Olimpico will be the match that saves women's hockey as a viable sport in the Winter Olympics.

For the first time in any major women's competition - world championship or Olympics - it will not be Canada vs. the U.S. in the final. Sweden, having never beaten either country, fell behind 2-0 against the Americans but fought back to tie 2-2, largely on the basis of a breathtaking goaltending exhibition by Kim Martin.

Both Swedish goals were scored by star forward Maria Rooth, and it was Rooth again in the shootout who ripped a wrist shot past Chanda Gunn in the U.S. net to send her country into the gold medal game on Monday.

It was an upset perhaps even greater than that of the 1980 Miracle on Ice in Lake Placid when the U.S. men upset the mighty Russians, for that had happened before. In fact, the Americans had been Olympic champions at Squaw Valley in 1960.

Moreover, the women's game has desperately been hoping that one of the non-North American nations would rise to challenge Canada and the U.S. and blunt growing skepticism about the legitimacy of having women's hockey in the Olympics.

Those criticisms are now gone, at least temporarily, and perhaps forever.

Sweden will now try to ride Martin's brilliance to gold, and just getting to Monday's game will offer enormous encouragement to other women's hockey nations, particularly Russia, China and Switzerland, countries who have been trying to develop the sport.

Martin stopped four straight American shots in the shootout, and while the Swedes poured off the bench after Rooth scored, the U.S. players leaned against the bench in apparent disbelief. After collecting themselves, however, they moved into a circle at centre ice, raised their sticks and saluted the fans in a warm show of sportsmanship.

The U.S. lost today, but even the American players understood that the women's game won. Big.

Comments

[Cavan Kelly]

Comments about the viability of women's hockey at the Olympics as a result of the one sided Canadian victories strike me as somewhat disingeneous. By that standard men's hockey should have been scrapped years ago because:

In 1924 the Canadian men outscored the opposition 85-0 in 3 preliminary games then defeated Britain 19-2 in the semis and the US 6-1 in the final.

In the 1928 championship round, Canada beat Sweden, Britain and Switzerland 11-0, 14-0 and 13-0 to take the title.

1932 was much closer. Canada won, outscoring the opposition only 32-4 in 6 games.

1936 Britian won beating Canada 2-1 along the way

No Olympics in 1940 or '44

In 1948 Canada finished tied with Czechoslovakia each with a record of 7-0-1. Canada took the title on goal differential (64-62) having outscored their opposition 69-5. (If Canada hadn't "run up" some scores they would have lost the gold)

In 1952, Canada's last win until 2002, they outscored their opposition 71-14

It's still early in the evolution of the women's game. If the emerging countries don't have a yardstick to measure themselves against they'll never reach their potential.

Cavan Kelly

[john robinson]

I agree that this is an important victory for the Swedes (but I agree more strongly that this may be short-lived). A three horse race is only mildly more interesting than a two horse race. I hope that Sweden's appearance in the gold medal game does indeed serve as an inspiration and push for other nations. Alas I fear economics and other considerations will have a greater influence on the direction of women's hockey in countries like Russia and China.

[Maria Gervasi]

Good Afternoon Damien,

In light of recent events at Torino today, particularly Sweden's shootout victory over the US team, wouldn't you consider retracting your narrow minded conclusion of this fine Olympic sport? Sweden has accomplished today what many thought was possible 5 - 10 years down the line, you a father of hockey daughters must have seen with your own eyes how big this sport has become in Canada over the past 9 years?

I have been playing hockey since I was 11 years old ( I am 29 now), long before it was accepted to have a girl walking into an arena with a hockey stick and not a ringette stick. The jeers and looks that I endured at that tender age simply to participate in a sport that I grew up loving from the time I could walk and talk. I played at a high level for a number of years and still play twice a week in a couple of the many fantastic Women's leagues that are offered in the GTA. The opportunities afforded to many young women because of the Olympic status of this sport (scholarships, endorsements, the NWHL) were never available before and probably never would have come into existence otherwise.

This sport will become more competitive over time as the Swedes have so proudly proven to Team USA and Finland is not far behind, Russia has a solid base of young players on the rise as well. This has only been an "official" Olympic sport for 9 years, what did you expect?

How come nobody ever questions why the men's teams from Germany & Kazakhstan bother to show up or even participate? Their chances of winning a game are slim to none, but they participate because they can, just like everyone else. Isn't that what the Olympics are all about?

So, please give the just kudos to our sport because unlike the men, women don't get paid hundreds of thousands of dollars or receive multi-million dollar endorsements because they pull on a Team Canada sweater, they do it for the LOVE of the game.

For the first time ever Canada will not be playing the US for gold, this is history in the making and we are here to witness it, sit back and enjoy the ride. I know I will!

Kind Regards,

Maria Gervasi

[Craig Takaki]

Actually, I think now is the time to commend the efforts of the Canadian women's hockey team to play at such a high calibre. They have raised the bar for the level of play.

By continuing their high level of play against all teams, they have challenged the status quo and raised the bar. Though they have been criticized for their approach, it is obvious that the US team would have better spent their time practising instead of participating in photo shoots.

Secondly, after watching the Canadian women defeat the Finnish women, I prefer watching a good team play than a lacklustre performance of an unprepared team (men's previous Olympics Vs Finland).

Bravo Canada!

Maybe it is also time for Don Cherry to show he is worthy of his status as a "great" Canadian and apologizes to the women's team.

[J Norman]

As the first comment pointed out, hockey history will very likely repeat itself and these other nations will get more competitive in women's hockey over time. The development of this sport in this fashion is not without precedent if we look at how the men came along.

I think those knowledgeable in sports would suggest that the enrolment of females into hockey is a much more key number to watch than a few lopsided hockey scores before raising alarm bells in the media.

I know women’s hockey has grown in North America substantially but I haven't seen the numbers for Europe recently. The key leap in growth rate for women’s hockey in North America happened when North Americans saw the sport in the Olympic games. So we cannot ignore that the Olympic participation feeds the interest in playing the sport. Organized women’s hockey in Sweden was growing at about at 10% annual rate in the 90s. That's a much better “score” for how the sport will progress rather than a few lopsided hockey scores in an event.

I'm sure there were a number of young Swedish girls inspired by what they saw today who will be looking to do more of the same in the years to come. In that way, it was a great day for the sport. But intelligent people running the Olympics are not going to panic over a few lopsided games when they’re cognizant of the bigger picture. They realize that this game today and others in the tournament have been growing the sport already. The best is yet to come.

[Mark]

Great day for the sport! 3 horses will turn to 4, and then 5 in short order. As far as Canada running up the scores - how patronizing it would be to the other teams for Canada to not play to its highest level. That's the bar and if they weren't themselves aiming for it, they would not compete. There should be far more outcry about the fact that they let a goon like Bertuzzi play in the olympics. Hardly an Olypian, I'd say.

[Rick]

Our phenomenal women's hockey team doesn't need to humiliate the host nation 16-0 to win the gold medal. As Don Cherry said, it's not the Canadian way.

To win the gold, we'll have to do what the Americans couldn't: solve a hot Swedish goaltender.

[selam]

the problem is more basic than north american is good at hockey. If you look at a lot of other team sports (soccer for example), the other nationals aren't as well developed because it seems that other nations don't take women's sports as seriously. For instance, Brazil and italy are soccer crazy overall... but look at their women's teams. Not that great.

[Dave Millar - Burlington, Ontario]

Damien,

Usually I hold your remarks in high regard. This time is no different. I believe that this was an extraordinary game for the ages in womens hockey. I must admit to not being too amused at watching the womens game, however, I am always happy to see the arch rival Americans go down! Now that the drama is over, lets hope for a Canadian Sweep in Hockey again this year so the celebrations can continue and we can rub it into the faces of our nemesis' face!

Dave Millar - Burlington, Ontario

[Bo Sedore]

It truly was a saving grace for womens hockey. Now Don Cherry and the Doomsdayers can drop the gloom and enjoy the way the girls play.

[shady lane]

even though the men aren't doing as well as the women in hockey, i believe that the men can still pull through and make it to the medal round.
i also believe that the women's hockey team has the ability to win the gold medal game against Sweden on monday.
hockey fans: don't be mad at the men's team for their disappointing record right now--perhaps it's the intense schedule they have or they're not playing as a team. whatever the reason, just be proud that they're in Torino for you, me and all of canada. anything can happen betwen now and the gold medal game for men's hockey so keep your fingers crossed. =)

[Arthur]

The criticisms are gone, "perhaps forever"?

One flukey game does not an event make. I disagree with all of this. Women's hockey will always be the inbred cousin of men's hockey. Every four years, we pretend to follow the event because a medal is up for grabs, but other than that, nobody follows this so-called "sport." I'm not trying to pee in the cornflakes, here. Grab any hockey fan in a bar and ask them to name three roster players. I promise the answer will be "Hayley Wickenheiser, and...uh..."

And this is in Canada.

All of the above is due to an excellent reason: no matter how you slice it, the women's game isn't as good - they aren't as fast as the men, aren't as skilled, and don't hit. It's just the way it is.

And only two countries are any good at it, this games' result notwithstanding.

Women's hockey: illegitimate. Time to throw this event under the next bus out of Turin.

[Mark]

I waited four years to comment, because I wanted the perspective of what is the trend, not what is one game result. Sweden is obviously no where near the North American Teams, Russia is ever further behind than it was 4 years ago. If Finland can play competitively in the semis maybe that means something, because China played them close, but again it is hockey and in a one game situation an outstanding goalie game can skew results, just like it did when Sweden beat USA 4 years ago. I think in the China game that is what happened, they get a great goalie game and an open space goal to make it close, but in reality the Finns dominated play, and the Finns are not on the level of Canada or the US. But yes Women's Hockey needs to stay, in the Olympics but everybody shut up with the criticism of the scores. It is actually hard sometimes to not run up a score on a team without patronizing them by intentionally not scoring. I remember a game of soccer when we were dominating a team 10-0 and our coach told us to only shoot with our off foot, the opponent found that out and screamed at us to play regular. I know how they felt because I was on the short end of a 66-6 football game, but guess what, the next year we beat the same team 16-13, so you can not put down the superior team for being superior, the only way to counteract it is to get better. Russia has over 100 million more women in it than Canada, has more of the top male players in the world than any country, so it is on them, not on the great Canadian women players to take pity on them. Other countries will only get better playing the best at their best, intentionally not scoring, switching the stick to your weak hand or just freezing the puck and not shooting is much more humiliating to the other team if you are an athlete than scoring 10 goals.