canadian hockey vs european hockey

what do u think is the weakness and strength with
1. canadian hockey
2. european hockey

They are practically the same thing nowadays.

If we just say European hockey is vastly superior will you stop?

They are practically the same thing nowadays.

Do u realy think so
I think there are several differences
size of ice
passing the puck
checking
big, strong -slow
normal size, fit -fast
and so on.......

Do u realy think so
I think there are several differences
size of ice
passing the puck
checking
big, strong -slow
normal size, fit -fast
and so on.......

Well size of ice is not really a style of play, both Euro countries, and Canada have proven they can both play effectively on the different ice surface.

If we just say European hockey is vastly superior will you stop?

here we go again!!??
I havnt started, anything wrong with the topic?

If we say??? how many are u sitting behind the computer:handclap:

Well size of ice is not really a style of play, both Euro countries, and Canada have proven they can both play effectively on the different ice surface.

thats true.

But do u realy think there is no difference in the way they play hockey?

thats true.

But do u realy think there is no difference in the way they play hockey?

I think Canada often maybe plays a more physical game, that is it pretty much.

As you appear to be new to HF understand that threads such as the one you started but has since been deleted (and their intentions) will stick with people.

Why take a bit of time to explain what makes you ask the question to begin with. What are your perceived differences/similarities and what impact do you think they bring to the style of play incorporated by each segment? Give us your thoughts in an unbiased and fairly represented way.

I think Canada often maybe plays a more physical game, that is it pretty much.

the momentom is much better in the canadian hockey because of the small ice.
I think the european hockey is getting tougher and tougher especially the finns are getting tougher,but I think the canadian often tend to breake the rules its not hard hockey the play unfair sometimes, is it just my/swedish opinion, what do u think when u watch a game between canada-finland dont u think the canadians often plays a bit to rough, I mean shoulder to shoulder thats hard in my oppinion but slashing, crosschecking and so on is found in the rulebook as 2 minutes and canadian often gets away with it

Please don't bunch European hockey together like that, personally I think there is huge differences in how swedes play compared to finns or czech's as well.

the momentom is much better in the canadian hockey because of the small ice.
I think the european hockey is getting tougher and tougher especially the finns are getting tougher,but I think the canadian often tend to breake the rules its not hard hockey the play unfair sometimes, is it just my/swedish opinion, what do u think when u watch a game between canada-finland dont u think the canadians often plays a bit to rough, I mean shoulder to shoulder thats hard in my oppinion but slashing, crosschecking and so on is found in the rulebook as 2 minutes and canadian often gets away with it

I was hoping we would not veer into this direction. I don't think we play dirty, and that is all I will say on the matter.

As you appear to be new to HF understand that threads such as the one you started but has since been deleted (and their intentions) will stick with people.

Why take a bit of time to explain what makes you ask the question to begin with. What are your perceived differences/similarities and what impact do you think they bring to the style of play incorporated by each segment? Give us your thoughts in an unbiased and fairly represented way.

I only do as some of the others when they start their threads, I speak my mind, I respect people so should u do. Why take time to even bother as u do if u dont think the topic is interesting why do u give me an answes as above, come on lighten up.

Please don't bunch European hockey together like that, personally I think there is huge differences in how swedes play compared to finns or czech's as well.

than tell us the huge differences, The topic is based on what lots of people say, they use the expression european hockey compared to canadian hockey, I agree their is lot of differences in swedish hockey compared to for an example finnish hockey.

the momentom is much better in the canadian hockey because of the small ice.
I think the european hockey is getting tougher and tougher especially the finns are getting tougher,but I think the canadian often tend to breake the rules its not hard hockey the play unfair sometimes, is it just my/swedish opinion, what do u think when u watch a game between canada-finland dont u think the canadians often plays a bit to rough, I mean shoulder to shoulder thats hard in my oppinion but slashing, crosschecking and so on is found in the rulebook as 2 minutes and canadian often gets away with it

Same thing for diving and europeans often gets away with it :sarcasm:

Same thing for diving and europeans often gets away with it :sarcasm:

agree on that one, the ref should be harder on the divingthings

Same thing for diving and europeans often gets away with it :sarcasm:

haha, zing.:handclap:

what do u think of the dump and chase hockey, I think its a typical canadian way of playing and its not funny to watch compared to handle the puck by passing it to a teammember as often as u can. I dont mean its a bad thing to do but its not so funny to watch.

to sum things up
Europeans -more skilled, Canadians -more physical and Russians are nothing

haha, zing.:handclap:

eeeehhhh???:shakehead did I miss something or :amazed:

Same thing for diving and europeans often gets away with it :sarcasm:

funny most famous nhl divers are Briere, Staal and Crosby

to sum things up
Europeans -more skilled, Canadians -more physical and Russians are nothing

dont u think the russians belong to the skilled ones? I do.

what do u think of the dump and chase hockey, I think its a typical canadian way of playing and its not funny to watch compared to handle the puck by passing it to a teammember as often as u can. I dont mean its a bad thing to do but its not so funny to watch.

it's not supposed to be funny to watch. it's often successful, and that's the point of it.

funny most famous nhl divers are Briere, Staal and Crosby

i think you're not giving enough "credit" to the ruutu brothers then.

funny most famous nhl divers are Briere, Staal and Crosby

Crosby also one of the most talented players in the league, I am a greate fan of him, I do realy miss forsberg in NHL who also was called a big diver, in sweden he is known as a very skilled, talented and magic puck handling guy, and he is also known for being realy tough and a hardhitting plyaer in sweden, what is the picture of forsberg in your opinion.

to sum things up
Europeans -more skilled, Canadians -more physical and Russians are nothing

Gotta disagree here. Russians are most truly "skilled", but often teams lack grit and goaltending. The Swedes are more towards the skill end, although their physicality impressed me yesterday, and it's interesting to see if they continue to shift towards that kind of play. The Finns are more like N.A. than any other country in Europe, in that they play 2-way physical hockey, but often lack top level scoring. Great goaltending though. Canada/US have combination of all of the above. Some times individual players/teams lack one area or the other, but Canadian teams have shown all areas as strenghts at different events.

I left out the Czechs and Slovaks, cuz they are always an inigma to me, they're all over the spectrum.

I only do as some of the others when they start their threads, I speak my mind, I respect people so should u do. Why take time to even bother as u do if u dont think the topic is interesting why do u give me an answes as above, come on lighten up.

Hey man, he's just trying to help you get a better response on your thread. In general, it's good taste that if you're going to ask a question in your OP, you answer it as well or at least do something to spark discussion. What do YOU think are the differences? Are there differences?

i LAUGH at those who say canada lacks 'skill'. obviously this is far and away absurd. Canada likes to play a physical power game. to play this type of game requires puck possession and cycling in the O-zone which wears the opposing D down. puck possession requires skill - stick-handling, skating, positioning, etc...it's a MYTH that Canada plays the trap, teams with less skill line up at their blue line playing a 1-4...and that's not canada

it's not supposed to be funny to watch. it's often successful, and that's the point of it.

good answer, ofcourse u have a point, but at the same time, lots of canadian people on the other hand discuss the way of making goal, most of the comments from canadian people to robbin f goal against denmark was cheap goal, lack of respect and so on...... funny to read your opinion, its not the way it looks that matters its the way to the goal that matters, I understand that some times some of the canadian people think its important how the goal is made and sometimes its the effecient way that matters, but I think its a strange way of looking at it.

In my opinion every goal counts and the way to it doesnt matter but once a time its nice to see som magic out there and that is important for the sport.

Gotta disagree here. Russians are most truly "skilled", but often teams lack grit and goaltending. The Swedes are more towards the skill end, although their physicality impressed me yesterday, and it's interesting to see if they continue to shift towards that kind of play. The Finns are more like N.A. than any other country in Europe, in that they play 2-way physical hockey, but often lack top level scoring. Great goaltending though. Canada/US have combination of all of the above. Some times individual players/teams lack one area or the other, but Canadian teams have shown all areas as strenghts at different events.

I left out the Czechs and Slovaks, cuz they are always an inigma to me, they're all over the spectrum.

agree with in u every word

good answer, ofcourse u have a point, but at the same time, lots of canadian people on the other hand discuss the way of making goal, most of the comments from canadian people to robbin f goal against denmark was cheap goal, lack of respect and so on...... funny to read your opinion, its not the way it looks that matters its the way to the goal that matters, I understand that some times some of the canadian people think its important how the goal is made and sometimes its the effecient way that matters, but I think its a strange way of looking at it.

In my opinion every goal counts and the way to it doesnt matter but once a time its nice to see som magic out there and that is important for the sport.


I don't think these are really related points..but I'll bite anyways.

First, you're right, it matters not how a goal is scored, just that it is.

HOWEVER, I think the cheap comments came in because it was 5-1 against a bad team. If he scores that goal against Canada, no one calls it cheap. To score it in a game against an obviously overmatched team, in a game that is all but over, is what would lead to people calling it cheap. ALthough, I will point out, I didn't care either way, and ignored that thread.

Hey man, he's just trying to help you get a better response on your thread. In general, it's good taste that if you're going to ask a question in your OP, you answer it as well or at least do something to spark discussion. What do YOU think are the differences? Are there differences?

If u have the interest than u read all posts, start from post 1 and so on u will find my thoughts, thanks for making things clear to me:sarcasm:

I don't think these are really related points..but I'll bite anyways.

First, you're right, it matters not how a goal is scored, just that it is.

HOWEVER, I think the cheap comments came in because it was 5-1 against a bad team. If he scores that goal against Canada, no one calls it cheap. To score it in a game against an obviously overmatched team, in a game that is all but over, is what would lead to people calling it cheap. ALthough, I will point out, I didn't care either way, and ignored that thread.

but admit its a bit strange to call a goal a cheap goal, every goal counts and if u make a slapshot as 6-1 than its cheap because u meet a bad team a slapshot is much easier than the goal robin did, come on !! the goal robin f made is difficult to make for most players in nhl even in training, if they would get 100 attempts most of the guys wouldnt score in nhl anyway.

but admit its a bit strange to call a goal a cheap goal, every goal counts and if u make a slapshot as 6-1 than its cheap because u meet a bad team a slapshot is much easier than the goal robin did, come on !! the goal robin f made is difficult to make for most players in nhl even in training, if they would get 100 attempts most of the guys wouldnt score in nhl anyway.


No, I don't think it's strange to call that goal cheap. I don't think they're calling it cheap as in "it was a cheap goal cuz it was fluky or easy", i think it's more along the lines of "if you're gonna be a hotdogger, do it against someone who has the skill to stop you". That's what it was about I think.

And yeah, I agree that it is more difficult than a Slap Shot goal, but so what? A goal is a goal, you just said it?

I think that every goal is a goal, no matter how they are scored. I just think that teams should stick to the basics when they're winning against an overmatched team, and not try hotdog crap like that.

No, I don't think it's strange to call that goal cheap. I don't think they're calling it cheap as in "it was a cheap goal cuz it was fluky or easy", i think it's more along the lines of "if you're gonna be a hotdogger, do it against someone who has the skill to stop you". That's what it was about I think.

And yeah, I agree that it is more difficult than a Slap Shot goal, but so what? A goal is a goal, you just said it?

I think that every goal is a goal, no matter how they are scored. I just think that teams should stick to the basics when they're winning against an overmatched team, and not try hotdog crap like that.

I see your point but disagree, its important for the sport with magic stuff, but I respect your opinion. I prefer 10 robin f goals instead of ten slapshots, because its nicer to see.

They are practically the same thing nowadays.

Yes and no.

I mean, I wouldn't say that the Finns and Swedes even remotly plays the same type of hockey.

Canada under Renney and Murray plays more like Sweden then what Finland does, Canada under Sutter plays more like Finland then Sweden does.

The Czech traps allot sometimes, sometimes you don't. I don't know there coaches well enough to know which way they are gooing and when.

Russia just plays allot on inspiration and a responsible center, more or less depending on the coach.

to sum things up
Europeans -more skilled, Canadians -more physical and Russians are nothing

Canadaian- More Skilled and Physical

Canadian Skill is really underrated in NHL and World Juniors, Championships etc....

i LAUGH at those who say canada lacks 'skill'. obviously this is far and away absurd. Canada likes to play a physical power game. to play this type of game requires puck possession and cycling in the O-zone which wears the opposing D down. puck possession requires skill - stick-handling, skating, positioning, etc...it's a MYTH that Canada plays the trap, teams with less skill line up at their blue line playing a 1-4...and that's not canada

There should be made a thread thats stickied about this subject.

You can find allot of things on HF, but in principle nobody ever said that.

Its a mantra that so many Canadians keeps bringing up. "People say Canada lacks skill, did you see that stickhandle move by Crosby".

Its just another way to bring up a reason to state how great Canada is.

You here it on TSN all the freakin time, yet I never hear anyone state that Canada don't got any skill. I have never heard it.

Euro - Circle

NA - Straight ahead.

Canadaian- More Skilled and Physical

Canadian Skill is really underrated in NHL and World Juniors, Championships etc....

Yeah right, by who?

Imagine beeing on a date with Jessica Alba all night, and all she does is talk about how everyone in the world is calling her ugly.

Thats how people outside Canada feels when they are talking hockey with a Canadian. "Everyone thinks that we really suck, but we are the best bla bla bla bla".

There should be made a thread thats stickied about this subject.

You can find allot of things on HF, but in principle nobody ever said that.

Its a mantra that so many Canadians keeps bringing up. "People say Canada lacks skill, did you see that stickhandle move by Crosby".

Its just another way to bring up a reason to state how great Canada is.

You here it on TSN all the freakin time, yet I never hear anyone state that Canada don't got any skill. I have never heard it.

u are so right ola!!:yo:

Yeah right, by who?

Imagine beeing on a date with Jessica Alba all night, and all she does is talk about how everyone in the world is calling her ugly.

Thats how people outside Canada feels when they are talking hockey with a Canadian. "Everyone thinks that we really suck, but we are the best bla bla bla bla".

Look up any Russian quotations regarding the summit series.

Look up any Russian quotations regarding the summit series.

You do it. I mean you can find allot here on HF, but I saw thoose games and read thoose threads, no talk whatsoever about it.

There where mostly talk about goonery and Sutters hit.

When Canada struggled in the late 90's they tryed to improve their program, correct flaws et c.

After that Don Cherry started talking about "people" who said Canada had no skill, and brought up examples of how much skill many Canadians had. Everyone outside Candada have probably always seen em as the team to beat.

You do it. I mean you can find allot here on HF, but I saw thoose games and read thoose threads, no talk whatsoever about it.

There where mostly talk about goonery and Sutters hit.

I am talking about russian hockey players talking about the 72 summit series, you got mixed up, you thought I was talking about the 2007 super series :teach:

Yeah right, by who?

Imagine beeing on a date with Jessica Alba all night, and all she does is talk about how everyone in the world is calling her ugly.

Thats how people outside Canada feels when they are talking hockey with a Canadian. "Everyone thinks that we really suck, but we are the best bla bla bla bla".

its not unusual to hear from a canadian:
we own the oponent, hockey is ower game and so on.........

But if u answer with the same attitude u get banned, its a pitty I think.

Today I am a proud swede but I still respect the canadian team and have them as nr 1 to win j.w.cup.

we take one game at time, tomorrow is a new day/new match.

By the way sweden is the only country who has won the olympics and world cup at the same year! just wanted to clear the picture for some of the guys here, and we can be cocky about it but we dont and shouldnt be.

The best is still to come

I am talking about russian hockey players talking about the 72 summit series, you got mixed up, you thought I was talking about the 2007 super series :teach:

Ok, sorry man! ;)

BTW, if it wheren't for Canadas tremendous interest in Hockey, the sport would really be on its way out.

Playing Canada and Finland is the thrill for a Swede in international tournaments. I love watching the Canadian plays, and I think that applys for most Swedes, I got many friends who dont watch Sweden in the WJC, but they make sure they get to watch the usual final between Canada and Russia, especially the 1st period in that game... ;)

But I just think its annoying when a Canadian say something like everyone say that we dont got any skill, when you are obviously the team to beat, pretty much always.

its not unusual to hear from a canadian:
we own the oponent, hockey is ower game and so on.........

But if u answer with the same attitude u get banned, its a pitty I think.

Today I am a proud swede but I still respect the canadian team and have them as nr 1 to win j.w.cup.

we take one game at time, tomorrow is a new day/new match.

By the way sweden is the only country who has won the olympics and world cup at the same year! just wanted to clear the picture for some of the guys here, and we can be cocky about it but we dont and shouldnt be.

The best is still to come

Every country has it's arrogant fans, we just happen to have more than others, because our national team has more fan support.

Canada: Always well-coached teams adopting according to the circumstances, lot's of end to end stuff, perfection of the most important aspects of the game like clearing the zone, finishing checks, face offs, shooting the puck and going for rebounds. They often forecheck a lot but traps when appropriate. Masters at finding ways to win. Crystal clear roles. Well educated hockey professionals.

Russia: Focused on individual skills, which btw is only one aspect of the concept of skills. Lots of skating and puck carrying wingers. Many skilled players but I feel that they're a bit lost these days when it comes to building effective systems with clear roles. Moody, difficulties fighting through adversity. Puck possesion through stick-handling.

Czech Rep. Counter-attack specialists. Keeping the team short. Strong defense and strong goaltending is almost always the base. Possesion through passing and position. Masters at working with a lead.

Sweden. Possesion though passing. Circling moves, often initiated from behind their own goal. Attacks in numbers. Ability to apply pressure for long stretches of time but has a long history of ineffective puck possession (Sedin twins, cough cough). C often rather defensive. Thrives as underdogs. Less clear roles. Almost, everyone is expected to be able to play every role.

Finland. Much less structured than Team Sweden. Lots of end to end stuff. High forecheck. More inspiration and improvisation than brains. Prone to making costly mistakes. Lots of problems containing leads...

I am talking about russian hockey players talking about the 72 summit series, you got mixed up, you thought I was talking about the 2007 super series :teach:

Using quotes from the Summit Series to imply that people don't think Canadian hockey is skilled is rather misleading. It's true, in general, Canadians did lack a certain amount of skill in 1972........particularly in the finesee department. However, that has nothing to do with today's game. Since that time, everybody has learned from each other and incorporated different styles into their game.
The contemporary Canadian 'style' relies more on skill than it ever has.

hear hear

Using quotes from the Summit Series to imply that people don't think Canadian hockey is skilled is rather misleading. It's true, in general, Canadians did lack a certain amount of skill in 1972........particularly in the finesee department. However, that has nothing to do with today's game. Since that time, everybody has learned from each other and incorporated different styles into their game.
The contemporary Canadian 'style' relies more on skill than it ever has.

I have heard this argument before, and while you are right, Canada has gained much skill, we still had skill back in 72, goals by paul henderson, pete mahovolich proved this.

Canada: Always well-coached teams adopting according to the circumstances, lot's of end to end stuff, perfection of the most important aspects of the game like clearing the zone, finishing checks, face offs, shooting the puck and going for rebounds. They often forecheck a lot but traps when appropriate. Masters at finding ways to win. Crystal clear roles. Well educated hockey professionals.

Russia: Focused on individual skills, which btw is only one aspect of the concept of skills. Lots of skating and puck carrying wingers. Many skilled players but I feel that they're a bit lost these days when it comes to building effective systems with clear roles. Moody, difficulties fighting through adversity. Puck possesion through stick-handling.

Czech Rep. Counter-attack specialists. Keeping the team short. Strong defense and strong goaltending is almost always the base. Possesion through passing and position. Masters at working with a lead.

Sweden. Possesion though passing. Circling moves, often initiated from behind their own goal. Attacks in numbers. Ability to apply pressure for long stretches of time but has a long history of ineffective puck possession (Sedin twins, cough cough). C often rather defensive. Thrives as underdogs. Less clear roles. Almost, everyone is expected to be able to play every role.

Finland. Much less structured than Team Sweden. Lots of end to end stuff. High forecheck. More inspiration and improvisation than brains. Prone to making costly mistakes. Lots of problems containing leads...


They sure seem pretty effective with the puck most nights, as someone who watched every Canuck game. They've mostly gotten over their constant cycling for "no reason" that they used to do, and now, take the first opportunity to take it to the net.

i think you're not giving enough "credit" to the ruutu brothers then.

Don't believe everything Grapes says, Tuomo is not a diver. Jarkko does that occasionally but he's not as bad as Avery for example

To answer the question of the topic, there's no such thing as European hockey as each country has different styles.

Don't believe everything Grapes says, Tuomo is not a diver. Jarkko does that occasionally but he's not as bad as Avery for example

To answer the question of the topic, there's no such thing as European hockey as each country has different styles.


You have got to be kidding. I'm a diehard Canucks fan, and believe me, Jarkko is that bad... It was pretty much his only role was to goad people into taking a little shot, and he'd act like he'd been killed. He's a disgrace. In the few 'hawks games I've seen over the last couple of years where Tuomo has actually been healthy, he seems like the same thing, with more talent.

Well the difference? I'm not going to make a lot of friends saying this but I will anyways. To me it's heart and hunger. If you want to compare skill then it's pretty even.

Many would suggest that Lemieux is the most naturally skilled of all time. Others say Orr. Then there's Jagr, Nilsson, Bure, Kharlamov etc. For every Denis Savard we have a Euro country has Sergei Fedorov. So its even right now. Look at today. Lecavalier, Crosby, Datsyuk, Ovechkin, etc. it's pretty even when you put skill vs. skill

But to me it's heart that Canada always wins on. Look at '72. The comebacks back then. Canada historically has always had that extra notch of passion that puts them above the rest. This is why a Canadian is always the Conn Smythe Trophy winner. Dont look at me just the facts. In 2006 9/10 of the top playoff scorer were Canadian. The other was an American, Chris Drury. Since 1965 when the Conn Smythe was awarded we've had 42 winners. 40 have been Canadian. One was American and one was a Swede. The last two werent bad picks but they could have been replaced by two Canadians (Messier and Yzerman) and no one would have batted an eyelash.

And history has been kind to Cup winners that are Canadian. Recent winners, Tampa, Carolina and even Anaheim were filled with Canadians. Not saying Selanne, Pahlsson and others werent important but in the last 15 years only Detroit seemed to have a big European influence on their Cup winning teams. New Jersey, Dallas, Colorado, had more of a N/A flavour to their teams. Again not saying Forsberg, Kurri, Lidstrom, Fedorov and even Hasek arent great playoff performers. It just seems that there are more Yashins or Roman Cechmaneks out there come playoff time. Yes Canada has their fair share of playoff chokers too, but in GENERAL you want a team full of Canadians sprinkled with about 3-4 Europeans. Usually this team wins the Cup.

Oh that and I think Canada always has and always will have the better goaltending. Even in past WJC championships ('93, '97, '99) they totally outclassed any other goalie they played against

Well the difference? I'm not going to make a lot of friends saying this but I will anyways. To me it's heart and hunger. If you want to compare skill then it's pretty even.

Many would suggest that Lemieux is the most naturally skilled of all time. Others say Orr. Then there's Jagr, Nilsson, Bure, Kharlamov etc. For every Denis Savard we have a Euro country has Sergei Fedorov. So its even right now. Look at today. Lecavalier, Crosby, Datsyuk, Ovechkin, etc. it's pretty even when you put skill vs. skill

But to me it's heart that Canada always wins on. Look at '72. The comebacks back then. Canada historically has always had that extra notch of passion that puts them above the rest. This is why a Canadian is always the Conn Smythe Trophy winner. Dont look at me just the facts. In 2006 9/10 of the top playoff scorer were Canadian. The other was an American, Chris Drury. Since 1965 when the Conn Smythe was awarded we've had 42 winners. 40 have been Canadian. One was American and one was a Swede. The last two werent bad picks but they could have been replaced by two Canadians (Messier and Yzerman) and no one would have batted an eyelash.

And history has been kind to Cup winners that are Canadian. Recent winners, Tampa, Carolina and even Anaheim were filled with Canadians. Not saying Selanne, Pahlsson and others werent important but in the last 15 years only Detroit seemed to have a big European influence on their Cup winning teams. New Jersey, Dallas, Colorado, had more of a N/A flavour to their teams. Again not saying Forsberg, Kurri, Lidstrom, Fedorov and even Hasek arent great playoff performers. It just seems that there are more Yashins or Roman Cechmaneks out there come playoff time. Yes Canada has their fair share of playoff chokers too, but in GENERAL you want a team full of Canadians sprinkled with about 3-4 Europeans. Usually this team wins the Cup.

Oh that and I think Canada always has and always will have the better goaltending. Even in past WJC championships ('93, '97, '99) they totally outclassed any other goalie they played against

I'm not sure you can base your decision on NHL play though because (and I'm not going to make a lot of friends saying this) in general the Cup means more to North Americans. Canadian and American players from a young age dream about winning the Cup. There may be a number of Euros that do as well, but overall.....not nearly as many. In addition, the NHL is a NA league, hence it's easier for NA's to take on leadership roles. The exact opposite would hold true if the NHL were set in Europe.


Historically, you're right though - and the Summit Series was a good example of this. However, in today's international game I don't see Canada having anymore heart than any other team. I certainly haven't seen it at any significant pro-level international tourney over the last 10-15 years.

The differences become more and more erased.

Europeans are becoming more physical and are learning to play a more direct style.

North Americans are learning to be more patient and tactical.

Basically, people will adopt to what works. The trap isn't a north american concept. But it makes winning easier. And north americans understand winning.

Do u realy think so
I think there are several differences
size of ice
Okay. I wouldn't really call that a "style of play." though.
passing the puck
Both Europeans and North Americans have been spotted passing the puck. Shocking, I know.
checking
There are european teams that play "North American-style" physical games. Also, the way that some European countries adopted the trap shows that they're hardly opposed to playing stingy, checking styles.
big, strong -slow
Examples of this exist from both sides of the pond. Also, big and strong don't necessarily mean slow.
normal size, fit -fast
What is "normal size?" Are people who are "big, strong" not also "fit?"
and so on.......
Please no.

Euro - Circle

NA - Straight ahead.

Canadian WJHC teams, at least as long as I can remember well (probably mid-90s onward. Before then, I was too young to really pay attention to and remember that stuff), have generally cycled a lot in the offensive zone.

Okay. I wouldn't really call that a "style of play." though.

Both Europeans and North Americans have been spotted passing the puck. Shocking, I know.

There are european teams that play "North American-style" physical games. Also, the way that some European countries adopted the trap shows that they're hardly opposed to playing stingy, checking styles.

Examples of this exist from both sides of the pond. Also, big and strong don't necessarily mean slow.

What is "normal size?" Are people who are "big, strong" not also "fit?"

Please no.

normal size:
not 2 meters tall
the weight is not over 95 kg
is able to attack end defense twice a shift without spitting blood

Ofcourse some of the big guys are fit, but I mean in comon:
big = slow
normal = fast

In sweden its been a known fact that u have no chance in advancing to nhl if u dont have the weight or hight but again there are a few exceptions.

I think u know what I mean, gretzky had a comment about this and said we have to be faster on our skates to match the russians.

another big difference is in captaincy

for Euro teams it's usually only letter "C" on the jersey - there is no need for only one captain (older experienced players are alll captains for us)

for canada or usa it's prestige and honor.

another big difference is in captaincy

for Euro teams it's usually only letter "C" on the jersey - there is no need for only one captain (older experienced players are alll captains for us)

for canada or usa it's prestige and honor.

what? do? u? mean?:amazed:

normal size:
not 2 meters tall
the weight is not over 95 kg
is able to attack end defense twice a shift without spitting blood

Ofcourse some of the big guys are fit, but I mean in comon:
big = slow
normal = fast

In sweden its been a known fact that u have no chance in advancing to nhl if u dont have the weight or hight but again there are a few exceptions.

I think u know what I mean, gretzky had a comment about this and said we have to be faster on our skates to match the russians.

I'm pretty sure that Hedman of the Swedes is over 2m tall, 95kg, and I'd imagine that he can fill your non-blood-spitting criteria.

"Some" of the big guys are fit? Seriously?

You're using mostly antiquated stereotypes. There are small, fast Canadian players. There are big, tough european players. There are players from all countries who fit in everywhere in between. There have been European national teams that have played very physical games, and there have been Canadian national teams that have played highly skilled games. Taking the "all Canadians are big and tough and have cement hands that they only use for smashing people and whacking the puck into the net, while all Europeans are wimpy fast skating small guys who are magicians with the puck and never dump and chase or play physical" route when talking about international hockey is ridiculous in this day and age.

another big difference is in captaincy

for Euro teams it's usually only letter "C" on the jersey - there is no need for only one captain (older experienced players are alll captains for us)

for canada or usa it's prestige and honor.

I don't think that there is any difference between North America and Europe in that regard. Of course older and experienced players are meant to provide leadership even without the C, but that is true everywhere.
It's always an honor to wear one of the letters, regardless of were you play.

I'm pretty sure that Hedman of the Swedes is over 2m tall, 95kg, and I'd imagine that he can fill your non-blood-spitting criteria.

"Some" of the big guys are fit? Seriously?

You're using mostly antiquated stereotypes. There are small, fast Canadian players. There are big, tough european players. There are players from all countries who fit in everywhere in between. There have been European national teams that have played very physical games, and there have been Canadian national teams that have played highly skilled games. Taking the "all Canadians are big and tough and have cement hands that they only use for smashing people and whacking the puck into the net, while all Europeans are wimpy fast skating small guys who are magicians with the puck and never dump and chase or play physical" route when talking about international hockey is ridiculous in this day and age.


Jeeez! dont be so upset kid, canada is known for their physical type of hockeystyle, europeans are known for theior technical style, canadians are so proud of their hard hitting, tough players, dont try to say anything else.
ofcourese canada have technical skilled guys, but the theme when u think of canadian hockey is raw power, physical strength - dump and chase, the theme thinking of european hockey is stickhandling, keeping the puck in the team by passing it.

I do agree that the typical style is about to be erased when the canadians have developed their skill and the europeans have started to get more physical, but the difference is still huge between them how to play hockey.

Jeeez! dont be so upset kid, canada is known for their physical type of hockeystyle, europeans are known for theior technical style, canadians are so proud of their hard hitting, tough players, dont try to say anything else.
ofcourese canada have technical skilled guys, but the theme when u think of canadian hockey is raw power, physical strength - dump and chase, the theme thinking of european hockey is stickhandling, keeping the puck in the team by passing it.

I do agree that the typical style is about to be erased when the canadians have developed their skill and the europeans have started to get more physical, but the difference is still huge between them how to play hockey.

I'm not upset.

The difference is not huge. For example, look at the size and weights of the Swedish team at this year's WJHC and that Canadian team. The big huge Canadians versus the "normal" sized europeans is no longer true across the board. Sticking to that mentality is not only incorrect, but it's also insulting to players on both sides.

I'm not upset.

The difference is not huge. For example, look at the size and weights of the Swedish team at this year's WJHC and that Canadian team. The big huge Canadians versus the "normal" sized europeans is no longer true across the board. Sticking to that mentality is not only incorrect, but it's also insulting to players on both sides.

have u ever seen a swedish elite league match, finnish or russian, the difference in playing hockey is huge, I dont think u have seen any other game than those who are played in nhl, olympics or worldcup.
I watch swedish hockey twice a week and follows nhl at least once a week the differende is more than huge how to play the game.

A big step is that the skill has improved alot in NHL the last 10-15 years, big reason why = the russians and other countries entrance in nhl.

have u ever seen a swedish elite league match, finnish or russian, the difference in playing hockey is huge, I dont think u have seen any other game than those who are played in nhl, olympics or worldcup.
I watch swedish hockey twice a week and follows nhl at least once a week the differende is more than huge how to play the game.

A big step is that the skill has improved alot in NHL the last 10-15 years, big reason why = the russians and other countries entrance in nhl.

The way their own leagues play has much to do with the rink size, public perception of how the game "should" be played, and other factors. The only way to accurately compare Canadian hockey against European hockey is to watch how they play when they're facing each other in the same game, on the same ice, in the same tournament.

I mean, hell, you can find a decent variance between the way the game is played in the WHL, OHL, and QMJHL (especially in past times), and those are all Canadian leagues.

Its funny, because the Slovaks always got a really big d crop.

However, in today's international game I don't see Canada having anymore heart than any other team. I certainly haven't seen it at any significant pro-level international tourney over the last 10-15 years.
Come on, don't tell me you were not impressed by Canada's "heart" in Turin :handclap:

Don't believe everything Grapes says, Tuomo is not a diver. Jarkko does that occasionally but he's not as bad as Avery for example

To answer the question of the topic, there's no such thing as European hockey as each country has different styles.

Agree with entire post!


Past
Soviet = Awesome Individual skills but team played extremely well together. Chess match hockey
Sweden = Great skating and passing Defense wasn't there though
Finns = Great two way hockey
Czech = Great passing and creativity. Much like the Soviets
Canada = Two way hockey. Great skills but I don't think their skills from top to bottom matched the Euro teams
U.S.= Same style as Canada but low skill level compared to the rest

Now
Russia = Great individual skills. But not even close to the team play that happened 20 years ago
Sweden = Very good skills, a lot tougher at both ends.
Finns = Same two way hockey. As close to Canada hockey as a Euro country can get
Czech = Not sure Haven't seen in a while
Canada = A lot more skilled now. Producing the most skilled by far now. Top to bottom great skaters, puckhandlers. Still as physical as ever but those physical guys have great skills as well.
U.S.= We are starting to get our heads out of our butts as far as developing some skilled players. Can't put a great team from top to bottom together like most countries but putting some very good individual players on these teams.

Canada: Always well-coached teams adopting according to the circumstances, lot's of end to end stuff, perfection of the most important aspects of the game like clearing the zone, finishing checks, face offs, shooting the puck and going for rebounds. They often forecheck a lot but traps when appropriate. Masters at finding ways to win. Crystal clear roles. Well educated hockey professionals.

Russia: Focused on individual skills, which btw is only one aspect of the concept of skills. Lots of skating and puck carrying wingers. Many skilled players but I feel that they're a bit lost these days when it comes to building effective systems with clear roles. Moody, difficulties fighting through adversity. Puck possesion through stick-handling.

Czech Rep. Counter-attack specialists. Keeping the team short. Strong defense and strong goaltending is almost always the base. Possesion through passing and position. Masters at working with a lead.

Sweden. Possesion though passing. Circling moves, often initiated from behind their own goal. Attacks in numbers. Ability to apply pressure for long stretches of time but has a long history of ineffective puck possession (Sedin twins, cough cough). C often rather defensive. Thrives as underdogs. Less clear roles. Almost, everyone is expected to be able to play every role.

Finland. Much less structured than Team Sweden. Lots of end to end stuff. High forecheck. More inspiration and improvisation than brains. Prone to making costly mistakes. Lots of problems containing leads...

Well done. A very good assessment.

have u ever seen a swedish elite league match, finnish or russian, the difference in playing hockey is huge, I dont think u have seen any other game than those who are played in nhl, olympics or worldcup.
I watch swedish hockey twice a week and follows nhl at least once a week the differende is more than huge how to play the game.

A big step is that the skill has improved alot in NHL the last 10-15 years, big reason why = the russians and other countries entrance in nhl.

Yes The skilled players from the other countries did raise the skill level of the league.

I think though the reason why the skill in the NHL now is so high by NA players is the grass roots push for better skilled players. Go to USAHockey.com or CanadaHockey.ca and you will see that the push for more practices and less games is in full swing and has been in full swing for quite a few years. I only know of USA hockey and I can vouch that USAHockey is not letting coaches just go through the motions. A full plan is taught to these coaches in order to implement and make sure that the players have the skills needed to go onto the next level

Off ice training (puckhandling, shooting, footwork, athleticism development, etc) is now mainstream for most top teams. That was not the case 15 years ago. More kids in NA are taking skating lessons and perfecting their skills than ever before.

A final note: A greater % of Parents are more involved in their kids development than ever before (this is good and bad in many ways though)

Yes The skilled players from the other countries did raise the skill level of the league.

I think though the reason why the skill in the NHL now is so high by NA players is the grass roots push for better skilled players. Go to USAHockey.com or CanadaHockey.ca and you will see that the push for more practices and less games is in full swing and has been in full swing for quite a few years. I only know of USA hockey and I can vouch that USAHockey is not letting coaches just go through the motions. A full plan is taught to these coaches in order to implement and make sure that the players have the skills needed to go onto the next level

Off ice training (puckhandling, shooting, footwork, athleticism development, etc) is now mainstream for most top teams. That was not the case 15 years ago. More kids in NA are taking skating lessons and perfecting their skills than ever before.

A final note: A greater % of Parents are more involved in their kids development than ever before (this is good and bad in many ways though)

I agree with u, and I know the trainers in usa and canada have a full plan teaching their players different skills. In sweden we have embrased a very talanted guy from canada maybe u have heard of him "jean skinner" he is realy magic and have alot of moves to teach players playing hockey.

This topic reminds me of this post made a while back.

http://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=5509957&postcount=54

:biglaugh::handclap::biglaugh::handclap:

Considering Sweden out-Canada'd Canada the other day, I'd say there isn't much of a difference...

i LAUGH at those who say canada lacks 'skill'. obviously this is far and away absurd. Canada likes to play a physical power game. to play this type of game requires puck possession and cycling in the O-zone which wears the opposing D down. puck possession requires skill - stick-handling, skating, positioning, etc...it's a MYTH that Canada plays the trap, teams with less skill line up at their blue line playing a 1-4...and that's not canada

Canada is as skilled as anyone, the difference is that Canadian teams don't generally include the players who refuse to play the way the coach wants them to. And the coaches want them to get the puck deep and play a safe game. If the coaches told them to go out there and play end to end hockey all day long they'd do it and they'd have success at it, but coaches hate that because a coaches main responsibility is to give up as few goals as possible.

Euro - Circle

NA - Straight ahead.

Yeah dude. That's it! That's really it.

The reason for Europeans cycling a lot and NA not is the different sizes of the rink. Bigger rings: more reasons to start offensive play with a cycling move. Smaller rinks; straight forward play until the blueline then dump and chase or shoot.

No one can match Canada's HEART :sarcasm: