At some point during the second period of the World Junior semifinal between Canada and Finland the action morphed into a cheap Hollywood remake. It presented a different cast, a different setting and even different teams. But the premise of the events were almost identical to that from which they were based. Canada enters a tournament in the hostile territory of a rival country. The team improves every game, culminating with an impressive New Year’s Eve victory. They enter the semi-final looking like a team that could end the country’s gold medal drought.
Then they fail to show up.
Those parallel plots represent the last two World Junior tournaments for the Canadian team. While certain details of the plot are different from one another the result is the same: a shocking 5-1 loss in the semi-final to an underdog team that ends any chance of a Canadian championship. Both times the team has underwhelmed, appearing not altogether ready for the game: Canada has not played well in a medal round game since the 2011 semi-final against the US.
In the more modern rendition, which transpired yesterday, it would be Finland who eliminated Canada. A lackluster effort by the Canadians would result in immense criticism and public disappointment in a team that had just regained the trust of its fans. It would ultimately be a fitting conclusion for a team that would demonstrate all of its faults in the face of elimination.
It is ironic, perhaps, that Canada was eliminated by a team that embodied what they could have been in their most effective form. Finland demonstrated both their incredible team structure and defensive ability while capitalizing on the chances they were given. This is how Canada appeared at its finest moment: the victory against the United States. But Canada would instead fall victim to a demonstration of their own successful identity.
Where Things Went Wrong
The closer they got to the end of the game the more individualistic the Canadian team became. Canada was not a great passing team at the best of times, but against Finland that sentiment was incredibly evident. Countless times a Canadian would skate aimlessly into the Finnish zone, posing possession but no real threat to the opposition. Canada never seemed to develop any sort of offensive chemistry, which was painfully evident in their final hour.
It was perhaps most clear on the powerplay, the weakest facet of an incredibly weak Canadian performance. In the practices leading up to the game the team worked extensively on their extra man puck movement and tactics. It didn’t translate as Canada appeared flat and completely disorganized under the immense pressure of the Finnish penalty kill. Special teams were a concern throughout the tournament, as Canada’s penalty kill was also not particularly effective.
The mention of poor penalty killing goes hand in hand with an annual Canadian issue: taking too many penalties. The counterproductive mindset is to blame international officiating. Instead, the only helpful option for Canada in the future is to better prepare their players for the altered rulings, which are usually as consistent as they are soft by North American standards. The Canadians took 26 minutes of penalties in the second period and it resulted in a 3-1 deficit that would never be overcome.
Deficits were also a major issue for the Canadians, who consistently failed to hold or acquire any kind of lead. They would only score the first goal once, a statistic that became as tiresome for the observer as it must have for the team. This evidently put them at an instant disadvantage, and one that they were only able to overcome on three occasions.
It did not help that the team was not blessed with the type of offensive talent of past Canadian rosters. In the end, only Anthony Mantha, Jonathan Drouin, Curtis Lazar and Nick Petan ever established themselves as scoring threats. Only three Canadians, the above group excluding Petan, had more than 5 points. Offense from the blueline was even scarcer with only three goals coming from the back-end, two of them against the Swiss. It is unlikely that these stats will be greatly inflated in the Bronze Medal Game. To put this is contrast, in 2009, the last year Canada won gold, PK Subban had three of Canada’s seven goals from the blueline. Meanwhile, John Tavares and Cody Hodgson alone would equal the point totals of Canada’s top four 2014 scorers combined; only three players in 2014 had over five points only Canada while only nine would be below that number in 2009.
What can be changed?
As this drought is elongated the fundamental question of “what can be changed?” is always brought to the forefront. The answer doesn’t seem to change, but then neither does Hockey Canada’s response. The fundamental problem with Team Canada is roster selection and overall mentality. The selection committee seems to continuously think that hard working and role playing teams will succeed at this type of tournament. Instead, a lack of scoring touch resulting from these selections is a portion of Canada’s annual downfall.
Selecting a perfect and unanimous Canadian junior roster is impossible, a fact that proves Canada is still one of if not the best hockey country in the world. It doesn’t help that the development between 18 and 19 seems to be high for Canadians, and therefore the best players rarely return. But the line of Frederick Gauthier, Kerby Rychel and Josh Anderson was a clear demonstration of where the grit over goals category is hurtful. Canada’s “physical presence” combined for only 1 goal 1 assist and a -7 rating. In fact of the four minus players on the Canadian roster they represented three.
The worry as a drought like this extends is that the Canadian Hockey League will try and make a drastic move to try and restore the development advantage that Canadian youth have. This has already been talked about with European goaltenders being limited and could translate into harsher sanctions on foreign players. While this would almost certainly benefit the success of Canada it would hurt the hockey community.
So the drought continues into 2014-15, and the emerged death of Canadian hockey narrative will continue. But this is not the end, but hopefully it is finally the beginning of a Hockey Canada realization that something here isn’t working. Hopefully next time Canada takes to the ice it will be talent and not truculence that defines the squad.
Photo: Frank Gunn of the Canadian Press
Thanks for reading. Please follow me on Twitter – MitchRTierney and follow the site – @lastwordonsport. Please take a moment to like our Facebook Page.
Interested in writing for LastWordOnSports? If so, check out our “Join Our Team” page to find out how.
