| |
VIEWPOINT: SCOTT OAKEQ
& A
Each week, Sports Online will turn the tables on Scott Oake,
who's used to peppering others with questions.
Steve Tambellini announced Team Canada's roster for this
year's world championship on Monday. What were your first impressions
of the team and how do you think they'll perform in Austria?
Because of the NHL lockout Steve Tambellini had the entire Canadian
NHL talent pool to select from. This almost always leads to some controversial
selections. But not this time. The notables who aren't on this Team
Canada– Lecavalier, St. Louis, Richards, Sakic, Niedermayer,
Lemieux, Iginla and a few others – are either injured or turned
down the invitations for personal reasons.
I think Tambellini and his staff did a good job of making the next
best selections. Obviously it's not as high powered a team as the
one that won the World Cup last September, but it has a nice mix.
This will probably be the most-scrutinized world championship ever
and I expect a lot of players to make the most of their opportunities
to represent Canada.
Players like Patrick Marleau, who didn't get into a game in the World
Cup, and players like Sheldon Souray and Mike Fisher, who are getting
their first shots. There has to be some concern about conditioning,
as half of Team Canada's players haven't been playing this season.
But, today's players don't usually let themselves get too far out
of shape and I wouldn't be surprised to see Canada win gold in Austria.
Your prediction of Mike Weir being among the leaders at this year's
Masters in last week's column was dead on. Did you watch the Masters?
What did you think of Tiger's win? Is he back on track to being golf's
most dominant player again?
Like most sports fans, I was glued to the broadcast of the Masters
on the weekend. It was hard not to like the way Mike Weir played especially
when he took a few risks on the last three holes trying to close the
gap. Tiger Woods's four Masters victories is a brilliant achievement
but No. 4 didn't seem as dominant as any of the previous three.
The old Tiger would have been untouchable with a three-shot lead after
three rounds. He's still a great player. His chip on the 16th underlines
that.
But, the new Tiger is a lot closer to the rest of the field than the
player who won seven majors from 1999 to 2000. Of course he' ll win
his share of tournaments, but I can't see the "Tiger Factor" being
as huge as it was a few years ago.
A recreational hockey group has filed a claim in Ontario Superior
Court, saying the Stanley Cup should be awarded this year although
there's no NHL season.
Should a recreational league team be able to compete for the Stanley
Cup?
Absolutely not! This is a silly idea.
The Stanley Cup goes to the team that endures a grueling regular schedule
and manages 16 tough post-season wins at the highest level of hockey
on the planet. It does not belong to a bunch of lawyers who play rec.
hockey on Wednesday nights any more than it belongs to the guys I
play shinny with on Tuesday afternoons.
Some of them, as former pro players, would be embarrassed at the notion
of being awarded the Stanley Cup given the level at which they play
now.
Awarding it to rec. level players would reduce the Stanley Cup from
the most cherished trophy in sport to novelty status.
Let's see: The Detroit Red Wings in 2002, The New Jersey Devils in
2003, the Tampa Bay Lightning in 2004 and Reggie's Gun and Tackle
Shop in 2005.
Sounds just about right.
I realize many fans have a negative view of the NHL, but let's take
a breath and realize the league will be in operation again and there
will be once again be a legitimate winner of the Stanley Cup.
Lightning-round questions:
Favourite television show?
The Shield starring Michael Chiklis
Manitoba Moose or St. John's Maple Leafs?
Manitoba Moose
Last concert I bought a ticket for was…
David Copperfield– but he never sang anything
One rule change I'd like to see in NHL hockey when it finally comes
back is…
No touch icing
Scott, I like your Q & A column and agree with a lot of your viewpoints on sports. However, I strongly disagree with your viewpoint that a bunch of rec hockey players should not have claim to what is the most cherished trophy in pro sports.
If I have got my history right, the Stanley Cup was first awarded to the best amateur club in Canada and really became NHL property through attrition. The NHL and the NHLPA have decided to put greed and their self-serving interests ahead of the game of hockey. The Stanley Cup represents more than just the NHL.
These guys that play in rec leagues play the game because they love it. You mentioned that awarding the Cup to rec-level players would reduce the most cherished trophy in sport to novelty status. I think we should be more concerned about the NHL and the NHLPA reducing the game of hockey to novelty status. What is the Stanley Cup worth in a novelty sport?
In my opinion, by demonstrating their greed and incompetence in trying to negotiate a new CBA, the NHLPA and the NHL have abdicated any claim on the Stanley Cup (at least for this season). Maybe by awarding the Cup to rec-league players, it would also send a not-so-subtle message to the NHL and its players that this game doesn’t just belong to them.
Thanks for listening and keep up the good work.
Ross Hewison
Cranbrook, B.C.
With regards to your Q&A and the question of "should a recreational league team be able to challenge for the Stanley Cup?"
I believe the Stanley Cup should go to the best AHL team, since they are
the highest level of hockey in North America right now.
Another train of thought to consider: award it to a recreational team
as a direct slap in the face of both the league's and the players association's
inability to reach a contractual agreement even when there is approx. $2
billion dollars on the table.
I really hope that the courts at least determine proper ownership, which
may, in fact, mean that the cup is simply owned on an annual basis by the
highest level hockey team in North America in any given year. I believe they
need to award it to someone this year, though. I do not believe that the NHL
owns the cup, because they certainly never bought it from anyone!
Fraser Sullivan
Toronto
I have to agree with Ross H. from Cranbrook. His response mirrors what
I have to say.
You do make some very valid points in your article, Scott. Those NHL
teams sweat and toil through too long a regular season and then must win
16 playoff dates to sip from the silver chalice. Good points all.
Scott, I shared these opinions on a CBC phone in show here in Calgary
before Christmas. I maintain that the Stanley Cup should be awarded for
2004/05 and it should have gone to an amateur hockey champion in
Canada.
I am a big NHL fan, a regular oldtimers player (like you) and I just
feel that some good could have come out of the lockout if the Cup was
awarded -- to someone.
Ross makes similar points to mine.
Although our views are just that -- ours -- they won't end up with the Cup
being awarded.
The NHL will keep Mr. Stanley locked up and behind closed doors this
season.
I think that is sad.
Brent Harris
Calgary
|
 |
|
Scott began his career by volunteering at the university radio station during three years of pre-med. studies at Memorial University in St. John's, Nfld. After two summers working at CBC-St. John's in radio and television, he was hired full-time in 1974. Since then, Oake has covered the Olympic Winter and Summer Games and the Commonwealth Games as a commentator for wrestling, hockey, alpine skiing, swimming, rowing, diving, boxing and athletics.
FULL
BIO
|
