The Truth

So, the Canadian women’s hockey team won gold—2-0 against the U.S.—which is, no doubt, a cause for celebration (and we’ll talk about celebrating later). But our women didn’t just win the gold: we dominated the competition. With the exception of the 2006 Turin Olympics, Canada and the United States have owned women’s hockey. And I mean owned. Take a look at the Vancouver 2010 scores:

Canada 18: Slovakia 0—Canada 13:Sweden 1—Canada 5: Finland 0—Canada 2: US 0

US 12: China 1—US 6:Finland 1—US 13: Russia 0

Pretty epic, no? Only 1 of the top scorers of the tournament wasn’t Canadian or American (Stefanie Marty of Switzerland). 6 were Canadian and 4 were American (there was a tie for 10th, in case you’re good at math)

And now, people are complaining because the Canadian and American teams are winning by too large a margin. No, you didn’t read that wrong: people are complaining because our women got too many goals in a competitive hockey game. There’s a lot being said about Canadian (and American) dominance in women’s hockey so, let’s look at one of the more ludicrous complaints: it’s not sportsmanlike to be so awesome to score so many more goals than one’s opponents. But what is sportsmanship about, really?

Dictionary.com lists sportsmanlike qualities as fairness, courtesy, good temper, etc. Certainly, there are more characteristics and temperaments we can throw in there and,  while an exact definition of sportsmanship might be hard to nail down, I think we all have an intuitive grasp on its meaning: a sort of ‘I’ll know it when I see it’ understanding (or perhaps a “I’ll know it when I don’t see it” as is more often the case with sportsmanship). So, does sportsmanship require us to curb our own skills?

Well, no. As far as I know, sportsmanship requires that we don’t play dirty, that we don’t laugh and point and jeer and that we don’t do those things which are not quite cheating but are kinda frowned upon. It involves being gracious as a winner, and gracious as a loser. It does not necessitate, by any stretch that I can see, ‘taking it easy’ on a team. Maybe, in a scrimmage, probably in the case that you’re playing against kids, but not when you’re playing in a competition against other internationally qualified athletes and absolutely not when you’re playing in the Olympics. For a lot of athletes, and a lot of spectators, the Olympics is the pinnacle of sport. It’s the endgame, as it were, and not the time to be pulling punches. On the international stage, at the international level, playing the sport to which you have dedicated your life against the best the world has to offer, do you ease up and play nice, do you curtsy and pour them a cup of tea or do you push forward with everything you’ve got at every opportunity?

Certainly, sportsmanship does not require that we baby other teams. And so it does not suggest that there ought to be some kind of ‘mercy rule’. But, might a mercy rule be needed in order to level out the playing field? To give the other teams a chance to mature and grow in order that we the spectators can have a better hockey-watching experience?

Well, one thing we should consider is that the men’s hockey competition does not now, nor has it ever (to my knowledge) had anything like a mercy rule. And one might point to that fact that Canada has only eked into the men’s gold medal game as demonstrating that, while there previously might have been disparity in scoring in men’s hockey, we’re now faced with admitting that it’s no longer just our game. And that, as they say, is precisely the point.

Women’s hockey was introduced in the Olympics in 1998, and building up a sport in a country takes time. Canada (and the U.S) have had that time, our women were clamouring for a chance to play hockey a long time ago, and they got it. Slowly and surely, the sport was built up and now, we are the queens of the ice-castle. So, other countries don’t have large pools of women from which to pick their teams, but give them some time! If I can remember 1998 (and I can—I was really into the Backstreet Boys and glitter), then it wasn’t that long ago.

Furthermore, if you want a team to get better, do you take it easy on them? Or do you push them, by pushing yourselves?  Look, if you’re the kind of person who, when you get your ass kicked at something, wants to give up and stop trying, then, I hate to break it to you but you’re not competitive athlete material. Hockey is a sport. Sports are (in this case) competitive. Competition necessarily involves someone losing. So, yes, we bring it hard. Yes, we are merciless. Yes, we shoot first and refuse to ask questions. But guess what? This is hockey. This is the Olympics. This is our game. So, stop whining and deal. Take it like a man woman.

While we’re on the topic of women and sport, it is also worth mentioning that, for Canada anyways, the majority of our medals have been won by women. While there’s a lot that might be said about this, I think Clara Hughes is on the right track in saying (via this post) that it has to do with depth of competition. There are simply more men for men to compete against. A lot of other countries underfund and undervalue women’s sport, even at the Olympic level, whereas Canada has made a commitment to give equal funding (although not per capita) to women and some of our most noticeable Olympians (like Clara Hughes) are women. This is not, of course, to belittle the talent and hard work of our women athletes, only to comment on the phenomenon. Competing at this level for men or women takes tremendous skill and effort.

It also takes tremendous ability to swallow some obvious double standards. Did you hear? The Canadian women’s hockey team, after beating their arch rivals at the Olympics with a 15 game winning streak, had some champagne, brewskies and cigars! And people care. Apparently, the IOC will not be launching a formal investigation and the hubbub seems to have died down; however, some people were/are upset and, well the fact that we have to talk about it all is indicative of the double standard. OK, Marie-Philip Poulin is 18 and the drinking age in B.C. is 19 (although it is 18 in Quebec, were Poulin is from—on a side note, how much fun is it to say her name: Marie-Philip Poulin, Marie-Philip Poulin…) but is a case of potential underage drinking really responsible for this ire? Does it justify the ruckus? Especially since she just won an Olympic gold medal in a game in which she scored the only two goals?

I don’t think so. In fact, I think this pretty much sums up my opinion on the matter. Seriously, what were they supposed to do? Knit a sweater?  I’d say more on the subject, but I have to go bake some muffins. No, seriously, lemon poppy seed (so good).