Politics, hockey and the French Language

No place in Canada takes the matter of language quite as seriously as Quebec. Go to Montreal and look around for some English. It’s generally not there and when it is, it’s buried under the French, smaller too.

That’s all part of the physical manifestation of Quebec’s ongoing culture wars, their attack on the English language. Bill 101, passed in 1977 made French the official language of La belle province. And everything in Quebec is French, Quebecois up the wazoo. The original intent of Bill 101 was to essentially banish English from the province: it banned English from commercial signs and restricted education in English to those who had siblings already in such programs.

It was later amended in the Henri Bourassa years, allowing some English signage, so long as the French was twice as large as the imposing, lesser language. Mordecai Richler once wrote of well-meaning citizens who would stalk the streets, tape measure in hand, photographing offending signs.

Make no mistake; French is an endangered species in Canada. With the vast majority of the country speaking English, with media from all sides coming into the province in English and with a slackening support for traditional powers like the Bloc, it’s not too hard to see Quebec changing. The actual impact of the silent revolution is something to argue over all day, but it’s intent was simple enough: protect the language of a loud, vocal minority.

The loud, vocal minority has a proud history of stirring up shit in Quebec. One of the first moments of the Silent Revolution was the Maurice Richard Riot, where a suspension led to an act of domestic terrorism. Indeed, between riots sometimes spring up during the playoffs, either on the street or on the ice. Arguably more than anywhere else in Canada, Quebec takes it’s hockey very seriously.

These two passions – protecting their language and winning hockey – have met occasionally in the past and flared up in recent weeks. In the midst of a rocky season, the Canadiens fired head coach Jaques Martin and replaced him with assistant Randy Cunneyworth.

The problem isn’t that the firing came too late, after the Canadiens found themselves in the cellar of the Northeast Division. It’s not that he has zero coaching experience in the NHL. It’s that he doesn’t speak French. It’s not an issue of speaking to his team – only three of their players are from Quebec – but one of fitting into a province that is predominantly French speaking.

Fittingly, it’s the media that keep banging this drum: the same media that is mostly French. There are five French newspapers, three French TV stations and a French talk radio station. Cunneyworth’s languages was been drummed by them, and amplified by the national media, into A Real Story, a news cycle of it’s own. Never mind that the Canadiens are winners of just three of their last 10 games, Cunneyworth should resign because he doesn’t speak French.

A French-language advocacy group, Mouvement Quebec francais, has taken Cunneyworth’s hiring personally, like a slap to the face, calling it the latest in a series of insults to the French language. According to a National Post story, their laundry list of complaints includes everything from ambient music to the team’s roster; not enough French players.

It’s reminiscent of Bill 101: they have a good idea – serve the French fans as you would the English ones – and they make an interesting points about post-game interviews. But they immediately go too far and all but call for blood. A comfortable medium – say, hiring someone from Berlitz for post-game media scrum translating – never comes up. The kneejerk reaction is the blunt one, a hammer to pound away any traces of anything that isn’t pure laine Quebecois.

And what would that solve? Would bringing in more French players – last I checked, Patrice Brisebois was available – bring more wins? Pounding the drum of Quebecois nationalism is an easy trick for the media (witness how it was pulled this spring) and it helps mask whatever problems beat reporters and columnists have with a person who can’t communicate with them.

Working a country away, in Philadelphia, Mark Bowden wrote a great book about the Eagles and explained how the pack makes coaches, and especially Buddy Ryan. “…he understood The Pack. You let them stand on the sidelines during practice and you feed them a steady line verbal stingers and you reminded them at least once a week that they really knew jackshit about football… and before long, they were eating out of your hand.”

That feeding, or rather the lack of it thanks to Cunneyworth’s language barrier, could end his coaching career before it even began. Is it right? Maybe not, but it’s certainly Quebecois.

Habs documentary leaves much to be desired

I wonder why it is that the CBC’s new documentary on the Habs seems to have almost as much music video footage as it does game footage?

Why does it gloss over the downfall of the Habs over the last 20 years; when they have been to just two Stanley Cup finals and gone through their longest Cup drought ever.

And why does it seem, at times, like a plea for anglos and quebecois to get along?

Well, it’s honestly because this is less a telling of what happened and why as it is a retelling of memories. Memories of Skrudland scoring nine seconds into overtime in 1986; of Dryden’s outstretched leg in 1970; of a draw in 1975; of Roy winking in 1993.

Montreal is home of the Canadiens and, for a time, the most celebrated arena in hockey, the Montreal Forum. The Canadiens are maybe the most successful team in all of professional sports; maybe only the New York Yankees or Boston Celtics come close to rivaling their streak of success.

And it’s a pretty good cultural town, too. More then a few good bands have come from the city, many of which seem to be prominently featured in this documentary. It seems that for each player interviewed, there seems to be either an actor, a singer or somebody vaguely described as a performer.

Sam Roberts talks of his fandom; Viggo Mortenson explains that he wore a Canadiens shirt under his costume in Lord of the Rings; Guy Lafleur’s disco record makes a cameo appearance. Only the late Mordecai Richler is missing from this tapestry of the Montreal arts, for the obvious reason of his death.

But this isn’t an arts documentary, so where are the athletes? Host George Strombolopolis talks to Bob Gainey, Guy Lafleur, Guy Carboneau and Jean Beliveau. But Patrick Roy is conspicuously absent despite being a segment devoted to him; so are current Habs like Saku Koivu, who’s captaincy is briefly discussed.

There is some game footage, but it’s loosely defined. Bits and pieces are mixed together; only eagle-eyed fans are likely to tell cup runs apart. Still, there are the timeless clips: The Red Army playing in the Forum on the eve of 1976, Patrick Roy winking after a big save in the 1993 Finals, Jean Beliveau carrying the Stanley Cup off the ice in the last game he ever played.

On the whole, this was a fun program to watch, even for a devoted Leaf fan. But still, it seemed to lack focus; there was just so much on the cultural impact of the Canadiens, it seemed too much. There were light jokes about Montreal’s nightlife, there was a clips from assorted French-Canadian artists (Malajube’s Montreal -40 Celsius actually showed up twice) and precious little on key figures in Canadiens history: I barely heard the names Sam Pollock, Scotty Bowman and Danny Galavan.

For something as important as the hundredth anniversary of the Canadiens, this documentary was more then a little underwhelming.

Habs vs Bruins has makings of a classic series

Ahh yes, the second season. A time when wins, losses and, yes, even shootout losses don’t matter.

A time when games start to take on a new intensity, a new sense of urgency and a greater sense of importance. It’s a time when enemies meet, where feuds start and rivalries are reborn.

Which is exactly what these NHL playoffs should bring.

The last, and perhaps the strongest, of the old original six rivalries is set to start once again this week when the number one seeded Montreal Canadiens take on the eighth seeded Boston Bruins. But first, a little history.

As far back as the 1950s, the Bruins faced the Habs in heated series. They met in the finals three times that decade, with the Habs winning all three.

In 1971 they played an epic seven-game series that went right down to the wire. Led by Bobby Orr, the Bruins were clear favourites to win the Cup that season, posting a 57-14-7 season, by far the best in the league. However, the Canadiens, backstopped by a young Ken Dryden, would win in seven games, the last a 4-2 thriller. They would go on to beat Chicago and win the Cup that season.

In 1977 the two teams met again, the first of two consecutive Finals meetings. The Canadiens would roll over them, sweeping the series. The next year, the Canadiens would win again, this time in six games, two of which went into overtime.

But an alignment in the playoff format would lead to them meeting Stanley Cup Semifinal the next season. This series would go the distance, with neither team taking a stronghold in the series. Neither team lost on home ice for the first six games of the series, forcing a climatic game seven in the Montreal Forum.

And was it ever a classic. All night it was back and forth, with neither team taking a strong lead. But s goal by Rick Middleton gave the Bruins a lead of 4-3 late in the third and the Bruins looked to upset the Canadiens.

However, with victory looking imminent, the Bruins fouled up a line change and took a too many men on the ice penalty in the final minutes of play.

The Canadiens would score on the ensuing power play, forcing overtime, and would score again, putting a dramatic cap on the series. The Canadiens would beat the New York Rangers in the next round, winnng their fourth Cup in a row and their sixth of the decade.

It was the fourteenth time that the Bruins had lost to the Canadiens, and the rivalry increasingly looked one-sided. After all, the Bruins had been a great team in the 1970s. Eight times they had finished with 100 points or more and had won their division seven times. They had won two Stanley Cups and had hall of fame players like Orr, Phil Esposito, Terry O’Reilly and Brad Park. Yet still, they couldn’t past the Canadiens in the playoffs, who dominated the decade.

They wouldn’t meet in the playoffs again until 1984, when they met for the first of four first-round meetings. While the Canadiens would win all four, the Bruins forced a game five in 1985 and lost 1-0.

However, 1988 was a turning point. Meeting in the Adams final – then the second round of the playoffs – they beat the Canadiens in five games. It was the first time they had beaten the Canadiens in the playoffs since 1943 and was the first of four series wins they would have over the next five seasons, including their first ever seventh-game win in 1991.

They met only once more that decade, in a 1994 series that again went seven games.

Since then they have met twice, in 2002 and 2004, with Montreal winning both times.

So, what then of this series? The Bruins sneaked into the playoffs finishing just one win above Carolina for the final spot. Their record, 41-29-12, puts them basically at .500, and they were outscored this season – the only playoff team to have been so.

But in most statistics, their goalie, Tim Thomas ranks higher then Carey Price, the Habs netminder. Thomas won 28 games this season, three of them shutouts, and his save percentage of .921 is the fourth-best in the league. His GAA is lower then Price’s and he’s stopped over 400 more shots, too.

And he’ll need to keep that up against a greay Canadiens offense. Right-winger Alex Kovalev led the team with 35 goals and 84 points. Four players scored 25 or more goals and six had fifty or more points. As a team they scored 262 goals, the most in the league.

However, injuries have taken their toll on them. Saku Koivu is out and Mike Komisarek is questionable. They’re two players the Habs will miss.

If this analysis sounds a little one-sided, that’s because the series mostly will be. It’ll come down to how well Boston’s defence and goaltending can handle the onslaught of Montreal’s multi-tiered offence, not the other way around. If Boston wants to win, they’ll have to keep Montreal on the defensive, where they’re not as sharp.

It’ll be tough, but it’s possible. Still, it’s hard to shake the feeling of a Montreal victory as anything but inevitable, especially given the history involved.

The Leafs-Habs Rivalry is dead

‘The Toronto/Montreal rivalry is dead … the Maple Leafs have killed it”
- Ken Dryden, The Game


Well, maybe he’s right.

For all the hype and the excitement that Saturday’s game may have around it – it all depends on who wins and who loses tonight and tomorrow – this game has as little to do with the famous Toronto vs Montreal rivalry as it does any two teams playing for a spot.

Toronto this year keeps reminding me of New Jersey, circa 1988. They’re a team that’s playing well above its head, is winning games they shouldn’t be – and is losing games they shouldn’t be, either. Oddly like the Devils that year, the Leafs are a team that only has a couple scoring threats. The Devils had Pat Verbeek and Kirk Muller, the Leafs have Mats Sundin and Darcy Tucker.

The 1988 version of the Devils was a team that was in the same situation that Toronto was in. While they had a lackluster year, towards the end of the season they made a run for the playoffs that went right down to a climatic game in Chicago that they had to win; a tie wasn’t enough.

And they did win, too, in overtime. From there the Devils had a wildly successful playoff run, upsetting the Islanders in six games and the Capitals in seven, before they lost to the Boston Bruins in seven games.

Too many times this year the Leafs have choked away leads, be it against Buffalo or Pittsburgh. They’re a team that is winning mostly because Andrew Raycroft, and their fans are quick to vilify him.

When the Leafs work – I’m not sure if play is appropriate here – a goalie as often as they have Raycroft, it’s safe to assume that it’d wear him down. Raycroft has never lost this many games in one season, but he has never won this many either. His minutes in net is more then double what it was last year and his save % is under .900.

And most of the Leafs fans I know don’t like him. They have the real deal, Justin Pogge, waiting in the wings. Raycroft, even if he gets them into the playoffs, is still a stopgap. He’s the bridge between Belfour and Pogge, like how Steve Penny was between Ken Dryden and Patrick Roy.

This is why Felix Potvin left Toronto. This is why Toronto won’t win the Cup this year.

If Toronto wins against Montreal, they may end up with the #8 seed. From there they’d face Buffalo. Then maybe the Sens, or maybe the Penguins. Perhaps the Rangers.

Either way, these are teams that are much better then Montreal is right now.

So yes, this is a big game.

But the rivalry is dead.