Team Canada Goalies
Steven Sanyal
I think Patrick Roy not being invited is very unfortunate. He deserves to
be there. Cujo, and Ranford are both great goalies, though I must say that
Cujo has not won anything yet. Brodeur had a good playoff when the Devils
won the Cup, but he was also on a very defensive minded team. Roy has
erased people's doubts that he is over the hill. He deserved a chance to
represent Canada this year.
Steve Sanyal
Glenn Chin
Steven Sanyal (steven...@utoronto.ca) wrote:
: I think Patrick Roy not being invited is very unfortunate. He deserves to
Two of the three final games are scheduled for Montreal. Since Roy left
the Canadiens on bad terms, there is a risk that Montreal fans may jump on
Roy if he allows a couple of questionable goals. Team Canada doesn't
need hometown fans who have a grudge against a former Hab.
Glenn
Allan L. Chu
Steven Sanyal (steven...@utoronto.ca) wrote:
: I think Patrick Roy not being invited is very unfortunate. He deserves to
: be there. Cujo, and Ranford are both great goalies, though I must say that
: Cujo has not won anything yet. Brodeur had a good playoff when the Devils
: won the Cup, but he was also on a very defensive minded team. Roy has
: erased people's doubts that he is over the hill. He deserved a chance to
: represent Canada this year.
: Steve Sanyal
I may be wrong, but I remember hearing some sportscaster saying that Roy
did not want to play for Canada in the world cup tournament...
Allan
_________________________________________________________________________
Allan Lawrence Chu al...@seas.upenn.edu
Management and Technology, '99 all...@wharton.upenn.edu
University of Pennsylvania http://homepage.seas.upenn.edu/~alchu
_________________________________________________________________________
Gerald Olchowy
In article <01bb8ded$e6457da0$LocalHost@03839828>, "Steven Sanyal" <steven...@utoronto.ca> writes:
|> I think Patrick Roy not being invited is very unfortunate. He deserves to
|> be there. Cujo, and Ranford are both great goalies, though I must say that
|> Cujo has not won anything yet. Brodeur had a good playoff when the Devils
|> won the Cup, but he was also on a very defensive minded team. Roy has
|> erased people's doubts that he is over the hill. He deserved a chance to
|> represent Canada this year.
I have no doubts about Patrick's abilities...but...
Patrick Roy turned down the job in 1991 when it was essentially all his...
all he had to do was show up, and he chose not to, and has never shown
the ability to check his ego at the door,
or sit on the bench for a few games and be hot
immediately when called upon and not sulk. The first game of the World
Cup is not exactly the time for your first game against a squad of
elite Russians.
Brodeur is Canada's goaltender of the future and maybe today, which was why
he was invited.
Ranford has the experience, and has the ability to come off the bench hot
and also be a team player.
Joseph is just a nice guy with the ability to come off the bench hot and
also be a team player.
Put simply...Sather (and Bowman at the time) wanted team players...
Potvin or Roy would likely have caused some needless internal rivalries
with Brodeur, which you won't get with Ranford or Joseph.
--
Gerald
Jeff Brose
"Steven Sanyal" <steven...@utoronto.ca> wrote:
>I think Patrick Roy not being invited is very unfortunate. He deserves to
>be there. Cujo, and Ranford are both great goalies, though I must say that
>Cujo has not won anything yet. Brodeur had a good playoff when the Devils
>won the Cup, but he was also on a very defensive minded team. Roy has
>erased people's doubts that he is over the hill. He deserved a chance to
>represent Canada this year.
>Steve Sanyal
Being Canadian doesn't mean being good, it means having a good
attitude towards life and whatever you do. And to put it plain and
simple, Roy is simply not the kind of guy you want representing your
country.
Vern Faulkner
GO> Brodeur is Canada's goaltender of the future and maybe
GO> today, which was why he was invited.
Today - sure. Future? I'd be inclined to look at Thibault somewhat, or maybe
Hirsch. Seriously. And by the time Brodeur has done his time, there will be many
more in the wings.
GO> Ranford has the experience, and has the ability to come off the bench hot
GO> and also be a team player.
Give Ranford a hunk of hardware to play for, and he becomes a man posessed.
Vladimir Svetlov
In article <4vcegt$7...@bcarh8ab.bnr.ca>, golc...@nortel.ca (Gerald
Olchowy) wrote:
>
> I have no doubts about Patrick's abilities...but...
Nor do I, nor should anyone else. In my mind, Roy unequivocally has
shown that he is still the best goalie in the game today, and the one
player you would want to have on your team when the games count, like in
the World cup or in the playoffs. The one thing you can't accuse Roy of
is not showing up when it counts.
> Patrick Roy turned down the job in 1991 when it was essentially all his...
> all he had to do was show up, and he chose not to, and has never shown
> the ability to check his ego at the door, or sit on the bench for a few
games > and be hot immediately when called upon and not sulk.
First of all there are a lot of players on team Canada that have huge
egos, and there are plyers not represented on the current team who have
played in past canada cups that also have huge egos, so Roy is not alone
in this respect. Its true he had the job clean in 91 but decided not to
play ( as I was in montreal at the time I recall him citing family reasons
for not playing, but this is a little hazy). The second point is that
there are very few goalies who can sit on the bench and be hot as soon as
they are called into action, and I don't see why he wouldn't be on the ice
to begin with. The best players are generally ridiculously competitive,
and thrive on playing. A lot of forwards do bitch about how little time
they get on the ice, feeling that they deserve more, now if your the
backup goalie there is a possibility that you won't play at all. How many
forwards would agree to play with the mere possibility that they will
never get on the ice ? I suspect that the number is very few.
> The first game of the World
> Cup is not exactly the time for your first game against a squad of
> elite Russians.
>
> Brodeur is Canada's goaltender of the future and maybe today, which was why
> he was invited.
The future part may be true, but you would likely generate a huge debate
saying that he is the best goalie today. I've said it before, I'm a huge
Roy homer, but if I had to pick one player whom I thought could single
handedly win games that count, it would be roy.
> Ranford has the experience, and has the ability to come off the bench hot
> and also be a team player.
Ranford is an excellent goalie and his experience helps him, but I don't
think that many would consider him in the same league with roy or brodeur
as far as talent.
> Joseph is just a nice guy with the ability to come off the bench hot and
> also be a team player.
I think that what you mean by team player is the ability to accept a
second string job, which ranford and joseph are both willing to do,
whereas I think that roy would not. Plus being a nice guy really
shouldn't be an attribute to select one player over another. I still think
that in short tournaments, where personalities don't have a long time to
clash, you would want to field the most talented players you could. For
forwards, you obviously wouldn't want a forward line consisting of
Marchmant/draper/Lemieux ( assuming they all made the team)
but in nets, you would want the player who was best apt at stopping the puck.
> Put simply...Sather (and Bowman at the time) wanted team players...
> Potvin or Roy would likely have caused some needless internal rivalries
> with Brodeur, which you won't get with Ranford or Joseph.
Seemingly implict in this argument is that brodeur should be given the
job outright, which I think is wrong. I'd bet even money that if they had
to try out for the job, that brodeur might have to take the job of back
up. Are you saying that ranford and joseph have no problem playing back
up to brodeur but they would playing behind roy ? Or are you saying that
ranford or joseph could beat out roy for the first spot ? But seeing as
roy has in the past shown his disinterest for this tournament its all
moot, but I do agree that based on performance, the fact that he was not
invited to try out after this years playoff preformance seems wrong. If
people don't like roy becuase they perceive him to have an inflated
perception of self worth, then these same people should shine the same
light on all of the other players on the team.
Sandy
Sameer Sehdev
Gerald Olchowy <golc...@nortel.ca> wrote in article
<4vcegt$7...@bcarh8ab.bnr.ca>...
> In article <01bb8ded$e6457da0$LocalHost@03839828>, "Steven Sanyal"
<steven...@utoronto.ca> writes:
> |> I think Patrick Roy not being invited is very unfortunate. He
deserves to
> |> be there. Cujo, and Ranford are both great goalies, though I must say
that
> |> Cujo has not won anything yet. Brodeur had a good playoff when the
Devils
> |> won the Cup, but he was also on a very defensive minded team. Roy has
> |> erased people's doubts that he is over the hill. He deserved a chance
to
> |> represent Canada this year.
>
> I have no doubts about Patrick's abilities...but...
>
> Patrick Roy turned down the job in 1991 when it was essentially all
his...
> all he had to do was show up, and he chose not to, and has never shown
> the ability to check his ego at the door,
No.. he had health problems.
> or sit on the bench for a few games and be hot
> immediately when called upon and not sulk. The first game of the World
> Cup is not exactly the time for your first game against a squad of
> elite Russians.
>
> Brodeur is Canada's goaltender of the future and maybe today, which was
why
> he was invited.
>
Brodeur is overrated. Believe me. He is not better than Cujo. Cujo
sparkled in relief of Brodeur in GM place in Canada's first
exhibition game. Although Brodeur may be one of the better goalies
in the future, he is not Cujo, or Fuhr, or Roy in their primes.
Steven Sanyal
Gerald Olchowy <golc...@nortel.ca> wrote in article
<4vcegt$7...@bcarh8ab.bnr.ca>...
> In article <01bb8ded$e6457da0$LocalHost@03839828>, "Steven Sanyal"
<steven...@utoronto.ca> writes:
> |> I think Patrick Roy not being invited is very unfortunate. He
deserves to
> |> be there. Cujo, and Ranford are both great goalies, though I must say
that
> |> Cujo has not won anything yet. Brodeur had a good playoff when the
Devils
> |> won the Cup, but he was also on a very defensive minded team. Roy has
> |> erased people's doubts that he is over the hill. He deserved a chance
to
> |> represent Canada this year.
>
> I have no doubts about Patrick's abilities...but...
>
> Patrick Roy turned down the job in 1991 when it was essentially all
his...
> all he had to do was show up, and he chose not to, and has never shown
> the ability to check his ego at the door,
> or sit on the bench for a few games and be hot
> immediately when called upon and not sulk. The first game of the World
> Cup is not exactly the time for your first game against a squad of
> elite Russians.
>
> Brodeur is Canada's goaltender of the future and maybe today, which was
why
> he was invited.
>
> Ranford has the experience, and has the ability to come off the bench hot
> and also be a team player.
>
> Joseph is just a nice guy with the ability to come off the bench hot and
> also be a team player.
>
> Put simply...Sather (and Bowman at the time) wanted team players...
> Potvin or Roy would likely have caused some needless internal rivalries
> with Brodeur, which you won't get with Ranford or Joseph.
Well, Glen Sather is known to be full of shit a lot of times when asked
things. He enjoys misleading the media I guess. But the reason I brought
up the situation was because of what he said. He said in fact that he did
not know why the goalies that are at camp were chosen. Scotty Bowman
really did the roster picking, but then he bailed. Sather has seemed to
have indicated that if he had known he was going to be coaching, then the
roster might have been considerably different.
Steve
Steven Sanyal
Vern Faulkner <Vern.F...@f44.n340.z1.fidonet.org> wrote in article
<8406...@f44.n340.z1.ftn>...
> GO> Brodeur is Canada's goaltender of the future and maybe
> GO> today, which was why he was invited.
>
> Today - sure. Future? I'd be inclined to look at Thibault somewhat, or
maybe
> Hirsch. Seriously. And by the time Brodeur has done his time, there will
be many
> more in the wings.
>
> GO> Ranford has the experience, and has the ability to come off the
bench hot
> GO> and also be a team player.
>
> Give Ranford a hunk of hardware to play for, and he becomes a man
posessed.
You're also forgetting guys like Chris Osgoode. He was impressive in his
first playoff. Don't count out Felix Potvin either. Potvin needs to
improve his consistency and he will realize his potential.
Regards
Steve
Gerald Olchowy
In article <vvsvetlov-210...@tcooper2.utmem.edu>, vvsv...@utmem1.utmem.edu (Vladimir Svetlov) writes:
|> I think that what you mean by team player is the ability to accept a
|> second string job, which ranford and joseph are both willing to do,
|> whereas I think that roy would not. Plus being a nice guy really
|> shouldn't be an attribute to select one player over another. I still think
|> that in short tournaments, where personalities don't have a long time to
|> clash, you would want to field the most talented players you could. For
|> forwards, you obviously wouldn't want a forward line consisting of
|> Marchmant/draper/Lemieux ( assuming they all made the team)
|> but in nets, you would want the player who was best apt at stopping the puck.
|>
The key to winning short tournaments is the ability to gel as a team
in a short time...something that Canada has learned rather well...as
our string of world junior championships attest to. Arguably, the
best junior team that we have put together in recent history, is
the last one that didn't win, because it didn't gel as a team.
If Sather could not be confident that Patrick was going to be happy and
ready on the bench when Brodeur starts ahead of him, there is no way
that Patrick is going to be chosen...with Ranford and Joseph, Sather
knew exactly what he was getting...no inter-goaltender games, and
no inter-Quebec goaltender rivalries between Brodeur, Roy, and Potvin.
|> > Put simply...Sather (and Bowman at the time) wanted team players...
|> > Potvin or Roy would likely have caused some needless internal rivalries
|> > with Brodeur, which you won't get with Ranford or Joseph.
|>
|> Seemingly implict in this argument is that brodeur should be given the
|> job outright, which I think is wrong. I'd bet even money that if they had
|> to try out for the job, that brodeur might have to take the job of back
|> up. Are you saying that ranford and joseph have no problem playing back
|> up to brodeur but they would playing behind roy ? Or are you saying that
|> ranford or joseph could beat out roy for the first spot ? But seeing as
|> roy has in the past shown his disinterest for this tournament its all
|> moot, but I do agree that based on performance, the fact that he was not
|> invited to try out after this years playoff preformance seems wrong. If
|> people don't like roy becuase they perceive him to have an inflated
|> perception of self worth, then these same people should shine the same
|> light on all of the other players on the team.
Patrick had a mediocre regular season, and an average playoff compared to
his normal standards. Potvin was having a mediocre season.
At the point the teams were chosen, Brodeur was by far the concensus choice
as the goaltender performing the best.
Ranford get his selection because he has a Canada Cup(&MVP), a World
Championship, and a Stanley Cup(&ConnSmythe) to his credit.
And Joseph for the reasons I mentioned previously.
Ranford and Joseph would have no problem playing behind Patrick or
Brodeur or anybody...that is part of the reason they were chosen.
Patrick wasn't chosen, because he wasn't having a great regular season,
he turned down the job last time, he has an attitude, and it couldn't
be guarenteed that he would be a happy backup...in a tournament where
team chemistry is going to be critical, you can't take that chance.
--
Gerald
Sandy Beeser
In article <4vhmaa$l...@bcarh8ab.bnr.ca>, golc...@nortel.ca (Gerald
Olchowy) wrote:
>
> The key to winning short tournaments is the ability to gel as a team
> in a short time...something that Canada has learned rather well...as
> our string of world junior championships attest to.
I mentioned that the guy playing nets is different from players that
have to shift with each other often. Generally I can't see any more of a
problem than the goaltenders competing amongst themselves. Of course
chemistry means something but for the guys between the pipes, they
generally are not considered leaders, and don't have linemates that may or
may not get pissed. NHL history is fraught with goalies that are a
little flaky, and having played the position for the vast majority of my
hockey experience, the trend is not restricted to the NHL.
> If Sather could not be confident that Patrick was going to be happy and
> ready on the bench when Brodeur starts ahead of him, there is no way
> that Patrick is going to be chosen.
Again I don't see how brodeur is given the job. I don't care how good
he is ( and make no mistakes I do think that he is good), if he can't beat
roy for the job thenm he simply does not deserve it. The fact that he may
be the future of canadian goaltending is meaningless in this situation.
The situation should be relatively simple, you start the best goalie, and
to this point brodeur has not proven that he is any better than roy.
>..with Ranford and Joseph, Sather
> knew exactly what he was getting...no inter-goaltender games, and
> no inter-Quebec goaltender rivalries between Brodeur, Roy, and Potvin.
Now this I really don't understand. I don't think that either roy or
brodeur are concerned with being the best goalie out of the province of
quebec. I think that they would want to be the best in the game period, a
title to which they both have the ability to lay claim to. To think that
they would compete more ferocioulsy because they are both french canadian
I think is silly. It may well be that roy and brodeur don't get along,
but to attribute this to some jealousy restricted to french canadians
seems juvinile. I think it more likely that both
would compete equally as hard against anyone, from any part of the
country, that would try to displace them from the starting position.
> Patrick had a mediocre regular season, and an average playoff compared to
> his normal standards.
Which is godlike, anyways I would hardly qualify his playoff performance
as average, he played extremely well against the wings, with his now
required big saves, and had a GAA of I beleive 1 in the finals, which
certainly ain't too shabby.
> Potvin was having a mediocre season.
You are certainly more generous on this than I would have been,
> At the point the teams were chosen, Brodeur was by far the concensus choice
> as the goaltender performing the best.
This I also have to disagree with. It's extremely hard to say that a
player whose team didn't make the playoffs can be considered the best
player at his position. If you look at the regular season, a case can
certainly be made for Puppa who helped his team to the playoffs and Carey,
who had his problems with
cheap goals in the playoffs. I know you can't fault brodeur for being on
a really horrible team, but with the devils not making the playoffs, we
didn't really see him in any "big" games except for the last few regular
season games when it wasn't clear if they would make the playoffs. Roy on
the other hand went from a young defensive team to a more experienced team
and made the lanche much better. I also don't think that consensus has
anything to do with it, it would likely be a consensus between sather and
bowman.
> Ranford get his selection because he has a Canada Cup(&MVP), a World
> Championship, and a Stanley Cup(&ConnSmythe) to his credit.
And roy, who has less international experience has more cups, and has
certainly shown to be capable at thwarting the more "talented" teams like
the wings ( except for ths shellacking at the forum).
> And Joseph for the reasons I mentioned previously.
>
> Ranford and Joseph would have no problem playing behind Patrick or
> Brodeur or anybody...that is part of the reason they were chosen.
I would never consider sub-serviance to be an asset of players on my team.
> Patrick wasn't chosen, because he wasn't having a great regular season,
> he turned down the job last time, he has an attitude, and it couldn't
> be guarenteed that he would be a happy backup...in a tournament where
> team chemistry is going to be critical, you can't take that chance.
Again, the last time he turned it down I thought it was for family
reasons, but others have posted that it was due to an injury. About the
attitude, if they were going to let lemieux play then the attitude
argument is a gonner. About the happy backup, I wouldn't want any player
on my team to accept a priori
that they would be second string. Plus look at the forwards, how many
players would sign up to play with the possibility that they are going to
get NO ice time ? The answer is that few would accept these terms.
Regards,
Sandy
> --
> Gerald
Richard Vanderwyst
Allan L. Chu (all...@futures.wharton.upenn.edu) wrote:
: Steven Sanyal (steven...@utoronto.ca) wrote:
: : I think Patrick Roy not being invited is very unfortunate. He deserves to
: : be there. Cujo, and Ranford are both great goalies, though I must say that
: : Cujo has not won anything yet. Brodeur had a good playoff when the Devils
: : won the Cup, but he was also on a very defensive minded team. Roy has
: : erased people's doubts that he is over the hill. He deserved a chance to
: : represent Canada this year.
: : Steve Sanyal
: I may be wrong, but I remember hearing some sportscaster saying that Roy
: did not want to play for Canada in the world cup tournament...
: Allan
: _________________________________________________________________________
: Allan Lawrence Chu al...@seas.upenn.edu
: Management and Technology, '99 all...@wharton.upenn.edu
: University of Pennsylvania http://homepage.seas.upenn.edu/~alchu
: _________________________________________________________________________
--
What I heard was that Patrick Roy was going to be too busy trying to sell
his home in Montreal and trying to get settled in at Colorado. That he
passed up the opp. to play at the World cup. (he didn't mean that he was
pissed and wouldn't play for Canada, he may have left Montreal but I
still believe he is still patriotic to his home country.)
Richard P. Vanderwyst
ap...@ccn.cs.dal.ca
*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*
| GO Flames GO|
*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*
Harvey Lee
: Steven Sanyal (steven...@utoronto.ca) wrote:
: : I think Patrick Roy not being invited is very unfortunate. He deserves to
: : be there. Cujo, and Ranford are both great goalies, though I must say that
: : Cujo has not won anything yet. Brodeur had a good playoff when the Devils
: : won the Cup, but he was also on a very defensive minded team. Roy has
: : erased people's doubts that he is over the hill. He deserved a chance to
: : represent Canada this year.
There is also a lingering theory that "big" goalies like Roy are not
suited well for international hockey. The preponderence of cross ice
passing means that you need a goalie who is really quick, not just a
space blocker. Maybe Roy's butterfly style makes him susceptible to
being caught on the ice. That was a theory that was discussed in '87,
when Fuhr got the start over Hextall.
Harvey
Gerald Olchowy
In article <abeeser-2208...@mdockter6.utmem.edu>, abe...@utmem1.utmem.edu (Sandy Beeser) writes:
|> I mentioned that the guy playing nets is different from players that
|> have to shift with each other often. Generally I can't see any more of a
|> problem than the goaltenders competing amongst themselves. Of course
|> chemistry means something but for the guys between the pipes, they
|> generally are not considered leaders, and don't have linemates that may or
|> may not get pissed. NHL history is fraught with goalies that are a
|> little flaky, and having played the position for the vast majority of my
|> hockey experience, the trend is not restricted to the NHL.
|>
Ranford, Joseph, and Brodeur are competing...but there is no danger of
any ill feeling with those three, as there would be if Brodeur were
competing with Roy or Potvin. And with Roy, if he didn't "win" the job,
he would likely take the whole team down with him.
|>
|> > If Sather could not be confident that Patrick was going to be happy and
|> > ready on the bench when Brodeur starts ahead of him, there is no way
|> > that Patrick is going to be chosen.
|>
|> Again I don't see how brodeur is given the job. I don't care how good
|> he is ( and make no mistakes I do think that he is good), if he can't beat
|> roy for the job thenm he simply does not deserve it. The fact that he may
|> be the future of canadian goaltending is meaningless in this situation.
|> The situation should be relatively simple, you start the best goalie, and
|> to this point brodeur has not proven that he is any better than roy.
|>
Brodeur has been the best Canadian goaltender in the NHL for the last
couple of years...there was no doubt that he would be one of the
goaltenders selected.
|> This I also have to disagree with. It's extremely hard to say that a
|> player whose team didn't make the playoffs can be considered the best
|> player at his position. If you look at the regular season, a case can
|> certainly be made for Puppa who helped his team to the playoffs and Carey,
|> who had his problems with
Did you watch any hockey last year...did you see how Brodeur played with
the pressure of having an anemic offense in front of him...did you look
at his stats?
Carey is an American...he can't play for Canada. When Puppa strings
season after good season together for a few years, he may regain he
reputation. He was absolutely horrid for a few seasons.
|> > Patrick wasn't chosen, because he wasn't having a great regular season,
|> > he turned down the job last time, he has an attitude, and it couldn't
|> > be guarenteed that he would be a happy backup...in a tournament where
|> > team chemistry is going to be critical, you can't take that chance.
|>
|> Again, the last time he turned it down I thought it was for family
|> reasons, but others have posted that it was due to an injury. About the
|> attitude, if they were going to let lemieux play then the attitude
|> argument is a gonner. About the happy backup, I wouldn't want any player
|> on my team to accept a priori
Roy was not injured in 1991. On this team, many star players are going
to be assigned roles, lesser roles than they are accustomed to on their
own team. The ability to accept a lesser role, to check your ego at the
door for the sake of the team, is an important qualification for
participation on these teams.
Claude Lemieux may be a despicable sportsman, but he is a very good team
player.
|> that they would be second string. Plus look at the forwards, how many
|> players would sign up to play with the possibility that they are going to
|> get NO ice time ? The answer is that few would accept these terms.
|>
Most of the forwards know that they are going to be assigned non-glamourous
roles, or less glamourous roles than they are accustomed to. It is how
Dale Hawerchuk beat out "better" players for a job in the last two Canada
Cups...
--
Gerald
Garry Holmen
Gerald Olchowy (golc...@nortel.ca) wrote:
:
: Ranford, Joseph, and Brodeur are competing...but there is no danger of
: any ill feeling with those three, as there would be if Brodeur were
: competing with Roy or Potvin. And with Roy, if he didn't "win" the job,
: he would likely take the whole team down with him.
There are two points to be made:
1) Roy has repeatedly said that he does not want to play in any
internaitional tournaments. If he doesn't want to be selected give
the job to someone who is willing to play their heart out for it.
Read Joseph's interview on ESPN when he's asked which he'ld rather win
the Stanley or World Cup... his is the correct attitude to have.
2) You also want a goalie who's going to play his damndest when you are
behind the eight ball. It's easy to be a winning goalie when you're
up by 2 or 3 goals... it's a different matter when you're behind by
3... you want your goaler to be playing as hard at that time as if he
was winning. All 3 goalies chosen have that attitude... Roy's is a
little suspect this year.
If you don't show up to win a job there is no way you can win it... that is
Roy's biggest problem for the World Cup. Let him sit home and watch it
on TV.
Garry