Talk:1976 Philadelphia Flyers–Red Army game

Philadelphia Low‑importance

	Philadelphia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philadelphia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Philadelphia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhiladelphiaWikipedia:WikiProject PhiladelphiaTemplate:WikiProject PhiladelphiaPhiladelphia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ice Hockey

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ice Hockey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of ice hockey on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ice HockeyWikipedia:WikiProject Ice HockeyTemplate:WikiProject Ice HockeyIce Hockey articles

Associated task forces:
/
	This article is supported by Philadelphia Flyers task force.

Russia: Sports & games Low‑importance

	Russia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the sports and games in Russia task force.

"Russian" vs "Soviet"

One unfortunate recent trend is for Russians to try to take credit for things that were done under the soviet union. we hear such nonsense as the "russians" sending the first human into space and so forth. True, Russia was the largest republic in the soviet union, but CSKA moscow didn't play under a "Russian" flag. It was a SOVIET RED ARMY team which could theoretically draw from ALL of the soviet republics (even if in practice in this particular case most of the players happened to be russian). To refer to the team as a "Russian" team negates the contributions of people from other republics and feeds into the worst tendencies of Putinism. I have duly replaced the incorrect references to the "Russian" team with the much more correct "Soviet" team. Anybody who complains that "soviet" and "russian" are in effect interchangable is simply ignorant - it was a wrong colloquialism during the cold war, and it's wrong now - at least, it's factually wrong and should not be used in an online encyclopedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.7.16.244 (talk) 19:38, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality tag

A neutrality tag has been placed without specifying what is POV about the article. I'll remove the tag if complaints cannot be made specific. A problem with the article is that there are no inline citations, but that's not the same as POV. BashBrannigan (talk) 02:51, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I dont know who placed the POV tag, but i agree with it at this point and dont think it should be removed. My observation is the way the prose is written 'delay of game tactic' was it a tactic? The text seems written from the point of view of the americans and does not repreasent nuetrality. thats just a small insight i saw which probably could be re written. I do not know what the original poster felt about the article. But i imagine its just prose. Personally id be inclined to say it could be merged into the main series article. But that is just an outside thought of mine. These games make great holiday watching though. happy editingOttawa4ever (talk) 16:20, 25 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So is there still any reason for this POV tag? The "game tactic" issue is adequately addressed below. Also the American POV "bias" is also adequately addressed below. Most if not all references are from American sources, so that is all one can draw on. As to merging, the Philadelphia Flyer (Wiki) Task Force has cited this article, so that would indicate it stands on its own. If there are no more objections, I plan on getting rid of the POV cite. User:10stone5|10stone5]] (talk) 17:52, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You guy are unbelievable... Of course this article is not neutral at all since it represents the American/Canadian point of view. There is a video on youtube of those "clean hits". Watch it and see for yourselves. I don't know if it is the same clip as the one in the references. How many clean hits do you see? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGOxVBG4bfk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.208.212.34 (talk) 02:23, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the person above doesn't watch much hockey, yes they were clean checks, some border line. As far as the 'delay of game tactic'; it probably was a tactic as the Flyer coach at the time, Fred Shero, studied the Soviet style and had visited the Soviet Union several times. He mentioned after the game that he has seen the Soviets use that tactic before and was sure they would return to the ice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.214.1.54 (talk) 12:18, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Ed Van Impe hit on Kharlamov was in no way a "clean hit". It was charging, cross-checking and an attempt to injure. Van Impe admitted as much in a recent documentary. Even in the 70's that should have been a major penalty. A hit like that had no place in the game, let alone in what was ostensibly an exhibition match. That was why the Soviets skated off: Loktev was understandably concerned for his players' safety given what was a clear cheap shot in full view of the officials. The way the article reads now pays little heed to the rules of hockey and what actually took place on the ice. Trac63 (talk) 21:19, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And that is your POV. The article's POV on the hit is neutral. While the Super Series games were exhibition games, they were much more important than that. The NHL's best versus the Soviet's best during the Cold War. The Soviets didn't have to agree to play the Flyers if they didn't want to. What the hell were they expecting? They could have hit back, you know. Van Impe's quote: "He had his head down and when he looked up to see where the puck was I hit him. I hit him on the side of the head with my shoulder. It was perfectly legal. There was no reason why he should have stayed down. It was an act." --Izzygood (talk) 04:52, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's not POV when Ed Van Impe admitted afterward that he skated down the ice and cross-checked Kharlamov on the back of the head. And the NHL rules on charging and cross-checking were and are pretty clear. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trac63 (talk • contribs) 17:37, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree about the hit on Kharlamov. I was there. I paid good money (at the time) to watch the Soviet team play "hockey." I was excited however my excitement was short lived. After Van Impe's hit and once the Soviets came back on the ice, they didn't play hockey. Every time a Soviet player received a pass, he immediately got rid of it so he wouldn't get drilled by a Flyer. I didn't blame them but I was disappointed in not being allowed to watch them skate and pass in the manner which they were known. There is a reason why the Flyers outshot them 49 -13 in that game and it was due solely to the Soviets just waiting for the third period to end so they could get out of there. I know hitting, checking and physical play was and is the hallmark of North American hockey, but the physical abuse put on the Soviets by the Flyers players and the vitriol expressed by the fans that day was inexcusable. The only time I was embarrassed for being a Flyers fan. Pg12359 (talk) 02:29, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So the Flyers were supposed to just sit back and watch the Soviets score pretty goals? That wasn't (and has never been) their style. Are you sure you are a Flyers fan? --Izzygood (talk) 04:52, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No way your a Flyers fan or heck even a Philadelphia sports fan if you were you'd know this is the greatest moment in Flyers history outside of the game 7 comeback vs Boston. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.198.248.44 (talk) 01:16, 30 January 2011 (UTC) One "tactic" used by the Flyers before the game to rally the fans and/or intimidate their opponents was to take to the ice after the Red Army team and, instead of the usual warmup drill, they skated around the arena in lockstep, doing a version of the "Houston Stride" from the movie "Rollerball". I believe a clip of this may have been shown on ABC's Wide World of Sports.137.200.0.112 (talk) 20:24, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to "1976 Philadelphia Flyers–CSKA Moscow game"

Does anyone oppose renaming this article to 1976 Philadelphia Flyers–CSKA Moscow game? The term "Red Army" in cold war era ice hockey is not entirely unambiguous. In addition to HC CSKA Moscow, it could just as well refer to the Soviet Union national ice hockey team and – even more confusingly – to the other Red Army team, SKA Leningrad, who at the time played alongside CSKA Moscow in the Soviet Championship League. The letters SKA in both club's name stand for "Sports Club of the Army", CSKA being the "Central Sports Club of the Army". This was after all not a national but club level game. --hydrox (talk) 23:03, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Who is Koloskov? And why is he referenced without introduction?

Playing The Trap

The article says: "Flyer head coach Fred Shero decided to stand up the Red Army attack at the Flyers defensive blue line rather than just back off the line, which caught the Red Army off guard since no other NHL team had tried this tactic.[citation needed]"

Shero used what is called "a trap" it is commonly called a neutral zone trap, and was used later by the Devils very effectively and famously in the 90s. The description in the article is weird, just say they used a neutral zone trap.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutral_zone_trap

Here's an article saying they used the trap.

https://lancasteronline.com/sports/%20nhl/forty-years-ago-today-flyers-earned-epic-victory-over-vaunted-soviets/article_947ebf74-b8d7-11e5-bde6-032c2fe59a66.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.63.157.32 (talk) 16:10, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]