Thursday, February 19, 1998
Disgraceful men, graceful women should face off in grudge
match
COLUMN: Battle of the century might be more balanced than you
think
It has been pretty insane around the sports department for the
last few hours, because we’ve all been working the phones like mad.
Don King, Vince McMahon, even those ASUCLA employees who put on
movies all the time, any and all promoters have been our targets
because I have hit upon a pay-per-view gold mine.
In light of recent ice-bound events in Nagano, I suddenly
reached a position of perfect clarity as this idea was
revealed.
I am absolutely certain that this possible matchup would
galvanize the nation and relegate the Bobby Riggs/Billie Jean King
"Battle of the Sexes" to has-been status.
I can see it in lights hung over a custom-made rink at the
Mirage …
"The Golden Ladies of the Puck" vs. "The Goats of Nagano," as
the men’s and women’s U.S. hockey teams get set to play each
other.
Now, everyone probably reflexively thinks that such a matchup
would be a blowout, that it would take the idea of gender-bashing
to a level that Thelma and Louise could never have possibly
considered.
The default feeling is probably that one team would capitalize
on its recent hype and turn the opposition into the laughingstock
of its sex.
But that really wouldn’t be the case. I don’t think that the
game would be a blowout at all, even though one of the teams would
certainly be a prohibitive underdog.
Seriously, I really think the men could give their female
counterparts a run for their money, even though all results and
even common sense would point to the contrary.
I know that the hockey counterpart to international basketball’s
Dream Team was supposed to at least make a run for the gold at
Nagano. And I know that our collective confidence in our team is
damaged since they didn’t just come up short of the gold, but they
tripped on their proverbial skate laces on the way to the medal
stand and fell flat on their faces, out of the medals.
So, it may look grim for our gap-toothed squad, but let’s try
and remember the good things.
Who can forget that heartstopping victory over Belarus
(population 19) in the round robin competition?
How will anyone ever lose that indelible image of our sturdy
front line of John LeClair and Brett Hull trying really, really
hard to score goals?
On the flip side, what did the women really accomplish anyway?
(Before we discuss this, let’s agree not to consider the fact that
they won the first women’s hockey gold medal, beating Team Canada
twice in the process.)
Sure, they’ve become the media darlings of the games, shown that
women’s hockey is really fun and exciting to watch and lived up to
every expectation that a nation could put on them.
But, hey, what have you done for me lately?
The men would come into the game with something to prove, and
the women would be overconfident, cocky, and ill-prepared. In
essence, each team would be acting just like the other did when the
games began, thus each would suffer a similar fate.
There is only one thing that we would have to be very careful of
– that would be keeping the trash-talking to a minimum, because
some of the men’s feelings might get hurt.
I only have the best interests of the testosterone-based life
forms in mind, because the estrogen variety showed that absolutely
nothing is sacred or off-limits to their witticisms when an
unidentified U.S. player insulted a Canadian player’s deceased
father during the two teams’ initial meeting.
Could you imagine Chris Chelios captaining the American men into
this game and losing his cool when Cammi Granato insulted his poor
dental work, then whupped him upside the head with her stick?
Hey, I would pay to see that happen.
Mark Shapiro is a Daily Bruin Staff Writer and columnist. E-mail
responses to [email protected]