Another tremendous installment, Matt!

Couple of quick notes. Yes, Richard's OT goal against the Wings was as he
described it. A fluke play, and without the many different angles available via
current replays, it's virtually impossible to tell what happened.

But the bottom line is the Canadiens were a vastly superior team and only
lost the first 2 games because of the long layoff between their semifinal series
and the start of the final. They would've won G6 had it continued. I saw the
game on live TV and can safely say the Red Wings were completely bottled up
by the Habs the entire 62 minutes. Their 2 goals were scored on tip-ins of
long slapshots from the blue line. It was almost complete domination by
Montreal. Thus, they would've won with or without Richard's goal.

Very touching about Richard's reaction to Provost's premature death. Yes, he
was just 51. As several of your interviewees have noted, Claude was very
underrated, yet had many skills. Aside from his famous negation of Hull in the
'65 final, I recall a wonderful goal he scored on national TV around '68.
Playing shorthanded against the Rangers, he reached out with his stick and
intercepted a pass from Rod Gilbert at the red line. With the entire Rangers
squad
heading the other way, Provost had all day to skate in on the Rangers goalie
(presumably Giacomin). In a play that verged on a slow motion replay, he
faked the goalie one way and went the other, then backhanded the puck into a
wide-open net. The goal was replayed several times, and announcer Jim Gordon, a
Ranger fan, couldn't help but comment, "Mmm, I could watch that one all day."
Not bad for a "defensive specialist".

That is also too bad that Richard can't remember the '65 final, a classic in
its own way. But it was kind of similar to the '71 series, wherein Henri was
the undisputed hero.

Z. Peter Mitchell



************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]