As a lifelong fan of Brett, I'm surprised he cared that much by the benching. But then again, this is a guy who has been dissed all his life. Team Canada didn't wan't him, back in the 80s. He went to team USA, who embraced him, and became one of the leading scorers in team USA history, and led them in scoring to a '96 championship in the World cup. I lived in St. Louis the first 18 years of my life, and he is the reason I am a hockey fan. I've heard the same garbage about him all my life. My only thoughts on the World cup thing are:
1. The World Cup is kind of an elite tournament (more competitive than the NHL.) He's 40 years old. I was surprised he was chosen. But once he was, I was confident he could perform. I believe the first two losses were the result of the style of play (as dictated by coach Ron Wilson,) where USA sent two forecheckers deep, while everybody else in the tournament was playing some sort of trap. This was said by Wilson. Unfortunately, once Hull did not play, and team USA won using a different strategy, Wilson believed it was harder for him to tell the players who filled in that they would not play, than to tell Brett and Brian Rolston, among others, that they would not play.
2. Team USA really needed Brett Hull in the end. The great ability of Hull is to lull you into a false security on defense and then he gets an opening, and shoves it in the back of the net. Tkachuck had a great game when it mattered (for once in his career). But without Hull, they had no great shooter to put it away besides Guerin.
3. The media, especially Canadian, will overblow anything having to do with Brett. Canadians hate Hull, because he plays for team USA, and because he dares question those who run their sacred sport.
I hope the players association comes to their senses pretty soon, because I would really love to see Brett Hull play in a Coyotes uniform for a full two seasons.