From Canada's hero to Donald Trump's ally? Wayne Gretzky's silence still feels like a betrayal to his home country
Wayne Gretzky faced criticism for his silence during a period of political tension between the U.S. and Canada (Getty Images)
I
n Canadian sports history, few names carry the weight and reverence of Wayne Gretzky. For decades, he wasn't just the Great One on the ice—he was a living symbol of national pride.
But during a politically turbulent time in the mid-2020s, Gretzky's silence became louder than words—and for many Canadians, it hurt more than expected.
The man who once roared for Canada fell silent when it mattered most
In 2002, during the Salt Lake City Olympics, Gretzky passionately defended Team Canada from what he described as 'American propaganda,' rallying the nation behind its hockey heroes. 'It almost sickens my stomach to turn the TV on because I'm such a proud Canadian,' he said at the time.
— IrishStarUS (@IrishStarUS)
Fast forward to the Trump era, and that fire seemed to fade. While U.S. President
Donald Trump
repeatedly jabbed at Canada—proposing to make it the 51st state and imposing damaging tariffs—Gretzky, now a naturalized American citizen living in the U.S., offered no public support to his home country.
His absence from the debate didn't go unnoticed. A petition to rename Gretzky Drive in Edmonton gathered over 12,000 signatures, reflecting a sense of betrayal from fans who once saw him as the embodiment of Canadian spirit.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
New Retirement Village Coming To Judsonia - Take A Look At The Prices
QuestionHero
Learn More
Undo
When national pride meets uncomfortable truths
Gretzky's defenders, including hockey legend Bobby Orr, called the backlash 'fickle' and unfair. Orr insisted that Gretzky remained 'one of the greatest Canadians ever,' urging the public to respect his personal beliefs. Gretzky's wife, Janet, also responded on Instagram: 'He would do anything to make Canadians proud.'
But what stung wasn't just Gretzky's political leanings or where he lives—it was the silence during a moment when many felt their identity and national dignity were under attack.
Gretzky's image as a unifying figure was always a projection. Raised in Brantford, Ontario, and celebrated as Canada's hockey son, he built his life and family in the U.S. The illusion that he would always speak for Canada shattered during those politically charged years.
Also Read:
Wayne Gretzky creates controversy, blames Oilers' Stanley Cup collapse on unforgivable goalie decision
This throwback isn't about vilifying a legend. It's a reflection on how deeply national identity and sports heroes are intertwined—and how silence, in the wrong moment, can echo louder than any goal ever scored.
For real-time updates, scores, and highlights, follow our live coverage of the
India vs England Test match here
.
Game On Season 1 kicks off with Sakshi Malik's inspiring story. Watch Episode 1 here
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
40 minutes ago
- Mint
Major League Baseball Is Too Silent on Immigration Raids
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- Last week, at the height of the immigration protests convulsing Los Angeles, federal agents showed up at Dodger Stadium, seeking access to the parking lot. Up to that point, the Dodgers had refused to comment on the Trump administration's immigration sweeps and their effect on the city's Latino community. The silence stoked complaints that the team had turned its back on some of its most passionate devotees. By some accounts, Latinos comprise over 40% of Dodger fans. But the morning agents came, the Dodgers finally acted. The team denied them access to the parking lot and a day later announced a $1 million pledge to help immigrant families harmed by the ongoing raids. That's a modest show of support for an organization worth an estimated $7.7 billion, and it hasn't satisfied everyone. But satisfactory or not, it's a clear indication of whose side the Dodgers are taking. Major League Baseball and its 29 other clubs, on the other hand, aren't following the Dodgers' lead, preferring silence. If this is their way of not drawing the ire of President Donald Trump, it's an awkward strategy. Immigration has been essential to baseball's history and continues to fuel its growth. In America's early years, baseball was a new sport for a new country. For immigrants, making a mark on an organized team was an indicator that the player — along with his ethnic group — was upwardly mobile and, finally, an assimilated American. Superstar shortstop and national sensation Honus Wanger, a son of German immigrant parents, was a prime example of this during the late 19th and early 20th century. He uplifted the German-American status, and in his community, he was an icon for making it big. Three-quarters of a century later, Fernando Valenzuela, a Mexican pitcher for the Dodgers, repeated the feat. In 1981, he electrified Los Angeles and his community with a dominant season, including seven complete games and five shutouts, which netted him Rookie of the Year and Cy Young honors (still the only player to win both in the same season).'Fernandomania,' as his early to mid-80s heyday is recalled, was a cultural phenomenon that diversified and drove attendance upward. In 1981, the Dodgers drew an average of 7,500 additional fans when he pitched at home, and an extra 19,000 when he started on the road. Mexican-Americans were an estimated 10% of the team's supporters when he joined the team; now the Dodgers — affectionately known across LA as Los Doyers — are a unifying institution for the city's Latinos. More fans, inevitably, means more kids playing baseball, both at home and abroad. Though there are a range of factors responsible for the growth of baseball internationally, the increase in Latin American and other international players has certainly contributed to the expansion and development of deep international talent pipelines. For MLB teams, bringing that talent to US shores is only constrained by their ability to scout. During the 1930s, a period of notoriously tight immigration restrictions and mass deportations, less than 1% of MLB players were foreign-born. Thankfully, in the post-war period, America decided to open its borders. The result? The number of foreign-born players in the league has seen steady growth over the decades. In 2025, nearly 28% of MLB players are foreign-born, and it's simply impossible to imagine baseball without stars such as Shohei Ohtani and Juan Soto. Those international stars, in turn, are leading a surge of interest in the game and the business of baseball. MLB is on track for its third straight year of attendance growth, and viewership in the US and Japan is surging in 2025. Of course, other factors are in play too, but does anyone seriously think a less international game would be as well-played, entertaining, and lucrative? Trump's immigration policies put that success at risk. For example, under the terms of his recently enacted travel ban, the issuance of new visas to Cuban and Venezuelan nationals is severely restricted. Dozens of players from both countries — Hall of Famers like Tony Pérez and current players like Jose Altuve — have made prominent contributions to MLB for decades. The new policies will make it far more difficult for teams to bring new signees from either country to the US. But even if loopholes are found, the message to players and their families in these baseball hotbeds is hardly welcoming. So far, MLB has chosen to remain silent on these changes, just as it has clammed up over the deportations that are running through its Latino fanbase. Perhaps the league and its teams believe that quiet diplomacy is the best way to approach the Trump administration on immigration-related matters. But if so, there's little public indication that doing so has achieved anything other than damaging relations between the Dodgers and their fans. Meanwhile, other sports are acting. In mid-June, the players associations for the Women's National Basketball Association and the National Women's Soccer League issued a joint statement of support for immigrants experiencing hardship due to the raids. Angel City FC of the NWSL took it a step further and distributed 10,000 T-shirts to fans and players emblazoned with 'Immigrant City Football Club' on the front. Proceeds from sales of the shirts go to an organization offering legal assistance to immigrants. Of course, no team or sport will convince Trump to change his course on immigration. But by showing solidarity with their fanbases, players and teams strengthen the community connections that are critical to growing sports, and the commerce around them. That's a legacy that can outlast any executive order. It's time for Major League Baseball to step up to the plate. More From Bloomberg Opinion: This column reflects the personal views of the author and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners. Adam Minter is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering the business of sports. He is the author, most recently, of 'Secondhand: Travels in the New Global Garage Sale.' More stories like this are available on
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
BSF ADG Mahesh Kumar Aggarwal reviews security at India-Bangladesh border in Tripura
Guwahati: BSF's Additional Director General (ADG), Eastern Command, Kolkata, Mahesh Kumar Aggarwal , visited bordering areas and Border Outposts (BOPs) along the India-Bangladesh border with Tripura. A BSF spokesman said that during his four-day visit (June 24-27), Aggarwal, a senior IPS officer, interacted with field commanders and jawans to assess the situation along the India-Bangladesh border. He said that the BSF ADG, along with Inspector General (IG), BSF Tripura frontier Ashwani Kumar Sharma, visited the BOPs falling under the districts of West Tripura, Sepahijala, South Tripura, Gomati and Dhalai. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Florida: These Companies Are Overcharging You for Auto Insurance Experts In Savings Learn More Undo The ADG, during his visit to the borders, took stock of the security scenario and reviewed operational readiness and vigilance on the frontiers. Aggarwal held meetings with Tripura Governor Indrasena Reddy Nallu, Chief Minister Manik Saha, Chief Secretary J K Sinha and Director General of Police Anurag and discussed various operational and administrative issues for effective border management in the state of Tripura. Live Events The BSF ADG on Friday addressed a Sainik Sammelan at BSF's Tripura frontier headquarters at Salbagan. Tripura Chief Minister Saha reiterated that the state government would not allow illegal immigrants from Bangladesh or Myanmar to enter Indian territory under any circumstances. Tripura has an 856 km border with Bangladesh.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
What's next for birthright citizenship as US Supreme Court's ruling expand Trump's power
The legal battle over President Donald Trump's move to end birthright citizenship is far from over despite the Republican administration's major victory Friday limiting nationwide injunctions. Donald Trump's executive order, signed in January, seeks to deny citizenship to children who are born to people who are living in the U.S. illegally or temporarily. (AFP) Immigrant advocates are vowing to fight to ensure birthright citizenship remains the law as the Republican president tries to do away with more than a century of precedent. The high court's ruling sends cases challenging the president's birthright citizenship executive order back to the lower courts. But the ultimate fate of the president's policy remains uncertain. Here's what to know about birthright citizenship, the Supreme Court's ruling and what happens next. What does birthright citizenship mean? Birthright citizenship makes anyone born in the United States an American citizen, including children born to mothers in the country illegally. The practice goes back to soon after the Civil War, when Congress ratified the Constitution's 14th Amendment, in part to ensure that Black people, including former slaves, had citizenship. 'All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States,' the amendment states. Thirty years later, Wong Kim Ark, a man born in the U.S. to Chinese parents, was refused re-entry into the U.S. after traveling overseas. His suit led to the Supreme Court explicitly ruling that the amendment gives citizenship to anyone born in the U.S., no matter their parents' legal status. It has been seen since then as an intrinsic part of U.S. law, with only a handful of exceptions, such as for children born in the U.S. to foreign diplomats. Trump has long said he wants to do away with birthright citizenship Trump's executive order, signed in January, seeks to deny citizenship to children who are born to people who are living in the U.S. illegally or temporarily. It's part of the hardline immigration agenda of the president, who has called birthright citizenship a 'magnet for illegal immigration.' Trump and his supporters focus on one phrase in the amendment — 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' – saying it means the U.S. can deny citizenship to babies born to women in the country illegally. A series of federal judges have said that's not true, and issued nationwide injunctions stopping his order from taking effect. 'I've been on the bench for over four decades. I can't remember another case where the question presented was as clear as this one is. This is a blatantly unconstitutional order,' U.S. District Judge John Coughenour said at a hearing earlier this year in his Seattle courtroom. In Greenbelt, Maryland, a Washington suburb, U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman wrote that 'the Supreme Court has resoundingly rejected and no court in the country has ever endorsed' Trump's interpretation of birthright citizenship. Is Trump's order constitutional? The justices didn't say The high court's ruling was a major victory for the Trump administration in that it limited an individual judge's authority in granting nationwide injunctions. The administration hailed the ruling as a monumental check on the powers of individual district court judges, whom Trump supporters have argued want to usurp the president's authority with rulings blocking his priorities around immigration and other matters. But the Supreme Court did not address the merits of Trump's bid to enforce his birthright citizenship executive order. 'The Trump administration made a strategic decision, which I think quite clearly paid off, that they were going to challenge not the judges' decisions on the merits, but on the scope of relief,' said Jessica Levinson, a Loyola Law School professor. Attorney General Pam Bondi told reporters at the White House that the administration is 'very confident' that the high court will ultimately side with the administration on the merits of the case. Questions and uncertainty swirl around next steps The justices kicked the cases challenging the birthright citizenship policy back down to the lower courts, where judges will have to decide how to tailor their orders to comply with the new ruling. The executive order remains blocked for at least 30 days, giving lower courts and the parties time to sort out the next steps. The Supreme Court's ruling leaves open the possibility that groups challenging the policy could still get nationwide relief through class-action lawsuits and seek certification as a nationwide class. Within hours after the ruling, two class-action suits had been filed in Maryland and New Hampshire seeking to block Trump's order. But obtaining nationwide relief through a class action is difficult as courts have put up hurdles to doing so over the years, said Suzette Malveaux, a Washington and Lee University law school professor. 'It's not the case that a class action is a sort of easy, breezy way of getting around this problem of not having nationwide relief,' said Malveaux, who had urged the high court not to eliminate the nationwide injunctions. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who penned the court's dissenting opinion, urged the lower courts to 'act swiftly on such requests for relief and to adjudicate the cases as quickly as they can so as to enable this Court's prompt review" in cases 'challenging policies as blatantly unlawful and harmful as the Citizenship Order.' Opponents of Trump's order warned there would be a patchwork of polices across the states, leading to chaos and confusion without nationwide relief. 'Birthright citizenship has been settled constitutional law for more than a century," said Krish O'Mara Vignarajah, president and CEO of Global Refuge, a nonprofit that supports refugees and migrants. 'By denying lower courts the ability to enforce that right uniformly, the Court has invited chaos, inequality, and fear.'
