**
The longstanding rivalry between Canada and Sweden in the world of curling has flared up once again, this time centring around a contentious accusation made during the recent Winter Olympics in Cortina d’Ampezzo. Following a viral incident involving Canadian curler Marc Kennedy, Swedish player Oskar Eriksson has reignited the debate over double-touching a stone, leading to widespread discussion and commentary within the curling community.
The Origins of the Controversy
The drama unfolded on February 13, 2026, during the men’s curling round robin, where Canada’s Brad Jacobs went head-to-head with Sweden’s Niklas Edin. During this match, Eriksson, who serves as the vice-skip for Edin’s team, accused Kennedy of double-touching the curling stone after release. This infraction, which occurs when a player inadvertently makes contact with a stone after letting it go, can significantly alter its trajectory.
Tensions escalated when Kennedy was caught on the live feed vocally disputing Eriksson’s claim, using expletives in his defence. This fiery exchange quickly spread across social media, with clips from the match generating numerous memes and humorous commentary. Following the match, Kennedy expressed his respect for Eriksson but firmly denied any wrongdoing. “I’ve been on tour for 25 years. I would never accuse you of cheating,” he stated.
Understanding Double-Touching Rules
In curling, players must release the stone before crossing the nearest hog line, which marks the boundaries for play. If a player touches the stone before it crosses the hog line, it must be removed from play; however, if the touch occurs after the stone has passed this line, it falls under different regulations. According to the World Curling Federation, a double touch before the hog line is not considered a violation, and during the match, umpires found no evidence of foul play.
Despite the absence of any formal infractions noted by officials, the incident has cast a long shadow over the sport, with implications for the reputations of the players involved. Jacobs’ team ultimately emerged victorious in the match, winning 8-6, while Sweden ended the tournament in a disappointing last-place tie with a record of 2-7.
The Resurgence of the Feud
Fast forward to March 27, 2026, when Sveriges Television, Sweden’s national broadcaster, aired a segment featuring Eriksson revisiting the incident. In a demonstration, he argued that Kennedy’s actions could have altered the rock’s path significantly, claiming potential violations occurred during the match. “Evil unfortunately wins sometimes,” Eriksson remarked, expressing his frustration with the perceived lack of sportsmanship from the Canadian team.
This renewed scrutiny has only intensified the rivalry, prompting further reactions from Canadian curlers. Jacobs, visibly irritated by the resurfacing of the controversy, labelled Eriksson’s video as “ridiculous.” He expressed disbelief that the incident was still being discussed so long after the Olympics. Team Canada lead Ben Hebert chimed in with a pointed remark, suggesting Eriksson was unable to move on from the disappointment of his team’s performance.
The Current State of Competition
Since the Olympic round robin, Team Jacobs and Team Edin have not faced each other in competition. Jacobs’ team missed out on qualifying for the World Men’s Curling Championship after losing in the semi-finals of the 2026 Brier to Team Matt Dunstone, who ultimately claimed the title. In contrast, Team Edin went on to secure the world championship, defeating Canadian rivals with a score of 9-6.
As the curling community watches this saga unfold, questions remain about the impact of such incidents on player relationships and the integrity of the sport.
Why it Matters
The ongoing feud between Canada and Sweden highlights the delicate balance of sportsmanship and competition in curling. As a sport steeped in tradition and camaraderie, such controversies can tarnish reputations and alter public perceptions. The implications of this dispute extend beyond the ice, questioning the integrity of players and the governing bodies that oversee the sport. As both teams prepare for future competitions, the echoes of this incident will linger, serving as a reminder of the passion and rivalries that define the world of curling.