I was surprised that one of Canada's national TV news organizations had to ask an American journalist to rate the success of the 2010 Vancouver Olympics - as if nobody in Canada is qualified to express a proper opinion.
Well, we can all relax.
Overall, if this one USA Today reporter is any indication, the Americans think we did a not-bad job of it. Probably not as good as the Salt Lake City Olympics, or the Lake Placid Olympics, but not bad, considering we're not Americans.
Whew, that's a relief.
Are we still so insecure, despite all our gold medal performances, that we need to get approval from the U.S. to take pride in our Olympics?
I hope not.
But had they asked the British Prime Minister, or Norwegian ski team coach, or the South Korean Foreign Minister to "rate our games", people would have been rightfully outraged: What do they know? Who do they think they are, commenting on us?
It seems, though, that we're quite content to let Americans comment and critique what we do, as if they obviously know more about our events than we do.
Of course the U.S. reporter had to point out that the tragic death of Georgian luger Nodar Kumaritashvili, the malfunction of the Olympic cauldron, and other negatives will likely be what people - especially Americans - remember about these Games. Just like Americans remember the bombing as the only thing about the Atlanta Summer Games.
Oh yes, that still stings. The 1996 Atlanta Olympics, hyped ahead of time as being the pinnacle of Olympic achievement, plagued by bad transit, bad organization, over-commercialization, poor athlete accommodations, and a host of other problems long before the "bombing", were the first the IOC president didn't refer to as "the best Olympics ever."
Oh, such a snub - how could they ever live it down?
But all in all, she said, the Vancouver games were OK, and Canada gets an affectionate if condescending pat on the back for a "good job" from big brother to the south – especially since the U.S. came out on top.
Huh?
Didn't Canada win more gold medals than the U.S. - more than any other country has ever won at a winter Olympics?
Oh, but wait - it's the total medal count that really determines the standings, and the U.S. is way out in front there, the USA Today staffer said.
Sorry, that's not how it works.
It's only the peculiarly North American Olympics (i.e. the U.S.) that insist on ranking performance by total medals, not by number of gold medals. (If you want a real thrill, look up the medal standings on the BBC Sport website - there's Canada atop the list at Number One.)
Can you think of any other sport which counts "second place" as worthy of mention? It would be like counting Stanley Cup defeats as being just as important as wins. In most sports "winning second place" is just a nice way of saying "lost."
But back in the old Cold War days, when the U.S. had to beat the Russians in everything to prove that "the American Way" was better than "Communism", counting all their medals was the only way the U.S. could top the standings at Olympics where the Russians actually won events.
Now I'm not trying to devalue the achievement of athletes who are second- and third-best in the world at their sports, and I think Canada should be justifiably proud of all our Olympic athletes, no matter where they placed. The Olympic medal system is set up to give recognition to those people who are at the top, if not the ultimate "winners" of events. (After all, being 10th best or even 20th best in the world - being selected to go to the Olympics - is a remarkable achievement.)
But in standings, this time Canada has bragging rights - even above the U.S. We won more gold medals than any other country, and if you put any importance on such things, that's a big deal.
And we also beat them in hockey, too - to some the only Winter Olympic event that really matters. Or would the U.S. like to consider their silver medal just as good as Canadian Gold?