What is more impressive, Canada's dominance in hockey or Brazil's in soccer?
View Single Post
05-23-2012, 10:42 AM
Join Date: Feb 2008
Originally Posted by
Itís NOT best on best though. Best on best means having your best players compete against another countryís best players
. The Olympics is best on best. The World Championships is not.
Not every countryís players come out in full force in anticipation of the WHC. Many players would prefer to rest, vacation, or heal in the off-season rather than play in what they see as an inferior tournament.
The Olympics on the other hand, is something that players look forward to and definitely get up for. I havenít heard too many instances of a player declining an Olympic roster invitation for any reason less than a serious injury or a family emergency.
Number one: No. Best on best means the nations best available team. If players in one country says no for no apparent reason, that's just bad culture in that country and the federations should step up and fix it.
Number two: Again, it's still a best on best. One or two teams bad culture of nations players saying no. It shouldn't punish the other nations and downgrading the importance for the majority. And again it's up to that nations federation to do something about it.
And by your arguments, a nation can have 7 players out for the Olympics and say, it's not best on best, because our guys are injured.
Best on Best = Best players available for the team! If people who are good enough say no, OK, that nations federation or organization has to do something about that culture! That's that nations problem. Not the other 15+ problem.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by SirKillalot