HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > International Tournaments
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
International Tournaments Discuss international tournaments such as the World Juniors, Olympic hockey, and Ice Hockey World Championships, as they take place; or discuss past tournaments.

World Junior Hockey should be added to the Olympics

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-24-2009, 10:04 PM
  #101
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,638
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jussi View Post
Isn't that what the WJC is also? Considering the cyclical nature of junior development outside North America?
Everyones level is cyclical, both at the junior and senior level, in NA and Europe.

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-24-2009, 10:05 PM
  #102
bigtimehockeyfan
 
bigtimehockeyfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,032
vCash: 500
Yes, if Bettman decides to not let NHL'ers play anymore.

bigtimehockeyfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-24-2009, 10:06 PM
  #103
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,638
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caesium View Post
How can anyone think that a freaking age limited event should occur only every four years? That's absolutely stupid. Younger players typically don't play in the tournament unless they are exceptionally skilled players, so you're basically screwing most players who would normally get a chance to play in the tournament if they were, say, 16 or 17 when the event occurred. They would be too old for the next one but forced out because the teams rely on 18 and 19 year olds.
If the NHL stops participating the better players will be screwed anyway once they make the NHL.

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2009, 04:20 AM
  #104
Ribban
Registered User
 
Ribban's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: USA
Country: Sweden
Posts: 1,512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
One of the major flaws of the IIHF is that its congress structure is fundamentally undemocratic. When you use the one country one vote system instead of one player one vote, you end up with extremely disproportionate representation. Hockey players in countries like Australia and North Korea are way over represented and those in North America are vastly under represented.
Unfortunately, a fragile organization like the IIHF can't afford "democracy" in the sense you describe it.

I agree that Canada has tradiotionally had less proportional influence than small countries like Sweden for example, but I don't think that is the case anymore. The IIHF is kissing Canada's knee caps these days.

...and as I said, history hasn't left people with a solid sense that Canada would put itself second on behalf of developing Hockey in Romania or Algeria, so the "undemocratic" system you describe will likely go on, as people outside Canada don't think of Esposito, Bobby Clarke, Eagelson and the Canada Cup as symbols of fair play and good examples of what will grow the sport worldwide. However, Canadians will defend their own and the past until they drop (murder would be justified), which pretty much sends the message that nothing has changed in Canada and only more of the same is to be expected in the future.

Whether this is accurate or not is irrelevant. I'm only describing an image problem, which will compromise Canada's influence on the IIHF global movement.

Ribban is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2009, 04:22 AM
  #105
Ribban
Registered User
 
Ribban's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: USA
Country: Sweden
Posts: 1,512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turboflex View Post
barf

cmon dude you can do better, there is no canada conspiracy theory.

second, the olympic games are not sacred, and not legendary. do you actually believe that crap?
Why aren't you answering the actual question?

Ribban is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2009, 04:39 AM
  #106
Sanderson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Posts: 4,783
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
The reason why most Canadians would want juniors instead of minor league players is that we want the tournament to mean something in terms of measuring a countries hockey ability. Obviously the best measure is to have all the best players available to play, but if that's not possible at least the U20 format allows for the best players in that age group to attend. Having a tournament with vastly varing levels of each countries player depth tells you next to nothing about where each country is at. Unless all you are worried about is winning and one format gives you a better chance, I can't see any reason for prefering an OG with minor league players.
The question is, why should Europeans accept that, just because Canada and the US, through the NHL, decide not to send their best players?

How is it Europe's fault, that someone else doesn't want to participate?
No one forces the NHL not to participate. It's their own choice. You don't see the best European soccer leagues deciding that playing the World Cup in their summer break is bad for the players, hence turning it into a junior tournament for everyone would be a good idea, as they can need the experience. The rest of the World would rightfully say, screw you, we send whoever we like to send, it's not your decision how this tournament is played.

The Olympics exist to determine the best, if someone doesn't want to send the best, tough luck. Doesn't mean everyone else has to weaken himself just to accomodate the one or two nations which don't bother.

There is not a single good reason why the Olympics should be turned into a junior tournament.

Sanderson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2009, 06:06 AM
  #107
mattihp
Registered User
 
mattihp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Årsta
Country: Finland
Posts: 14,847
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macman View Post
Nowhere near as farcical as having pros from Europe playing kids from North America. That's what you'll have once again without NHL involvement.
Worse hockey players = more farcical.

Pros are in general better than junior players and it is up to the North American countries if they want to send their best outside of the NHL or kids.

mattihp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2009, 06:12 AM
  #108
jekoh
Registered User
 
jekoh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,837
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macman View Post
You make it sound like the banning of pros by the IOC has never happened before.
The IOC used to ban pros because they wanted to ban pros, not because a couple of them could not attend.


Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
Its quite simple, in soccer, the World Cup is the most important international stage in soccer, in hockey, its the olympics.
Not just in ice hockey but in pretty much every team sports played at the Olympics.

jekoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2009, 06:56 AM
  #109
Jussi
Dat Times Square
 
Jussi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Finland
Posts: 44,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
Everyones level is cyclical, both at the junior and senior level, in NA and Europe.
But in North America, especially Canada, the effects aren't as visible due to the large pool of players. When you have fewer players to pick from, a bad age group shows.

Jussi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2009, 07:41 AM
  #110
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,638
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ribban View Post
Unfortunately, a fragile organization like the IIHF can't afford "democracy" in the sense you describe it.

I agree that Canada has tradiotionally had less proportional influence than small countries like Sweden for example, but I don't think that is the case anymore. The IIHF is kissing Canada's knee caps these days.

...and as I said, history hasn't left people with a solid sense that Canada would put itself second on behalf of developing Hockey in Romania or Algeria, so the "undemocratic" system you describe will likely go on, as people outside Canada don't think of Esposito, Bobby Clarke, Eagelson and the Canada Cup as symbols of fair play and good examples of what will grow the sport worldwide. However, Canadians will defend their own and the past until they drop (murder would be justified), which pretty much sends the message that nothing has changed in Canada and only more of the same is to be expected in the future.

Whether this is accurate or not is irrelevant. I'm only describing an image problem, which will compromise Canada's influence on the IIHF global movement.
All I can say is that the European led IIHF method of growing the game has been a complete flop so maybe its time for a new approach.

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2009, 07:48 AM
  #111
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,638
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sanderson View Post
The question is, why should Europeans accept that, just because Canada and the US, through the NHL, decide not to send their best players?

How is it Europe's fault, that someone else doesn't want to participate?
No one forces the NHL not to participate. It's their own choice. You don't see the best European soccer leagues deciding that playing the World Cup in their summer break is bad for the players, hence turning it into a junior tournament for everyone would be a good idea, as they can need the experience. The rest of the World would rightfully say, screw you, we send whoever we like to send, it's not your decision how this tournament is played.

The Olympics exist to determine the best, if someone doesn't want to send the best, tough luck. Doesn't mean everyone else has to weaken himself just to accomodate the one or two nations which don't bother.

There is not a single good reason why the Olympics should be turned into a junior tournament.
But it does effect everyone. Every countries best players are in the NHL, not just the North Americans.

As to why should Europeans listen the North Americans with regards to hockey? To start with maybe because over 2/3rds of the world's hockey players are actually in North America....

With only 31% of the world's players in Europe I think your Eurocentric attitude sucks.


Last edited by Mr Kanadensisk: 12-25-2009 at 10:37 AM.
Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2009, 07:55 AM
  #112
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,638
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jussi View Post
But in North America, especially Canada, the effects aren't as visible due to the large pool of players. When you have fewer players to pick from, a bad age group shows.
So you're looking for a system that handicaps Canada's depth, how is that fair to us?

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2009, 10:29 AM
  #113
Macman
Registered User
 
Macman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,400
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sanderson View Post
The Olympics exist to determine the best, if someone doesn't want to send the best, tough luck. Doesn't mean everyone else has to weaken himself just to accomodate the one or two nations which don't bother.

There is not a single good reason why the Olympics should be turned into a junior tournament.
I can think of a pretty good reason: level playing field. The Olympics without NHLers won't do that. It will return to the farce it once was with essentially one country winning all the golds because of the simple fact they will have a greater majority of its best players available while others won't. It'll be a tournament but it won't amount to a hill of beans. It certainly won't determine the best. Your words not mine.

Macman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2009, 10:31 AM
  #114
Macman
Registered User
 
Macman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,400
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jekoh View Post
The IOC used to ban pros because they wanted to ban pros, not because a couple of them could not attend.



Not just in ice hockey but in pretty much every team sports played at the Olympics.
No. The IOC was selective in which pros they banned. Namely, North American ones.

Macman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2009, 10:34 AM
  #115
Macman
Registered User
 
Macman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,400
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattihp View Post
Worse hockey players = more farcical.

Pros are in general better than junior players and it is up to the North American countries if they want to send their best outside of the NHL or kids.
It won't just affect North America.

Macman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2009, 10:45 AM
  #116
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,638
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macman View Post
No. The IOC was selective in which pros they banned. Namely, North American ones.
Just to be clear it was also the IIHF's policy for a long time not to allow NHLers to compete in their tournaments.

http://www.iihf.com/iihf-home/the-ii.../story-17.html

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2009, 11:11 AM
  #117
jekoh
Registered User
 
jekoh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,837
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macman View Post
No. The IOC was selective in which pros they banned. Namely, North American ones.
Eastern Europeans were not technically "pros", hence why they were not banned. All the others were, disirregardless of where they were from. Just look at the cycling.

Anyway, you only further make my point that the IOC is not going to ban non-NHL pros.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Macman View Post
I can think of a pretty good reason: level playing field.
There's just no reason to level the playing field, if NA is stupid enough to make its best players unavailable, tough luck.


Last edited by jekoh: 12-25-2009 at 11:29 AM.
jekoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2009, 09:44 PM
  #118
Zine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 8,832
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
Just to be clear it was also the IIHF's policy for a long time not to allow NHLers to compete in their tournaments.

http://www.iihf.com/iihf-home/the-ii.../story-17.html


Had Canada had its way in '70, olympic hockey would've ceased to exist.
Not that it's fair for Canada, but any reasonable federation should have agreed that hockey's status as an olympic sport should not be compromised. Unfortunately, Canada didn't see it that way.
As the supposed leader of the game, Canada should've temporarily 'bitten the bullet' and continued to work for an optimal solution. Instead, they decided to quit and go home when they didn't receive what they wanted.

This basically backs up Ribban's assertion that Canada (i.e. NHL) isn't trusted in putting itself second on behalf of developing the game...AND more than proves a 1 player, 1 vote IIHF congress is a bad idea.
Any federation given too much influence will act solely in its own interest and not in that of the global game's. IIHF would turn into a tyranny of the majority, which is far more undemocratic than the current status quo


Last edited by Zine: 12-26-2009 at 03:12 AM.
Zine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2009, 09:48 PM
  #119
Zine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 8,832
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macman View Post
No. The IOC was selective in which pros they banned. Namely, North American ones.
No one was selectively banned. Clear and concise rules were given. Eastern Europeans found ways around those rules, others did not.

Zine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2009, 06:17 AM
  #120
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,638
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zine View Post
Had Canada had its way in '70, olympic hockey would've ceased to exist.
Not that it's fair for Canada, but any reasonable federation should have agreed that hockey's status as an olympic sport should not be compromised. Unfortunately, Canada didn't see it that way.
As the supposed leader of the game, Canada should've temporarily 'bitten the bullet' and continued to work for an optimal solution. Instead, they decided to quit and go home when they didn't receive what they wanted.

This basically backs up Ribban's assertion that Canada (i.e. NHL) isn't trusted in putting itself second on behalf of developing the game...AND more than proves a 1 player, 1 vote IIHF congress is a bad idea.
Any federation given too much influence will act solely in its own interest and not in that of the global game's. IIHF would turn into a tyranny of the majority, which is far more undemocratic than the current status quo
Ah, yes the evil Canadians once again.... At least we know that the Europeans never act in their own self interest at the IIHF.

Why is growing the game so important to you anyway?

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2009, 06:18 AM
  #121
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,638
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zine View Post
No one was selectively banned. Clear and concise rules were given. Eastern Europeans found ways around those rules, others did not.
The IIHF ban was clearly selective, they new full well that it would only effect North Americans.

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2009, 06:52 AM
  #122
Chimp
Registered User
 
Chimp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In my food garden.
Country: Sweden
Posts: 10,478
vCash: 500
Yes, the best European players play in NHL. Yes, world hockey is largely affected if NHL plays the egocentric, moronic approach. But if the NHL is so stupid that they refuse to send any players to the olympics for two weeks every 4th year for the sake of the sport, it has nothing to do with the rest of the world.

No NHL players in the olympics 2014? There's your reason why no other country or league should listen to NA if this becomes reality. It'll probably start a riot among Euro players in NHL, with the Russians stars as the front figures, who have expressively said they will go to the olympics, regardless what anyone else say.

So what'll NHL do? Ban them, suspend them? Fine, let's kick out all the Euro players from NHL and see how much the league will benefit from that.

But turning the olympic hockey into some ******* peewee tournament is a frigging ridiculous proposal.

In fact, the proposal to turn olympic hockey into a junior hockey tournament is the most ridiculous proposal I've read on this forum for months. And that's including the trade proposal board. It goes hand in hand with the "olympic hockey should only allow amateurs to play!" proposal. Why not discuss replacing hockey with skating hampsters and rabbits while we're at it?

And if you're even trying to compare that with how the olympic football is formed, you must start with the reason why the olympic football is a kid tournament. And regardless of the reasons, olympic football is incredibly boring.

When hockey has the same problem as football does, with continental cup qualifiers, world qualifiers, continental cups, continental club cups (Champion's League), national tournaments added to the regular league, friendly national exhibition games and the world cup, then we can start discussing if the leagues and the players should be relieved with a U-23 proposal for the olympics. But I know, it's so hard for the league to sacrifice two weeks every 4th year, I don't know how they can put up with it.


Last edited by Chimp: 12-26-2009 at 07:19 AM.
Chimp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2009, 07:11 AM
  #123
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,638
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimp View Post
Yes, the best European players play in NHL. Yes, world hockey is largely affected if NHL plays the egocentric, moronic approach. But if the NHL is so stupid that they refuse to send any players to the olympics for two weeks every 4th year for the sake of the sport, it has nothing to do with the rest of the world.

No NHL players in the olympics 2014? There's your reason why no other country or league should listen to NA if this becomes reality. It'll probably start a riot among Euro players in NHL, with the Russians stars as the front figures, who have expressively said they will go to the olympics, regardless what anyone else say.

So what'll NHL do? Ban them, suspend them? Fine, let's kick out all the Euro players from NHL and see how much the league will benefit from that.

But turning the olympic hockey into some ******* peewee tournament is a frigging ridiculous proposal.
Since when does Bettman represent Hockey Canada or Hockey USA?

I think it would be a big mistake of the NHL pulled out of the Olympics. Having said that, if they do pull out and Olympic hockey goes back to what it was pre 1998, then I just won't be interested in it. Personally I just want to see the best players competing, whether it is at the Olympics or some other venue doesn't really matter to me. Soccer, Cricket and Rugby are perfect examples of how the Olympics doesn't have to be the showcase tournament for the sport.

Would players revolt if the NHL stopped going? Yes some probably would. Keep in mind though that when Europeans started coming to the NHL in big numbers in the late '80's and early '90's they did so assuming their Olympic days were over, and that didn't seem to stop anyone. Now that there is starting to be a viable alternative in the KHL maybe things are different, but no one knows for sure.

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2009, 07:15 AM
  #124
Chimp
Registered User
 
Chimp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In my food garden.
Country: Sweden
Posts: 10,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
Since when does Bettman represent Hockey Canada or Hockey USA?...
That depends if Hockey Canada and Hockey USA would support or openly revolt against Bettman and NHL. If they support Bettman, it would be a =. If they would stand against him, then it's obviously not the same, agreed.

The problem is, I think they would stay in neutral ring corners, saying nothing. Then it again would be a =. And some hockey countries in Europe would probably also stay silent (especially the smaller nations who only have better chances in an olympic tournament if no NHL'ers are present). Then it's a = for them as well.


Last edited by Chimp: 12-26-2009 at 07:20 AM.
Chimp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2009, 07:45 AM
  #125
Macman
Registered User
 
Macman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,400
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zine View Post
No one was selectively banned. Clear and concise rules were given. Eastern Europeans found ways around those rules, others did not.
I guess Canada's mistake was not giving a military rank to all its hockey players.

The IOC and IIHF ban on North American pros was blatantly discriminatory and there is no defending it, although some of you will try. The worlds and Olympics were a meaningless joke when it comes to hockey for decades and the Olympics will return to that again if the NHL is stupid enough to pull out.

Macman is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:21 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.