2023 World Championships - All Divisions

[TomB]

IIHF is going back to 6 teams in the lower divisions. It seems like the divisions for next year are:

Elite:
Austria
Canada
Czechia
Denmark
Finland
France
Germany
Hungary
Kazakhstan
Latvia
Norway
Slovenia
Slovakia
Sweden
Switzerland
United States

Russia and Belarus still suspended.

Division IA:
Great Britain (host)
Italy
Korea
Lithuania
Poland
Romania

Division IB:
China
Estonia (host)
Japan
Netherlands
Serbia
Ukraine

Division IIA:
Australia
Croatia
Georgia
Iceland
Israel
Spain (host)

Division IIB:
Belgium
Bulgaria
Mexico
New Zealand
Turkey (host)
UAE

The IIHF stated that the Division III and IV participants and hosts will be confirmed later, but it will likely look something like this:

Division IIIA:
Chinese Taipei
Korea DPR
Luxembourg
South Africa (host)
Thailand
Turkmenistan

Division IIIB:
Bosnia-Herzegovina (host)
Hong Kong
Iran
Kyrgyzstan
Malaysia
Singapore

Division IV:
Kuwait (host)
Philippines

I wouldn't be surprised if the bottom two of Division IIIB gets put into Division IV and we end up with two groups of 4 at the bottom. Alternatively, there will be newcomers to the program, but I don't think that will happen this coming year.

Click to read more...

 

[aquaregia]

As expected, no Russia or Belarus - both 1A and 1B look weird but interesting.

Heard a lot of hype about Poland but am still not convinced just yet that they're favourites to return to the top tier for the first time since 2002. Not writing them off of course but they'll need a big dog performance in them against either GB or Italy which I've not seen from them yet. I'll look forward to trying to get tickets for one of our games in Nottingham, as long as all our good forwards are available I think we should be targeting top 2.
Would also like to see Lithuania continue to punch above their weight and send Romania's team of hired guns back where they belong after their stay of execution.

1B'll be cool to see whether China's own mercenaries really have their hearts in the project still. 2A was a breeze as expected, but compared to their Olympics performances they played quite a lot of sloppy hockey. Performances which teams like Japan and (unexpectedly okay-looking) Ukraine'll be able to punish where say, Spain and Croatia lacked the quality.

 

[KTl]

There are plans to merge Division I into a ten team tournament - two groups of five, potentially shared by two countries. I think there would be some play-offs at the end, but I'm not sure. Would be interesting though (and a way to get two top level teams back into the tournament system).

Division I A 2023 is already shared between Nottingham and Belfast, is that right? Logistically, that screams nightmare, I would think....

 

[HungryFrank]

What a joke with no relegation

 

[ChaiTiefling]

There are plans to merge Division I into a ten team tournament - two groups of five, potentially shared by two countries. I think there would be some play-offs at the end, but I'm not sure. Would be interesting though (and a way to get two top level teams back into the tournament system).

Division I A 2023 is already shared between Nottingham and Belfast, is that right? Logistically, that screams nightmare, I would think....

No, 1A in 2023 is solely in Nottingham.

 

[SoundAndFury]

Heard a lot of hype about Poland but am still not convinced just yet that they're favourites to return to the top tier for the first time since 2002. Not writing them off of course but they'll need a big dog performance in them against either GB or Italy which I've not seen from them yet. I'll look forward to trying to get tickets for one of our games in Nottingham, as long as all our good forwards are available I think we should be targeting top 2.
Would also like to see Lithuania continue to punch above their weight and send Romania's team of hired guns back where they belong after their stay of execution.

Poland hype is overrated, their team is a bit of a house of cards. They need:

1) solve the goalie issue. Murray needs to want to play, be healthy, and be at the top of his game on the eve of his 36th birthday. There is basically no plan B.

2) their best players to actually be there:

Chmielewski always wants to play for Poland but Trinec needs to get kicked out of the Extraliga PO which is no given thing. Lyszczarczyk will most likely be in the same position if he manages to get into the Trinec lineup as a regular next year, which is sort of expected. Trinec making the finals (which happens all the damn time) would be a major hit for Polish hopes.

Dronia hasn't played for NT in forever but one needs to hope he would return for D1A. Tyczynski has never played for the NT (although I don't think there is an actual problem with it, just nobody was smart enough to invite him to join the team yet).

3) without Dronia, that defense is very, very suspicious for the D1A level. It has no puck-moving potential whatsoever meaning even the games against weaker opponents are a struggle in terms of possession which inevitably hurts on the scoreboard as well from time to time. There was an infamous loss to Romania in 2019, this year they were expected to steamroll the competition and yet they actually got outshot against Ukraine in the game which ultimately went to a shootout, and then got outshot in a must-win game against Estonia.

So many things have to align for Poland to be in the actual fight for promotion.

Regarding our (Lithuanian) chances, I'm feeling fairly confident, I think we can beat Korea with no Dalton 9 times out of 10. At the same time, I think you are wrong to say Romania and their hired guns belong in D1B. It's Koreans, who no longer have any hired guns, that do.

Division I A 2023 is already shared between Nottingham and Belfast, is that right? Logistically, that screams nightmare, I would think....

No, it's just in Nottingham, it's a single city, single arena event, always has been.

 

[Eye of Ra]

As expected, no Russia or Belarus - both 1A and 1B look weird but interesting.

Heard a lot of hype about Poland but am still not convinced just yet that they're favourites to return to the top tier for the first time since 2002. Not writing them off of course but they'll need a big dog performance in them against either GB or Italy which I've not seen from them yet. I'll look forward to trying to get tickets for one of our games in Nottingham, as long as all our good forwards are available I think we should be targeting top 2.
Would also like to see Lithuania continue to punch above their weight and send Romania's team of hired guns back where they belong after their stay of execution.

1B'll be cool to see whether China's own mercenaries really have their hearts in the project still. 2A was a breeze as expected, but compared to their Olympics performances they played quite a lot of sloppy hockey. Performances which teams like Japan and (unexpectedly okay-looking) Ukraine'll be able to punish where say, Spain and Croatia lacked the quality.

Poland hype is overrated, their team is a bit of a house of cards. They need:

1) solve the goalie issue. Murray needs to want to play, be healthy, and be at the top of his game on the eve of his 36th birthday. There is basically no plan B.

2) their best players to actually be there:

Chmielewski always wants to play for Poland but Trinec needs to get kicked out of the Extraliga PO which is no given thing. Lyszczarczyk will most likely be in the same position if he manages to get into the Trinec lineup as a regular next year, which is sort of expected. Trinec making the finals (which happens all the damn time) would be a major hit for Polish hopes.

Dronia hasn't played for NT in forever but one needs to hope he would return for D1A. Tyczynski has never played for the NT (although I don't think there is an actual problem with it, just nobody was smart enough to invite him to join the team yet).

3) without Dronia, that defense is very, very suspicious for the D1A level. It has no puck-moving potential whatsoever meaning even the games against weaker opponents are a struggle in terms of possession which inevitably hurts on the scoreboard as well from time to time. There was an infamous loss to Romania in 2019, this year they were expected to steamroll the competition and yet they actually got outshot against Ukraine in the game which ultimately went to a shootout, and then got outshot in a must-win game against Estonia.

So many things have to align for Poland to be in the actual fight for promotion.

Regarding our (Lithuanian) chances, I'm feeling fairly confident, I think we can beat Korea with no Dalton 9 times out of 10. At the same time, I think you are wrong to say Romania and their hired guns belong in D1B. It's Koreans, who no longer have any hired guns, that do.


No, it's just in Nottingham, it's a single city, single arena event, always has been.

Seems like some belive in the hype:

Polish league is on the rise, for sure. But no way this fast.

 

[jonas2244]

Groups for WC 2023 very probably:
Group A:
Finland
Sweden
Czech Republic
Germany
Denmark
France
Austria
Hungery

Group B:
Canada
USA
Switzerland
Slovakia
Latvia
Norway
Kazakhztan
Slovenia

 

[saskriders]

Seems like some belive in the hype:

View attachment 553641
Polish league is on the rise, for sure. But no way this fast.

I haven't heard anything about this (I'm in North America). Saying the league is better than the DEL sounds insane. What makes everyone think the league is getting that much better?

 

[SoundAndFury]

I haven't heard anything about this (I'm in North America). Saying the league is better than the DEL sounds insane. What makes everyone think the league is getting that much better?

It's not. It's the same as Buffalo fans turning John Scott into an All-Star (or Latvian fans Girgensons, or Belarussian fans Gretzky in the KHL). Poland is a country with 40 million people, somebody shared the link in the FB group of their hockey community or whatever and the rest is history.

That much better is actually on par with the lowest level of professional leagues as opposed to fully semi-pro.

 

[Elvs]

Without Russia, they should really just have let ran the tournament. Even with Russia in it, 14 teams would be enough.

But since IIHF insists on running with 16 teams, I wish they would at least re-introduce the four group format. At least that way, there will be one less meaningless game for everyone.

 

[Albatros]

Without Russia, they should really just have let ran the tournament. Even with Russia in it, 14 teams would be enough.

But since IIHF insists on running with 16 teams, I wish they would at least re-introduce the four group format. At least that way, there will be one less meaningless game for everyone.

Austria and France performed fairly well though, earning 7 and 5 points respectively, those weren't meaningless games.

 

[Elvs]

Austria and France performed fairly well though, earning 7 and 5 points respectively, those weren't meaningless games.

That's not surprising since they are better hockey nations than Italy and GBR. I'm talking about in general. It's the same nations going yo-yo between the top and second division every year. Look at next year, it's almost certainly a given that Hungary will be demoted again. Likely Slovenia will follow with them.

My point is that there's a significant drop off behind Latvia and Denmark. Without Russia, they round out the top 10 nations of the hockey world. Do we really need six teams that are way below their level? Even Latvia and Denmark has the ability to absolutely crush the likes of Italy and Hungary. I don't see the point, really.

 

[AKQJ]

Austria beat Czechia and robbed a point from USA. No team was left pointless. There is enough thrill in those games. Latvia - GB, Austria - GB were great games with enormous amount of emotions. I was there and saw them. Despite those games are meaningless deciding the winner of the tournament, they are big enough for countries involved.

 

[Elvs]

Austria beat Czechia and robbed a point from USA. No team was left pointless. There is enough thrill in those games. Latvia - GB, Austria - GB were great games with enormous amount of emotions. I was there and saw them. Despite those games are meaningless deciding the winner of the tournament, they are big enough for countries involved.

You can't simply draw conclusions from single games in a single year. Proves nothing. Especially since my idea of a 14 team format would still include Austria most of the time. And France for that matter.

Great Britain? They are ranked what? 20 something... So really, since they are so competitive, we might as well promote another eight teams to the top division, make it a 22 team tournament.

 

[Urbanskog]

Great Britain? They are ranked what? 20 something... So really, since they are so competitive, we might as well promote another eight teams to the top division, make it a 22 team totournament.

They are ranked 17th.

 

[Elvs]

Heck, in my idea (actually not my idea, because this is how the WC used to be) of a four group format 16 teams would still be in. The only difference is that teams would play six games instead of seven.

For example, it would work like this:

Group A:
Finland
Germany
Denmark
Great Britain

Group B
Canada
Slovakia
Latvia
Italy

Group C
USA
Switzerland
Norway
Kazakhstan

Group D
Sweden
Czechia
Austria
France


The three best teams goes on to the next group stage, with the last placed team in each group playing for surival in the top group.

So in the next group stage, group A and B are mixed together. But at that point, Italy and Great Britain would be out of the equation, and so Finland won't have to play Italy and Canada won't have to play Great Britain. It's a win for everyone, including Italy and Great Britain, really.

They are ranked 17th.

My bad. But from what I can find, it's actually 18th.

But really it doesn't matter. They are in the same tier as Italy, Slovenia, Hungary, Korea and Poland. I'm fine with having one of them in the top division every year, but not several of them.

 

[Shrimper]

Heck, in my idea (actually not my idea, because this is how the WC used to be) of a four group format 16 teams would still be in. The only difference is that teams would play six games instead of seven.

For example, it would work like this:

Group A:
Finland
Germany
Denmark
Great Britain

Group B
Canada
Slovakia
Latvia
Italy

Group C
USA
Switzerland
Norway
Kazakhstan

Group D
Sweden
Czechia
Austria
France


The three best teams goes on to the next group stage, with the last placed team in each group playing for surival in the top group.

So in the next group stage, group A and B are mixed together. But at that point, Italy and Great Britain would be out of the equation, and so Finland won't have to play Italy and Canada won't have to play Great Britain. It's a win for everyone, including Italy and Great Britain, really.



My bad. But from what I can find, it's actually 18th.

But really it doesn't matter. They are in the same tier as Italy, Slovenia, Hungary, Korea and Poland. I'm fine with having one of them in the top division every year, but not several of them.

Except GB want to play the likes of Canada

 

[aquaregia]

...

My point is that there's a significant drop off behind Latvia and Denmark.

...

The gap between Denmark/Latvia and the very top is probably wider than the gap between them and Italy/Hungary/GB.

 

[Elvs]

Except GB want to play the likes of Canada

So does South Africa.

 

[Elvs]

The gap between Denmark/Latvia and the very top is probably wider than the gap between them and Italy/Hungary/GB.

It isn't. Denmark won over Canada just this year and steamrolled over Kazakstan 9-1.

Latvia beat Italy in the Olympic qualifications 6-0 last fall (shots 36-16) and also Hungary (who are promoted next year) 9-0 (shots 45-17). Also Latvia beat Canada at the World Championship last year.

 

[aquaregia]

It isn't. Denmark won over Canada just this year and steamrolled over Kazakstan 9-1.

Latvia beat Italy in the Olympic qualifications 6-0 last fall (shots 36-16) and also Hungary (who are promoted next year) 9-0 (shots 45-17). Also Latvia beat Canada at the World Championship last year.

Eh on second thought maybe lumping Denmark with Latvia is a bit harsh here, but really you can pick whatever from the limited sample of matches and easily draw different conclusions.
Looking at this year's WC, with Latvia being well beaten by a US team not even close to full strength and barely scraping past Austria and GB, heck even Denmark collapsed specatularly when the chance of a last-8 spot presented itself, you can forgive me for getting the impression that the margins between the middle and the top (esp in a scenario where top teams can ice full-strength lineups), are wider than the middle and the bottom end of the WC-calibre sides.

 

[SoundAndFury]

You can't simply draw conclusions from single games in a single year. Proves nothing.

It isn't. Denmark won over Canada just this year and steamrolled over Kazakstan 9-1.

Nice consistency here. Denmark winning against Kazakhstan 9-1 means a lot but going to OT against GB last year doesn't.

I mean it's not like you have no point entirely but it's hard to see why would someone argue so hard for "one less meaningless game". Does it really change so much?

 

[Elvs]

Eh on second thought maybe lumping Denmark with Latvia is a bit harsh here, but really you can pick whatever from the limited sample of matches and easily draw different conclusions.
Looking at this year's WC, with Latvia being well beaten by a US team not even close to full strength and barely scraping past Austria and GB, heck even Denmark collapsed specatularly when the chance of a last-8 spot presented itself, you can forgive me for getting the impression that the margins between the middle and the top (esp in a scenario where top teams can ice full-strength lineups), are wider than the middle and the bottom end of the WC-calibre sides.

Nice consistency here. Denmark winning against Kazakhstan 9-1 means a lot but going to OT against GB last year doesn't.

I mean it's not like you have no point entirely but it's hard to see why would someone argue so hard for "one less meaningless game". Does it really change so much?

Yeah, I realize I was being inconsistent the moment I was writing that, because I was being lazy. I could go on and look up results over a much longer sample size, but I am not gonna do that right now. But I know from having followed the World Championships for 20 years that the likes of Denmark and Latvia are stealing points from the "big 6" with much more frequency than the likes of Italy is stealing points from Denmark or Latvia...

 

[Elvs]

Anyway, I'm not even sure what we are discussing anymore. Even if we pretend you are right for a second, saying the gap between Italy and Latvia is the same as between Latvia and Canada... Why should that grant Italy a spot in the top division? You gotta draw the line somewhere. Otherwise, we might as well invite the next tier of nations too. Lithuania and Romania could maybe earn a point from Italy once or twice in every ten meetings, so why not?