no, it is not... soccer, actually football, is the most popular non-individual sport in the world by many light years... you don't know what you are talking about... I don't see any single reason why the match with Canada should be officiated by the canadian referee. full stop.
Better format for next World Cup
- Thread starter Mythras
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Gary Nylund
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2013
- 31,704
- 25,547
Soccer/football is most popular yes, nobody said it wasn't. As far as officiating goes, If all the best soccer/football referees were from one country then we'd have a valid point of comparison but that's not the case now is it?
Canada
USA
Czech Republic
Slovakia
Russia
Finland
Norway
Sweden
Germany
Switzerland
Belarus
Italy (which would feature Canadians of Italian descent)
USA
Czech Republic
Slovakia
Russia
Finland
Norway
Sweden
Germany
Switzerland
Belarus
Italy (which would feature Canadians of Italian descent)
JackSlater
Registered User
- Apr 27, 2010
- 19,793
- 15,442
It seems to be heavily influenced by where a person comes from. Canada and USA played in the 2002 and 2010 Olympic finals with Canadian referees. Canada won both games. I have never once seen an American claim that it was because the referees were Canadian. I have seen Swedes/Europeans claim that the 2014 final was compromised by Canadian referees, though humourously they always refuse to pinpoint when exactly that happened.
USA or Canada or both getting embarrassed while individual players on the gimmick team performed well, while still getting eliminated, was the best realistic option to ensure that the gimmick doesn't return. I am pretty confident that the federations won't agree to let the gimmick team have first pick of players again, but it remains to be seen if it will be back.
SUBdrewgANS
Let's Go Pens!
We're ONE nation and united we stand! 
GKJ
Global Moderator
- Feb 27, 2002
- 195,600
- 45,417
If you're bringing 8 teams, just have them all play each other once, top 4 go to a semi-final. Apart from their faults, the fact that one bad game puts you in a do-or-die situation like we had for the USA and Finland is absolutely ridiculous. Five out of eight teams played one game in this tournament that meant absolutely nothing to them, which means including the exhibition games, those teams have played more games that meant nothing than games that actually did mean something.
do you really think there is no referee outside NA able to whistle the game? if yes, then you need to look back to history, when Canada thought, that had been dominating the game, and surprise surprise...
Rob
Registered User
End on a Hinote
Registered Abuser
Can we just stop with the arrogant "Canada should ice two teams" talk? The world may love Canada as a whole but in the hockey world there is a reason why we are so hated....
Gary Nylund
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2013
- 31,704
- 25,547
Now you equate "being able to whistle a game" with being the best referees available?
I think (and it's widely acknowledged that) the best referees are in the NHL, twist it any way you want.Canada has in fact been pretty dominant, what other country comes close? (hint, the Soviet Union was not a country). That has nothing to do with refereeing anyway so whatever.
Canuck21t
Registered User
I've been following international hockey for years and there are some very good officiating from referees elsewhere. There are some bad ones, but the good ones exist too. It is extremely arrogant from Canadians to think we are the only ones who are good. Even the US in other sports aren't this arrogant.Now you equate "being able to whistle a game" with being the best referees available?
Canada has in fact been pretty dominant, what other country comes close? (hint, the Soviet Union was not a country). That has nothing to do with refereeing anyway so whatever.
Past Considerations
Registered User
OP has great idea!
But here's an even better one:
Pool A: Canada 1, Canada 3, Canada 5, Canada 7
Pool B: Canada 2, Canada 4, Canada 6, Canada 8
But here's an even better one:
Pool A: Canada 1, Canada 3, Canada 5, Canada 7
Pool B: Canada 2, Canada 4, Canada 6, Canada 8
Rob
Registered User
If NHL players stop going to the Olympics I would like to see the World Cup be held in February. Players will be in top shape and it would get better ratings.
uncleben
Global Moderator
If you're going to do that, do:
Canada, USA, Russia, Sweden, Finland, World
Where World has free range of all other players, and can take up to one player from the previous five countries, AFTER those 5 countries have entered a preliminary roster (and taxi squad in case of injury) EDIT: Wait... this cuts out Czechia though. Not a good idea.
Similarly, if you keep 8, you could do Europe as "World" and NA23 could be simply "U23", and players can be taking from any country (each country can have up to one protected U23 player on their roster, or something).
Couple other things I'd like to see...
-Less exhibition games, and more round robin.
-Bronze medal game. (As far as I can tell Russia has no chance at playing the loser of SWE/EUR for bronze, and I think that is lame. Please tell me I am wrong.)
Last edited:
uncleben
Global Moderator
You'd guarantee no cooperation from KHL or NLA (who both allowed players this year), nor improve your chances of Liiga, SHL letting their players go.
Especially if the combo teams are dropped, and a team like Switzerland or Germany is having to ice a full roster.
If you can't get KHL, NLA, SHL, Liiga, ELH, Sl.Extraliga, or DEL to buy in, you may be supplementing teams with players from EIHL, Magnus, Alps, Metal Ligaen, EBEL... AIHL, ALIH... actually maybe that would be cool, haha
Also, ONE of the reasons the NHL would opt out of the Olympics is because they don't like having the long break there, and having to mess with the schedule. Putting the WC in that place would still cause a 2-3 week break.
coolboarder
Registered User
Better it be called Canada Cup than World Cup. A true World Cup would involve more of a qualifying process with other countries a chance to host a final while Canada Cup was more of an invitational event while maintaining the best on best concept. Rebranding Canada Cup to World Cup was a mistake in the first place. If this year's event were called Canada Cup and maybe the rest of the world might care enough to recognize this a premier international hockey event of the year over the World Championship, Stanley Cup or any other national domestic league championship trophy.
A naming brand, World Cup means to me, giving all countries in the world a chance to participate through the qualifying tournament with NHL rink and NHL rules before the official World Cup. It should have been done in the first place then people in the world would recognize this a true World Cup concept as there are many hockey nations in the world even if they are not good enough. They need more experience playing games against their best even if the blowout occurs as it has been proven from the history. Each time they play against Canada, they are given a chance to improve as the generations come and go because the foreign players going back to their own league a better player, resulting a younger player becomes better because he has played against the best in the world. I am not talking about Division B team playing against Division C for a spot in the World Cup, I'm talking about giving Division D a chance to play against Canada, USA, Russia, Sweden of the world in a qualifying tournament once every 4 years, rather than once every 30 years in a World Championship or Olympics and they won't actually improve one ounce without an experience in that game.
Remember Russia, Sweden, Finland, Czechoslovakia had no chance in the beginning because they played Canada in an amateur sense in Olympics and World Championship and never faced any NHLers in history of the international play until first played in Canada Cup, it took them 20-30 or even 40 years after first Canada Cup to recognize as a hockey power because of that experience playing Canada and Soviet in the best on best play. After the Soviet played in the Summit Series, they became more dominant because of that battle harden experience against Canada. It is only Canada that stood up to their dominance in Canada Cup on best on best play except for 1981 edition of Canada Cup.
So if Mexico, Italy, German, or Britain played Canada a few games once every 4 years even in a blowout sense, they go back to their league a better player, dominant in that domestic league, and their younger player might be better than them for a generation and they might be ready to stand up to Canada when they are fully developed like Sweden, Finland did but Mexico has been playing against Division C and most often, Division C teams dominate them and it is not the right type of hockey as they learned nothing from that international experience as an example. They never played on a small ice because of the international hockey keeps insisting on bigger ice for all international competition. Small ice is what it helped Canada to maintain their dominance even in today's game.
I feel that Switzerland misses out on the developmental sense on this year's World Cup participation and who knows, how this might affect their development a generation from now with this missed chance because of useless gimmick in Team North America.
/end rant
A naming brand, World Cup means to me, giving all countries in the world a chance to participate through the qualifying tournament with NHL rink and NHL rules before the official World Cup. It should have been done in the first place then people in the world would recognize this a true World Cup concept as there are many hockey nations in the world even if they are not good enough. They need more experience playing games against their best even if the blowout occurs as it has been proven from the history. Each time they play against Canada, they are given a chance to improve as the generations come and go because the foreign players going back to their own league a better player, resulting a younger player becomes better because he has played against the best in the world. I am not talking about Division B team playing against Division C for a spot in the World Cup, I'm talking about giving Division D a chance to play against Canada, USA, Russia, Sweden of the world in a qualifying tournament once every 4 years, rather than once every 30 years in a World Championship or Olympics and they won't actually improve one ounce without an experience in that game.
Remember Russia, Sweden, Finland, Czechoslovakia had no chance in the beginning because they played Canada in an amateur sense in Olympics and World Championship and never faced any NHLers in history of the international play until first played in Canada Cup, it took them 20-30 or even 40 years after first Canada Cup to recognize as a hockey power because of that experience playing Canada and Soviet in the best on best play. After the Soviet played in the Summit Series, they became more dominant because of that battle harden experience against Canada. It is only Canada that stood up to their dominance in Canada Cup on best on best play except for 1981 edition of Canada Cup.
So if Mexico, Italy, German, or Britain played Canada a few games once every 4 years even in a blowout sense, they go back to their league a better player, dominant in that domestic league, and their younger player might be better than them for a generation and they might be ready to stand up to Canada when they are fully developed like Sweden, Finland did but Mexico has been playing against Division C and most often, Division C teams dominate them and it is not the right type of hockey as they learned nothing from that international experience as an example. They never played on a small ice because of the international hockey keeps insisting on bigger ice for all international competition. Small ice is what it helped Canada to maintain their dominance even in today's game.
I feel that Switzerland misses out on the developmental sense on this year's World Cup participation and who knows, how this might affect their development a generation from now with this missed chance because of useless gimmick in Team North America.
/end rant
Straight Fire
Registered User
NA under 23 and Europe was ridiculously stupid for as much as I liked watching NA. To make this thing seem legit get rid of the gimmicks.
Kasper92
Registered User
Guys you can't create the fantasy of olympics within a 2 weeks timespan. This is a mini-expose of the best NHL players as the NHL season begins, take it for what it is. And Canada will win no matter how many lame ass teams you want to include.
Corax
Registered User
- May 1, 2007
- 287
- 7
krt88
Registered User
Instead of 3 pre tournament games, play one
Then play everyone in the group twice. Use a 3-2-1-0 points system.
Cross over 3 v 2 quarterfinal
Use two locations, one per group
Buffalo and Toronto
Ottawa and Montreal
Edmonton and Calgary - something like that
Then play everyone in the group twice. Use a 3-2-1-0 points system.
Cross over 3 v 2 quarterfinal
Use two locations, one per group
Buffalo and Toronto
Ottawa and Montreal
Edmonton and Calgary - something like that
