WJC: Bring back the bye to semifinals for the group winners!

[Lollipop]

Sweden won the group B. But is it any favour of that??? We is in the thoughest bracket in the elemination games.

I think it should be a favour to win the group. But is it???

I think canadians feels good about this but shouldn't the other group winner get any favour too??

I want the bye to semifinals back. Or maybe the winners should get the opportunity to choose opponent in QF.

I have faith in my team. It's not about that. But I want rules that make the top team's to want win not thinking it's better to lose.

What's your thoughts

Click to read more...

 

[Statsy]

Sweden won the group B. But is it any favour of that??? We is in the thoughest bracket in the elemination games.

I think it should be a favour to win the group. But is it???

I think canadians feels good about this but shouldn't the other group winner get any favour too??

I want the bye to semifinals back. Or maybe the winners should get the opportunity to choose opponent in QF.

I have faith in my team. It's not about that. But I want rules that make the top team's to want win not thinking it's better to lose.

What's your thoughts

This is probably the first thing we've ever agreed on. First place in a group should earn you a ticket to the next round.

 

[SpeedDemon]

for Sweden it's luck of the draw. If the Finns weren't in a scoring slump they'd have drawn the Slovaks in the quarters. Group play is about position nothing more. I for one am glad the automatic bye is gone. Gives too many powerhouse teams a free pass. This way top seeded can be ousted by a bottom one if the cards fall the right way.

I hated the bye. glad it's gone. hope it's never coming back. They don't use it in the NHL it should be used here either.

 

[Statsy]

for Sweden it's luck of the draw. If the Finns weren't in a scoring slump they'd have drawn the Slovaks in the quarters. Group play is about position nothing more. I for one am glad the automatic bye is gone. Gives too many powerhouse teams a free pass. This way top seeded can be ousted by a bottom one if the cards fall the right way.

I hated the bye. glad it's gone. hope it's never coming back. They don't use it in the NHL it should be used here either.

The sentence I bolded says it all. The difference is that you seem to think that's a good thing. The point of this tournament is to find out who's the best team. Though some may argue that if a good team loses to a lesser team, they aren't really a better team, but we all know that's a big load of manure. You're right that the NHL doesn't have a bye, but then again it has a seven game series, and it's pretty damn difficult for a vastly inferior team to steal a series, but in a one game winner-take-all, anything can happen.

 

[Lollipop]

for Sweden it's luck of the draw. If the Finns weren't in a scoring slump they'd have drawn the Slovaks in the quarters. Group play is about position nothing more. I for one am glad the automatic bye is gone. Gives too many powerhouse teams a free pass. This way top seeded can be ousted by a bottom one if the cards fall the right way.

I hated the bye. glad it's gone. hope it's never coming back. They don't use it in the NHL it should be used here either.

Is it better to think it's better to think it's good to lose??? The teams should play for to win the games not lose.

I think the winner should get some favour. If not with ticket to semis then at least they should be allowed to choose the opponent in QF.

Why should NHL decide everything??? Such a arrogant comment from you!nhl isn't the superpower that should rule in international hockey.

 

[teris]

Sweden won the group B. But is it any favour of that??? We is in the thoughest bracket in the elemination games.

I think it should be a favour to win the group. But is it???

I think canadians feels good about this but shouldn't the other group winner get any favour too??

I want the bye to semifinals back. Or maybe the winners should get the opportunity to choose opponent in QF.

I have faith in my team. It's not about that. But I want rules that make the top team's to want win not thinking it's better to lose.

What's your thoughts

It's the way it is. Other than the medals and bragging rights, Finland's gold medal finish last year was awarded with being grouped with Canada and USA this year. Losing Sweden got Russia and the Czechs. The bye just favored the old boys club, the top six. We wouldn't be seeing the cinderella story Denmark in the quarters this year if the bye was still in place. Getting rid of the bye was also a step towards healthy expansion of the tournament.

 

[Lollipop]

It's the way it is. Other than the medals and bragging rights, Finland's gold medal finish last year was awarded with being grouped with Canada and USA this year. Losing Sweden got Russia and the Czechs. The bye just favored the old boys club, the top six. We wouldn't be seeing the cinderella story Denmark in the quarters this year if the bye was still in place. Getting rid of the bye was also a step towards healthy expansion of the tournament.

I really don't see why we shouldn't see a cinderella story like Denmark even with bye. Do you mean Russia didn't play as well as they would with the old rules. If so it's confirm my thoughts. So you think it's better the power houses not playing at their potential only because countries as Denmark should get a chance to qualify???

Still if no bye then the winner should get some kind of other favour like choose the QF opponent.

 

[SpeedDemon]

The sentence I bolded says it all. The difference is that you seem to think that's a good thing. The point of this tournament is to find out who's the best team. Though some may argue that if a good team loses to a lesser team, they aren't really a better team, but we all know that's a big load of manure. You're right that the NHL doesn't have a bye, but then again it has a seven game series, and it's pretty damn difficult for a vastly inferior team to steal a series, but in a one game winner-take-all, anything can happen.

the single elimination where anything can happen is the very reason why the bye shouldn't exist. Best teams on paper shouldn't be handed everything on a silver platter.


FYI- if by some small miniscule twist of fate, Denmark beats Canada on Friday, I'm gonna be on cloud nine (and I was born in Alberta no less)


Best teams don't stay best for eternity. This tournament is in many ways a starting point for the careers of many of today's up-and- comers. Rosters change, players change, programs in countries improve and evolve. If a less talented teams wins against a more talented team it means one of two things

a)the more talented team didn't bring their best game and underestimated their opponents

or

b) fortune simply smiled upon someone else. And luck is an integral part in competition. Not a major factor but it's there and it shouldn't neglected.

Is it better to think it's better to think it's good to lose??? The teams should play for to win the games not lose.

I think the winner should get some favour. If not with ticket to semis then at least they should be allowed to choose the opponent in QF.

Why should NHL decide everything??? Such a arrogant comment from you!nhl isn't the superpower that should rule in international hockey.

[mod]

Secondly, N ONE SHOULD BE GRANTED FAVOR OF ANY KIND. Choosing your opponent is like being handed a free victory (because everyone's going to want to play a team you defeat if your were drugged and wasted), that's the point that you seem to miss. Just because a team wins its group doesn't mean it should be treated like royalty. Perhaps the NHL is a bad example, but I'm comparing what happens in a 5 to 1, 10 to 1 or even 20 to 1 scenario- upsets. It's a fantastic thing in sports. . More talented teams shouldn't be given special treatment over less talented ones. Let's take the Men's worlds instead. 16 teams opposed to 10 still 4 teams advance per group. There is no bye for the group winner. You play games for points in order to qualify, as well as get in a seeding that will be advantageous based on speculations of what would happen in the other groups. You keep track of what happens and if its in your power you play the game a certain way to get a certain result.


I am sick and tired of seeing the same teams in medal competition year after year. Removing the bye puts everyone on an even footing. It allows for the possibility of upsets which should be allowed to happen. It adds to the game.

 

[SpeedDemon]

I really don't see why we shouldn't see a cinderella story like Denmark even with bye. Do you mean Russia didn't play as well as they would with the old rules. If so it's confirm my thoughts. So you think it's better the power houses not playing at their potential only because countries as Denmark should get a chance to qualify???

Still if no bye then the winner should get some kind of other favour like choose the QF opponent.

seriously? a cinderella story with only six teams making it to the medals when you have a top six circle in the sport. Canada, the U.S., Russia, Sweden, Finland, the Czechs and the Slovaks are well ahead of the game. Cinderella stories would happen once or twice in millenium.

as for chosing your opponent let me illustrate a scenario here

Supposing Canada does not win gold in the next two tourneys also. That's 7 years without Gold. They win the group in 2017. By some miracle Kazakhstan qualifies in the other group. The Canadians see this as an advantage to get closer to a medal and instead of playing a another team which would require a bit of hard work, chose to play Kazakhstan and clobber them 16 to 1. Fairness?? HELL NO.

 

[teris]

I really don't see why we shouldn't see a cinderella story like Denmark even with bye. Do you mean Russia didn't play as well as they would with the old rules. If so it's confirm my thoughts. So you think it's better the power houses not playing at their potential only because countries as Denmark should get a chance to qualify???

Still if no bye then the winner should get some kind of other favour like choose the QF opponent.

I mean Denmark finished 4th in their group this year and thus would've ended up in relegation round rather than the quarters if we went by the old rules.

But I want rules that make the top team's to want win not thinking it's better to lose.

This was ironic coming from (assumedly) a swede btw.

 

[slovakiasnextone]

The winner of the group does get a favor, it is getting to play the 4th ranked team from the other group in the quarterfinals. It's just pure chance that Sweden was unlucky this year with Finland finishing 4th in the other group.

I can't think of any other top level tournament or league (Olympics, IHWC, NHL, European leagues), where the top ranked team in the preliminary round gets such an advantage as used to be the case in this tournament. Slovakia won everything possible in preliminary games in Torino only to be ousted by the Czechs who were bad until that point in the QF. Yet I don't think anyone complains about this in the Olympics, WC or in league play.

Under the old system not only did they get a bye to the SF, their opponent also had to play the QF and SF within 2 days if memory serves me correctly. It made for a boring tournament, always with the same 4 teams finishing top four, with the only exceptions being Slovakia and Switzerland finishing 4th once in recent memory.

 

[Lollipop]

Where's the fairness with the group winner is unlucky and get the harder opponent than #2 or even #3. ???

 

[Lollipop]

the single elimination where anything can happen is the very reason why the bye shouldn't exist. Best teams on paper shouldn't be handed everything on a silver platter.


FYI- if by some small miniscule twist of fate, Denmark beats Canada on Friday, I'm gonna be on cloud nine (and I was born in Alberta no less)


Best teams don't stay best for eternity. This tournament is in many ways a starting point for the careers of many of today's up-and- comers. Rosters change, players change, programs in countries improve and evolve. If a less talented teams wins against a more talented team it means one of two things

a)the more talented team didn't bring their best game and underestimated their opponents

or

b) fortune simply smiled upon someone else. And luck is an integral part in competition. Not a major factor but it's there and it shouldn't neglected.




[mod]

Secondly, N ONE SHOULD BE GRANTED FAVOR OF ANY KIND. Choosing your opponent is like being handed a free victory (because everyone's going to want to play a team you defeat if your were drugged and wasted), that's the point that you seem to miss. Just because a team wins its group doesn't mean it should be treated like royalty. Perhaps the NHL is a bad example, but I'm comparing what happens in a 5 to 1, 10 to 1 or even 20 to 1 scenario- upsets. It's a fantastic thing in sports. . More talented teams shouldn't be given special treatment over less talented ones. Let's take the Men's worlds instead. 16 teams opposed to 10 still 4 teams advance per group. There is no bye for the group winner. You play games for points in order to qualify, as well as get in a seeding that will be advantageous based on speculations of what would happen in the other groups. You keep track of what happens and if its in your power you play the game a certain way to get a certain result.


I am sick and tired of seeing the same teams in medal competition year after year. Removing the bye puts everyone on an even footing. It allows for the possibility of upsets which should be allowed to happen. It adds to the game.

But they don't . They play for it in preliminary round. That's the point. I hear the argument that the best teams get free pass. But they play for it as all other teams.

 

[Lollipop]

Also if teams as Denmark can't qualify with the bye then they aren't good enough perhaps! It's the same for all countries.

 

[Kharkov]

tbh there is a reason why Finland is 4th in their group

 

[nhlfan9191]

But they don't . They play for it in preliminary round. That's the point. I hear the argument that the best teams get free pass. But they play for it as all other teams.

Agree with this. There was a purpose of playing your best hockey in the round robin so you could get a bye into the semi's. Now, it seems its lost a lot of its purpose unless your so bad, you end up in a relagation situation. Look at Sweden. They should be rewarded for finishing first in their pool. But their reward is playing last years winners, despite having a tough round robin. Doesn't make sense to me other then rolling in more money.

 

[Cloned]

Meh, if you win your group and have designs on winning the tournament, you should be able to beat the other best teams anyways. Doesn't matter if it's in the QFs, SFs or the final.

 

[Lollipop]

Agree with this. There was a purpose of playing your best hockey in the round robin so you could get a bye into the semi's. Now, it seems its lost a lot of its purpose unless your so bad, you end up in a relagation situation. Look at Sweden. They should be rewarded for finishing first in their pool. But their reward is playing last years winners, despite having a tough round robin. Doesn't make sense to me other then rolling in more money.

Thank you! This is what I'm trying to say.

The excitement about the the round Robin is gone.

After the game against russia it would be feeling great as a Swede. Instead the question was was it good to win or was Russia lucky to lose that game? The wow feeling and excitement is gone.

Sweden has a perfect record in round robin. But what is the purpose?? To meet the last years gold medallists?

 

[ZDatsZuke]

I think its fair as it is now. Canada got "lucky" this time, or some teams are worse than expected. now Russia, USA, Sweden and Finland will have to really prove themselves before the final with Canada (most likely) ... I like it! Go Sweden!

 

[yarre]

Love the new format. There is no semifinals-freecard in any other tournament in hockey that I can remember, why should WJC have it?

 

[Lollipop]

Meh, if you win your group and have designs on winning the tournament, you should be able to beat the other best teams anyways. Doesn't matter if it's in the QFs, SFs or the final.

Yes, and same should be in the round robin. Right now the round robin seems meanless. Why not make a lottery instead for playing round robin? Save money and boring games.

 

[Swipes]

Is it better to think it's better to think it's good to lose??? The teams should play for to win the games not lose.

I think the winner should get some favour. If not with ticket to semis then at least they should be allowed to choose the opponent in QF.

Why should NHL decide everything??? Such a arrogant comment from you!nhl isn't the superpower that should rule in international hockey.

There is no automatic bye to the semi-final in any international hockey tournament (as far as I know) so why should there be one here?

 

[slovakiasnextone]

This thread would not exist if Slovakia had finished 4th in their group.

 

[Lollipop]

There is no automatic bye to the semi-final in any international hockey tournament (as far as I know) so why should there be one here?

Because they had it before they removed it.

I think the international tournaments should have it because it give the round robin meaning.

To all people who defend the new rules: Sweden won all games in round robin and got maximum 12 points. What was the purpose of that?

 

[Swipes]

Where's the fairness with the group winner is unlucky and get the harder opponent than #2 or even #3. ???

There's no fairness and why should there be? If you want to win the gold medal, you should be able to beat anyone and not be looking for an easy route to the final! (hint: Sweden 2006 OG )