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

[Hockeyfrilla]

Now the czechs get easier QF!!!!

 

[Swipes]

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?

But it didn't exist in the older tournament though, did it?

As someone has already pointed out, if you win your group you will play the easier opponent in the QF. Sweden were unlucky in that Finland finished last in their group. Not a lot you can do about that really.

 

[Lollipop]

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 )

Agreed!

But shouldn't the teams be able to beat anyone in the round robin too. Why you are bring up og 2006?? What that good do you think??? It only proof how meanless the round robin is.

Why not make a lottery instead?

 

[MR4]

Firstly check your gramer I can't understand a word you just said.

Secondly, N ONE SHOULD BE GRANTED FAVOR OF ANY KIND.

Check your spelling buddy..

Also, all capitals is a big grammar mistake, so don't be crying about someone presumably Swedish typing English with some mistakes, if you can't even do it perfectly.

-----------------

I do agree with Lollipop though, it literally would've been better for the Swedes to throw a couple games than to win all four of them.

 

[Lollipop]

But it didn't exist in the older tournament though, did it?

As someone has already pointed out, if you win your group you will play the easier opponent in the QF. Sweden were unlucky in that Finland finished last in their group. Not a lot you can do about that really.

And that is fair?? That the team that won all games got the tougher opponent?? So once again what was the purpose for Sweden to win all games.

 

[Lollipop]

Now the czechs get easier QF!!!!

Yes, and how is it fair?? Czech R who was very close at play in relegation round now get the easier opponent than Sweden that won all games and is 7 points ahead of Czech R in the standings. So 7 those extra points were totally meanless.

 

[Swipes]

Why not make a lottery instead?

What, so randomly assign teams QF opponents and ignore the group standings? If that's what you mean, what would be the point in playing a group stage?

Anyway, they regularly change the rules in these tournaments so I wouldn't be surprised if they went back to the old system again. You might have to wait a bit though

 

[Swipes]

And that is fair?? That the team that won all games got the tougher opponent??

Fairness has absolutely nothing to do with this.

 

[Swipes]

And that is fair?? That the team that won all games got the tougher opponent?? So once again what was the purpose for Sweden to win all games.

The purpose of Sweden winning all their games was to play the easier opponent in the QF. And they would have if Finland beat Slovakia. Anyway, as I'm sure the players would tell you, there are no easy opponents when you reach the knock-out round. It's one game, so anything can happen!

 

[slovakiasnextone]

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?

So that they could play an (scoring wise) impotent Finland squad in the QF.

 

[Lollipop]

What, so randomly assign teams QF opponents and ignore the group standings? If that's what you mean, what would be the point in playing a group stage?

Anyway, they regularly change the rules in these tournaments so I wouldn't be surprised if they went back to the old system again. You might have to wait a bit though

Why play group stage at all? They are meanless anyway. Make a lottery instead.

 

[Skip2myBordyloo]

Why play group stage at all? They are meanless anyway. Make a lottery instead.

And make it a 3 day tournament? who'd want to watch that?

 

[teris]

The Swedes are just sour that this time they didn't get the chance to throw a game to get their preferred matchup.

 

[Lollipop]

The purpose of Sweden winning all their games was to play the easier opponent in the QF. And they would have if Finland beat Slovakia. Anyway, as I'm sure the players would tell you, there are no easy opponents when you reach the knock-out round. It's one game, so anything can happen!

I agree with there's no easy opponents. But still some are easier than other. No I still don't get the purpose. Since the the group win can't guarantee easier opponent then that argument is weak.

 

[Lollipop]

And make it a 3 day tournament? who'd want to watch that?

Who want to watch round robin which is totally meanless?? Who want watch games and then say ooh they are so lucky they lost?

 

[wwvdw]

Stop whining. There's a reasons Finland came 4th, they're not very good. In the semis we were always expected too get a the U.S. so then having to play a difficult quarterfinal against Russia is only in a Sweden's advantage.

 

[Lollipop]

Stop whining. There's a reasons Finland came 4th, they're not very good. In the semis we were always expected too get a the U.S. so then having to play a difficult quarterfinal against Russia is only in a Sweden's advantage.

Lol, people said the same last year. Who won the gold? Right Finland.

 

[Skip2myBordyloo]

Who want to watch round robin which is totally meanless?? Who want watch games and then say ooh they are so lucky they lost?

They aren't meaningless they determine who you play in the elimination round.

I'd want to watch.It's exciting watching the best up and coming youngsters in the game of hockey.

The possibility of seeing only one game of a guy like Rantanen or Hanifin or Nylander would leave much to be desired.

 

[Chara-3]

Lol.

Once we have this people will start whining that finishing 2nd does not guarantee you easier QF opponent than finishing 3rd.

 

[Lollipop]

They aren't meaningless they determine who you play in the elimination round.

I'd want to watch.It's exciting watching the best up and coming youngsters in the game of hockey.

The possibility of seeing only one game of a guy like Rantanen or Hanifin or Nylander would leave much to be desired.

Which means it's meanless to the powerhouses. How often do they not play the elimination round? It's only meanful for countries as Denmark, Switzerland ect. So maybe only those countries play about to play in elimination round and then a lottery.

BTW, what's exciting to watch the top prospects if we don't know if the list on purpose or not. It would be way more exciting if the top teams have something to play for.

 

[Lollipop]

Lol.

Once we have this people will start whining that finishing 2nd does not guarantee you easier QF opponent than finishing 3rd.

Lol the difference is so big. Do you really it's fair that Czech R with 7 points less than Sweden got the easier opponent?

 

[wwvdw]

Lol, people said the same last year. Who won the gold? Right Finland.

Did Finland finish 4th last year?

Even if your position after 4 matches doesn't say everything they say quite a bit about the quality of a team. Finland isn't that good, especially compared to last year.

 

[helgo]

I agree with there's no easy opponents. But still some are easier than other. No I still don't get the purpose. Since the the group win can't guarantee easier opponent then that argument is weak.

Teams play four games in the group stage and the team which gets the most points gets to play the team with the least points from the other group - seriously what is not fair about that? Yeah Sweden got Finland, well tough luck, but it is still the team with the best record to this day from one group against the team with the worst record from the other group, the country name or quality on paper doesn't matter. What you're basically criticizing is one of the main parts of competition - the fact, that there will always be some surprises, some competitors will overachieve while the others will not play to their full potential, but that is not a fault of the system, or to be more precise, that is not even fault at all. Everything should be decided on the ice, any other kind of solution (lottery, choosing your opponent) would be just tinkering with earned results ...
.

 

[Skip2myBordyloo]

Which means it's meanless to the powerhouses. How often do they not play the elimination round? It's only meanful for countries as Denmark, Switzerland ect. So maybe only those countries play about to play in elimination round and then a lottery.

BTW, what's exciting to watch the top prospects if we don't know if the list on purpose or not. It would be way more exciting if the top teams have something to play for.

The top teams play for easier opponents, Can't help it that Slovakia upset Finland, Can't help it that Denmark upset Switzerland.

Top teams shouldn't get byes.

May as well Give Canada's Olympic team an automatic spot in the Semi-Finals next go round with your reasoning since we are so superior when it comes to absolute best on best. Everyone else can play for the other spots.

 

[Lollipop]

Did Finland finish 4th last year?

Even if your position after 4 matches doesn't say everything they say quite a bit about the quality of a team. Finland isn't that good, especially compared to last year.

The top teams play for easier opponents, Can't help it that Slovakia upset Finland, Can't help it that Denmark upset Switzerland.

Top teams shouldn't get byes.

May as well Give Canada's Olympic team an automatic spot in the Semi-Finals next go round with your reasoning since we are so superior when it comes to absolute best on best. Everyone else can play for the other spots.

Not really. Canada needs to win their group nothing else.

Yes, they play for easier opponents. Still Sweden got the tougher opponent. The system is flawed.