Fasel unhappy with NHLers skipping Turin

[jekoh]

The overall issue with which I have is the Olympic standards, and I already mentioned hockey was the exception to the rule where they allowed established, paid player to participate.

Hockey was an exception how ? Professionnals were participating in the Olympics in various sports long before the NHL finally decided to take part.

But the point is those who were paid were mainly from Eastern Bloc and the level of competition wasn't considered to be the same.

The level of the Soviet league was definitely comparable to the NHL in the 70s and 80s. After that, there were no Eastern bloc any more.

Or if you want to make this easier, professionals are considered the best players in the world at that sport, thus being the NHL.

That's a ridiculous definition, since not all the best players are in the NHL, far from that. Guys like Korolyuk or Morozov are better than at least half the NHL.

 

[sarge88]

Based on your post you seem to have no idea what the Olympics are. There are professionals all over the place in many different sports. This collection of NHLers are the best in the sport that these countries have to offer. Should we be taking someone off a recreational ski hill because the top skiiers are professionals? Should we send a local curling hack to the games because many play on pro tours? The Olympics should be about the very best not a collection of merely good athletes. That is my idea of the Olympics.

Well in the case of hockey, prior to what was it 1998, the U.S. Olympic hockey team was made up of players who weren't NHL'ers. If I remember correctly there may have been a few minor leaguers but overall they were a collection of college aged kids. The "professionals" if you will (and I'm not sure if AHL'ers were even included) were obviously not top level players. Peter Laviolette, may have been one, and he was a marginal player at best.

Ultimately, in the "team" sports, I am against any player competing in the Olympics if the primary league where they make their living is the top league in any country.

 

[SwisshockeyAcademy]

I understand they used players from their leagues, but they weren't considered at the same professional level leagues. The players were all young, look at team Sweden or Russia. The players got paid, but they aren't professionally paid or playing against real professional competition. Those leagues were their forms of University/College. Just because the definition of a professional is someone who gets paid to do their job, doesn't make a i.e. 19 year old Peter Forsberg playing a 19 year old Paul Kariya, professional hockey players.

My brother is finishing high school, and he wants to become a director. A friend of ours who organizes big concerts pays my brother to film them and make a dvd. Does my brother getting paid make him a professional? He's 17. Does that make him on the same level as Steve Speilberg?

You need to give your head a shake again.

I gave it a shake again. I do not agree with your point but the area is a little grey.

 

[twelve]

No point in forcing the players to play in the Olympics.

Some are simply too lazy to move their asses to the tournament.
Good riddance.

Some have valid reasons.
Nothing to be done.

What's important is that those players who are there show good hockey and fight for their points.

 

[Flonaldo]

I understand they used players from their leagues, but they weren't considered at the same professional level leagues. The players were all young, look at team Sweden or Russia. The players got paid, but they aren't professionally paid or playing against real professional competition. Those leagues were their forms of University/College. Just because the definition of a professional is someone who gets paid to do their job, doesn't make a i.e. 19 year old Peter Forsberg playing a 19 year old Paul Kariya, professional hockey players.

Obviously you have no idea what you're talking about. Today every player in every European league (Finland, Sweden, Russia, Switzerland, Germany, Czech, Slovakia) is a pro, yes, even the teens. All of them are paid as pros, none of them have other jobs. European pro leagues do not compare to college in any way.

Pros are pros, that simple. They don't become amateurs just because they're making 100k$, not 200k$ or 450k$. And they don't become amateurs because they're playing in a league that is only the second/third/fourth best in the world, not the best.

If Forsberg @ 19 playing in the 2nd/3rd best league in the world, getting pro money isn't "playing pro" then what makes Crosby a pro?

European teams at club or country level aren't "just young guys", where did you get that silly idea.

Europeans have played pro in Europe since the 60's/70's and those players have competed in the Olympics since then.

Pros in skiing, skating, ski jumping etc. etc. have competed in the Olympics even before hockey players. Back in the 50's being a pro was something hidden but it's been in the open for decades. Skiers, figure skates and other athletes make NHL money, a great many olympiates pull in seven figures.

 

[Connorrhea]

For the last freakin time, let me make this clearer for you people. The idea of a professional and an amateur, isn't MY opinion, it's the opinion of the Olympics.

Jekoh, again, I didn't say the level of competition wasn't the same, I said that the Olympics didn't consider those leagues professional on the same level as the NHL. And I said hockey was an exception, not the only exception. You need to read carefully.

Get it through your heads people, I am not saying that is the way the Olympics were, my point of view is that is the way the Olympics should be, but all of you like to twist my words.

Go back and read my posts if you don't believe me. I clearly said that "the Olympics don't consider", not "I don't consider." My arguments are giving the Olympic side of this, not my side.

 

[Flonaldo]

For the last freakin time, let me make this clearer for you people. The idea of a professional and an amateur, isn't MY opinion, it's the opinion of the Olympics.

Go back and read my posts if you don't believe me. I clearly said that "the Olympics don't consider", not "I don't consider." My arguments are giving the Olympic side of this, not my side.

The amateurs are those who do not receive pay for playing, thus indeed, before 1998, the majority of players were chosen from Universities, Colleges, and non-professional hockey leagues. The amateur rule is that if an athlete was found to be receiving pay for playing their sport, the olympic committee would automatically disqualify them. But hockey is one of the events with exceptions.

It used to be the opinion of the Olympics - but that was decades ago. For decades pro athletes have competed practically in all Olympic sports.

The Olympics used to consider anyone receiving any money from sports to be a "pro" and thus ineligible to participate. But that rule hasn't been applied for quite some time. There aren't any "exceptions" for hockey nor have there ever been. Pro athletes have been allowed to compete in the Olympics for decades now.

And if the rule was still imposed it wouldn't make any difference whether an athlete was making 100k$ in Europe, AHL or any other league vs. larger sums in the NHL.

Before 1998 the US and Canadian teams were made up of mostly college players. But all of the European teams had nothing but pros competing for them. And I'm not talking about teenage pros but 10-year NHL vets and many a like.

Here you can read the Olympic charter and maybe then stop representing the Olympics with your misinformation.

edit. Just fact-checking: the distinction between pros and amateurs was officially deleted from the charter in 1974 and all references to amateurism removed in 1986.

 

[HockeyCritter]

Canadian Press

2/11/2006 7:16:42 AM

TURIN, Italy (CP) - The president of the International Ice Hockey Federation is disappointed that some NHL stars will skip the 2006 Winter Olympics.

Rene Fasel said clubs should encourage players to compete at the Games because it is the biggest stage on which to promote the sport.

He was upset that players like Calgary Flames goaltender Miikka Kiprusoff will skip the Games to avoid aggravating injuries.

"This is a platform here," said Fasel. "The Olympic Games - 3.2 billion TV spectators, 200 countries - if we want to show our game to the world and make this promotion for hockey, for the game, for the NHL, for the IIHF, for the teams, this is the best place in the world.

"I would tell anyone who has this egoism just to work for their own team or their own profit, they should forget that."


Fasel said players want to compete at the Olympics because of the Games' prestige and because it is a unique experience.

The NHL is committed to sending players to the Games through the 2010 Olympics in Vancouver.

Fasel said he has not yet discussed extending the agreement with the NHL but is confident the league will want it to continue.

AMEN

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story/?ID=154443&hubname=nhl


Not only kipprusof, but naslund has 5p in 3 games after he withdrew from sweden.

Olympic hockey is not in any way, shape, or form remotely related to the NHL style of hockey. You are talking about a two/three week limited tournament where only the supposed “best-of-the-best†are allowed to play …… watching Olympic hockey is not the same thing as watching the Chicago or Atlanta. People who get “turned†on to hockey because of the Olympics (and I refute the numbers being spouted; hockey is among the least watched Olympic events (figure skating, skiing, and speed skating (go figure) are the most popular events --- or so said FoxNews)) will be severely disappointed when they turn into an NHL game (though with the reinstatement of tag-up off-sides and removal of the red line it will be less of one).

[sarcasm] And now dare NHLers put the needs/wants/desires of their NHL dream before what was once a glorious sporting event. [/sarcasm]

I know some Flyer fans who are more than a little angry with Forseberg because he sat out Flyer games yet is going to Italy.

 

[Connorrhea]

It used to be the opinion of the Olympics - but that was decades ago. For decades pro athletes have competed practically in all Olympic sports.

The Olympics used to consider anyone receiving any money from sports to be a "pro" and thus ineligible to participate. But that rule hasn't been applied for quite some time. There aren't any "exceptions" for hockey nor have there ever been. Pro athletes have been allowed to compete in the Olympics for decades now.

And if the rule was still imposed it wouldn't make any difference whether an athlete was making 100k$ in Europe, AHL or any other league vs. larger sums in the NHL.

Before 1998 the US and Canadian teams were made up of mostly college players. But all of the European teams had nothing but pros competing for them. And I'm not talking about teenage pros but 10-year NHL vets and many a like.

Here you can read the Olympic charter and maybe then stop representing the Olympics with your misinformation.

For the love of God! The very first few posts I made in this thread I explained how the Olympics used to be, I never said they were always like that.

My overall view is that if the NHL wants to participate, then why are players, owners and coaches using the excuse of resting injuries for the good of the team? If the Olympics are going to be missing NHLers, then why bother going. They should just go back to the old rules. NHLers were brought in to help promote the league, yet Mikka Kiprusoff plays over 50 games with success but says he needs 2 weeks off.

I did not mis-inform anyone. I gave the information, but you all assumed I meant it as definite and always being that way.

Flonaldo, you said that the terms were deleted in '78, so for only the last 25 years have the Olympics (winter/summer) been using pros. That is what I mean when I repeatedly said the Olympics USE to use..not always used.

 

[Borlag]

I know some Flyer fans who are more than a little angry with Forseberg because he sat out Flyer games yet is going to Italy.

I don't consider fans like that to be true fans at all. If the player wants to represent his own country in what is considered as one of the biggest if not the biggest international sporting event when it comes to hockey, then he should be allowed to do so without fans getting a hissy fit about it.

First and foremost, true fans are fans of hockey first, the team second.

 

[RangersFan88*]

People who get “turned†on to hockey because of the Olympics (and I refute the numbers being spouted; hockey is among the least watched Olympic events (figure skating, skiing, and speed skating (go figure) are the most popular events --- or so said FoxNews))

[sarcasm] And now dare NHLers put the needs/wants/desires of their NHL dream before what was once a glorious event. [/sarcasm]

I know some Flyer fans who are more than a little angry with Forseberg because he sat out Flyer games yet is going to Italy.

do you listen to yourself acctually

hockey is the biggest event in the olympics only because the north americans dont watch it that much because of the time schedule or whatever reason
! **** fox ,they're just blablabla ! the **** do they know about the world !
the whole ****ing world is watching this event and the biggest thing in this event is the hockey tournament
this is the biggest chance of international hockey promotion
i live in germany the only nhl i see is on the highlights on nhl.com ,i'm just shaking when i start of thinking that in 2 days the hockey really starts
and a HUGE REASON WHY is because the nhlers are going to play it just makes the tournaments so much more worth watching
and pro or amateurs
an olympic winner is the best of the best and i dont know why the best of the best (NHLers) shoulndt be going to turin....

i dont now why but ,are you serioulsy so ignorant calling the olympics a
"once glorious event"
why do u americans always live in a ****ing bubble where there is only the USA the AXIX OF EVIL and "the rest"
it makes me sick how u are talking about the olympics

and **** the flyers fans btw

still nobody of u is getting the olympic message
its very very sad .....

 

[Flonaldo]

Hell, NHLers shouldn't be allowed to participate because the Olympic games celebrate amateur athletics, but that's another debate for another time.

If players are allowe to choose, then the NHl should not be allowed to participate in the Olympics and allow amateur hockey players who play for the love of the game to represent their countries the right way.

Ah, the NATIONAL HOCKEY LEAGUE is the PROFESSIONAL ranks in case you didn't know that.

Did you not realize the Olympics are using NHLers for only the third time, or are you still learning hockey at the swiss hockey academy.

The amateur rule is that if an athlete was found to be receiving pay for playing their sport, the olympic committee would automatically disqualify them. But hockey is one of the events with exceptions.

The overall issue with which I have is the Olympic standards, and I already mentioned hockey was the exception to the rule where they allowed established, paid player to participate. But the point is those who were paid were mainly from Eastern Bloc and the level of competition wasn't considered to be the same.

Or if you want to make this easier, professionals are considered the best players in the world at that sport, thus being the NHL. Just look at figure skating. Once you become a professoinal (i.e. Kurt Browning, Katarina Witt), you cannot compete again at the Olypmics because as the title of "profesional", you are considered to be the best at your profession, not just because you get paid. That is where some of you are getting lost with my arguments.

They should just go back to the old rules. NHLers were brought in to help promote the league, yet Mikka Kiprusoff plays over 50 games with success but says he needs 2 weeks off.

I did not mis-inform anyone. I gave the information, but you all assumed I meant it as definite and always being that way.

Flonaldo, you said that the terms were deleted in '78, so for only the last 25 years have the Olympics (winter/summer) been using pros. That is what I mean when I repeatedly said the Olympics USE to use..not always used.

I just collected all of these.

1. The Olympics do not celebrate amateur athletics.
2. The NHL isn't participating, individual players are. Individual players could've participated before Nagano but there didn't happen to be a break in the schedule before '98.
3. The NHL is not "the professional ranks". In your opinion it might be. But not mine, not the IOC or anyone else associated with the Olympics for that matter.
4. There are current NHL'ers in the Olympics for the third time (because of the timing of the games). There were 10-year NHL vets way before '98.
5. Hockey has never had an exception of any kind in the Olympics.
6. Disqualification of pros used to happen, over 50 years ago.
7. All the while when the Soviets had their own pros, other teams had pros as well. The level of competition for the Soviets was comparable to the NHL, as witnessed by the Canada Cups.
8. Pros=best players. That doesn't exist anywhere nor has such a distinction ever been associated with the Olympics.
9. Figure skaters "turned pro" after the Olympics to make more money, they were making money before the Olympics. Turning pro for figure skaters meant joining tours - that's what made it impossible for them to participate, they couldn't practice nearly at the same level as what was required. You could call it the easy life.
10. There haven't been any "old rules" about the participation of NHL'ers (meaning rules that would've been changed in '98). The NHL just decided to give its players a chance to go to the games.
11. Pros were allowed to participate long before those clauses were removed from the Olympic charter. In the 30's some athletes were DQ'd - and only some, politics that is. In the 50's it wasn't practically enforced any more.

 

[HockeyCritter]

<<< ranting snipped >>>

I’d be inclined to listen to your bombastic ramblings if you demonstrated the ability to formulate a coherent thought without resorting to childish name-calling.

Yes, I fully believe that the Olympics have become a mere shell of their former glory. At one time making the Olympic squad actually meant something; it meant you worked your butt off; it meant honor; it meant being the pinnacle of athletic form; and it meant achievement a life long dream. At one time representing your country in the Olympics actually meant something. Now those ideals have been corrupted and perverted by the all-mighty dollar. No longer do we hear stories of athletes working their whole lives for a single moment on an international stage; gone are the days of playing for the love of the sport; and gone are the days of self-sacrifice. They’ve been replaced with stories of metal counts; stories of players suspended because they covered up a corporate logo; and stories of how much money the “games†will make. The reason the Summer/Winter Olympics were split had everything to do with generating revenue. The reason the NHLers were invited to the Olympics was to generate revenue.

The downward trend started in the mid-eighties and by the 98 Games it was in full swing. Every one (and I mean every one) in the Olympics from the hockey players, to the skiers, to the figure skaters, to the ski jumpers are all paid professionals ………some how the spirit of what the Olympics were supposed to be, what they were intended to be is completely missing/devoid of the last few Olympiads and that greatly diminishes the meaning, appeal, glory, and magnitude of the entire event.

While you may scoff at the dismay Flyer fans display regarding Forseberg’s decision to abandon his team to play in the Olympics, would you be so dismissive if Jagr decided he was too “injured†to play the last week before the Olympics yet managed to “heal†just in time to jet off to Italy.

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

The only issue that I have with Kipper not going is if he was pressured by the Flames not to attend, so he could start something crazy like 48 of CAL last 50 games (I'm assuming he'll start almost all of them after the Olympic break). He's a big boy who can make his own decisions. If he doesn't want to compete in the Olympics, that's his perogative.

Can't really blame guys like Naslund who are legitimately hurt, and have been gutting through it to play in the NHL.

My quick point about all of this? In 2002, Mario Lemiex came back, so a bunch of fans in PITT bought season tickets. Mario only felt good enough to play in 13 games that season, but was healthy enough to go to the Olympics in play. I don't think he played in a game after the Olympics that year, and I thought that was wrong on so many levels. Here was a guy that put his Olympic hopes ahead of the franchise that he owned, and the fans that supported the team. Just my $.02

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

I’d be inclined to listen to your bombastic ramblings if you demonstrated the ability to formulate a coherent thought without resorting to childish name-calling.

Yes, I fully believe that the Olympics have become a mere shell of their former glory. At one time making the Olympic squad actually meant something; it meant you worked your butt off; it meant honor; it meant being the pinnacle of athletic form; and it meant achievement a life long dream. At one time representing your country in the Olympics actually meant something. Now those ideals have been corrupted and perverted by the all-mighty dollar. No longer do we hear stories of athletes working their whole lives for a single moment on an international stage; gone are the days of playing for the love of the sport; and gone are the days of self-sacrifice. They’ve been replaced with stories of metal counts; stories of players suspended because they covered up a corporate logo; and stories of how much money the “games†will make. The reason the Summer/Winter Olympics were split had everything to do with generating revenue. The reason the NHLers were invited to the Olympics was to generate revenue.

The downward trend started in the mid-eighties and by the 98 Games it was in full swing. Every one (and I mean every one) in the Olympics from the hockey players, to the skiers, to the figure skaters, to the ski jumpers are all paid professionals ………some how the spirit of what the Olympics were supposed to be, what they were intended to be is completely missing/devoid of the last few Olympiads and that greatly diminishes the meaning, appeal, glory, and magnitude of the entire event.

While you may scoff at the dismay Flyer fans display regarding Forseberg’s decision to abandon his team to play in the Olympics, would you be so dismissive if Jagr decided he was too “injured†to play the last week before the Olympics yet managed to “heal†just in time to jet off to Italy.

Agree with you to a certain extent. In the Olypmic competitions where there are major profesional leagues, I agree with you 100%. Leagues see the Olympics as a way to market their respective sports, and it unfortunately goes downhill from their. I really think that a substantial portion of the big $ sport (basketball, hockey, tennis, etc) Olympic atheletes are at there strictly because they don't want the backlash of not playing for their country.

However, I still think the Olympics are "pure" in the less commerciallized events. How many people make their living doing the biathalon, luge, or the 10,000 meter skating events? Those people dedicate their lives to be in world class shape, and the pinnacle of their life is the chance to compete in the Olympics.

 

[SopelFan*]

He has never helped the Swedish nationalteam before, even when healthy, so why even bother. He´s a floating turd who depends on Bertuzzi and Morrison in order to get those easy tap-in goals.

He´s so overrated It´s just insane.

LOL

This is the dumbest post I have ever witnessed.

 

[RangersFan88*]

I’d be inclined to listen to your bombastic ramblings if you demonstrated the ability to formulate a coherent thought without resorting to childish name-calling.

QUOTE]


wow dude
1. i'm not english
2. who the **** gives u the right to tell me how to write my postings

know where u complained about my writing let me complain about your wannabe high-sophisticated cocky way of discribing your low headed thoughts

i think this fits in well

but lets get to the important part

these athletes competing in this olympic games
didnt they work hard their whole life to achieve this ?
did they not sacrifice everything for their sport ?
just tell me other hockey players or speedskaters or ski jumpers that derserve this more then the actual athletes ....

 

[SopelFan*]

Naslund isn't going because he is fighting two injuries and badly needs a break. The team who pays his bills would like to see him healthy when the NHL resumes, and Naslund decided that he wasn't healthy enough to provide for Team Sweden and should sit out and recover. Makes sense to me. If Forsberg gets hurt in Turin, I'll bet many Flyers fans will think differently...

Kiprusoff's situation is odd, however...

 

[Connorrhea]

I just collected all of these.

1. The Olympics do not celebrate amateur athletics.
2. The NHL isn't participating, individual players are. Individual players could've participated before Nagano but there didn't happen to be a break in the schedule before '98.
3. The NHL is not "the professional ranks". In your opinion it might be. But not mine, not the IOC or anyone else associated with the Olympics for that matter.
4. There are current NHL'ers in the Olympics for the third time (because of the timing of the games). There were 10-year NHL vets way before '98.
5. Hockey has never had an exception of any kind in the Olympics.
6. Disqualification of pros used to happen, over 50 years ago.
7. All the while when the Soviets had their own pros, other teams had pros as well. The level of competition for the Soviets was comparable to the NHL, as witnessed by the Canada Cups.
8. Pros=best players. That doesn't exist anywhere nor has such a distinction ever been associated with the Olympics.
9. Figure skaters "turned pro" after the Olympics to make more money, they were making money before the Olympics. Turning pro for figure skaters meant joining tours - that's what made it impossible for them to participate, they couldn't practice nearly at the same level as what was required. You could call it the easy life.
10. There haven't been any "old rules" about the participation of NHL'ers (meaning rules that would've been changed in '98). The NHL just decided to give its players a chance to go to the games.
11. Pros were allowed to participate long before those clauses were removed from the Olympic charter. In the 30's some athletes were DQ'd - and only some, politics that is. In the 50's it wasn't practically enforced any more.

For the last time, I am not referring to EVERY Olympics prior to 1998, and I am not only referring to the Winter Olympics.

Furthermore, if you asked anyone around the world where the best players play hockey, basketball, football and baseball, they will all tell you the four major north american leagues are the pros. It's a philosophical term, not a technical one which you are making this out to be. Go ask an athlete what his main goal is growing up as a young hockey player or baseball player... "to make it to the pros".

Again, about the exception, I did fact-checking myself and there were more than one sport (which i already indicated) that allowed athletes who got paid for their sport, to participate...this is a fact. I did not single out hockey. It may have been a long time ago, maybe not in the winter olympics, but it is a fact.

And yes, the old rules prohibited NHLers because they didn't have an agreement, therefore they could not participate, that means they were exempt from playing until they reached an agreement in '98, or unless they had contract issues and weren't part of any particular team.

Obviously we don't agree, so let's agree to disagree.

 

[grego]

To be more precise. NHL players could not participate without an agreement, because they were legally bound to play for their NHL teams. Since the Olympics conflicted with the NHL schedule, and no NHL player could make any team practises for the Olympics they were essentially cut out of the Olympics.

 

[Flonaldo]

Furthermore, if you asked anyone around the world where the best players play hockey, basketball, football and baseball, they will all tell you the four major north american leagues are the pros. It's a philosophical term, not a technical one which you are making this out to be. Go ask an athlete what his main goal is growing up as a young hockey player or baseball player... "to make it to the pros".

I think you're pretty oblivious to what people in Europe and around the world think. I do not know a single person in Finland who would refer to the NHL as pros. If you ask a Finnish hockey player what his goals he might answer "make it to the NHL". "Pro sports" is a purely American term.

Baseball, American football - no one even plays them. So no one would think of those leagues as "the pros". The NBA is the only league that is even mildly followed in Europe besides the NHL.

In Europe there isn't even a lot of talk of "pros". Mostly pro as a term is used to refer to professionalism - acting like a professional.

And "a pro" is a technical term when you talk of athletes being excluded from the Olympics based being a pro. Your philosophical definition of a pro has nothing to do with the Olympics.

Again, about the exception, I did fact-checking myself and there were more than one sport (which i already indicated) that allowed athletes who got paid for their sport, to participate...this is a fact. I did not single out hockey. It may have been a long time ago, maybe not in the winter olympics, but it is a fact.

Which sports and when? And when was this particular exception done for hockey?

And yes, the old rules prohibited NHLers because they didn't have an agreement, therefore they could not participate, that means they were exempt from playing until they reached an agreement in '98, or unless they had contract issues and weren't part of any particular team.

The NHL'ers were prohibited from the Olympics by the NHL ('cause they had contracts to play in the NHL during the games). Not the other way around, NHL players were not prohibited from attending by the IOC. And that of course had nothing to do with amateurism.

 

[Connorrhea]

Which sports and when? And when was this particular exception done for hockey?The NHL'ers were prohibited from the Olympics by the NHL ('cause they had contracts to play in the NHL during the games). Not the other way around, NHL players were not prohibited from attending by the IOC. And that of course had nothing to do with amateurism.

Heres' the link: http://www.aafla.org/6oic/primer_text2.htm

Read the Olympic Charter paragraph.

Here's a different link about the standards of competition:
http://energycommerce.house.gov/108/News/05182005_1531.htm

And finally, when I say the they didn't have an agreement, I do mean the NHL and the IOC.

 

[alecfromtherock]

Kipper should not have said he was nursing an injury months before the Olympics.

Had Kipper taken 1-2 weeks off in the NHL in addition to missing the Olympics people would not be as pissed off as they are currently.

As it stands now Kipper has played in almost every single Calgary game to date, rest during the Olympics and then play every single Calgary game after the break.

No that’s not snubbing your Country at all :

If Finland ends up in the top 4 without Kipper then all the better.

Hopefully a curse will be placed on Kipper for skipping the Olympics, a NHL = to the Curse of the Bambino.

As if Calgary needs a curse to miss the Stanley Cup again

Naslund missing the Olympics will not effect Finland ½ as much as Kipper.

Floppa has been injury prone his entire career so its no big deal that the Flyers had to do without his services a couple of games before the Olympics.

The Flyers need Floppa for the playoffs therefor it will not surprise me if he sits out games before the playoffs, whatever it takes to have him at his best.

Game 1 Floppa should be able to miss(Kazakhstan)
Game 2 is Vs Russia(must play)
Game 3 he can miss(Latvia)
Game 4 (USA)
Game 5 (Slovakia)

We are looking at 2-3 must-play games for Floppa in the above 5.