NHL will ruin International hockey

[FiLe]

I'd rather eliminate the players with "cultural ties" that never lived in the country. Really it's a hockey team, not a cultural team, people's "cultural ties" shouldn't matter.

Yet, that is the entire idea behind having a national team in the first place. Or what it should be: A group of people who recognize a nationality - in other words, certain cultural identity - as the thing that connects them. Club teams, in turn, are first and foremost hockey teams.

I am, however, thoroughly against using mercenaries, as in people who simply accept a country's passport to get to play in an international event. But if a person actually feels a cultural connection with the country he wishes to represent, that should not be hindered by arbitrary requirements.

 

[jekoh]

Yet, that is the entire idea behind having a national team in the first place. Or what it should be: A group of people who recognize a nationality - in other words, certain cultural identity - as the thing that connects them.

Let's be serious, national teams do not represent "cultures", they represent countries. Just look at multi-cultural, multi-national countries : they do not get to field or ice multiple teams.

I am, however, thoroughly against using mercenaries, as in people who simply accept a country's passport to get to play in an international event. But if a person actually feels a cultural connection with the country he wishes to represent, that should not be hindered by arbitrary requirements.

You can feel all the cutural connection you want, if you have not played hockey there, there's no reason why you should be allowed in that country's national hockey team. Instead you should be playing for your real country.

I mean doesn't it strike you as odd that all those "patriots" only ever play for their grandparents country when they're simply not good enough to play for their real country?

 

[FiLe]

Let's be serious, national teams do not represent "cultures", they represent countries. Just look at multi-cultural, multi-national countries : they do not get to field or ice multiple teams.

Countries and nations are very much cultural entities, since people living within them usually recognize a given set of societal rules - which change, if only ever so slightly, from country to country, nation to nation. And I don't mean the written law here, but simply that ingrown sense of understanding your fellow's habits and not feeling weirded out by them. For me, a person is kin when we - for the most part - speak the same language and know the same customs. Living inside some arbitrary line drawn on the ground is not a requirement. A country is often a nation's cultural bastion - but the entire nation does not have to be confined within it.

I mean doesn't it strike you as odd that all those "patriots" only ever play for their grandparents country when they're simply not good enough to play for their real country?

I know why they do that. And I already told you, I don't like mercenaries any more than you do - right by blood or no. But I'm willing to tolerate their presence if it's the requirement for allowing people to represent for cultural reasons.

 

[kabidjan18]

You can feel all the cutural connection you want, if you have not played hockey there, there's no reason why you should be allowed in that country's national hockey team. Instead you should be playing for your real country.

I hope this makes sense to someone but it certainly doesn't make sense to me. You should be playing for your real country, real country defined as the one you played hockey in? So if I was born in Finland but moved to Russia at 10 and played all my junior hockey in Russia while returning to Finland during the offseason and carrying only a Finnish passport I am somehow Russian because Russia is the place I played hockey in? You see this is IIHF logic and it's horrible. My country can be where I was born, or raised, or what my passport says, or where I culturally identify with the most, but no one defines nationality by where you've played hockey.

 

[FiLe]

I hope this makes sense to someone but it certainly doesn't make sense to me. You should be playing for your real country, real country defined as the one you played hockey in? So if I was born in Finland but moved to Russia at 10 and played all my junior hockey in Russia while returning to Finland during the offseason and carrying only a Finnish passport I am somehow Russian because Russia is the place I played hockey in? You see this is IIHF logic and it's horrible. My country can be where I was born, or raised, or what my passport says, or where I culturally identify with the most, but no one defines nationality by where you've played hockey.

Actually, if you only carry a Finnish passport, then the IIHF recognizes you as a Finn. However, if in this scenario you have acquired a Russian passport too - if only to make it easier to cross borders and move around the country you live in - then the IIHF says you're a Russian. Which doesn't, IMO, make it much better, since that kind of person would have the right in my book to consider himself a Finn as much as I do.

 

[kabidjan18]

Actually, if you only carry a Finnish passport, then the IIHF recognizes you as a Finn. However, if in this scenario you have acquired a Russian passport too - if only to make it easier to cross borders and move around the country you live in - then the IIHF says you're a Russian. Which doesn't, IMO, make it much better, since that kind of person would have the right in my book to consider himself a Finn as much as I do.

True, but my point was to illustrate how low where you played hockey is on the list of nationality markers. In my fictional example he had everything but where he played hockey, though, then my iihf logic jab isn't entirely true so touche.

 

[Psyfer]

Both my parents are Canadian but I was born and raised in the US if you ask me what my Nationality is I will say American don't see what is wrong with players making the same choice and choosing to play for the US instead of a Country they may not have a big connection to.

 

[jekoh]

Actually, if you only carry a Finnish passport, then the IIHF recognizes you as a Finn. However, if in this scenario you have acquired a Russian passport too - if only to make it easier to cross borders and move around the country you live in - then the IIHF says you're a Russian. Which doesn't, IMO, make it much better, since that kind of person would have the right in my book to consider himself a Finn as much as I do.

What people consider themselves is irrelevant, as it is none of a sports governing body's business.

If you have both Russian and Finnish citizenship and you have only ever played hockey in Russia and lived there most of your life so as to qualify for naturalization, then of course you should be playing for your real country Russia. That's just common sense.

 

[kabidjan18]

What people consider themselves is irrelevant, as it is none of a sports governing body's business.

If you have both Russian and Finnish citizenship and you have only ever played hockey in Russia and lived there most of your life so as to qualify for naturalization, then of course you should be playing for your real country Russia. That's just common sense.

Let's do some basic math here if you first represent your country at say a U17 or u18 tournament so presumably you're 16, you moved from Finland to Russia at 8 and you spend half the year, the summer, in Finland that math works out to 12 years in Finland and 4 in Russia. 12 is more than 4, 12 would be considered "most of your life" more than 4, that's nothing to do with where you played hockey that's just, wait for it, common sense. If you had a Finnish passport first then gained a Russian one it's only reasonable that you're a Russian not a Finn legally obviously, you will actually pay taxes to both governments I believe at least with American dual citizenship it works that way. Your entire idea is predicated on the assumption that where people play hockey is where they are legally or culturally or common sensically bound, and that doesn't make sense because puck-is-life but so are taxes, traditions, languages, etc...

 

[jekoh]

Let's do some basic math here if you first represent your country at say a U17 or u18 tournament so presumably you're 16, you moved from Finland to Russia at 8 and you spend half the year, the summer, in Finland that math works out to 12 years in Finland and 4 in Russia. 12 is more than 4, 12 would be considered "most of your life" more than 4, that's nothing to do with where you played hockey that's just, wait for it, common sense. If you had a Finnish passport first then gained a Russian one

I have no idea why you assume you'll be eligible to become a naturalized citizen of Russia if you don't even live there permanently at any point.

I can't even be bothered to read the rest of your nonsense.

 

[kabidjan18]

I have no idea why you assume you'll be eligible to become a naturalized citizen of Russia if you don't even live there permanently at any point.

I can't even be bothered to read the rest of your nonsense.

Citizenship is a lot more complicated than living somewhere a long time if you didn't know. Especially if you have a Russian parent and you are a minor there are a lot of different possibilities and this hypothetical example can be expanded to any country with any citizenship law. You chose to bear the burden of proof, your stance is that it is impossible for any person of any country to live in any other country a longer period than the country they played junior hockey in. Like if you were to say all cats are gray, I only need to find one cat that isn't gray or even the conceptual possibility, but I won't spend the time because I see that logic isn't your forte. Feel free to reply, but I won't be bothered to read the rest of your nonsense if you do so feel free to just rant to the person next to you about how stupid I am haha

 

[jekoh]

So the Finn through and through who only ever played hockey in Russia and has lived there for years turns out to have a Russian parent as well now.

That's a real great example of a guy who should be playing for a country other than Russia.

 

[FiLe]

The bottom line is that, a person should be eligible to represent a country if he...

a) Is a citizen of said country.

b) Feels that his national identity aligns with said country.

Where he actually lives and plays hockey in this case is irrelevant. After all, it's even called a national team, not a "country team". That alone indicates that it's a team for common nationals - and residence does not determine nationality.

And like I said, I'd be fully willing to eliminate all use of mercenaries if there is a way - as in people who have acquired citizenship of some country, but align with the national identity of another.

 

[jekoh]

The bottom line is that, a person should be eligible to represent a country if he...

a) Is a citizen of said country.

b) Feels that his national identity aligns with said country.

This getting absurd. Why in the world would a sports governing body give a fuck whether or not players feel their "national identity aligns with their country"? It's really none of their business.

If your national identity does not align with your real country, you know, the one you're eligible to play for, tough luck.

 

[aphyro]

A cat born in a stable is a horse i guess?

If you are born to two russian parents you are russian dosent matter where in the world you are born...

 

[jekoh]

A cat born in a stable is a horse i guess?

If you are born to two russian parents you are russian dosent matter where in the world you are born...

And a Russian who has acquired another citizenship and has never played hockey in Russia shouldn't be eligible to play for Russia, no matter where he was born. He can play for his country instead of his parents' country. You know, like Barkov does.

 

[FiLe]

This getting absurd. Why in the world would a sports governing body give a fuck whether or not players feel their "national identity aligns with their country"? It's really none of their business.

If your national identity does not align with your real country, you know, the one you're eligible to play for, tough luck.

Why it is so unfathomable to you that a player who's been a citizen since birth or early age, regardless of where he's actually played, should be allowed to represent said country?

For the umpteenth time, we're not talking about someone who wishes to represent on a whim, or someone who goes through a naturalization process due to sheer opportunism. Sometimes a person truly feels he's a national of one country while living in the other for whatever reason. Like maybe his parents living and working there. And it's not yours, or the IIHF's business to tell him he can't represent the country he wants to represent. It's exactly the kind of case where the governing body should give a frig. And you should be giving none, let alone be as presumptuous as telling this person what his "real" country is. Save the steam for those real mercenaries.

I'm starting to get the vibe this is one of those cases where the other person realized long ago what it is about, but argues simply because they're too stubborn to admit they were wrong.

 

[jekoh]

Why it is so unfathomable to you that a player who's been a citizen since birth or early age, regardless of where he's actually played, should be allowed to represent said country?

For the umpteenth time, we're not talking about someone who wishes to represent on a whim, or someone who goes through a naturalization process due to sheer opportunism.

For the umpteenth time, people's reason for choosing one country over another is none of our business, and make no difference whatsoever.

Sometimes a person truly feels he's a national of one country while living in the other for whatever reason. Like maybe his parents living and working there. And it's not yours, or the IIHF's business to tell him he can't represent the country he wants to represent.

Yes, it certainly is the IIHF's business to tell this player that he cannot represent the hockey team of a country he's never played in if he is eligible for a second country in which he did play. His feelings are irrelevant and do not give him any special right.

All that player has to do to become eligible for the first country is to play two seasons there. Not too much to ask to such a staunch "patriot".

I'm starting to get the vibe this is one of those cases where the other person realized long ago what it is about, but argues simply because they're too stubborn to admit they were wrong.

It's too bad you are not bright enough to realise that your opinion is merely your opinion, and that not everybody has to agree with it. Do you also get mad at people that do not agree with your opinion that apples are better than oranges?

 

[FiLe]

All that player has to do to become eligible for the first country is to play two seasons there. Not too much to ask to such a staunch "patriot".

Listen to yourself. First you argue that a player's "real" country is the one he's played in, no matter how long he has actually stayed in the other or how strong are his roots there.

But all of a sudden, these two years make all the difference? A player who has been a citizen of both A and B since birth, but lived only in A, is a "real" citizen of A, according to you, right? But now that he suddenly plays two years, which at that stage probably barely constitute a tenth of his life, in B, that magically becomes his "real" country now? Even if he may, up to that point, have played nearly a decade of hockey in A? You make no sense.

The bottom line is that those who have been dual citizens since birth or early age, subjecting them to the two-year rule is frivolous. It should be saved for players who are old enough and their obvious motivation for switching jerseys is not being good enough to play for their (only) country of origin.

 

[jekoh]

But all of a sudden, these two years make all the difference? A player who has been a citizen of both A and B since birth, but lived only in A, is a "real" citizen of A, according to you, right? But now that he suddenly plays two years, which at that stage probably barely constitute a tenth of his life, in B, that magically becomes his "real" country now?

There's really nothing "magical" nor "sudden" about living in a country for two years, and yes only once you have done that can you claim that country is your real country.

Your original claim was that you shouldn't even need those two years, and now you make it sound like it's not enough. Want to make it 4 years instead? That'd fine with me in theory (save for the fact it would probably make a lot of young players ineligible anywhere).

Every country in the world has a legislation that will allow foreigners to "suddenly" and "magically" not be foreigners any more after a few years in the country. That's hardly a new concept, nor a very difficult one to grasp even for you.

The bottom line is that those who have been dual citizens since birth or early age, subjecting them to the two-year rule is frivolous.

You're merely repeating your opinion over and over again. Let's agree to disagree and leave it at that.

 

[kabidjan18]

Lol, chill it file, you're talking to a person who thinks where you learned to play hockey is where you are a citizen. So if I picked up a taiwanese citizenship without ever living there (there are loopholes that allow people to do so) and then I visit there once, visit the one rink there and learn to play hockey I'm suddenly taiwanese. The other guy thinks that that nationality is like animal species, as if Russian and no Finnish cannot mate (cats and horses cannot). Trying reason on some is wasted effort.

 

[SladeWilson23]

A cat born in a stable is a horse i guess?

If you are born to two russian parents you are russian dosent matter where in the world you are born...

This doesn't mean he should be forced to play for Russia if they move to say Finland and he grows up and plays hockey in Finland.

 

[jekoh]

Lol, chill it file, you're talking to a person who thinks where you learned to play hockey is where you are a citizen. So if I picked up a taiwanese citizenship without ever living there (there are loopholes that allow people to do so) and then I visit there once, visit the one rink there and learn to play hockey I'm suddenly taiwanese. The other guy thinks that that nationality is like animal species, as if Russian and no Finnish cannot mate (cats and horses cannot). Trying reason on some is wasted effort.

If you pick up a Taiwanese citizenship, that obviously makes you Taiwanese disirregardless of whether or not you visit a rink.

But File says you should be allowed to play for Taiwan's national team right away, while I argue you should play hockey there for two seasons first before you are even eligible.

Good to see you agree that the former is unreasonable, too bad you' re not bright enough to understand that it's File's stance.

 

[FiLe]

But File says you should be allowed to play for Taiwan's national team right away, while I argue you should play hockey there for two seasons first before you are even eligible.

Good to see you agree that the former is unreasonable, too bad you' re not bright enough to understand that it's File's stance.

No, that's not what I'm saying. If you actually read what I said and rubbed two cells together, you'd realize that I was only willing to grant exemption to those who have acquired the citizenship at the age of 15 or younger. Because I think it's utterly unreasonable to demand a kid who's 13 to 15 years old to prep for the choice.

If a player is worth anything, the first time a national fed may come calling is when they're 16, to take part in an U18 event. So to prep for this, a player would have had to move to another country at 14, when it's still utter crapshoot whether they'll even receive an invite. And moving at 16 is still a big choice, especially if it means leaving behind an environment that has worked pretty well for you this far. It would also effectively mean skipping the U18 level for both countries.

Or, a player who has been born to parents who are nationals of the country he wishes to represent, speaks the language, roots for that NT and visits the country regularly, could just accept the invite of this other NT. Never mind it also makes him a four-year case and effectively locks him down for the rest of his career, especially if he wishes to play in the NHL one day. It's not the country he prefers, but hey, it's still international hockey and he gets to soak in the unique athmosphere.

And do you realize what is that? It's exactly the reasoning used by these mercenaries you so loathe.

 

[jekoh]

Or, a player who has been born to parents who are nationals of the country he wishes to represent, speaks the language, roots for that NT and visits the country regularly, could just accept the invite of this other NT.

Of course he should accept the invite of the country he's been living in for years, possibly his entire life, especially if he's gone the trouble of acquiring that country's citizenship. That's just common sense, and that's what the overwhelming majority does.

If he doesn't want to play for his country, he should man up and live with the consequence of his choices and stop the whining.