Riga sole host for 2021 world championships (Mod warning in post #204)

[Jumptheshark]

@LordFalstaff

I really recommend you guys to read the statements from Fasel. He is very clear about the intention of Kummola & others. So, to sum it up, these people are under big influence of politicians. They are not making independent decisions, they are just following the pressure of politicians. So, they can not be taken seriously. And I say, they are hurting not just themselves (their credibility) but all European hockey. Fasel also says that "someone" has been making pressure on sponsors. Again, their decisions are not independent, at all.

Btw, any statement from Reindl?

1) I work with members of team GB-- have some insight but not a lot but as I previously posted(see number 2)
2) we know where the pressure is coming from and why
3) No politics talk
4) This problem started 2 years ago
5) No one knows just what is going behind closed doors and public statements need to be taken with a POUND of sugar right now
6) There is a big bear in the room that people are trying to avoid making angry and everyone is doing their best to make sure that the bear does not drop the gloves and try and organize a boycott of the games by starting their own games

there is reason why many people with different confederations do not believe the games will go off as planned

One suggestion is to reduce the number of teams in this championship

Canada
USA
Germany (money)
Sweden
Finland
Czech Republic
Latvia (host)
Swiss (money)

with Denmark, Team GB, Slovakia, Belarus, Norway, Italy and Kaskastan coming back in 2022. There won't be any relegation as the secondary games in Poland and Slovenia have already been cancelled


Finland federation is not the federation speaking behind closed doors. If it was just Finland the games would not have been moved.

 

[FiLe]

two other pieces. The Finnish and Swedish delegations banging their drums and then sponsors kicking up a storm.

The actual "Finnish delegation", represented by the Finnish Ice Hockey Association Chairman Harri Nummela and other FIHA officials have, in fact, mostly been hemming and hawing about the issue. It's just been Kummola, in his role as the IIHF Vice President, who's been very outspoken about this all - and he's been so, directly opposing Fasel, for months. He actually takes a bunch of blatantly open political stances in that article (which I left out because of the board rules) and directly admits that he's been talking about the issue with the President of Finland and various members of the Finnish Government. However, I don't think we need to develop any conspiracy theories about any politicians influencing him - if you ask me, it seems it was rather the other way around.

The bottom line is that it was likely Kummola who was throwing his weight around in an effort to strip Belarus the hosting rights. (Wouldn't be surprised if it turns out it was him who encouraged the sponsors to speak out in an effort to further twist Fasel's arm.) And it makes sense, given that he, like Fasel, is retiring from his IIHF post after the next IIHF Congress this year. So he's simply out of darns to give and is trying, for once, to do what he thinks is right before he's out the door.

 

[Jumptheshark]

The actual "Finnish delegation", represented by the Finnish Ice Hockey Association Chairman Harri Nummela and other FIHA officials have, in fact, mostly been hemming and hawing about the issue. It's just been Kummola, in his role as the IIHF Vice President, who's been very outspoken about this all - and he's been so, directly opposing Fasel, for months. He actually takes a bunch of blatantly open political stances in that article (which I left out because of the board rules) and directly admits that he's been talking about the issue with the President of Finland and various members of the Finnish Government. However, I don't think we need to develop any conspiracy theories about any politicians influencing him - if you ask me, it seems it was rather the other way around.

The bottom line is that it was likely Kummola who was throwing his weight around in an effort to strip Belarus the hosting rights. (Wouldn't be surprised if it turns out it was him who encouraged the sponsors to speak out in an effort to further twist Fasel's arm.) And it makes sense, given that he, like Fasel, is retiring from his IIHF post after the next IIHF Congress this year. So he's simply out of darns to give and is trying, for once, to do what he thinks is right before he's out the door.

It is not just the Finnish delegation that had a problem. They have just been more outspoken than others

 

[FiLe]

It is not just the Finnish delegation that had a problem. They have just been more outspoken than others

Allow me to rephrase. I just said that the Finnish delegation has hardly been outspoken at all. Kummola has. For months. And Kummola is not - at least officially - connected in any way to the Finnish association anymore.

I repeat, for emphasis: Yes, FIHA likely has had a problem like many other IIHF member associations. But they haven't really spoken out any more than other countries. (For which they've been pressured by the Finnish media.) Kummola is a Finn, but he doesn't represent FIHA anymore - he's just been acting in his position as the IIHF Vice President. Just like Fasel doesn't represent the Swiss delegation - which, as I understood, recently came out against Belarus hosting.

 

[Tuoppi]

Hopefully Bratislava and the finals there too so it would be a sure win for Finland. Without audience it would not matter where it is held why not even Luxembourg.

 

[vorky]

1) I work with members of team GB-- have some insight but not a lot but as I previously posted(see number 2)
2) we know where the pressure is coming from and why
3) No politics talk
4) This problem started 2 years ago
5) No one knows just what is going behind closed doors and public statements need to be taken with a POUND of sugar right now
6) There is a big bear in the room that people are trying to avoid making angry and everyone is doing their best to make sure that the bear does not drop the gloves and try and organize a boycott of the games by starting their own games

there is reason why many people with different confederations do not believe the games will go off as planned

One suggestion is to reduce the number of teams in this championship

Canada
USA
Germany (money)
Sweden
Finland
Czech Republic
Latvia (host)
Swiss (money)

with Denmark, Team GB, Slovakia, Belarus, Norway, Italy and Kaskastan coming back in 2022. There won't be any relegation as the secondary games in Poland and Slovenia have already been cancelled


Finland federation is not the federation speaking behind closed doors. If it was just Finland the games would not have been moved.

You talk about "games" which I understand as IIHF Worlds.

The poster@FiLe described it very correctly. All Fasel says is that Kummola is under the pressure of politicians, direct or indirect, and his words need to be taken as political statements.

But I say in my posts about something deeper. The representatives of national hockey federations play a dangerous game. Their reputation is in stake. And, they are not able to develop European hockey, club hockey. They are doing nothing positive for European hockey, just playing politics these days. Because I saw similar statements (as Kummola´s) from different representatives of national hockey federations. It is not their job. Their job is to develop the game of hockey, which they fail. I am asking, why are not they so strict on the NHL (transfer rules)? Why do not they make so big pressure on the NHL? But accepting the very first offer from the NHL, which is not beneficial for the European clubs? Why is their project (CHL) not playing? And I could ask more questions.

You say, "no one knows just what is going behind closed doors " Yes, correct. We all know that the President´s elections are this year. And I believe that some people dislike Reindl. It would be really disgusting if some people take the IIHF Worlds as hostage & campaign opportunity.

 

[Albatros]

Some people dislike Reindl even within the DEB, it would be futile to expect things to change under him.

 

[FiLe]

The poster@FiLe described it very correctly. All Fasel says is that Kummola is under the pressure of politicians, direct or indirect, and his words need to be taken as political statements.

Then it's word against word, as Kummola expressly denied having been under any pressure. He was, however, very open about his contacts with Finnish politicians, and why shouldn't he be? Because, at least in Finland, when somebody asks you to take a firm stance against human rights violations, that's not "pressure", or a thing you should frown upon, or hide, or be ashamed of. No, it's considered a commendable thing that's going to bring you tons of respect. It's not even seen as playing at politics - it's seen as basic human decency.

I wonder, is that not the same where Fasel comes from? Or where you come from?

 

[Jussi]

Do you even read what's being said? I just said that the Finnish delegation has hardly been outspoken at all. Kummola has. For months. And Kummola is not - at least officially - connected in any way to the Finnish association anymore.

I repeat, for emphasis: Yes, FIHA likely has had a problem like many other IIHF member associations. But they haven't really spoken out any more than other countries. (For which they've been pressured by the Finnish media.) Kummola is a Finn, but he doesn't represent FIHA anymore - he's just been acting in his position as the IIHF Vice President. Just like Fasel doesn't represent the Swiss delegation - which, as I understood, recently came out against Belarus hosting.

https://www.hs.fi/urheilu/art-2000007638858.html

”Olemme kertoneet Kansainväliselle jääkiekkoliitolle hyvin selkeästi, että Valko-Venäjällä ei voi eikä pidä kisoja pelata ainakaan tämänhetkisessä tilanteessa”, SJL:n puheenjohtaja Harri Nummela kertoo.

"Finnish hockey association chairman: We have informed the IIHF very clearly that under the current circumstances, there can't and shouldn't be a tournament in Belarus."

 

[Jussi]

Kummola talked about compensation for Belarus. Under the IIHF rules they're not obligated to pay anything for removing the hosting but will compensate for hotel reservations. That sum is expected to be 1-2 million euros. It will likely be paid to the Belarus association but where it will actually end up is anyone's guess.

 

[FiLe]

"Finnish hockey association chairman: We have informed the IIHF very clearly that under the current circumstances, there can't and shouldn't be a tournament in Belarus."

I didn't say they've been completely mum, just that they haven't been any more vocal than many other member associations. Very few countries, if any, have come out with any ultimatums, like threatening withdrawal, for example. I was driving home the other day and Nummela was being interviewed in the radio; he was asked about this and basically said, "we trust the IIHF to make the correct decisions". Of course, it's entirely possible he knew by then that the games are being moved and there's no need to present any public ultimatums on FIHA's part.

 

[vorky]

Then it's word against word, as Kummola expressly denied having been under any pressure. He was, however, very open about his contacts with Finnish politicians, and why shouldn't he be? Because, at least in Finland, when somebody asks you to take a firm stance against human rights violations, that's not "pressure", or a thing you should frown upon, or hide, or be ashamed of. No, it's considered a commendable thing that's going to bring you tons of respect. It's not even seen as playing at politics - it's seen as basic human decency.

I wonder, is that not the same where Fasel comes from? Or where you come from?

Perhaps it is perceived differently in the country where Fasel comes from. But generally, when somebody is using as argument the withdrawal, cancellation, relocation, sanctions etc, then he is playing the political game. Especially when all he is doing is talking to media. Like it or not.

I do not know Kummola, his opinion. But I see a very different approach among his steps & Fasel´s. While Fasel is trying to solve all things by negotiations (and he was obligated to talk directly to Belarus officials), Kummola is a talking head in media. If he wanted, he could join Fasel´s delegation in Minsk to solve the issue directly with relevant people. But he did not want to do it and chose to speak to the media instead. How can he be taken seriously? Even in Finland.

And if I were the IIHF CEO, I would obligate Kummola (and others speaking for relocation) to pay all costs from his (their) pocket, including the compensation to Belarus. Because, as Fasel says, the IIHF is obligated to compensate Belarus. It is an obligation from the agreement between the IIHF & Belarus signed a few years ago.

 

[Albatros]

If he wanted, he could join Fasel´s delegation in Minsk to solve the issue directly with relevant people. But he did not want to do it and chose to speak to the media instead.

What's the point when the relevant people categorically refuse to discuss those issues? Fasel was there to discuss questions related to the organization of the games, and that's what they discussed. Speaking to the media and trying to affect sponsors through public opinion is without a doubt the most effective way to address other matters so it's not hard to see why Kummola chose it. You can find distaste in it if you want, but it's not like there were other feasible avenues available.

 

[vorky]

What's the point when the relevant people categorically refuse to discuss those issues? Fasel was there to discuss questions related to the organization of the games, and that's what they discussed. Speaking to the media and trying to affect sponsors through public opinion is without a doubt the most effective way to address other matters so it's not hard to see why Kummola chose it. You can find distaste in it if you want, but it's not like there were other feasible avenues available.

So you just confirmed that Kummola acted politically.

 

[FiLe]

Perhaps it is perceived differently in the country where Fasel comes from. But generally, when somebody is using as argument the withdrawal, cancellation, relocation, sanctions etc, then he is playing the political game. Especially when all he is doing is talking to media. Like it or not.

Don't try to move the goalposts - I asked you if it should be seen as "pressure" or otherwise a despicable thing when two parties agree to work for the advancement of human rights.

Whether it can be seen as playing at politics or not is more debatable, but that was not the point here, especially since not all politics is despicable.

So, I ask you again: Is taking a firm stance against human rights violations a commendable thing where you come from? Yes or no?

I do not know Kummola, his opinion. But I see a very different approach among his steps & Fasel´s. While Fasel is trying to solve all things by negotiations (and he was obligated to talk directly to Belarus officials), Kummola is a talking head in media. If he wanted, he could join Fasel´s delegation in Minsk to solve the issue directly with relevant people. But he did not want to do it and chose to speak to the media instead. How can he be taken seriously? Even in Finland.

Another disingenuous argument. Kummola was not just talking to the media - he is the IIHF Vice President, a member of the IIHF Council, and was negotiating and rallying for support within that council to make sure the IIHF doesn't take tournament into a country that is dealing with serious security issues. He only came out in the media and told his story once the decision had been made. Fasel is the IIHF President, not the IIHF Dictator. He was defending Belarus' bid, but when Kummola along with the majority of the IIHF Council decided to withdraw the games, he couldn't overrule that decision.

Also, if you disparage Kummola for playing at politics, what was the meeting with Fasel and Lukashenko about? Why was Fasel meeting the President of Belarus instead of the President of the Minsk Tournament Organizing Committee? And if he was meeting the latter, what was the President of Belarus even doing there? If you're of the mind that politics and sports shouldn't mix - which isn't a bad stance at all - you can start by condemning that infamous hug.

And if I were the IIHF CEO, I would obligate Kummola (and others speaking for relocation) to pay all costs from his (their) pocket, including the compensation to Belarus. Because, as Fasel says, the IIHF is obligated to compensate Belarus. It is an obligation from the agreement between the IIHF & Belarus signed a few years ago.

If there is a compensation to be paid, it will be paid by the IIHF, not a single individual IIHF official. I'm not against compensating Belarus for the costs of organizing a tournament that never happened, but that compensation will be paid by the IIHF as a body, just like it makes decisions as a body. Again, the IIHF is not a dictatorship - the majority decisions of the IIHF Council dictate the federation's policy. And sometimes even the president of that body may find himself in the minority. So even if you were the "CEO" of the IIHF, you still couldn't dictate that the council members who disagree with you have to pay the compensation out of their own pocket.

It seems that you have trouble understanding how majority decisions work and would clearly prefer having just one guy who runs the entire show. I wonder why.

 

[Albatros]

So you just confirmed that Kummola acted politically.

It's not like his actions are somehow separate from the more general developments, you can choose whom you agree with but pinpointing one person is just counterfactual. If anything could be said about Kummola it's that his time at the IIHF is coming to its end and so there won't be any consequences for him when he chooses to speak freely. It's quite possible that there won't be a Finnish member in the IIHF Council soon, but it's not going to be related to this.

 

[vorky]

@FiLe

Starting with your last words. Do not be afraid, I understand all nuances. And I know how the majority works. All the problem here is that I prefer direct negotiations over talking to media.

Regarding the own pocket. Yes, of course, it will not be paid by individuals.

Guessing you understand all details. Of course, Fasel´s delegation met with the President of the Minsk Tournament Organizing Committee. But you need to understand the culture of the countries you are talking to. In some countries, it is more useful to meet with the highest-ranked official to solve the problem. Hence why he met the President of Belarus. Plus Fasel knows him personally, so he wanted to discuss the topic with him. I am asking why Kummola was not there if he is such a big advocate of human rights. Which I support. He would have a unique opportunity to directly talk to the head of state in trouble (with human rights). He could defend the idea of human rights, but he chose not to do so.

 

[Albatros]

I am asking why Kummola was not there if he is such a big advocate of human rights. Which I support. He would have a unique opportunity to directly talk to the head of state in trouble (with human rights). He could defend the idea of human rights, but he chose not to do so.

Fasel himself stated that other topics were denied by the hosts and trying to press anything would have ended the talks immediately.

 

[FiLe]

Starting with your last words. Do not be afraid, I understand all nuances. And I know how the majority works. All the problem here is that I prefer direct negotiations over talking to media.

The quoted bit below proves rather convincingly that you have no idea how majority decisions work.

Of course, Fasel´s delegation met with the President of the Minsk Tournament Organizing Committee. But you need to understand the culture of the countries you are talking to. In some countries, it is more useful to meet with the highest-ranked official to solve the problem. Hence why he met the President of Belarus. Plus Fasel knows him personally, so he wanted to discuss the topic with him.

So, when it's Belarus, playing at politics is good, but when it's Finland, playing at politics is bad? Where I come from, that's called a double standard. It's generally frowned upon.

I am asking why Kummola was not there if he is such a big advocate of human rights. Which I support. He would have a unique opportunity to directly talk to the head of state in trouble (with human rights). He could defend the idea of human rights, but he chose not to do so.

Now, here's how majority decisions work:

Kummola did not go to Minsk, because the negotiations were not between himself and the Minsk officials. The negotiations were between the IIHF and the Minsk officials. And Kummola is a member of the IIHF Council, the federation's ruling body. First, the IIHF Council - including Kummola - negotiated amongst themselves what improvements they wish to see in the host country's situation to allow the tournament to proceed. Once that had been settled on, by majority decision, they sent an envoy to Minsk to convey the results. That envoy was Fasel. He didn't go there to tell the Belarussians what he thought of the situation, he didn't go there to tell them what Kummola thought of the situation - he went there to tell them what the IIHF Council thought of the situation. Kummola didn't go to Minsk because he didn't have to go there. The human rights situation in Belarus was one of the things that made Kummola oppose Minsk hosting, but he still couldn't have said anything more than that was already baked into the IIHF Council's majority decision - as a matter of fact, if he had gone to Minsk to say anything more, as you think he should have, he would have directly acted against the majority decision. Thus you don't really understand how majority decisions work.

I don't know what kind of personal assurances Fasel gave to Lukashenko when they met. And if he gave any, he was within his rights, but Fasel's main job during that meeting was to explain what the IIHF Council had decided. If he failed to do that and instead told Lukashenko a bunch of beautiful fairy tales, then he wasn't doing his job, and the onus is on him. And if he did and the Minsk officials didn't listen, the onus is on them. Kummola telling the media his side of the story after the decision to withdraw the games had been made is nothing to frown upon, as by that time the IIHF Council had already negotiated with Lukashenko & Co.


Now, back to those human rights violations... Is taking a firm stance against them a commendable thing where you come from? Yes or no? You seem to be doing your darnest to dodge this question for some reason.

 

[Jussi]

Kummola also said the IIHF council had already made the decision before sponsors even spoke publicly.

 

[MrGeno101]

Does it even matter where they play? they will probably still play without an audience. That they took away from the Belarus championship a year like this makes no difference really if you think about it. But with this decision, the IIHF makes the ''western world'' happy, I guess.

 

[lilidk]

Nice to know that international hockey is wholly owned by corporations.

Just Wake up?

 

[GX]

An interesting idea appeared on Latvian media yesterday - apparently, Lithuania has offered help to Latvia, to host a part of the tournament. That would be odd, but, without their NT requesting a place in Top Div, it would probably be a slightly safer scenario for two groups from logistics standpoint. This topic doesn't allow me to go into, why Lithuania might be interested, but still some news.

N.B. Latvian government will likely make no exceptions for this tournament concerning how many people can watch them. Currently live audiences for indoor sports have been banned entirely since November. In September, October 1000 people were allowed to attend games at Arena Riga. Let's hope that we have improvements by May, but those still will be last-minute decisions by the Latvian government, so, I guess, will limit severely foreign fans planning their trips 1-2 months in advance.

 

[vorky]

@FiLe

Do not be worry, I understand all details regarding the business process in organisations like the IIHF.

All your argument is that Kummola is an advocate of the idea of human rights. And it is great. We both disagree in a way how he should defend the idea of human rights. You prefer him to speak to media or other IIHF Council members. Btw, speaking to the IIHF Council members is very easy if all or majority share the same opinion with Kummola. But I would prefer the direct (Kummola´s) dialogue with the head of state in trouble. That would be much effective way of how to point out that human rights are breaking in Belarus. I know that Fasel was an envoy here. But Kummola should persuade other IIHF Council members that the topic of human rights is a very important message in that meeting and he - Kummola - will personally speak about it to the head of state. My conclusion is that he failed with his mission. Speaking to media, even after the decision, is not enough. It is fine & we should give him a credit for it, but simply, it is not enough.

 

[FiLe]

Do not be worry, I understand all details regarding the business process in organisations like the IIHF.

I'm glad that you do, now that it was very thoroughly explained to you.

All your argument is that Kummola is an advocate of the idea of human rights. And it is great.

That's still not a direct answer to my question. But with you, I'll take what I can get, I suppose. However, if we both agree that defending human rights is a great thing, we can also agree that a man can be a defender of human rights by his own volition, right? That he does not need to be pressured by anyone? If so, I'm quite inclined to believe Kummola when he says he didn't feel any pressure when talking with politicians, as you literally can't be pressured into agreeing with something you already agree with. So, it would appear to be that Fasel is wrong and Kummola wasn't pressured, he was simply coordinating his efforts with Finnish state actors - something he has never denied, on the contrary.

Speaking of which, have you considered that it might have been Fasel, and not Kummola, who was feeling some pressure? I won't detail the methods, as you appear to be already quite familiar with them.

We both disagree in a way how he should defend the idea of human rights. You prefer him to speak to media or other IIHF Council members. Btw, speaking to the IIHF Council members is very easy if all or majority share the same opinion with Kummola. But I would prefer the direct (Kummola´s) dialogue with the head of state in trouble. That would be much effective way of how to point out that human rights are breaking in Belarus. I know that Fasel was an envoy here. But Kummola should persuade other IIHF Council members that the topic of human rights is a very important message in that meeting and he - Kummola - will personally speak about it to the head of state. My conclusion is that he failed with his mission. Speaking to media, even after the decision, is not enough. It is fine & we should give him a credit for it, but simply, it is not enough.

And I'd prefer that all the nasty wolves of the world would stop eating all the cute little sheep and become vegetarians. Unfortunately, some things just can't be done. It was, after all, very explicitly reported that the Belarussian officials stopped listening the moment the IIHF officials brought the human rights issues up. As a matter of fact, they aren't listening to a large swath of their own citizens who appear to be very, very concerned about the matter. If you haven't heard about that, maybe you should consider expanding your platter of news sources. But we don't have to go there, as I believe it would go dangerously close to breaking the "no politics" rule.

And if the Belarussian officials wouldn't listen, what avenues were there left for Kummola and others concerned about these issues? Well, trying to influence the IIHF Council members. And in that, I'd say he was being rather successful, given that Minsk was stripped of its hosting rights. So in the end, he settled to speaking about the issue with people he thought might listen, as in other IIHF Council members, and whoever there might be in the general public. If we forego all the evidently futile efforts - which you appear to say he should have tried anyway - we can quite safely say he did what he could, given his position was simply the IIHF Vice President and not, say, the Emperor of the World. So he and the others in the IIHF Council who might have agreed with him did what they had the power to do, which was stripping Minsk of its hosting rights.

The unruly child had had enough stern talking-tos - and had apparently learnt nothing. So, it was time to cancel the trip to Disneyland. Now, we'll see what the child has to say the next time somebody tries to bring the topic up.

And I have to say, I'm quite pleasantly surprised by the results of this conversation. After all, you clearly went from saying Kummola did something dirty to saying Kummola did a good thing, even hoping he could have done more. I didn't expect quite a result, to be honest.