Should the Women's World Championship be held in conjuction with the Men's tourney?

[habsrule4eva3089]

Embarrassing attendance in Malmo, there's no way you can't even fill a home team's game in such a small arena.

Begs the question, in order to maximize the growth of the Women's game should the event be held alongside the Men's tournament in the same city perhaps just before their tournament begins or a similar plan.

What ideas would work in Europe, after offering the most entertaining Hockey games seen at Sochi, it's been embarrassing the last couple of Worlds.

Click to read more...

 

[joe89]

Embarrassing attendance in Malmo, there's no way you can't even fill a home team's game in such a small arena.

Begs the question, in order to maximize the growth of the Women's game should the event be held alongside the Men's tournament in the same city perhaps just before their tournament begins or a similar plan.

What ideas would work in Europe, after offering the most entertaining Hockey games seen at Sochi, it's been embarrassing the last couple of Worlds.

Top league in Sweden had an average of 102 spectators this season. The small arena you're referring to can cover ~4000 for the tournament and about 5500 normally.

 

[habsrule4eva3089]

Top league in Sweden had an average of 102 spectators this season. The small arena you're referring to can cover ~4000 for the tournament and about 5500 normally.

Are they not promoting the tournament?

Just give the tickets to school kids across Malmo as done across Canada for tournaments that don't sell. At least have spectators, these athletes deserve it, this is high quality Hockey that girls across Sweden can take inspiration from especially if you look at personal stories ala Erika Grahm.

 

[Jonimaus]

Make them play better or give away the tickets for free to people who are interested.

 

[habsrule4eva3089]

Make them play better or give away the tickets for free to people who are interested.

Have you seen the progression of Women's Hockey lately? Watch back tapes from 10 years back, it's come A LONG LONG WAY.

Women's Tennis, Basketball, Skiing, Biathlon, Figure Skating, I can go on all attract well, why is it this tournament only attracts well in Canada and the Olympics.

Heck watch the skill level of Japan, who's the surprise of this tournament, mighty impressive.

They should try one year to hold this tournament just prior to the Men's tournament in the host city and see the reaction. I'm sure you'd be able to attract crowds in Europe.

 

[Jonimaus]

Have you seen the progression of Women's Hockey lately? Watch back tapes from 10 years back, it's come A LONG LONG WAY.

Women's Tennis, Basketball, Skiing, Biathlon, Figure Skating, I can go on all attract well, why is it this tournament only attracts well in Canada and the Olympics.

Heck watch the skill level of Japan, who's the surprise of this tournament, mighty impressive.

I enjoy a lot of womens sports. There's 2 I do not enjoy however, womens hockey and football, and it's not because I haven't given them a chance, I watched a lot of the football games last tournament, as it was hosted in Sweden, the quality is just not high enough for me to enjoy it. It's the same reason I don't watch my local division 3 or 4 teams in said sports, lack of quality, and based on attendance I would guess I'm not alone having this opinion.

 

[Jussi]

Have you seen the progression of Women's Hockey lately? Watch back tapes from 10 years back, it's come A LONG LONG WAY.

Women's Tennis, Basketball, Skiing, Biathlon, Figure Skating, I can go on all attract well, why is it this tournament only attracts well in Canada and the Olympics.

Heck watch the skill level of Japan, who's the surprise of this tournament, mighty impressive.

They should try one year to hold this tournament just prior to the Men's tournament in the host city and see the reaction. I'm sure you'd be able to attract crowds in Europe.

If you watched Finland's games from Nagano to basically every Olympics after it, you'd see that we've regressed. While we have elite goalies now (which we didn't back then), we are really lacking the top offensive defenders and forwards. Even though she is widely regarded as one of the best women's hockey players ever and a generational team sports talents in Finland, a 41 year old Riikka Välilä (formerly Nieminen) shouldn't still be leading the team in scoring. Games against Canada and Finland we're much closer in the 90's, this year (and last) we lost again with wide margins. It's Canada and USA who are advancing, that I will give you. Considering the resources they have at their disposal, they should be. Rest of the world's women don't have that luxury.

 

[FiLe]

If you watched Finland's games from Nagano to basically every Olympics after it, you'd see that we've regressed. While we have elite goalies now (which we didn't back then), we are really lacking the top offensive defenders and forwards. Even though she is widely regarded as one of the best women's hockey players ever and a generational team sports talents in Finland, a 41 year old Riikka Välilä (formerly Nieminen) shouldn't still be leading the team in scoring. Games against Canada and Finland we're much closer in the 90's, this year (and last) we lost again with wide margins. It's Canada and USA who are advancing, that I will give you. Considering the resources they have at their disposal, they should be. Rest of the world's women don't have that luxury.

In large part, this regression happened only over the last couple of years. Our previous coach Pieniniemi practically concentrated on developing a playstyle that kept the score close against USA and Canada - as in, tight defensive game and hope for an odd goal or two - but in the process, the team forgot how to beat those opponents they should be a step ahead of. Sochi was the epitome of this - while the scores against the big two were close, our girls just looked lost versus Switzerland and Sweden, both games they should have been in control of.

This year's opener against Russia showed that Räsänen has more or less managed to take us back to the preceding situation - no chance against the North American squads, but the right idea is back when playing against an opponent more on our own level. I know it sounds like a lot to say for a game that went into SO - but when compared to Sochi, they really didn't look like they were just scraping to win anymore.

While a win against USA and Canada looks to be even further away, I actually prefer this. If Finland, or any country, is to become a constant challenger for the big two, the path to that position should become through gradual development of play rather than resorting to that page of the book the little guys refer to when they wish to pull an upset.

 

[Yabob]

Top league in Sweden had an average of 102 spectators this season. The small arena you're referring to can cover ~4000 for the tournament and about 5500 normally.

The fact that it's held smack in the middle of the SHL playoffs probably doesn't help either. Or that not one, but two of the local teams in Malmö are involved in important qualification games for next season at the moment.

 

[Mikwammichi]

I think most people don't go to women's games because we're creatures of habit/custom and it's hard to break into a new market. We do what's easier/go with the crowd. So if the games were regularly side-by-side, like in the Olympics, attendance should increase. Not a bad idea actually.

I've never been much of a spectator of anything, but women's hockey is something I'd go to if I were nearby and didn't have plans. I wish my husband would pick me up from work and surprise me with a few tickets to a CWHL game some day I enjoy seeing the development of the women's game and seeing where an early start and proper intense training will take these players. Maybe nothing large-scale will come of it, but then maybe it will be a part of history one day just like the old timey men's hockey is part of history now, as different as it is from the modern men's game.

IMO, for any hockey fan to actually watch a well-matched women's hockey game and say they didn't enjoy it is hard to believe. Unless they're like 16 and have no attention span and are awkward around females. Or 26 and have no attention span and are jealous that these women get to play on the world stage while raising 3 kids, and they didn't. I think for a hockey fan to NOT enjoy women's hockey, it's because they're coming into it with an attitude or opinion - some elitist "not the highest level of sport hum hum" or "women can never play at the same level tisk tisk." Then I hope they never have the displeasure of sitting through quite a few of the duller NHL games. If you want to only watch the best, watch out! You might end up wasting more than a few hours on some games Obviously not every team is the best/fastest. Some are barely in the race.

Now if PAYING $ to watch "lower-level" is the issue, MLSE would be broke. They're not, becuase of marketing, image, and tradition. Honestly, some women's games are like 10 bucks - so in my city, you can watch a lopsided predictable-outcome "NHL" game for more than $100, with loud ugly "fans," or a game where anything can happen for $10 with polite passionate supportive fans who care about hockey, not just men's hockey.

But, hey, Go leafs go!


(Disclaimer: I'm not from Toronto, I don't play competitively, and am easily entertained. I'll even watch young teens' hockey (whatever that is called - bantam?) on TV because even though they mess up a LOT, it's fun to watch them learn and figure it out. But I wouldn't pay to watch it )

 

[Urbanskog]

IMO, for any hockey fan to actually watch a well-matched women's hockey game and say they didn't enjoy it is hard to believe. Unless they're like 16 and have no attention span and are awkward around females. Or 26 and have no attention span and are jealous that these women get to play on the world stage while raising 3 kids, and they didn't. I think for a hockey fan to NOT enjoy women's hockey, it's because they're coming into it with an attitude or opinion - some elitist "not the highest level of sport hum hum" or "women can never play at the same level tisk tisk." Then I hope they never have the displeasure of sitting through quite a few of the duller NHL games. If you want to only watch the best, watch out! You might end up wasting more than a few hours on some games Obviously not every team is the best/fastest. Some are barely in the race.

Eh, the Finnish national team gets beaten down by 15-16 year-old's on a regular basis. Currently, Riikka Välilä is one of the best players in the national team despite retiring for ten years prior to her return.

The level of play is just simply atrocious.

 

[Mikwammichi]

Maybe it's just that some people believe in men playing hockey/sports, but don't believe in women playing. It just doesn't resonate with them or impress them. Sports makes them feel manly so why would women do it? Maybe those people could stay in men's hockey discussions. There are still a lot of people who feel that way, or there are at least a few who like to talk loudly, and a LOT, to make it seem like there are a lot of them. They couldn't handle being less valid or less heard.

Eh, the Finnish national team gets beaten down by 15-16 year-old's on a regular basis. Currently, Riikka Välilä is one of the best players in the national team despite retiring for ten years prior to her return.

The level of play is just simply atrocious.

Really, atrocious? That's helpful. Was it the falling, the missed passes, the weak shots? The lack of energy? How do we address this? Note: I don't think you need to address falling, because falling isn't really a negative outcome in my mind. If I'm a pro-level anything, it's faller.

So do you think women should bother, then? Do you think in order for it to be a valid sport, women have to be able to play against men competitively? Or do you think that with programs for young girls and a push towards a hockey career and serious performance, and addresses health and physical difference more women have, the next generation would be consistently great players? Even if you personally don't enjoy watching women play against each other, and they never play against men, do you think they could ever be less atrocious?

Btw, comparing women to teenage boys or men is a dumb argument meant purely to insult and everyone knows it. If you're over 16, think about what you're saying. If you're under 16, find new role models.

Leafs get beat down by everybody on a regular basis - atrocious! But we give them a chance. And our money. Well, I don't. It's painful to watch. Most of the boys teams in each league probably get regularly beat down by the best boys teams, but we don't refuse to acknowledge them as valid players. We accept that it's natural that they should play if they enjoy it and we cheer them on.

I have no problem with men and women playing against each other at a recreational level, I love playing against the boys, and my friends all play non-checking, so the incidental contact is fun. But it's silly to think it's only a valid sport if we men and women together competitively - unless it's like boxing where there are weight categories - but based on muscle mass! My recent 170-lb weigh-in had its but kicked by my friend's 135 I had more total muscle but too much fluff dragging me down, she was younger and more streamlined Probably less lazy too.

TL DR - as for the question, yes, let's have women play next door and during the same weekend as men's big tournaments and games - good opportunity for everyone.

 

[Jonimaus]

Btw, comparing women to teenage boys or men is a dumb argument meant purely to insult and everyone knows it. If you're over 16, think about what you're saying. If you're under 16, find new role models.

It's really not. For most people it has absolutely nothing to do with them being women. Womens skiing is bigger than mens in Sweden, and the only sports athlete in Sweden that comes even close to being close to rival the popularity of Ibrahimovic is a female cross-country skiier. The problem is that in ice hockey the lack of quality between the skill levels is extremely obvious, which makes it hard for a lot of people to enjoy.

 

[Urbanskog]

Maybe it's just that some people believe in men playing hockey/sports, but don't believe in women playing. It just doesn't resonate with them or impress them. Sports makes them feel manly so why would women do it? Maybe those people could stay in men's hockey discussions. There are still a lot of people who feel that way, or there are at least a few who like to talk loudly, and a LOT, to make it seem like there are a lot of them. They couldn't handle being less valid or less heard.



Really, atrocious? That's helpful. Was it the falling, the missed passes, the weak shots? The lack of energy? How do we address this? Note: I don't think you need to address falling, because falling isn't really a negative outcome in my mind. If I'm a pro-level anything, it's faller.

So do you think women should bother, then? Do you think in order for it to be a valid sport, women have to be able to play against men competitively? Or do you think that with programs for young girls and a push towards a hockey career and serious performance, and addresses health and physical difference more women have, the next generation would be consistently great players? Even if you personally don't enjoy watching women play against each other, and they never play against men, do you think they could ever be less atrocious?

Btw, comparing women to teenage boys or men is a dumb argument meant purely to insult and everyone knows it. If you're over 16, think about what you're saying. If you're under 16, find new role models.

Leafs get beat down by everybody on a regular basis - atrocious! But we give them a chance. And our money. Well, I don't. It's painful to watch. Most of the boys teams in each league probably get regularly beat down by the best boys teams, but we don't refuse to acknowledge them as valid players. We accept that it's natural that they should play if they enjoy it and we cheer them on.

I have no problem with men and women playing against each other at a recreational level, I love playing against the boys, and my friends all play non-checking, so the incidental contact is fun. But it's silly to think it's only a valid sport if we men and women together competitively - unless it's like boxing where there are weight categories - but based on muscle mass! My recent 170-lb weigh-in had its but kicked by my friend's 135 I had more total muscle but too much fluff dragging me down, she was younger and more streamlined Probably less lazy too.

TL DR - as for the question, yes, let's have women play next door and during the same weekend as men's big tournaments and games - good opportunity for everyone.

I mean no disrespect, I'm just saying how it is. Hayley Wickenheiser is often regarded as the best female hockey player in history. He had a short stint (10 games) with Salamat in the second-tier of Finnish hockey, and the level of play was clearly way too high for her.

 

[we like our team*]

men fill up arenas to watch terrible echl and high school teams but cross their arms and sneer at the suggestion of watching women's hockey

 

[habsrule4eva3089]

Right, level of play is horrible. These are athletes competing to the best of their abilities just like the men. Your telling me there was one game in the NHL or KHL or any professional league in Europe or Men's Olympic Hockey that was superior to the Women's Gold Medal game in 2014?

There's not one game this year that even matches the intensity and excitement that game had.

Should we not watch Women's Tennis because they can't hit as hard as Nadal, or Women's skiing because they're not as fast as Aksel Lund Svindal, or the parathletes that perform to their best, that's the stupidest argument you can put up. Elitist, sexist, whatever you want to call it.

Remind me when we see a game that is superior to the Canada vs. USA in the next couple of years, because we certainly won't.

 

[Jonimaus]

Right, level of play is horrible. These are athletes competing to the best of their abilities just like the men. Your telling me there was one game in the NHL or KHL or any professional league in Europe or Men's Olympic Hockey that was superior to the Women's Gold Medal game in 2014?

There's not one game this year that even matches the intensity and excitement that game had.

Should we not watch Women's Tennis because they can't hit as hard as Nadal, or Women's skiing because they're not as fast as Aksel Lund Svindal, or the parathletes that perform to their best, that's the stupidest argument you can put up. Elitist, sexist, whatever you want to call it.

Remind me when we see a game that is superior to the Canada vs. USA in the next couple of years, because we certainly won't.

Then you can watch womens hockey, and if you can enjoy it, then good for you. I don't watch it just as much as I don't watch division 3 hockey, because the quality is not high enough for me to enjoy it.

I'll continue watching sports events I deem worth my time, the gender of the participants doesn't matter **** to me. For me there are only 2 sports I watch the men play where I do not watch the women, and it's football and hockey.

You can call it sexist as much as you want, but that's just beyond stupid.

Remind me when we see a game that is superior to the Canada vs. USA in the next couple of years, because we certainly won't.

That game probably ment a whole lot to people outside of Canada and USA.

 

[Mikwammichi]

I mean no disrespect, I'm just saying how it is. Hayley Wickenheiser is often regarded as the best female hockey player in history. He had a short stint (10 games) with Salamat in the second-tier of Finnish hockey, and the level of play was clearly way too high for her.

But why does she need to play against men in order to be good or enjoyable to watch? Competing against men shouldn't even be the goal. Forget about that, competitively.

I personally don't like boxing but the analogy is valid - we don't expect Pacquiao or Mayweather to fight against Ali or Tyson. And we don't say "well I wouldn't watch them because they're no match for Tyson." It's the matching I'm most interested in, though better consistent smart play is the goal for everyone. Bad hockey is hard to watch unless it's to support a cause - family, friend, community.

If you don't enjoy it because it isn't the fastest most consistent/precise/hard-hitting etc, fine. Don't watch it. But at least some people just have a problem with women having fun and being fast and strong and skilled as women or for some political/ideological reason.

 

[Cursed Lemon]

men fill up arenas to watch terrible echl and high school teams but cross their arms and sneer at the suggestion of watching women's hockey

Virtually all of those teams would wreck the Canadian womens' Olympic squad, and they involve hitting, so...

 

[habsrule4eva3089]

It's obvious most of the posters on this side of the board are older because a lot of young people watch these amazing athletes also due to the fact most of these girls are so damn cute lol.

In all seriousness, some of the games seen today are more entertaining then some NHL Games, the robotic play of every professional Hockey gets so boring. I feel sorry for people who have to watch NHL Hockey every day of their lives. How it doesn't feel like torture baffles me. Maybe it's just International Hockey seems so much more pure, guess that's why the World Juniors is so much more exciting as well.

 

[habsrule4eva3089]

Sweden vs. Russia was a great game.

Finland looked completely different with Karvinen out there. Will be fun to see if the Finns can keep it close vs. Canada.

 

[Mikwammichi]

Virtually all of those teams would wreck the Canadian womens' Olympic squad, and they involve hitting, so...

So.... care to finish your thought? "So what", maybe?

If you're saying that properly trained young males are generally faster, stronger, hit harder, and are more consistently performing at hockey than pretty-well trained females, what other revelations do you have for us? How old are you?

The fact that the guys are that young and the women are a wide range of ages hardly matters - IMO once hockey-immersed guys hit mid-teens, watch out. Not many women continue to gain muscle mass and power compared to guys in mid-late teens. Long-time players get an advantage, but only so much against fast young guys. We're built differently and are trained differently, and play somewhat differently, but why do some men insist on having a monopoly on sport, and competing against women? Or on "wrecking" women who want to enjoy sport too?

I don't actually know what your point is though. The question is, would people who enjoy all hockey be more likely to go to more women's games if they were more conveniently timed/located, such as beside men's games?

Pretty sure the answer is yes.

Now, how the logistics work, who knows.

 

[alce*]

The fact that the guys are that young and the women are a wide range of ages hardly matters - IMO once hockey-immersed guys hit mid-teens, watch out. Not many women continue to gain muscle mass and power compared to guys in mid-late teens. Long-time players get an advantage, but only so much against fast young guys. We're built differently and are trained differently, and play somewhat differently, but why do some men insist on having a monopoly on sport, and competing against women? Or on "wrecking" women who want to enjoy sport too?

Could you please give such examples from this thread? About monopoly on sport? Why do you insist that women's hockey should be interesting to all men? Is it so hard to accept that most people (men and women alike) don't care about it?

I don't actually know what your point is though. The question is, would people who enjoy all hockey be more likely to go to more women's games if they were more conveniently timed/located, such as beside men's games?

Pretty sure the answer is yes.

Now, how the logistics work, who knows.

You want to force women's tournament as some sort of undesirable addition to main tournament? It wouldn't give nothing except raising expenses for host country.

 

[Stats01]

It's embarrassing that we get people in high places who say the right things about promoting women's sports in general and yet we have the IOC who have considered getting rid of women's hockey all together...Just mind boggling really. I don't think we all realize how far women's sports in all genres has progressed up to this point. Just because certain countries get creamed in the Olympics doesn't mean we should just shame the sport and get rid of it...Find better ways to get other countries to invest in it. You can't go back now.

 

[Mikwammichi]

Could you please give such examples from this thread? About monopoly on sport? Why do you insist that women's hockey should be interesting to all men? Is it so hard to accept that most people (men and women alike) don't care about it?



You want to force women's tournament as some sort of undesirable addition to main tournament? It wouldn't give nothing except raising expenses for host country.

For sure, I accept that a lot of people don't care about it - there's a whole lot of things I don't care about too. I can't think of any right now because I don't care about them. But strangely you don't see me going to the off-topic board seeing stuff I "don't care" about saying "most people don't care about this!" The people who do do - the people who don't don't. They're not the ones being surveyed here, because they don't care.

And yet, people who "don't care" about women's hockey seem to voice their opinions about how undesirable, wreck-worthy, and atrocious it is. Can you tell me why or shall I stick with my existing assumption?

Back to the topic: no, I don't want to force women's tournaments anywhere. I actually don't care a lot in the grand scheme of things - I like playing and I'm happy to see the ladies playing against people all over the world, but I'll never be pro more than you will, so you know - let 'em play *shrug* The question is, could attendance be increased by convenience? I think the answer is yes, because, in my opinion, MOST of us are creatures of habit/custom and do what's easiest/marketed most effectively. But maybe I'm just lazier than most.

I went off-topic to address insults to women's hockey, but above is the real question. It shouldn't be TOO hard for any of us to NOT talk about things we're not interested in...