Some details about the World Cup...

[Lepardi]

Most GMs do, you made it sound like they don't at all. Your point to, once again, was make the NHL look bad in some way. The NHL still has the best players in the world.

What you're saying is nothing but a straw man. Did I say that the NHL doesn't have the best players? No. Did I say that NHL should let their players play in the WJC? No. That's just you putting words into my mouth. I have no problem with teams not letting the best prospects like Barkov and MacKinnon play in the WJC. The Panthers pay Barkov's salary, not the Finnish Ice Hockey Federation.

I think there are very few GMs in the NHL who would let guys like Crosby, Stamkos or Patrick Kane go to the WJC. It's only natural, and I have no problem with it. Letting a guy like Rasmus Ristolainen go to the tournament is a different deal completely.

 

[tony d]

To make this a better event and more of a World Cup, they need to include more than 8 nations. I'm thinking between 16 and 24 nations.

 

[Xokkeu]

To make this a better event and more of a World Cup, they need to include more than 8 nations. I'm thinking between 16 and 24 nations.

Maybe with qualifiers but otherwise there's about 12 teams that would be wasting their time.

 

[daver]

Here's a question:

If an arrangement is worked out to have Euro leagues and Euro league players participating in the WC and getting a share of revenues, do you think they will view a NA location as unfair when it means they will have more money in their pockets than if it was held in Europe?

 

[Theokritos]

Which leagues ?

For example the Czech league used to start in early September in the 1990s, except in 1996 when it began 1-2 weeks later, after the World Cup had finished. Unexpectedly, the Czechs were eliminated early so it didn't matter in the end, but the willingness to make adjustments was there. Another example I was going to cite is the fact that the Soviet league used to begin in September during the 1960s and the start was moved back to October by the time the Summit Series came around. But I've found that this change was already introduced one year earlier, in 1971, and I'm not sure they had the opportunity of an international series in mind when they did that.

Generally speaking, the European leagues were most often willing to make schedule adjustments for international tourmaments when necessary. Just think of the Olympic break. The Soviet league even had a World Championship break at times since the national championship was not always over when the World Championship was scheduled.

 

[Rekin]

Here's a question:

If an arrangement is worked out to have Euro leagues and Euro league players participating in the WC and getting a share of revenues, do you think they will view a NA location as unfair when it means they will have more money in their pockets than if it was held in Europe?

There's a good chance that the NHL would be willing to organize it also in Europe even if the first edition takes place in Toronto.

 

[Tomas W]

To make this a better event and more of a World Cup, they need to include more than 8 nations. I'm thinking between 16 and 24 nations.

I think that at least the lower ranked teams should have a theoretical chance of getting the gold with some kind of qualifiers. I guessing that the NHL want to keep thier players from getting too many games, but you can have a qualifier rounds without the top 6 or 8 teams (which one that gets to be could be up to discussion...) and then add a few qualifier teams for the main tournament.

That way it would be a real world cup.

 

[SanDogBrewin]

For example the Czech league used to start in early September in the 1990s, except in 1996 when it began 1-2 weeks later, after the World Cup had finished. Unexpectedly, the Czechs were eliminated early so it didn't matter in the end, but the willingness to make adjustments was there. Another example I was going to cite is the fact that the Soviet league used to begin in September during the 1960s and the start was moved back to October by the time the Summit Series came around. But I've found that this change was already introduced one year earlier, in 1971, and I'm not sure they had the opportunity of an international series in mind when they did that.

Generally speaking, the European leagues were most often willing to make schedule adjustments for international tourmaments when necessary. Just think of the Olympic break. The Soviet league even had a World Championship break at times since the national championship was not always over when the World Championship was scheduled.

Thanks

 

[Jussi]

There's a good chance that the NHL would be willing to organize it also in Europe even if the first edition takes place in Toronto.

"I find that hard to believe, Max."

 

[cutchemist42]

I think that at least the lower ranked teams should have a theoretical chance of getting the gold with some kind of qualifiers. I guessing that the NHL want to keep thier players from getting too many games, but you can have a qualifier rounds without the top 6 or 8 teams (which one that gets to be could be up to discussion...) and then add a few qualifier teams for the main tournament.

That way it would be a real world cup.

Yep, if there's no clear-cut, publicly-known way for a federation to have a chance, all you have is an NHL invitational.

I actually don't mind the main tournament being 8 teams, I just don't want it cut off at 8 teams at the NHL's marketing department's discretion.

Baseball's WBC was invite for the first two tourneys, 3rd one had qualifiers so 24 teams had a known avenue, and rumour is 32 teams will be involved in the 4th one. At that point, the baseball world is reaching its limit for acceptable national teams. This is the NHL's 3rd World Cup, but 3rd after a big hiatus. I would at least want qualis by the next one.

Overall, I would want probably 20 hockey teams knwoing they have a clear-cut avenue. Once you get past the first 10-11 countries, you're not really dealing with NHL talent anymore, so the NHL should not have a problem with its players being affected. It's like the WBC, with their qualis you're really only looking at domestic league players, or players in the minors. Hockey should be the same.

 

[Doshell Propivo]

The WHC was originally the European Championships. It has always been structured around the European schedules. The Euro leagues didn`t all get together and collectively decide to sacrifice money and finish their playoffs early for the WHC. The European leagues do not accommodate the tournament as you say, the tournament has always accommodated them.

.

Yeah, in like 1908 it was the European Championships. The first true World Championships were in 1930 and Canada and US participated. In the 70's when there was interest from the NHL to send players the IIHF DID move the tournament out a few weeks so it wouldn't interfere with the NHL schedule. However, due to NHL expansion, longer playoffs, etc., that is no longer the case.

 

[Doshell Propivo]

No other best on best tournament will have the same cachet as the Olympics.

 

[Kalzu]

Still, I'd find having another best-on-best event cool, there'd be a best-on-best event every two years. A bit like soccer has the WC & Euro.

 

[TollefsenFan]

To make this a better event and more of a World Cup, they need to include more than 8 nations. I'm thinking between 16 and 24 nations.

Or how about a real WORLD CUP. We can split the world of hockey in 3. North America, Europe and Asia/ South America/Africa/Australia. In North America u got USA and Canada. In Europe there are a bunch of countries. In Asia u got Kasakhstan, South Korea, Japan, Qatar, China etc. In Africa u got Algerie, South Africa etc.

Learn from Fifa and make the sport more global.

The tournament can be held in August every 4 year. It should be an IIHF event With support from NHL and KHL.

 

[Xokkeu]

As long as the nhl cuts the khl and iihf in and commits to consistently hosting the tournament, then it will have success.

 

[SanDogBrewin]

The tournament can be held in August every 4 year. It should be an IIHF event With support from NHL and KHL.

It doesn't matter who hosts it but it does matter that three and the unions all communicate. The IIHF over NHL or KHL has nothing to do with the Olympics, WHC or the WHJC success. Fans watch and attend to rout for the players playing for their countries not who put it on.

The fixation of having the IIHF over the NHL for global hockey is a waste.

 

[1Gold Standard]

It doesn't matter who hosts it but it does matter that three and the unions all communicate. The IIHF over NHL or KHL has nothing to do with the Olympics, WHC or the WHJC success. Fans watch and attend to rout for the players playing for their countries not who put it on.

The fixation of having the IIHF over the NHL for global hockey is a waste.

You are right... If I'm actually going to spend money on a tournament, then I sure as hell want an entertainment bang for my buck..and in terms of providing value and entertainment, the NHL far and away exceeds anything the IIHF has to offer and personally I couldn't care less where my dollars go after that or who gets it...

And did you happen to catch the opening match from the World Cup yesterday? I would hardly call that an exemplary example of "unbiased" officiating even though the ref was from a "neutral" country. That was typical FIFA. How anybody can argue FIFA is the standard by which all sporting events should be officiated, I say, No thanks. NHL gets it right.

 

[Theokritos]

And did you happen to catch the opening match from the World Cup yesterday? I would hardly call that an exemplary example of "unbiased" officiating even though the ref was from a "neutral" country. That was typical FIFA. How anybody can argue FIFA is the standard by which all sporting events should be officiated, I say, No thanks. NHL gets it right.

FIFA per se is not the standard, but a ref from a neutral country is the international standard in sports as far as a can see.

 

[1Gold Standard]

FIFA per se is not the standard, but a ref from a neutral country is the international standard in sports as far as a can see.

If there was a world wide supply of competent, professional and experienced officiating, then I'd buy your argument... since there is not, I prefer to stick with the pros of the NHL than the armatures the IIHF provides. Until the IIHF can correct that, then the NHL is the best option. The NHL ref's professional integrity trumps any perceived national bias. mostly from what I've observed from 5 NHL Olympics, that so -called "bias" is a figment of peoples' imagination.

 

[Theokritos]

If there was a world wide supply of competent, professional and experienced officiating, then I'd buy your argument

Stating that refs from neutral countries are the international custom is a matter of fact, not an argument. Making an argument would be the next step: the international custom should also be observed in hockey. Do I make that argument? Well, yes, I do believe it's not optimal to have Canadian refs working games of Team Canada. But I also concede that the level of IIHF refereeing is not always satisfactory and it's better to use Canadian NHL refs than incompetent refs from a neutral country.

... since there is not, I prefer to stick with the pros of the NHL than the armatures the IIHF provides. Until the IIHF can correct that, then the NHL is the best option.

I'm not satisfied with the IIHF failure to draw conclusions & take steps to improve their refereeing. For example they should pick the top referees of each country and those are not necessarily the ones the national federations like to nominate. They should try to take the selection out of the hands of the individual federations really.

That said, I don't think either side is doing itself a favour by strictly thinking in terms of who is obliged to do this and who has failed to do that. With a little practicality, the NHL could rather easily improve the reputation & acceptance of the World Cup in Europe IMO. Refs from neutral countries would be optimal if they were capable of quality refereeing, so why not try out inviting (or negotiating with the IIHF/European leagues that they pick) those european referees who get voted top referees in their leagues?

 

[1Gold Standard]

Stating that refs from neutral countries are the international custom is a matter of fact, not an argument. Making an argument would be the next step: the international custom should also be observed in hockey. Do I make that argument? Well, yes, I do believe it's not optimal to have Canadian refs working games of Team Canada. But I also concede that the level of IIHF refereeing is not always satisfactory and it's better to use Canadian NHL refs than incompetent refs from a neutral country.



I'm not satisfied with the IIHF failure to draw conclusions & take steps to improve their refereeing. For example they should pick the top referees of each country and those are not necessarily the ones the national federations like to nominate. They should try to take the selection out of the hands of the individual federations really.

That said, I don't think either side is doing itself a favour by strictly thinking in terms of who is obliged to do this and who has failed to do that. With a little practicality, the NHL could rather easily improve the reputation & acceptance of the World Cup in Europe IMO. Refs from neutral countries would be optimal if they were capable of quality refereeing, so why not try out inviting (or negotiating with the IIHF/European leagues that they pick) those european referees who get voted top referees in their leagues?

You make a number of valid points and I don't fundamentally disagree with any of them...but for now the standard of IIHF officiating is so sub-standard, to have officiating like that at an Olympics or any other Best on Best tournament would be a travesty... as a niche sport (which hockey is) having officiating like that at a "best on best" tournament would do more harm than good. FIFA can get away with it... Hockey cannot.

If we can get all parties, Hockey Canada/USA Hockey/NHL with the IIHF and all European Federations working together to improve the level of IIHF officiating, then sign me up.... but until the IIHF at their annual May shindig can demonstrate a consistent and professional standard of officiating, I say we stick with the NHL pros for now... but yes, implement some kind of training program for the best referees in European leagues and find a way to train them up.

 

[Theokritos]

but yes, implement some kind of training program for the best referees in European leagues and find a way to train them up.

I'm not sure the best European referees are actually worse than NHL refs and need to be trained up (other than to get familiar with small rinks, just like NHL refs who officiate games in Europe should get familiar with large rinks). But if it's necessary, do it. The optimal scenario would be to have a pool of North American and European referees with a joint training program and exchange experience (North Americans officiating in European leagues for a period of time, Europeans refereeing in the NHL for a time) available for international tournaments.

 

[1Gold Standard]

I'm not sure the best European referees are actually worse than NHL refs and need to be trained up (other than to get familiar with small rinks, just like NHL refs who officiate games in Europe should get familiar with large rinks). But if it's necessary, do it. The optimal scenario would be to have a pool of North American and European referees with a joint training program and exchange experience (North Americans officiating in European leagues for a period of time, Europeans refereeing in the NHL for a time) available for international tournaments.

I can't say that I agree with that. I did live in Europe for 7 years. I went to a lot of games from Switzerland to Moscow. but certainly, as the old adage goes, a good referee is one who goes unnoticed. But if the IIHF consistently ignores the good refs for the poor ones b/c they are better at playing politics with their respective federations, then that just further illustrates the ineptitude of the IIHF and not an argument in favor of the IIHF being the sole body entitled to organize a tournament. But I've never been a fan of the IIHF anyway.

 

[Theokritos]

But if the IIHF consistently ignores the good refs for the poor ones b/c they are better at playing politics with their respective federations, then that's just further illustrates the ineptitude of the IIHF and not an argument in favor of the IIHF being the sole body entitled to organize a tournament. But I've never been a fan of the IIHF anyway.

I'm not defending the IIHF, I just think the continued finger-pointing doesn't lead us anywhere and that's why I'm trying to look beyond "who is responsible" at "what could be done". And I think there is something that could be done by the NHL to make the World Cup a more respectable and relevant tournament in the eyes of Europeans, which I, as a European, would like to see. Invite the best european referees, train them if you feel it's needed, let them work at the World Cup. No-one is gonna be able to bring the bias issue up anymore.

 

[1Gold Standard]

I'm not defending the IIHF, I just think the continued finger-pointing doesn't lead us anywhere and that's why I'm trying to look beyond "who is responsible" at "what could be done". And I think there is something that could be done by the NHL to make the World Cup a more respectable and relevant tournament in the eyes of Europeans, which I, as a European, would like to see. Invite the best european referees, train them if you feel it's needed, let them work at the World Cup. No-one is gonna be able to bring the bias issue up anymore.

I'm still of the opinion that there is only a perceived bias and that it is largely a figment of imaginations b/c fans will ***** and complain about anything and everything, it's the nature of being a fan... So, the NHL can institute a program to train non-NHL (Europeans) refs to work the World Cup, but fans will complain about that as well...there'll be something..a call will be made...and there will be folks around these parts who will immediately fill up these pages calling that ref an NHL sell out.. the NHL bought and paid for that call to favor the NHL's desired outcome. i.e. a U.S. or Canada win.... you know that is how it is going to go down...

but hey, the NHL should institute a program for the best European refs...have them work the IIHF WHC in May along with NHL refs not assigned to play-off duty. (they are not the best NHL refs otherwise they'd be working playoffs..but still they may be better than the political ass-kissers the IIHF normally goes with on the recommendation of the Federations...see how they do at the WHC and then if that works out, then the best of the best work the WC.