Some details about the World Cup...
- Thread starter UsernameWasTaken
- Start date
- Status
If Finland didn't look tired it doesn't mean that the players didn't suffer from jet lag. If the whole tournament had been played in NA, maybe Finland had won the final
I'm sure Canada would have won in 2006 if we had just arrived in Italy a week earlier or so. We could have gotten more accustomed physically, sipped a little vino in the olive gardens, gelled personalities,mixed with the locals, experienced the culture and worked on our break out passing.
Because no way does Canada ever just flat out fail in a tournament because the team wasn't good enough.
Past Considerations
Registered User
Mindboggling. What's next in this thread, pro athletes are ok to swap all daily meals to hamburgers because an average joe doesn't get fatter from eating junk food once in a week?
Looking forward to the World Cup. Always great to see a tournament which is best on best, unlike the European "World Hockey Championship" that is not best on best, and where teams like Russia stack themselves against everyone's C Team. It was great hockey played in 2004, and i was there for the Final between Canada and Finland which was a great atmosphere.
Past Considerations
Registered User
Why do you juxtapose WC and WHC or have you somehow managed to miss past five olympics?
One of the most juvenile posts I've read. News ****ing flash; Hockey is an expensive sport. You want to try funding youth programs without cash; have a go.
Why not have the NA federations lobby for playing in June? After all, the IIHF is comprised of it's member federations.
On another note, the WHJC is not a best on best. A fair amount of eligible players are unable to participate each year. Doesn't seem to hinder Canadians from enjoying the tournament. A tournament which is run by the IIHF. Who'd a thunk it. Enjoy the hockey instead of going on and on and on and ****ing on about it not being best on best.
Last edited:
Yeah, the IIHF is all about funding youth programs.
The only thing that ever got funded in my neck of the woods was from the NHL. ( a paid for olympic size arena)
They must be too busy putting the kids in Ornskoldsvik through minor hockey,That would make sense.
Get out of here with your baloney. The I.I.H.F is about making money and letting some morons have fat cat jobs.
And by the way, if you have a problem with me not enjoying a tournament because it's not best on best heres a ****ing news flash for you. I DO enjoy the WHC and watch it every year and don't complain about travel time, not best on best and blah, blah,blah. It's guys like YOU who come here and whine and baby about a best on best just because it isn't run by the IIHF and your teams have to travel and all the other crap that seem to have all the issues.Show me where I went on and on about the WHC?. No need for you to flat out lie because you're ticked off.
You've got the problem, not me. Take your own advice and stop going on and on and on about whats wrong with the world cup and just enjoy it when it happens.
Last edited by a moderator:
True, especially nowadays where it's not uncommon that players really have only a few things in common with their country aside from the passport. most don't play in their home country, some weren't even trained there.
some posters in this thread are a good example for that. instead of trying to spread interest in a tournament of their favourite sport they try to argue why it's not significant if some countries and it's fans are NOT interested because they are insignificant anyway. completely thinking in national barriers instead of thinking the game as a global sport.
then again, I don't see the need for this tournament. to me it's a NA thing with little significance because of the irregularity that it's held. but kind of typical for the NHL to think it's better than the rest and doesn't need it, organizing "global" events, thinking a bit too highly of itself. recent comments about the olympics go along well with that sentiment.
some posters in this thread are a good example for that. instead of trying to spread interest in a tournament of their favourite sport they try to argue why it's not significant if some countries and it's fans are NOT interested because they are insignificant anyway. completely thinking in national barriers instead of thinking the game as a global sport.
then again, I don't see the need for this tournament. to me it's a NA thing with little significance because of the irregularity that it's held. but kind of typical for the NHL to think it's better than the rest and doesn't need it, organizing "global" events, thinking a bit too highly of itself. recent comments about the olympics go along well with that sentiment.
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm glad you enjoy the WHC and I wasn't pointing fingers at you specifically. Sorry if it came across that way. But, then again, I haven't been whining about travel time ether. My beef is with the NHL. As for the IIHF, you can have issues with how it's managed, who they choose to employ, salary figures and so on but you'd have to be specific. Just ranting over how the IIHF is good for nothing, because you sure as hell never saw any of that IIHF money, is as backwards as it gets. You don't want the IIHF around? Who'd fund the lower tier competitions? Women competitions? Who'd see too the interest of the hockey federations? Who'd grow the sport in the world? It's not on the NHL's agenda. That's for sure.
O.K.No offense taken.
I think growing the sport in the world is on the NHL agenda, why wouldn't it be? huge growth in the sport likely ends up in more money for them.
But if they don't see that huge growth taking place with their involvement in 5 olympics now, they may want out of that involvement and concentrate on protecting their assets and doing other things internationally, it is a business after all. You nor I can fault them for that and the players sure as hell don't want their bottom line affected, they know who pays the bills and it sure as hell isn't some kid in Mongolia.
Just what is the IIHF doing for the growth of the game anyway? holding Tournaments in Rumania? They would be better off providing funding for the tons of kids in Canada, Russia, the Czech Republic and so on that can't friggen afford it then trying to establish hockey in tanzania or whatever foolish thing we could pass off as altruistic "feel good" so called game growing. Waste of resources IMO. we've already got a boatload of kids who can't even think of playing in already hockey popular countries to bother wasting money on stuff like that. Why not try promoting the world cup in Europe so as to establish a partnership with the nhl in a working manner so it becomes a truly international event in interest for the hockey loving countries and build on that to parts afar? It would probably go a long way in getting rid of a lot of euro posters complaints about how it can never be in Europe and travel time and no history and fear of no nhl olympic involvment and all that jazz.
But no, no vision and no interest in having any because they are fine with the way things as they are. They are comfortable with it as it is, having some tier 2 tournaments in budapest makes them sleep well at night and allows them to think they are doing what is best for the game.
I like your idealism and in a perfect world I would be right with you but it's not reasonable and quite frankly naive.
Last edited by a moderator:
Jussi
Registered User
But that was before the tournament, a tournament that had a format where basically every team went through. With the World Cup previously it was during the tournament before the playoffs.
I don't think it is naive. Hockey has grown steadily in Norway, Denmark, Germany and other countries where, not long ago, it was almost non existent. WHC in Belarus was a slam dunk. Record attendance numbers and a great job done by the host. Even womens hockey is growing in Sweden which never would have happened had it not been for the Olympics and the Women WHC. Not sure if I'm imagining things but it feels like hockey is growing all over. I'm feeling positive.
As far as the NHL goes, I have a feeling that they'd rather not pay a dime to other leagues who develop players. I'd rather not go in to the specifics of agreements and such. I'll leave that for another discussion. But the NHL will turn up wherever there is a potential profit to be had by trying to tap in to an existing hockey market. As expanding to europe seem unrealistic, why would they pour money into europe? No, I don't feel that they have my interest at heart.
How bitter can one possibly be?
The fact is, the world cup needs to be hosted in europe for the avg hockey interested european person to care. Not many people will get up in the middle of the night to watch world cup hockey, and if people don't start watching the games, why will they care? For me, the problem isn't the travel (although denying that problem is like denying that there's a sun), it's that right now it really is a "no name" tournament over here, and it will take many years for it to get the "real deal" status that the olympic hockey has. No one will deny the quality will be higher than in the WHC, but that's besides the point. The WHC has been around for a long time now. It had a chance to grow on people.
All these issues are not really a problem if the NHL is fine with it being almost exclusively aimed at Canadian (and I guess US) fans.
If so we can all move along and just hope that NHL doesn't severely hurt the sport of icehockey by not allowing NHL players in the olympics.
How bitter can one possibly be?
The fact is, the world cup needs to be hosted in europe for the avg hockey interested person to care. Not many people will get up in the middle of the night to watch world cup hockey, and if people don't start watching the games, why will they care? For me, the problem isn't the travel (although denying that problem is like denying that there's a sun), it's that right now it really is a "no name" tournament over here, and it will take many years for it to get the "real deal" status that the olympic hockey has. No one will deny the quality will be higher than in the WHC, but that's besides the point. The WHC has been around for a long time now. It had a chance to grow on people.
All these issues are not really a problem if the NHL is fine with it being almost exclusively aimed at Canadian (and I guess US) fans.
Bitter? no........pragmatic.
Nevertheless, despite what side of this debate one is on if the IIHF was really serious about growing the game they would be promoting both the World cup and the WHC, not just the WHC.
You can't build any history for the WHC if you don't promote it over here and you can't build history for the world cup if you don't promote it in Europe.
Why don't they? Why do they listen to guys like you and fans from here who are so set in their ways and just want to badmouth and mock each respective tournament depending on their ethnocentrism?
International hockey will stay as it is with the same stalemate if the IIHF just stands pat and buys into that attitude.
It doesn't seem you are for growing the game at all, just having it as you want it.
So far you're the one who suggested to grow the game by donating equipment to people in hockey interested countries, and is now heavily debating for a tournament hosted mainly in the by far most hockey interested country in the world where you really can't grow the game. What do you suggest next, an international american football tournament in USA? A football/soccer tournament in Brazil or Germany?
I can guarantee you the world cup will do next to nothing to grow the game, at least compared to the WHC. The WHC helps countries like Germany and Denmark a TON, you know, countries that aren't good, but not terrible either.
I've told you before, I am all for the world cup, as long as it does not happen at the expense of an already existing tournament. And reading what Bettman and co suggests, it seems like they would want the world cup to replace the olympics as the premier best on best tournament, which would be TERRIBLE for hockey.
I agree, they don't have your interest at heart,their interest is business.But then again neither does the KHL or AHL or Finnish league or coca cola or walmart.
Should we stop all possible international tournaments because they don't have the little guys interest at heart?
I am not sure what money the swedish elite and khl league pays for overseas development of talent, are you saying they dole out good money to the national programs of those players while the nhl doesnt? What did the SEL Sloveina give for Anze Kopitars services?
What is the KHL giving Canada for Nigel Dawes?
Maybe you can clear this up
And we don't know yet if it is at the expense of an already existing tournament so calm down.
I'm not arguing that, i am arguing that helping out kids with costs will.Most kids can't play.
I am arguing that growing the world cup can grow the game in parts away from Canada.
Maybe the NHL could pay for my future kids hockey equipment? Bad guy IIHF wouldn't do it, but good guy NHL developing the game sure would, right?
Oh and again, calm down, take a walk, come back when you can express yourself without bursting a blood vessel.
You said the IIHF is who should be about growing the game, get them to pay for your equipment. You think so highly of their abilities in that regard.
[Mod]
Last edited by a moderator:
I think the IIHF should grow the game, but getting them to pay for equipment was your "idea".
[Mod] But if you think a Canada hosted tournament is the best way to grow the game, well I don't know what to tell you.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah, this thread is something amazing. One can have opinions, but it's plain stupid to argue against scientific research studies if one has no better arguments than "I don't suffer from jet lag".
I think the IIHF should grow the game, but getting them to pay for equipment was your "idea".
But you change the reason you argue here like 3 times in 3 posts anyways, so what's the point anymore. I'll keep track of this thread and see if maybe more mature people will deliver better points and less bitter arguments. I'm done with you.
Well, I get your idea - growing of the sport would be nice. I think that having World Cups AND Olympics would be probably better.
But in my opinion, you can grow the sport in a lot of ways. Hockey is not and never will be as global as soccer for example. If we want to focus on growing the sport in countries like Spain, China, Korea, etc., how's that changing with one tournament? If you just want hockey to get some attention for the 'non-hockey' world, it's too much simple concept. First, you want also the national federations/governments to spend some money on sport, and ice hockey, and I'm not sure how do the olympics change that. Maybe you can give me an example or something that I don't know.
Second, whether the NHL is participating or not, you still have men's and women's hockey tournament at olympics. So there definitely still is something for the non-hockey world to look at.
It depends what you set as realistic goals as to where the sport can grow, and as to what countries are invited to play in the world cup. Will countries like Denmark, Norway or even France be invited? In Norway and Denmark the sport is very small, but it at least has a decent chance to grow into something more than a marginal sport.
Even countries like England and France (even though I mentioned it above) which easily has millions of people who could easily equip themselves/their children with hockey equipment, it's very unlikely we'll see the sport of hockey as even a marginal sport.
We likely won't see another hocke "super power" within the next 50 years though.
Fans from countries like Germany and Denmark as examples would hardly watch a world cup tournament far away from their primetime where they might not even participate just because they love the sport so much, stuff like that only happens in Canada.
But I say it again, my point has always been about the world cup that I definitely do not mind it, and if it would not screw up my diurnal rhythm too much, I'd watch as many games as I could. It won't touch the WHC which is probably even better than the olympics for growing the game, I mean France made the playoffs, how many times would that happen in any other tournament? And it would take decades for the world cup to garner the same international hockey attention as the olympics, if it ever would. But hey it's all hypothetical if this is even an issue anyways, so probably not worth discussing yet.
Let's get back to the jet lag dicussion?
Last edited:
The problem here is that the NHL definitely won't make a room for a 30-day tournament, like the IIHF (if you want 16 teams there). I think eight teams sounds just about right, considering all the circumstances. To just pick Switzerland over the likes of Latvia/Germany/Denmark might not be the perfect option, but probably the most accessible.
We will see what the tournament's gonna look like, I personally can't wait.
- Status
