WCH - Impressions of the Tournament

[Gary Nylund]

I think Team UK versus Team Europe would be a natural rivalry.

Now you're talking.

 

[JackSlater]

Not sure how eligibility would be determined for this but Matthews is part Mexican, I'm just saying ...

Seriously though, you guys can laugh all you want and it seems like all the posts on this subject have a mocking tone to them but why? I keep hearing that the NHL has insulted the 7th and 8th ranked nations by not considering them "worthy" of playing in the World Cup, now the same people are mocking the idea of these "lesser" nations being represented. Would it be so horrible to have an exhibition tournament with Giordani and Girardi leading Team Italy? Why would that be so horrible? OK they lose 23-1 to Canada but still a thrill to participate right? Would it not be a thrill for these "lesser" Italian players to play against the best in the World? Would this not lead to new fans of this great sport?

I've read many posts setting up the World Cup of soccer as a great example for the NHL to follow, wouldn't this be a small step in that direction - drum up interest in hockey in these countries so that maybe in the future they can be competitive on the world stage? How is hockey ever supposed to develop a following world wide when the same people who are insulted because Switzerland is not invited to the World Cup laugh at the idea of hockey in these other countries?

You can't have it both ways people, you either want to grow the game or you don't. A tournament with these "lesser" nations just might be an awesome thing for the game.

Strange post. Of course the team Italy lead by Giordano and Girardi is bad - it's "Team Italy" being lead by Canadians. As for whether or not that would "grow" the sport of hockey, I'm doubtful. I don't think that a "Team Canada" playing handball would get much interest in Canada if it was filled with Germans and Swedes. Many, probably most, people mocking these obviously stupid ideas don't expect a hockey tournament to "grow" the sport by including random teams for no reason.

 

[86Habs]

Not sure how eligibility would be determined for this but Matthews is part Mexican, I'm just saying ...

Seriously though, you guys can laugh all you want and it seems like all the posts on this subject have a mocking tone to them but why? I keep hearing that the NHL has insulted the 7th and 8th ranked nations by not considering them "worthy" of playing in the World Cup, now the same people are mocking the idea of these "lesser" nations being represented. Would it be so horrible to have an exhibition tournament with Giordani and Girardi leading Team Italy? Why would that be so horrible? OK they lose 23-1 to Canada but still a thrill to participate right? Would it not be a thrill for these "lesser" Italian players to play against the best in the World? Would this not lead to new fans of this great sport?

I've read many posts setting up the World Cup of soccer as a great example for the NHL to follow, wouldn't this be a small step in that direction - drum up interest in hockey in these countries so that maybe in the future they can be competitive on the world stage? How is hockey ever supposed to develop a following world wide when the same people who are insulted because Switzerland is not invited to the World Cup laugh at the idea of hockey in these other countries?

You can't have it both ways people, you either want to grow the game or you don't. A tournament with these "lesser" nations just might be an awesome thing for the game.

Yes, it would be a horrible idea because neither Giordano or Girardi are ****ing Italian! They're Canadian! It's also extremely presumptuous and frankly ridiculous to simply assume that those two players - or any players in general with a non-British/French last name - even identify with the country of their ethnic ancestry. Their families may have spent generations in Canada, the maternal side of their family may have originated from somewhere other than Italy, etc., etc.

 

[seventieslord]

What on Earth is stopping the NHL from starting their season in early September?

I don't disagree. They could each move two weeks and get the same effect.

 

[jj cale]

As an example which I'm sure you can understand, the World Championships are not considered best-on-best because the NHL playoffs are happening at the same time, therefore certain countries are highly unlikely to have all of their best players available. Some argue that certain World Championships (i.e., 2005) can be considered best-on-best because of the lockout making all players available.

There is a difference though, and it is a troublesome one. While agreeing with you that this world cup is not a legitimate best on best you have pointed out here that the WHC is not either. Why then do Europeans go wild at winning that tournament yet give this tournament so little care and respect eventhough it is essentially the same thing.............an international tournament that is not best on best.

It suggests ethnocentrism and a hatred for anything NHL.

It's a very real thing with many if not most of them and it will be a hard thing to overcome in organizing any future true world cup best on best.

 

[xxxx]

Thank you for confirming that you don't understand what best on best means. What would the "best" in your described tournament refer to?

what best on best means? where is the official definition? I can't find one. Thanks that you are voicing your personal opinion - if even shared by many - isn't still an official/the only one definition. Not saying that your definition doesn't work, it works, and in terms of that one definition it's not 100% best on best, but it's still 99%.

to repost my post from the other thread - I see a huge difference in tournament being 99% best on best and not being best of best at all, but you apparently not, you see 1% best on best the same as 99% best on best. Weird, but to each to his own. I'm certainly not going to lose my time over such ridiculous things.

 

[fulic1]

Why would an Estonian bar be showing hockey? Maybe back in the 1980s when when watching Finnish TV channels was pretty much their only window to the west.

Actually I just watched hockey in an Estonian bar this past weekend. For some reason they were showing a Dinamo Riga game on Viasat Baltic.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Yes, it would be a horrible idea because neither Giordano or Girardi are ****ing Italian! They're Canadian! It's also extremely presumptuous and frankly ridiculous to simply assume that those two players - or any players in general with a non-British/French last name - even identify with the country of their ethnic ancestry. Their families may have spent generations in Canada, the maternal side of their family may have originated from somewhere other than Italy, etc., etc.

Oh chill out, no need to be so sensitive. I have no idea if they have an Italian background or not, I was referring to an earlier post who listed them as such. The post also mentioned Luongo who does have some Italian roots though, do you have a problem with him if he wanted to suit up for Italy? I have dual citizenship myself and if I was an NHL player I'd be proud to represent Estonia in such a tournament. I'd also wager that a great many players in the NHL feel exactly the same way I do. We're proud Canadians, but also proud of our roots. Some perhaps aren't, but some most assuredly are.

BTW, so many here hold up the Olympics as some ideal to strive for. Not sure if you're one of them but if you are then I suggest you familiarize yourself with what the eligibility rules are there. You might be in for a surprise, a big surprise.

Actually I just watched hockey in an Estonian bar this past weekend. For some reason they were showing a Dinamo Riga game on Viasat Baltic.

That's bizzarre, what bar was that if you don't mind my asking? I recently lived there for 11 years and the only time I saw hockey in a bar was when I taped a Leaf playoff game on some Russian channel (aired at 2AM local time) and brought the tape to a bar the next day where the owner let me and my buddies watch.

 

[JackSlater]

what best on best means? where is the official definition? I can't find one. Thanks that you are voicing your personal opinion - if even shared by many - isn't still an official/the only one definition. Not saying that your definition doesn't work, it works, and in terms of that one definition it's not 100% best on best, but it's still 99%.

to repost my post from the other thread - I see a huge difference in tournament being 99% best on best and not being best of best at all, but you apparently not, you see 1% best on best the same as 99% best on best. Weird, but to each to his own. I'm certainly not going to lose my time over such ridiculous things.

Once again, my question for you is what the "best" refers to in your definition. It's pretty clear that your nonsense definition simply means: good players against good players. And no, this is not acceptable. The meaning of best on best is quite clear and has existed for decades. Just because you cannot grasp it does not make the nonsensical definition that you alone hold valid.

I also laugh at the idea that this is "99%" of a best on best competition, when it is a simple binary result. It is not a best on best competition. Even funnier when four of the eight teams are not teams that could be found in an actual best on best competition.

Oh chill out, no need to be so sensitive. I have no idea if they have an Italian background or not, I was referring to an earlier post who listed them as such. The post also mentioned Luongo who does have some Italian roots though, do you have a problem with him if he wanted to suit up for Italy? I have dual citizenship myself and if I was an NHL player I'd be proud to represent Estonia in such a tournament. I'd also wager that a great many players in the NHL feel exactly the same way I do. We're proud Canadians, but also proud of our roots. Some perhaps aren't, but some most assuredly are.

BTW, so many here hold up the Olympics as some ideal to strive for. Not sure if you're one of them but if you are then I suggest you familiarize yourself with what the eligibility rules are there. You might be in for a surprise, a big surprise.

It's funny to see a person create a strawman to support their point, and actually acknowledge it in the same post but then continue anyway. The stupidity of the IOC of course has nothing to do with the stupidity of what the NHL is proposing.

 

[Lepardi]

I don't disagree. They could each move two weeks and get the same effect.

I think not wanting to start the season in September might have something to do with the NFL.

 

[ForumNamePending]

BTW, so many here hold up the Olympics as some ideal to strive for. Not sure if you're one of them but if you are then I suggest you familiarize yourself with what the eligibility rules are there. You might be in for a surprise, a big surprise.

The IIHF eligibility rules (that apply to the Olympic hockey tournament) are considerably more strict than something like having a grandmother born in Italy or Germany making you eligible for Italy or Germany.

Some nations have still tried to load up on "ringers" in IIHF tournaments, but because the rules are relatively strict it usually doesn't get a country much higher than their "natural" level, and most (all?) seem to eventually abandon the "ringer strategy". I don't like the ringer strategy myself as a national team full of ringers, even if the results do improve, doesn't seem to result in hockey becoming (more) relevant in a country that chooses to deploy it. Despite what the league/PA might say, I don't think they are considering "heritage" teams to grow the game, they are considering "heritage" teams as a way to try to sell additional "national" teams filled with NHL players to the existing fan base in Canada.

If the speculation proves to be true the unfortunate thing is a country like Italy, due to not much more than large waves of immigration to NA last century, could get a spot, while Denmark (among others), a country that has made significant strides in the sport over the past 15-20 years by actually produces their own talent, could still be sitting at home... It's the NHL/PA tournament so they can obviously run it how they like, but I'm honestly not sure how this encourages growth.

 

[snipes]

Are the other players insured? Honest question, i don't know the answer, but i don't think they are. Never heard of it and this would raise a lot of follow up questions from all the other athletes participating (which i know aren't insured).

It sucks to lose a star player to an injury while he's not playing for your team. I think we've all been there, it can cost you an entire season. Still want him to play in the next tournament tough.

If the players are treated differently when injured at the Olympics vs at an NHL game, this should be adressed in the CBA, but not as a rather sad excuse to skip the Olympics.

Unfortunately the IOC and IIHF have decided not to cover the insurance and travel costs for the NHL players. They have covered the insurance and travel for every Olympics since 1998.

There is still time for it to get figured out. Fingers crossed they work out a deal. We all care deeply about Olympics hockey.

 

[TheTotalPackage]

I have no clue how this tournament will go. Attendance should be fine. Viewership I am skeptical about and will be interesting to see.

Must say though, weeks away from the tournament and it just seems there is minimal advertising and hype around the city. You wouldn't know a major tournament was set to be played in the city.

 

[Privet]

The marketing/advertising for this tournament has been awful. I haven't heard anything about it lately and completely forgot about it.

 

[Henkka]

The marketing/advertising for this tournament has been awful. I haven't heard anything about it lately and completely forgot about it.

Bettman just said 90% of the tickets are sold.

 

[1Gold Standard]

Bettman just said 90% of the tickets are sold.

Not really that significant, as 90% is pretty much the Corporate Season Ticket Holders at the ACC. They have the tickets and dish them out to clients and employees accordingly.

 

[xxxx]

Once again, my question for you is what the "best" refers to in your definition. It's pretty clear that your nonsense definition simply means: good players against good players. And no, this is not acceptable. The meaning of best on best is quite clear and has existed for decades. Just because you cannot grasp it does not make the nonsensical definition that you alone hold valid.

I get it, it's not best-on-best for you no need to argue with someone who has fixed mind already.

 

[admire]

Right now fans from some of the non included teams are very busy concentrating on Olympic qualifiers these days....All Danmarks nhl players except Lars Eller is in Minsk right now for tonight game vs belarus

 

[Gary Nylund]

The IIHF eligibility rules (that apply to the Olympic hockey tournament) are considerably more strict than something like having a grandmother born in Italy or Germany making you eligible for Italy or Germany.

Some nations have still tried to load up on "ringers" in IIHF tournaments, but because the rules are relatively strict it usually doesn't get a country much higher than their "natural" level, and most (all?) seem to eventually abandon the "ringer strategy". I don't like the ringer strategy myself as a national team full of ringers, even if the results do improve, doesn't seem to result in hockey becoming (more) relevant in a country that chooses to deploy it. Despite what the league/PA might say, I don't think they are considering "heritage" teams to grow the game, they are considering "heritage" teams as a way to try to sell additional "national" teams filled with NHL players to the existing fan base in Canada.

If the speculation proves to be true the unfortunate thing is a country like Italy, due to not much more than large waves of immigration to NA last century, could get a spot, while Denmark (among others), a country that has made significant strides in the sport over the past 15-20 years by actually produces their own talent, could still be sitting at home... It's the NHL/PA tournament so they can obviously run it how they like, but I'm honestly not sure how this encourages growth.

Like you say, it's all speculation for now but your point re. Denmark is a valid one. I personally doubt they'll ever have this kind of tournament but if they do then I guess we'll see.

Re. eligibility, have a look at this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zola_Budd

I don't know if the rules have changed but there were several stories this year about athletes representing nations they had at best a tenuous connection to. One was a US gymnast on the Belarus team I believe and another was a swimmer on the Canadian team who I believe had never even been to Canada. This is just for interest sake, if the NHL has some exhibition tournament then of course they can make up whatever rules they like.

Unfortunately the IOC and IIHF have decided not to cover the insurance and travel costs for the NHL players. They have covered the insurance and travel for every Olympics since 1998.

There is still time for it to get figured out. Fingers crossed they work out a deal. We all care deeply about Olympics hockey.

My fear is that the IOC's shortsighted decision got the NHL owners thinking - do we really need the Olympics? It just may end up happening that the NHL doesn't participate when they would have had the IOC not started this ugly ball rolling and that would be really sad. If we end up with a World Cup every 4 years without gimmick teams then I'll still be pretty happy but I know the Olympics are more important to many others and I just want everybody to be happy.

Not really that significant, as 90% is pretty much the Corporate Season Ticket Holders at the ACC. They have the tickets and dish them out to clients and employees accordingly.

Even for games in places like Ohio?

I get it, it's not best-on-best for you no need to argue with someone who has fixed mind already.

I stopped reading or responding to his posts some time ago. I can live with people who have their mind made up but the arrogant/insulting/condescending tone gets tiresome after a while.

 

[Jussi]

Around 2000 tickets still available for the Finland-Sweden exhibition game. No surprise the most expensive seats are available. A comment from the comment section of one of the biggest papers in Finland:

"An exhibiton game. Two parents and two kids. Almost 300€ plus an additonal 100€ for parking and food. And they wonder why it's not sold out?"

 

[Gary Nylund]

BTW, there have been many posts here saying that the WC isn't an international event because of the gimmick teams. By that standard the Olympics weren't an international event either this year because the Olympics weren't free of gimmick teams either.

Oh well, so much for international competition I guess.

 

[86Habs]

BTW, there have been many posts here saying that the WC isn't an international event because of the gimmick teams. By that standard the Olympics weren't an international event either this year because the Olympics weren't free of gimmick teams either.

Oh well, so much for international competition I guess.

I'll play along...what were the supposed gimmicks at the Olympics?

 

[Gary Nylund]

I'll play along...what were the supposed gimmicks at the Olympics?

Nothing "supposed" about it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refugee_Olympic_Team_at_the_2016_Summer_Olympics

 

[JackSlater]

I get it, it's not best-on-best for you no need to argue with someone who has fixed mind already.

You choose to not get it. You make up a factually wrong definition and you won't, and can't, defend it. It's not a matter of opinion - your definition is idiotic and does not match the term which has existed for decades. I use the definition as it has always been and as the vast majority use it. You attempt to twist the definition, in a nonsensical way, to attempt to justify something you like and that you want others to agree with. You are entitled to like the tournament, but apparently you cannot accept that the fact is that it is not a best on best tournament.

My fear is that the IOC's shortsighted decision got the NHL owners thinking - do we really need the Olympics? It just may end up happening that the NHL doesn't participate when they would have had the IOC not started this ugly ball rolling and that would be really sad. If we end up with a World Cup every 4 years without gimmick teams then I'll still be pretty happy but I know the Olympics are more important to many others and I just want everybody to be happy.

I remain curious as to whether you legitimately didn't know that the NHL owners were openly questioning the value of the Olympics for well over a decade, or if you simply refuse to admit that your assertion was wrong. The fact, once again not a debatable point, is that the owners have talked about leaving the Olympics since long before this IOC issue came about. In fact, the NHL itself talked about leaving the Olympics the very day this tournament was announced. To suggest that the IOC started this ball rolling is at this point willful ignorance to what has been pointed out repeatedly.

 

[Jussi]

Nothing "supposed" about it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refugee_Olympic_Team_at_the_2016_Summer_Olympics

You do know the difference between competing under a "refugee flag" as individuals and competing as a team in a team sports?