Uncle Rotter
Registered User
Switzerland didn't go for the short term fix & stuff their national team full of Canadians like Austria did
Why is Norway not good at hockey compared to Sweden/Finland?
- Thread starter Eagle Eye Cherry
- Start date
It was their greatest achievement in 40 years at that point. After the Soviet Union broke up and several teams appeared/re-joined the World Champs, they were relegated back to the 2nd tier. They weren't good. They are clearly better now.
It has become a lot more popular. The popularity of NLA has exploded, the quality of the league is growing. They're producing more NHL prospects and the quality of the national team has improved significantly.
From 1980 up until 1997 7 Swiss players were drafted by NHL teams. More Swiss players have been drafted in the last 3 years. They're averaging 2-3 draftees per year now.
SurMartin
Registered User
Nope. The Norwegians are consistently performing better in international tournaments, it's not just about Sochi. Look at their World Ranking. We're not talking about the number of NHLers, but the quality of their national team.
Hockey is not the most popular sport in Switzerland, football is.
Bjorn Le
Hobocop
National team performance doesn't mean their program is better. Denmark simply develops more talent, they're just not always in position to go to the WC or qualification. Best on best Denmark blows Norway out of the water. Norway's depth may be similar or better than Denmark but Denmark can develop high end talent far better.
I said arguably, and I've seen many Swiss posters argue that hockey is the most popular team sport in Switzerland. And Europeans tend to be pessimistic about the popularity of hockey in their country. People tend to default and assume soccer is the most popular sport in every country but it's really not.
jekoh
Registered User
- Jun 8, 2004
- 4,416
- 4
It has not "exploded" at all, most teams have the same attendance they had 15 year ago.
That says next to nothing about the popularity of the game.
We aren't talking about their programme, we're talking about their national team.
If we would be talking about their programme, it would be much easier for me to prove that Norway is better, as they have a lot more players, a lot more kids playing hockey, a lot more ice rinks and a slightly higher attendance in the domestic league.
They're also likely to join the KHL in the coming years.That's just incorrect. The attendance rates have been growing constantly for a number of years now. In 2007 they averaged 5,500 people, now the average attendance has reached 6,800+. And that number is growing on a yearly basis. If you've got some older data, do share the numbers.
The original point had nothing to do with popularity, but rather the quality of the Swiss national team and their hockey programme. Number of NHL prospects produced is a valid indicator, if we want to measure the quality of Swiss hockey.
Canuck21t
Registered User
Switzerland was once as good in alpine skiing as Austria. Switzerland is still a major player in alpine skiing. The Alps region is good in alpine skiing. So why is Norway not good in hockey when its neighbours are?
Spinkis
Registered User
- Dec 26, 2011
- 1,232
- 1
Are those outdoor rinks with lighting? Otherwise those numbers look very small.
I agree, I'm from a small town with sub 10'000 habitants and we had 4 outdoor rinks and 1 indoor, all with lightning. I imagine it to be something similar in the other counties(I'm from dalecarlia/dalarna)
Last edited:
15 outdoor rinks in finland and 2 in norway? I live within 15 minutes of over 20 outdoor rinks in Calgary
Eisen
Registered User
Is it true that Norwegians see hockey players as uneducated morons? 
I have no idea about the cost for putting your kids in a team but it shouldn't be any problems since they're all wealthy, at least it feels so. I think we will see more from Norway over the years.
I have no idea about the cost for putting your kids in a team but it shouldn't be any problems since they're all wealthy, at least it feels so. I think we will see more from Norway over the years.
jekoh
Registered User
- Jun 8, 2004
- 4,416
- 4
Even if hockey's popularity had been increasing since 2007, that obviously wouldn't explain the national team getting better or more players getting drafted, since all of the players were already playing hockey as of 2007.
http://www.hockeyarenas.net/index.php?page=4000&ctID=ch&tmID=20
http://www.hockeyarenas.net/index.php?page=4000&ctID=ch&tmID=23&tmID=4
http://www.hockeyarenas.net/index.php?page=4000&ctID=ch&tmID=34&tmID=15
http://www.hockeyarenas.net/index.php?page=4000&ctID=ch&tmID=31&tmID=17
http://www.hockeyarenas.net/index.php?page=4000&ctID=ch&tmID=24&tmID=3
http://www.hockeyarenas.net/index.php?page=4000&ctID=ch&tmID=25&tmID=26
http://www.hockeyarenas.net/index.php?page=4000&ctID=ch&tmID=21&tmID=19
http://www.hockeyarenas.net/index.php?page=4000&ctID=ch&tmID=27&tmID=22
As you can see, most teams already had the same attendance by the early 90s. It just so happened that small town teams were replaced by bigger cities like Geneva.
As a general remark, overall league attendance doesn't tell the whole story. In fact you could have an increase of overall league attendance with every single team showing a decrease.
You offered increased popularity as an explanation for better programme. Then you used the better programme as proof of increased popularity. That's circular logic.
Last edited:
pluppe
Registered User
- Apr 6, 2009
- 693
- 3
The answer has been given. Norway has a completely different topography from the other scandinavian countries.
"Finland nature" in google
"Sweden nature" in google
"Norway nature" in google
Sweden and Finland have some mountains but most of all we have lots of freshwater lakes close to their cities and flat ground to freeze water on.
Norway also have a lot of lakes but since the country is basically one long mountain (I kid you not) it is not easy to get a group together after school. Norway is also warmer and have more precipitation because of the gulf stream making it harder to find places to skate (fjords often dont freeze).
The mountains also make roadtrips much harder which I would guess also makes individual sports more attractive where you can reach sucess on your own. I work in Norway at the moment at a hospital and some of our patients in this region of 25 000 people have a 10 hour round trip to get here. Imagine if they wanted to get a team and have games against neighbouring cities.
They also happen to be a very traditional country and since they are more suited for skiing, that's what they do the most. And with great success
That is what I think at least.
"Finland nature" in google
"Sweden nature" in google
"Norway nature" in google
Sweden and Finland have some mountains but most of all we have lots of freshwater lakes close to their cities and flat ground to freeze water on.
Norway also have a lot of lakes but since the country is basically one long mountain (I kid you not) it is not easy to get a group together after school. Norway is also warmer and have more precipitation because of the gulf stream making it harder to find places to skate (fjords often dont freeze).
The mountains also make roadtrips much harder which I would guess also makes individual sports more attractive where you can reach sucess on your own. I work in Norway at the moment at a hospital and some of our patients in this region of 25 000 people have a 10 hour round trip to get here. Imagine if they wanted to get a team and have games against neighbouring cities.
They also happen to be a very traditional country and since they are more suited for skiing, that's what they do the most. And with great success
That is what I think at least.
It is all about infrastructure of course. But that answer just pushes the question further, why is the infrastructure so weak? Then it comes down to culture, hockey is no big thing but skiing is.
I do not know if the economical argument is of importance. Norway sure have money but they haven't had that for very long as it is just oil money. Norway have been a weak country when looking at industry. That would speak for a natural reason for a weak hockey infrastructure from a historical cultural perspective, not even mentioning than equipment costs.
On the other hand, hockey has not always been an expensive sport, outdoor rinks, skates and a stick is can be cheap, certainly back when there wasn't any high end equipment to speak of.
Climate might perhaps be a historical cultural factor. Lack of frozen lakes might be one factor. Sweden and Finland got heaps of heaps of frozen lakes. Might be a weak argument to have bearing on today, but what else.
EDIT: "Pluppe" above seems to be on this track, when I was writing.
I do not know if the economical argument is of importance. Norway sure have money but they haven't had that for very long as it is just oil money. Norway have been a weak country when looking at industry. That would speak for a natural reason for a weak hockey infrastructure from a historical cultural perspective, not even mentioning than equipment costs.
On the other hand, hockey has not always been an expensive sport, outdoor rinks, skates and a stick is can be cheap, certainly back when there wasn't any high end equipment to speak of.
Climate might perhaps be a historical cultural factor. Lack of frozen lakes might be one factor. Sweden and Finland got heaps of heaps of frozen lakes. Might be a weak argument to have bearing on today, but what else.
EDIT: "Pluppe" above seems to be on this track, when I was writing.
The figures for amount of rinks seems very low... I assume there is a lot of rinks not counted here, perhaps only rinks that acutally is used by hockeyclubs is counted here.
There is more than 139 (lighted) outdoor rinks in Sweden, I can almost garantuee it. Could it be 139 outdoor rinks with artificial ice?
What I think is that several outdoor rinks simply isnt registred. They arent counted. But they are still used (at least when cold enough).
Villages with 1000 inhabitants usually got one rink.
And 15 outdoor rinks in Finland, it just cannot be true...
Last edited:
It's not. There are at least 5 withing walking distance from my house, so that would leave 10 for the rest of Finland. It's a completely ludicrous statement unless they only count ones that are actively used by clubs or something.
Is it true that Norwegians see hockey players as uneducated morons?
I have no idea about the cost for putting your kids in a team but it shouldn't be any problems since they're all wealthy, at least it feels so. I think we will see more from Norway over the years.
Far too many people consider hockey a low class, violent sport. If you want to make a career in business in Norway cross country skiing is the thing to do. Correct people ski and that is the place you meet the influental people in Norway. Do you think that crosscountry skiers have any problems finding sponsors?No. The biggest companies sponsor them. When it comes to hockey you mainly find small businesses sponsoring hockey.
Also, when there has not been built a hockey rink in Oslo the last 20 years you understand that the sport is in serious trouble
Last edited:
In the 80's West Germany played in the Canada Cup instead of Finland because we'd sucked so bad the tournament before
In 1988 we won our first medal, beat the soviet union in a competition for the first time
Finland's really come from not being a pretender/contender into becoming a contender in the last 20 years. We're still on an upward trajectory imho (frequency of medals increasing etc)
I would not be surprised at all to see the Swiss be a serious contender and 8th hockey power in 10 years. Where they are noted, seen as possible medallists but thought of on paper to be below others, like Finland has been seen many times previously
Then you get 1 or 2 superstars, your Kurri, Selänne - and all of a sudden in the right year, things click and you can win the whole thing.
yeah there's no way those figures are correct.. I can think of 3 outdoor rinks within walking distance of my house
yeah that's gotta be it.. hell there's 2 just in my neighborhood (Friisilä) let alone walking distance
IslesNorway
Registered User
The reason is this:
In Norway hockey has a bad reputation and is viewed as a sport for bullies and short-tempered troublemakers. It garners little interest and there is no real desire among the Norwegian public to change its views of the sport. Actually it is the second most watched team sport in Norway (in attendance) but doesn't even get a fraction of the attention that women's handball gets.
Secondly there is no real tv-coverage to speak of. Some games are shown on channels unavailable to many people or on pay-tv, which of course is akin to preaching to the congregation. It doesn't make any new fans that way. If more games were shown on bigger stations and the media bothered to inform properly about the sport that could change, but don't really see it coming. The world cup will ensure some attention, but they always fail to capitalize on it. Games aren't advertised properly either.
Thirdly, there are next to no rinks in Norway outside of the Oslo area. Look at the list of teams in the Norwegian top flight and all but two play within a two-hour drive from Oslo. There are no teams north of Trondheim worth mentioning. Hockey is popular in certain areas of the country, but the large masses remain ignorant. Even Norway's second biggest city, Bergen, cannot support a hockey team.
Fourthly, the sport is run by amateurs. All you ever hear is of more financial troubles surrounding clubs and there is little professionalism in the teams or in Norwegian hockey federation, leading to a no development.
Fifthly, for all the reasons above Norway aren't just any good at hockey which of course completes the vicious cycle. Not doing well equals no media exposure equals no new fans.
Finally, the idea that Norwegians prefer individual sports is not true. By far the biggest sport in Norway is football (soccer). Both in terms of players, tv-audience, attendance and media coverage. In the summer months it is the all-encompassing sport and most poeple have an opinion. In winter however, skiing takes precedence for three main reasons:
1. We're the best in the world leading to lots of coverage.
2. Virtually everybody in Norway goes skiing or knows how to ski. It is the national pasttime for five months of the year and any given Saturday and Sunday the woods get overcrowded with skiers.
3.At weekends National tv runs 8-hour monster broadcasts covering all sorts of winter sports, but no hockey. Skiing, skating, alipne skiing and biathlon dominate.
I think that hockey could grow here but it requires a major change in the perception of the game by the general public.
In Norway hockey has a bad reputation and is viewed as a sport for bullies and short-tempered troublemakers. It garners little interest and there is no real desire among the Norwegian public to change its views of the sport. Actually it is the second most watched team sport in Norway (in attendance) but doesn't even get a fraction of the attention that women's handball gets.
Secondly there is no real tv-coverage to speak of. Some games are shown on channels unavailable to many people or on pay-tv, which of course is akin to preaching to the congregation. It doesn't make any new fans that way. If more games were shown on bigger stations and the media bothered to inform properly about the sport that could change, but don't really see it coming. The world cup will ensure some attention, but they always fail to capitalize on it. Games aren't advertised properly either.
Thirdly, there are next to no rinks in Norway outside of the Oslo area. Look at the list of teams in the Norwegian top flight and all but two play within a two-hour drive from Oslo. There are no teams north of Trondheim worth mentioning. Hockey is popular in certain areas of the country, but the large masses remain ignorant. Even Norway's second biggest city, Bergen, cannot support a hockey team.
Fourthly, the sport is run by amateurs. All you ever hear is of more financial troubles surrounding clubs and there is little professionalism in the teams or in Norwegian hockey federation, leading to a no development.
Fifthly, for all the reasons above Norway aren't just any good at hockey which of course completes the vicious cycle. Not doing well equals no media exposure equals no new fans.
Finally, the idea that Norwegians prefer individual sports is not true. By far the biggest sport in Norway is football (soccer). Both in terms of players, tv-audience, attendance and media coverage. In the summer months it is the all-encompassing sport and most poeple have an opinion. In winter however, skiing takes precedence for three main reasons:
1. We're the best in the world leading to lots of coverage.
2. Virtually everybody in Norway goes skiing or knows how to ski. It is the national pasttime for five months of the year and any given Saturday and Sunday the woods get overcrowded with skiers.
3.At weekends National tv runs 8-hour monster broadcasts covering all sorts of winter sports, but no hockey. Skiing, skating, alipne skiing and biathlon dominate.
I think that hockey could grow here but it requires a major change in the perception of the game by the general public.
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
HF Habs: Trade Proposal Thread #91: 2025 Trade Deadline edition- Latest: Beendair Donedat
