Why is Norway not good at hockey compared to Sweden/Finland?

[Namejs]

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.

That's a great straw man argument.

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 you can clearly see, the popularity of hockey exploded in Switzerland in the early 90s and has continuously increased during the last decade, which was exactly my point.

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.

Maybe in another universe with different rules of logic. If the overall attendance has increased, it is impossible for every single team to show a decrease in attendance. Not to mention that individual teams don't matter. Nationwide exposure to the sport matters. And it's worth to mention that all the NLA games are now televised.

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.

And another straw man argument.

You implied that hockey in Switzerland hasn't become more popular and that the quality of their programme hasn't improved.

What I did was prove the opposite, without offering a causal relationship between these two phenomena. The only suggestion I made regarding the possible reasons of improved quality of their programme was investments in hockey infrastructure.

 

[stv11]

That's a great straw man argument.



As you can clearly see, the popularity of hockey exploded in Switzerland in the early 90s and has continuously increased during the last decade, which was exactly my point.


Maybe in another universe with different rules of logic. If the overall attendance has increased, it is impossible for every single team to show a decrease in attendance. Not to mention that individual teams don't matter. Nationwide exposure to the sport matters. And it's worth to mention that all the NLA games are now televised.



And another straw man argument.

You implied that hockey in Switzerland hasn't become more popular and that the quality of their programme hasn't improved.

What I did was prove the opposite, without offering a causal relationship between these two phenomena. The only suggestion I made regarding the possible reasons of improved quality of their programme was investments in hockey infrastructure.

Jekoh is right, just let it go. Hockey has always been popular in Switzerland, even back when the NLA was an amateur league. Changes in attendances can be explained by teams from mountains towns being replaced by teams from cities.

 

[Atas2000]

There are traditions in every country. Some sports are more popular than others. Only huge countries like the US or China cann support alot of major sports on olympic level. Smaller countries concentrate on most popular sports. Hockey doesn't have a tradition in Norway. While most northern countries do play hockey it doesn't necessarily mean Norwegians should. They are a huge winter sports nation elsewhere instead. For a country with such a small population there probably is no room for another sport to grow to that level.

 

[jekoh]

Maybe in another universe with different rules of logic. If the overall attendance has increased, it is impossible for every single team to show a decrease in attendance.

No, champion, it is not impossible at all if you keep in mind that every year one team gets relegated and another one gets promoted. All you need is for the promoted team to be more popular than the relegated team. It does not really take a genius.

You implied that hockey in Switzerland hasn't become more popular

I still do, and backed it up with figures. You did not provide any conclusive evidence.

And you certainly implied a causal relationship between the two, though it now appears you did that implication by mistake.

 

[Botta]

There are traditions in every country. Some sports are more popular than others. Only huge countries like the US or China cann support alot of major sports on olympic level. Smaller countries concentrate on most popular sports. Hockey doesn't have a tradition in Norway. While most northern countries do play hockey it doesn't necessarily mean Norwegians should. They are a huge winter sports nation elsewhere instead. For a country with such a small population there probably is no room for another sport to grow to that level.

There is room for the sport to grow. I guess where you maybe come from(Russia?) kids play soccer in the summer and hockey in the winter. In norway kids play soccer and go crosscountry skiing in the winter. So in my mind many of the kids that go skiing could play hockey because hockey is much more related to soccer than skiing is

 

[AstrophysicalJet]

Well read again.. They dont like team sports Its their thing, in general, of course there are exceptions like the Norwegian womens handball team. In general though they are more individual. Could be because of their geografy, landscape where mountains and fjords make it difficult to build rinks and to get together as large groups to form teams

It also concurs with them being a very individually minded country culturally.

http://geert-hofstede.com/norway.html

To build on the responses, there's also the presence of mountains that has aided their specializing in snow sports. The Scandinavian Mountains also run into Sweden, but that's not where the population bases are in Sweden. Finland is extremely flat, especially south of Lapland.

No my Friend, Denmark is EXTREMELY flat

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On another note, why do these threads always turn into Denmark vs. Norway?

 

[IslesNorway]

The climate has a bit of an impact too.

No it doesn't. I've no idea where that notion comes from but Norway's climate is identical to that of Sweden and Finland. Norway's leading hockey team at the moment is Stavanger, an area with little to no snow in the winter, kinda like Malmø in Sweden. There are all sorts of opportunities to play outdoors here, but as the sport has no following, noboy does. Kids go skiing or sledding instead as playing hockey is not part of our culture

And just for the reord, Norwegians LOVE team sports, it's just that football is hundred times bigger than anything else

 

[Atas2000]

There is room for the sport to grow. I guess where you maybe come from(Russia?) kids play soccer in the summer and hockey in the winter. In norway kids play soccer and go crosscountry skiing in the winter. So in my mind many of the kids that go skiing could play hockey because hockey is much more related to soccer than skiing is

It certainly works for countries with 100+ millons population and there is still room for groth in Norway, but I think if we're talking about serious potential for high-end sports growth it would mean less ppl would do skiing or skating on top level. Obviously a small country can concentrate on one sport and reach significant heights, like basketball in Lithuania or hockey in Latvia. Norway is already a winter sports powerhouse. There is still potential for growth in hockey I would think, but it would be a tough competition against other popular winter sports.

 

[jekoh]

No it doesn't. I've no idea where that notion comes from but Norway's climate is identical to that of Sweden and Finland. Norway's leading hockey team at the moment is Stavanger, an area with little to no snow in the winter, kinda like Malmø in Sweden.

The winters on the Norwegian coast are certainly milder than in Sweden and Finland
http://www.uk.gardenweb.com/forums/zones/hze2.html
http://viavasterbotten.se/sectors/climate-testing/facts-figures/weather-conditions/

And while Stavanger has the current top team, hardly any of the top players come from there, almost all of them come from the South-East.

 

[IslesNorway]

The winters on the Norwegian coast are certainly milder than in Sweden and Finland
http://www.uk.gardenweb.com/forums/zones/hze2.html
http://viavasterbotten.se/sectors/climate-testing/facts-figures/weather-conditions/

And while Stavanger has the current top team, hardly any of the top players come from there, almost all of them come from the South-East.

Because that is the place in the country to have rinks! As I pointed out previously all top teams in Norway but two are from the area close to Oslo. Climate does not play a part - culture does. If there was a desire to build rinks or encourage kids to pick up hockey the sport could grow considerably, but there isn't.

As for the Norwegian coast, it is so scarcely populated there is no need for rinks - there wouldn't be any kids playing or equipment available. Climate doesn't factor one bit-

 

[Ola]

No it doesn't. I've no idea where that notion comes from but Norway's climate is identical to that of Sweden and Finland. Norway's leading hockey team at the moment is Stavanger, an area with little to no snow in the winter, kinda like Malmø in Sweden. There are all sorts of opportunities to play outdoors here, but as the sport has no following, noboy does. Kids go skiing or sledding instead as playing hockey is not part of our culture

And just for the reord, Norwegians LOVE team sports, it's just that football is hundred times bigger than anything else

Because that is the place in the country to have rinks! As I pointed out previously all top teams in Norway but two are from the area close to Oslo. Climate does not play a part - culture does. If there was a desire to build rinks or encourage kids to pick up hockey the sport could grow considerably, but there isn't.

As for the Norwegian coast, it is so scarcely populated there is no need for rinks - there wouldn't be any kids playing or equipment available. Climate doesn't factor one bit-

Hmm, I don't know. I got more time so I will explain.

You know, Norway don't quite have those long steady -- never ending -- winters in the high populated areas of Finland and Sweden, especially in the 1930-1980 (today is a diffrent story with the weather lately...).

Like, there was a helluva lot of skating going on, on lakes and what not, in Sweden in the 50's. That transformed into bandy games being played, on lakes, all over Sweden into the 70's. A lot of hockey was played early.

When Sweden was real rich -- one of the top 6 richest countries in the World after WWII -- this transformed into a lot of rinks being built. The socialist goverment placed a lot of industries in smaller city's all over Sweden, and winter time the hockey teams in those city's became very popular.

I just think that the above movement is one that didn't take place in Norway. Climate today is not much of a factor, that is of course true. But when TV had 1 channel and the winter was 5.5 month long, you had lakes all over the place and nothing else to do, it led to a whole bunch of skating. That skating led to a whole bunch of rinks being build. A lot of small industrial city's led to a whole bunch of hockey teams. The Soviets pwning international hockey, led to some kind of dream in Sweden of being able to beat them. This led to hockey players becoming professionals. Etc etc etc.

You say that climate doesn't matter, culture does. But where does culture come from? Climate had a part there early on, as I understand.

 

[Proust*]

Well read again.. They dont like team sports

I guess that's why they ain't in the Euro-zone.

 

[jekoh]

Because that is the place in the country to have rinks! As I pointed out previously all top teams in Norway but two are from the area close to Oslo. Climate does not play a part - culture does.

Despite what you claim it does look like climate does play a part. It seems natural that places with milder winters will have fewer rinks.

As for the Norwegian coast, it is so scarcely populated there is no need for rinks - there wouldn't be any kids playing or equipment available. Climate doesn't factor one bit-

Bergen, Stavanger, etc. are on the coast and are big cities (by Norway's standards). Climate is probably not the only factor but it does seem to explain why these cities are less likely to produce hockey players than even smaller towns in the South-East.

 

[Botta]

It certainly works for countries with 100+ millons population and there is still room for groth in Norway, but I think if we're talking about serious potential for high-end sports growth it would mean less ppl would do skiing or skating on top level. Obviously a small country can concentrate on one sport and reach significant heights, like basketball in Lithuania or hockey in Latvia. Norway is already a winter sports powerhouse. There is still potential for growth in hockey I would think, but it would be a tough competition against other popular winter sports.

I belive there are 100 000 crosscountry skiers i Norway which is about the half of the total skiiers world wide(not a big sport, but lots of medals to win in the olympics) There are only 7000 playing hockey. I would be very happy if 15000 could have played hockey instead of skiing.(Switzerland have 27000 players)Of course we would need another 70 rinks for that number of players

 

[Namejs]

No, champion, it is not impossible at all if you keep in mind that every year one team gets relegated and another one gets promoted. All you need is for the promoted team to be more popular than the relegated team. It does not really take a genius.

It does not take a genius to understand the difference between the terms 'league' and 'division'. NLB is a part of the Swiss hockey league. So if we're talking about every single team, relegation/promotion is completely irrelevant.

Compare the total attendace, look up the stats. The attendance rates have clearly gone up.

I still do, and backed it up with figures. You did not provide any conclusive evidence.

I provided the stats since 2007, you provided a link with all the available stats. Should've checked your own sources.

As for the quality of the national team, you have to be blind to not see the improvement. Elite talent produced, success at international competitions, world ranking all point to the obvious.

And you certainly implied a causal relationship between the two, though it now appears you did that implication by mistake.

Quote me, please. I have never implied a causal relationship between the two. You should read more carefully.

 

[IslesNorway]

Despite what you claim it does look like climate does play a part. It seems natural that places with milder winters will have fewer rinks.


Bergen, Stavanger, etc. are on the coast and are big cities (by Norway's standards). Climate is probably not the only factor but it does seem to explain why these cities are less likely to produce hockey players than even smaller towns in the South-East.

No, because today hockey is an indoor sport. Kids don't grow up playing outside and haven't ever done so here. There is a rink in Bergen of course, only they never amount to anything, because nobody cares!

Remember, more than 50% of the population of Norway live within an hour's drive from Oslo - an hour's drive in a country with a coastline longer than the circumference of the earth! This is why nearly all players come from the Oslo area and unless rinks are built it won't change. Distances in rural Norway and along the coast are so vast that there is no way a kids league could be upheld and there simply ain't enough people to support it. If you look at the Norwegian national football team the situation is the opposite -nearly all players come from the countryside and virtually none from Oslo!

Coastal areas don't produce skiers either, for all the obvious reasons. Never has there been any elite skier from Bergen, Stavanger, Haugesund or their surrounding areas, but interest in skiing remains huge. What they do is get in the car and drive for an hour or so into the mountains at weekends, which is considered a perfectly natural thing to do here. Nearly all Norwegian families have access to mountain cabins so going skiing is rarely a problem.

Ola mentioned above the importance of skating, and much like the Netherlands speed skating is popular here. Back in the 50s and 60s everybody listened to the skating on the radio and then the sport could be practised everywhere. Outside spped skating rinks were everywhere but nobody thought of investing in hockey.

 

[jekoh]

It does not take a genius to understand the difference between the terms 'league' and 'division'. NLB is a part of the Swiss hockey league. So if we're talking about every single team, relegation/promotion is completely irrelevant.

Teams are relegated and promoted out of the National League aswell, so the general remark still stands. Your insistance on having the last word is laughable.

Compare the total attendace, look up the stats. The attendance rates have clearly gone up.

I provided the stats since 2007, you provided a link with all the available stats. Should've checked your own sources.

I did compare the attendances. And they do not go up. Hockey has become more popular in certain towns, less in others.

The stats you provided are inconclusive, as has been explained to you by another poster aswell, but you're too stubborn to admit it.

Quote me, please. I have never implied a causal relationship between the two. You should read more carefully.

Switzerland actually weren't that good 15-20 years ago. Why has hockey become more popular in Switzerland in recent years? No clue. But it is obvious that they have made huge strides in developing their hockey programme.

You're welcome.

 

[damicius]

weather

the answer is in weather. Norway is closer to the main flow from gulf stream, so much more humid weather. Sweden lies behind the mountains where the most of rain/snow falls.

The current "hockey" states were developed in 1930-1960 not in the halls, but in openair on nature ice. When you compare for example Trondheim and Östersund, which lies 250km only from each other. Trondheim has 3x more snow during winter and the average temperature is 5°C higher than in Östersund.
So it absolute logical that the condition for creating the natural icerinks were much better in Sweden.

 

[Botta]

the answer is in weather. Norway is closer to the main flow from gulf stream, so much more humid weather. Sweden lies behind the mountains where the most of rain/snow falls.

The current "hockey" states were developed in 1930-1960 not in the halls, but in openair on nature ice. When you compare for example Trondheim and Östersund, which lies 250km only from each other. Trondheim has 3x more snow during winter and the average temperature is 5°C higher than in Östersund.
So it absolute logical that the condition for creating the natural icerinks were much better in Sweden.

Funny that you mention Trondheim.., but there is no snow here and hasn`t been all winter I was outside skating 2 hours ago.The problem is also that there no hockey rinks here anymore(no boards) so almost all practise is inside. We can skate outside(also on the lakes in and surrounding the city) but not really play. Climate in the eastern parts of Norway, where 60-70 % of the people live is like the climate they have in central Sweden.The reason is that mountains shield for the humid and mild weather in the winter. Look up Lillehammer and you will see that it is cold enough

 

[jmarc0]

Teams are relegated and promoted out of the National League aswell, so the general remark still stands. Your insistance on having the last word is laughable.


I did compare the attendances. And they do not go up. Hockey has become more popular in certain towns, less in others.

The stats you provided are inconclusive, as has been explained to you by another poster aswell, but you're too stubborn to admit it.



You're welcome.

Jekoh is absolutly right, hockey is one of the three most popular sport in Switzerland for decades. Now it's not surprising to have greater attendance in Geneva than in Arosa or La Chaux-de-Fonds.

They are several reason for the swiss team to performe better today than 20 years ago :

-We have real professional players for a quite short time compared to NHL or Sweden

-The interest for the Swiss team have increased after we had some good international results. In the past the attendance for an international game was far below the attendance for an NLA game... So our best players are far more involved now than they use to be.

-The coaches (Kruegger and now Simpson) have done a really nice job (and enought time to do it)

That said, I'm not sure at all that the number of swiss players playing in NHL tell the truth about swiss hockey level. This number dramaticly increased after Mark Streit have been recognized as a really good NHL player. He put swiss players in the spotlights for NHL draft, that's it. If you don't believe me, have a look to wich team recruite much of the swiss players... Montreal Montreal and Montreal

 

[Captain Bowie]

Why does Canada suck at soccer? Because they're obsessed with hockey.

Why does Norway suck at hockey? Because they're obsessed with skiing.

Pretty much. A majority of Norway's best athletes gravitate to alpine sports. Just like the majority of Canada's best athletes gravitate towards hockey.

 

[Eagle Eye Cherry]

All this talk about Switzerland makes me think it's great to see Switzerland make an effort to improve their program. It's nice to see their quality of hockey improve from the 90s compared to now. Nowadays, we get a handful of Swiss players drafted each year compared to before. By the looks of it, the Swiss might surpass Slovakia as Slovakia seems to be on the decline.

But yeah, Norway should be better at hockey in my opinion.

 

[roto]

Someone posted some some stats about the amount of outdoor rinks in Finland (~15), which were laughable. I have something like 5 rinks (with lights) in 5km radius of where I live.

Big amount of outdoor rinks and ices are one reason why ice hockey has became popular here in Finland. It's easy and free for kids to go there, be there whole evening etc. It's difficult to build some ice hockey culture if there are basically no outdoor rinks/ices, but just few indoor arenas where you can't go whenever you like.

Well, during last years the winters have been so warm that the season hasn't been too long. This winter we got ice to outdoor rinks few weeks ago, and then it was a bit too cold (-20C).

 

[Pgust]

Don't know how it is in Norway but in Swe/Fin you have just like in NA with high School hockey etc. etc.

Why do all other countries suck at bandy except from Sweden and Russia? Both Finland and Canada should be good at it because we all have pretty much the same climate. Hockey have been a sport of choice since a long time ago in Swe/Fin and skiing have been the most popular in Norway instead.

 

[QnebO]

They're a dominant winter sports country (they tied for third with USA in Vancouver with 9 Golds, only behind Germany in 2nd with 10 and Canada in 1st with 14). Odd that their success hasn't translated that well over to hockey but can't win them all, right?

And they did that with under 5 million peope population. They are great.
Historically Finland is very good too in Olympics in relation to population (most gold medals in relation to population actually) but lately we have sucked in most individiual sports.

While saying, Aino-Kaisa Saarinen Skiing really good in Italy so far.

The fact that Norway sucks in hockey is confusing. They just should be.. But then, they would "loose" hunderds of young strong men to hockey teams and not have so many good individual sportsmen, like us. One hockey team takes 30 athletes and you need many of those teams to make good leagues..