Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ice-hockey World Championship 2019

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #51
    They aren't showing all of the games, but they are showing a decent number, including all of the US matches.

    And the IIHF is posting non-geo-blocked highlights of every game on YouTube.

    I think that having more freedom to play in international tournaments is going to be a negotiation point for the players in the next CBA.

    Comment


      #52
      The Worlds started in the 1930s (and were dominated by Canadian amateurs for decades until the Soviets got serious).

      Comment


        #53
        Really? I looked it up and it said the 70s.

        I looked it up again, and it appears that the 70s were the first time Canada (and the US, but we didn't matter back then) were allowed to send NHL players. So, for the purposes of this discussion, that's the relevant time frame, I think.

        Wiki says...
        "In 1975, Dr. Günther Sabetzki was elected president of the IIHF. He replaced Bunny Ahearne, whose heavy-handed regime had caused him to grow increasingly unpopular toward the end of his presidency. Sabetzki would remain in office for nearly two decades, which were considered up to that point the most successful period for international ice hockey on all fronts.[13]

        Sabetzki's greatest achievement was ending the Canadian boycott of the World Championships and Olympic Games. The Canadians had boycotted these tournaments between 1970 and 1976 after the IIHF had refused to allow them to roster professional players at the World Championships from NHL teams that had not qualified for the Stanley Cup playoffs. President Sabetzki managed to find a compromise that resulted in the return of Canada to international events beginning in 1977. The pro players whose teams had been eliminated from the playoffs were allowed to compete and in exchange, Canada and the U.S. agreed to participate in the World Championships. They also waived their right to host any World Championships. The creation of the Canada Cup (a competition organized by the NHL in Canada every four years) was also part of the new agreement between the IIHF and North American professional hockey.[13]

        Comment


          #54
          Originally posted by Hot Pepsi View Post
          Really? I looked it up and it said the 70s.

          I looked it up again, and it appears that the 70s were the first time Canada (and the US, but we didn't matter back then) were allowed to send NHL players. So, for the purposes of this discussion, that's the relevant time frame, I think.
          That feels a bit like saying that the World Cup wasn't really a thing until 1950 because that's when England deigned to take part.

          Comment


            #55
            Bunny Ahearne. Now there was a character.

            I'm probably getting this wrong but, I believe that he got involved in hockey when the then British Ice Hockey Association rented some office space above his travel agency. From there, he graduated from the BIHA to the IIHF via granting votes to countries that hardly played the game, pissing off the North Americans and keeping the Soviets sweet. Oh, and countries that didn't book through his travel agency found themselves short of accreditations and visas. Basically the 50s/60s equivalent of Sepp Blatter.

            He's in the British Hockey Hall of Fame, obviously..
            Last edited by Snake Plissken; 14-05-2019, 21:03.

            Comment


              #56
              Originally posted by San Bernardhinault View Post

              That feels a bit like saying that the World Cup wasn't really a thing until 1950 because that's when England deigned to take part.
              But that’s true, though, isn’t it? England would have been a clear favorite in the 30s, wouldn’t they? And it didn’t really pick up steam until after the War.

              But the situation between the 40s and 76 in hockey is not the same. It was more like having a rugby World Cup and telling New Zealand they can only bring their u-23 team.

              It wasn’t that Canada didn’t want to legitimize the competition. The Soviets and Czechs teams were professionals but the IIHF wasn’t letting Canada bring its professionals. It was rigged and didn’t offer Canadian fans any compelling reason to care.

              Last edited by Hot Pepsi; 14-05-2019, 23:47.

              Comment


                #57
                Originally posted by Hot Pepsi View Post
                England would have been a clear favorite in the 30s, wouldn’t they?
                Hmmm. Possibly, but it's a small sample size. Outside of the "home countries" England's record in the 1930s against European opposition was 17-7-2. Good but by no means invincible. It included losses to Belgium, Yugoslavia, Austria, Hungary and others.

                Comment


                  #58
                  I wouldn't have had them as favourites in any of the three pre-war World Cups given the quality of the teams that were playing at home, the distance and unfamiliarity of Uruguay and the significant assistance that Italy got.

                  I appreciate that British bookies would have had them as sure things, but that didn't work out great in 1950.

                  Comment


                    #59
                    Ok. Although I suppose it’s hard to know how well a hypothetical England World Cup team could have done if they really understood the quality of the opposition and were properly prepared, managed, and knew how to get the most of their talent. We’re still waiting for that, I guess.

                    But my point is that a properly prepared team of Canadian NHL players would have had a reasonably good chance to win any international hockey tournament, even against the Soviets, if they would have played them in them in the 60s or 70s. They wouldn’t have won all of them, but they’d have won a lot. And not having them there undercuts the legitimacy, for lack of a better word, of those World Championships in the same way that some medals in the 1980 and 1984 Olympics don’t seem quite so impressive as the ones earned in Olympics without massive boycotts.

                    We know Canada could have won, because they pulled out the 72 Sunmit Series despite being overconfident at the start. And they won multiple Canada Cups, of course, even though the Soviets had the advantage of playing together a lot more often.

                    It’s unfortunate that didn’t happen, because regular “best on best” tournaments with the best European teams could have taught the North Americans a lot we needed to learn about tactics and skill.

                    Comment


                      #60
                      The Czechoslovaks likely would have gotten a couple as well. Single elimination means that the best team doesn't always win.

                      I now see where you are coming from much better than I did before. Yes, those tournaments were unequivocally not best-on-best. Nor is this one. And you are right that it is very difficult to reach that standard at this tIme of year given the NHL calendar.

                      But I would argue that that standard is too high. It has only been reached a handful of times in a sport that has been played for over a century and may well not be reached again until the Olympics come back to North America (if then).

                      And I wouldn't allow pursuit of that ideal to devalue what the tournament currently is and what it represents, particularly to players from outside North America

                      Though Inwould never presume that to be the only valid or defensible point of view.

                      Comment


                        #61
                        Originally posted by Hot Pepsi View Post
                        We know Canada could have won, because they pulled out the 72 Sunmit Series despite being overconfident at the start. And they won multiple Canada Cups, of course, even though the Soviets had the advantage of playing together a lot more often.
                        Bobby Clarke deliberately breaking Kharlamovs ankle had a heck of a lot to do with it.

                        Originally posted by Hot Pepsi View Post
                        It’s unfortunate that didn’t happen, because regular “best on best” tournaments with the best European teams could have taught the North Americans a lot we needed to learn about tactics and skill.
                        There is an excellent ESPN 30 for 30 documentary called "Of Miracles and Men" which - although focused on the Miracle on Ice and its aftermath from a Russian perspective - is excellent in explaining just why Russian hockey is/was so stylistically different from the North American game.

                        Comment


                          #62
                          Yesterday was hugely disappointing for GB.

                          We didnt begin to show what we are capable of. We gave up really cheap penalties to go 5 on 3 on the PK. The Danes punished us with 2 power play goals. 3-0 at the end of the first wasnt game over but any lingering thoughts we had of getting back into things were put to bed with a horrific 5 goal 2nd period. Bowns couldn't do it on his own. His D were poor - Ben O'Connor worryingly so given that he's by far our best blue liner. The forward lines just haven't clicked at all and we don't look to carry any kind of threat. We didnt test the Danish goaltender nearly enough despite him being a potential weak link in their team. I've seen it suggested that Pete Russell's contract wrangling and move to DEL2 may be a distraction and could actually hinder the team. It's a worry if the head coach doesnt have his head in the game right now. If that's the case then I'd actually consider sending him home and going with Adam Keefe/Corey Neilson for the rest of the tournament. Not like they're not both good club head coaches with a good bit of experience between them.

                          It's all about the French now. USA, Slovakia and Finland are nothing games for us. I'd be mixing up the forward lines to try to generate something. I'd have Kirk on the 2nd with Dowd and either Ben Lake or Mike Hammond. I'd potentially be looking at having Farmer and Perlini on a line with the other dual national forward to try to make something happen offensively. Lake is a big body and both Farmer and Perlini can play physical whilst still skating well so that may well be a better option than what we've got right now.

                          Obviously we want to avoid an absolute hammering today against the USA and Fri/Sat against the 2 Europeans but the score in those games probably doesnt matter much in the grand scheme of things. We win against France and as long as they don't pick up another point we'll finish above them. Use the next 3 games to try and find the line combinations that will give us a fighting chance against the French because right now we're down without laying a finger on anybody. We were never going to run the big nations close but it's worrying that the Danes were able to destroy us. It looked a far bigger gulf in class between us and Denmark than us and Germany (even if the Germans were playing well within themselves).

                          Comment


                            #63
                            Didn't see today's game but only losing 6 - 3 to the USA seems unimaginable after yesterday.

                            Comment


                              #64
                              Originally posted by Hot Pepsi View Post

                              But that’s true, though, isn’t it? England would have been a clear favorite in the 30s, wouldn’t they?
                              No, to be honest. They'd have done their usual thing of being thought of as favourites then blown it against the hosts, in particular. The way the 1950 and 1954 World Cups played out for England wouldn't have been far removed. Don't know about Scotland in that era though. If they'd entered, and taken it seriously?

                              Comment


                                #65
                                Originally posted by ad hoc View Post
                                Didn't see today's game but only losing 6 - 3 to the USA seems unimaginable after yesterday.
                                Caught the last 15 minutes. Ben Bowns stopped 59 shots, many of them great saves. Ben Davies scored an absolute rocket of a wrist shot after coming out of the box. I quite liked Aaron Murphys comments on just what GB were up against - the USA squad were paid a combined $80m last year and have over 6000 NHL games between them.

                                Comment


                                  #66
                                  I finally got to see a whole game last night, sort of, the Finns returning to winning ways following our narrow defeat to the Americans. Our victims were the Danes, who were up for the fight and kept going for the whole 60 minutes. I thought that 3-1 to us was a fair reflection of the way the game went. The Danes took the lead at the start of the second period, something that I contrived to miss, before Kakko levelled the scores with yet another quality finish. Our second was brutal, in that we pinned the Danes in their own defensive zone for a protracted period (is there a word for this in English? Finnish uses the term mylly = "mill"), replenishing our lines but keeping their same five players on the ice. Sakari Manninen emerged from a pile of bodies as the goal scorer. Our third goal has to be put down to their goalie, rather sadly because he had an otherwise very good game, Kaapo Kakko's long range effort, albeit being marginally tipped by Harri Pesonen, going straight through him.

                                  While a 3-1 victory is obviously a good result, for most of the game I thought we lacked incision in front of goal. Other teams in the games ahead may not be so forgiving.

                                  It's Finland versus GB tonight. I'm looking forward to it, and as an added bonus our commentator will be Antero Mertaranta. That's almost certainly s name that means nothing elsewhere, but in these parts the man's a legend.

                                  Comment


                                    #67
                                    The North American term is "pinning them in their own zone", with the imagery coming from butterfly collecting.

                                    Comment


                                      #68
                                      I thought I'd half-heard it, but the Finnish coach is the guy who coached the Newcastle RiverKings and the Newcastle Jesters in the old ISL. I think he was behind the bench when the RiverKings made the playoff final, beating Sheffield to much hilarity.

                                      Comment


                                        #69
                                        Yep, that's the guy. He made his name over here as coach of HPK (Hämeenlinna Pallo Kerho) on his return from Britain, getting one of the top league's smaller clubs punching way, way over their weight.

                                        Comment


                                          #70
                                          Divided household this evening for Slovakia vs GB. Slovakia should win easily enough, but it looks like neither side will achieve their aims for the tournament. Slovakia look unlikely to make the QF, GB will probably finish bottom of the group.

                                          Still, I'm sticking to my idea that the bottom half of Group A is a bit stronger than that of Group B. Certainly, France and GB have been better sides than Austria and Italy respectively.

                                          Comment


                                            #71
                                            Originally posted by ursus arctos View Post
                                            The North American term is "pinning them in their own zone", with the imagery coming from butterfly collecting.
                                            I thought it came from wrestling.

                                            Comment


                                              #72
                                              I guess it could.

                                              The concept of being "pinned down" exists in multiple contexts, including that of troops under fire.

                                              Comment


                                                #73
                                                Jeez, that Slovak goal/victory song gets old really fast.

                                                Comment


                                                  #74
                                                  Worth taking Ben Davies after all then, he scores the OT winner to make it 4-3 against France and GB stay up!

                                                  Comment


                                                    #75
                                                    Woo hoo!

                                                    And from 3-0 down in the second period
                                                    Last edited by ursus arctos; Yesterday, 17:04.

                                                    Comment

                                                    Working...
                                                    X