The Hockey News article on why Russia not playing is better for the WJC

[Crosby2010]

Okay, so this was a different approach to someone saying Russia not being in the WJC is a good thing. Ryan Kennedy of the Hockey News had what I would describe as a desperate article written recently detailing why it is a better thing without Russia playing because it gives other countries more opportunity. Because if Russia was there they are, I guess, too good of a team to let the Swiss and Latvians and such get a shot at anything. It was a weird article to read because it was one of those articles that you feel the writer is trying to convince himself of it as he is writing it.

It makes no sense, Russia's presence in the WJC has always been better for the tournament. One of the things we missed last year was a Canada/Russia showdown. Getting to see how Bedard does against Michkov. We never saw this. To me that is a bad thing and a letdown for the fans, not a good thing from a hockey standpoint. It is really the only wrinkle in an otherwise great tournament last year. How can you say things are better when a contender is not in the line up? It is like playing the NFL playoffs and taking out the Chiefs or the Niners and then pretending that it is a good thing because the Chargers might make a run at it without the Chiefs in the way of things.

Sorry, I don't get how it is better hockey. It isn't. We can definitely debate on either side as to whether Russia should come back, but I didn't do this thread for that, it is how can someone say with a straight face that the value of the tournament is better without them?

The Hockey News Archive

Explore every issue of The Hockey News from 1947 to today.

archive.thehockeynews.com

Click to read more...

 

[Hanji]

From a hockey standpoint only, omitting Russia is not good for the WJC.
Kennedy understands this well but he’s a Don Cherry throwback with a distaste for Russia. Not surprised he’d write something like that.
Par for the course for the Hockey News.

 

[Crosby2010]

From a hockey standpoint only, omitting Russia is not good for the WJC.
Kennedy understands this well but he’s a Don Cherry throwback with a distaste for Russia. Not surprised he’d write something like that.
Par for the course for the Hockey News.

Well the media is all-in with this distaste for Russia now. It isn't attractive since they are covering hockey. But you brought up a good question, what is the take Grapes has on the Russians not playing? I have to think Cherry would still want them playing against us. It just isn't the same.

 

[majormajor]

The tournament is much worse without them, we just don't have enough big matchups.

All this hype for the tournament and the round robin play is largely vs weaker countries. The United States for example is playing Norway, Switzerland, Slovakia, and Czechia (very down year Czechs).

Actually without Russia I'd say the two group system doesn't work. They should have a single group of like 6 teams, that way we at least get to guarantee seeing the few top clubs play each other.

 

[Satan]

Brutal take

 

[ijuka]

But would all other teams have been there if Russia had participated? I can say that the public pressure for Finland to boycott would be massive, and at that point Sweden probably would want to boycott with Finland.

So while it's cool to dream about a potential scenario with everyone participating, I really doubt it could be seen.

 

[Plastic Joseph]

Politics aside, the tournament is obviously weaker.

That would be like saying "by omitting the LA liga from champions league we actually get a better product!" with the rationale being that seeing competitors from others leagues showcases more talent somehow.

 

[Hanji]

JFC, can you people leave your politics out of it for once.
The topic is about quality of hockey at the WJC without one of the big 6.

 

[Fjorden]

Okay, so this was a different approach to someone saying Russia not being in the WJC is a good thing. Ryan Kennedy of the Hockey News had what I would describe as a desperate article written recently detailing why it is a better thing without Russia playing because it gives other countries more opportunity. Because if Russia was there they are, I guess, too good of a team to let the Swiss and Latvians and such get a shot at anything. It was a weird article to read because it was one of those articles that you feel the writer is trying to convince himself of it as he is writing it.

It makes no sense, Russia's presence in the WJC has always been better for the tournament. One of the things we missed last year was a Canada/Russia showdown. Getting to see how Bedard does against Michkov. We never saw this. To me that is a bad thing and a letdown for the fans, not a good thing from a hockey standpoint. It is really the only wrinkle in an otherwise great tournament last year. How can you say things are better when a contender is not in the line up? It is like playing the NFL playoffs and taking out the Chiefs or the Niners and then pretending that it is a good thing because the Chargers might make a run at it without the Chiefs in the way of things.

Sorry, I don't get how it is better hockey. It isn't. We can definitely debate on either side as to whether Russia should come back, but I didn't do this thread for that, it is how can someone say with a straight face that the value of the tournament is better without them?

The Hockey News Archive

Explore every issue of The Hockey News from 1947 to today.

archive.thehockeynews.com

Russia will be back when the war ends. Until then they will not participate.

 

[Statsy]

I mean, sure, it’s good for the teams below Russia, but that’s about it. It’s decidedly worse for the thing that matters the most… the fans.

 

[majormajor]

And this is why the reaction to the Russian government’s offensive is largely wrong.

I understand sanctions. I don’t understand why I’m supposed to accept explicit discrimination against people of a certain background. For any reason.

Are Russians allowed to play as "Athletes from Russia" rather than Team Russia? I'm not sure if the IIHF made that an option. I think they should.

Not allowing a team to play under the Russian flag with Russian anthems is quite a bit different from discrimination against individuals. I understand why they don't allow Team Russia, but not allowing Russian players is an additional step that I oppose.

 

[RorschachWJK]

But would all other teams have been there if Russia had participated? I can say that the public pressure for Finland to boycott would be massive, and at that point Sweden probably would want to boycott with Finland.

So while it's cool to dream about a potential scenario with everyone participating, I really doubt it could be seen.

This. I would have been among those demanding immediate boycotting. f*** putler and f*** russia. Anything and everyone is better off without them and this includes hockey.

 

[TheBeastCoast]

I think the kids should be allowed to play. Don't allow them to wear the Russian flag or colours or whatever, but the kids dreaming of playing in this tournament have absolutely nothing to do with the brutal things their leader has done. It absolutely weakens the tournament as well.

 

[Macman]

JFC, can you people leave your politics out of it for once.

There’s nothing political about invading a neighbour and pounding it into paste.

 

[namttebih]

But would all other teams have been there if Russia had participated? I can say that the public pressure for Finland to boycott would be massive, and at that point Sweden probably would want to boycott with Finland.

So while it's cool to dream about a potential scenario with everyone participating, I really doubt it could be seen.

That’s cool. I get way more excited for games against Russia than against the aforementioned countries.

I don’t understand what you’re trying to prove/achieve by doing this.

 

[CharasLazyWrister]

I think the kids should be allowed to play. Don't allow them to wear the Russian flag or colours or whatever, but the kids dreaming of playing in this tournament have absolutely nothing to do with the brutal things their leader has done. It absolutely weakens the tournament as well.

I like this solution.

 

[CharasLazyWrister]

But would all other teams have been there if Russia had participated? I can say that the public pressure for Finland to boycott would be massive, and at that point Sweden probably would want to boycott with Finland.

So while it's cool to dream about a potential scenario with everyone participating, I really doubt it could be seen.

That’s a good question. I think, at this point, no. Not all other teams would have come. But much of that is because discriminating against Russia (not just the government, but the entirety of its people) became somehow totally normal after the invasion.

What should be explored is a solution like the one offered in this thread (no Russian flag, but Russian players permitted). It would take some uncomfortable conversation, but I think there would be a good chance you would get full participation.

“Bigotry” isn’t a solution. Actually, it’s incredibly destructive both in the short term and long term. I would never attempt to justify Vladimir Putin’s government atrocities. But to think that somehow rationalizes discrimination of hundreds of millions of “associated people”. Shit is disgusting. And the worst part is that almost everyone who puts their own bias and emotion aside for a single second knows it. And yet it continues.

 

[leeroggy]

There’s nothing political about invading a neighbour and pounding it into paste.

Should the US have been barred during the years of Iraqi invasion and occupation? Afghanistan was at least a response to the 9/11 terror attacks; Iraq was an optional war in retrospect.

 

[Hanji]

But would all other teams have been there if Russia had participated? I can say that the public pressure for Finland to boycott would be massive, and at that point Sweden probably would want to boycott with Finland.

So while it's cool to dream about a potential scenario with everyone participating, I really doubt it could be seen.

This mentality could set a bad precedent though.
Are we going down a path where countries routinely boycott others when their national interests are threatened? None of this occurred even during the cold war to any great extent.
Surely the boycott on Russia isn't predicated on innate ethics, invasion, or killing. If it were there are many other countries who should be banned. I mean let's be honest, nobody really cares about the slaughter of 3rd world dark people, right?

Does the ad hoc (although justified) banning of Russia's now give other countries the justification to not play others whenever they see fit?

 

[yianik]

Purely based on hockey, as with every single other sport, a competition is always better when the best are playing the best.

 

[NyQuil]

Are we going down a path where countries routinely boycott others when their national interests are threatened? None of this occurred even during the cold war to any great extent.
Surely the boycott on Russia isn't predicated on innate ethics, invasion, or killing. If it were there are many other countries who should be banned. I mean let's be honest, nobody really cares about the slaughter of 3rd world dark people, right?

Does the ad hoc (although justified) banning of Russia's now give other countries the justification to not play others whenever they see fit?

Whether or not it's comprehensively applied is irrelevant as there is precedent.

1980 Summer Olympics boycott - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[jj cale]

1980 Summer Olympics boycott - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

ouch!!!

 

[Kevin27NYI]

Russia should be playing

 

[Sasha Orlov]

Lmao f*** The Hockey News

 

[Macman]

Should the US have been barred during the years of Iraqi invasion and occupation? Afghanistan was at least a response to the 9/11 terror attacks; Iraq was an optional war in retrospect.

Short answer: yes.