Great Britain: WC D1A Budapest, Hungary (Final roster announced)

[3 Minute Minor]

I'm feeling generous so I'll allow you to double check that and correct yourself before I respond further.

Needless to say, I wouldn't have made that statement if it were not based on fact.

They use dual nationals but it's not the same (HEY LOOK I'M SAYING A CANADIAN COMPARISON IS NOT THE SAME )

Who were the dual nationals on the last Canadian Olympic team? Dany Heatley (born in Germany, grew up in Canada playing all his hockey in Canada?) and Joe Thornton who got USA Citizenship when he was 30



It's not like they got their top scorers from a different country, never trained in Canada and they only ever played pro in Canada, and without them, Canada doesn't get relegated lol

 

[3 Minute Minor]

Do you even know what we are actually talking about when we say dual national?

We are talking about guys who learned all their hockey in one country then went somewhere else to play pro and got citiezenship there.

We are not talking about people like Dany Heatley.

I've gone through every team Canada WC roster all the way back to 2001 and I haven't found a single player who wasn't Canadian trained.

Brendan Perlini is from GB

 

[Siamese Dream]

Oh wait I found one! Petr Nedved! And that's going all the way back to the 94 Olympics

A grand total of 1 player in 2 decades

 

[3 Minute Minor]

Oh wait I found one! Petr Nedved! And that's going all the way back to the 94 Olympics

A grand total of 1 player in 2 decades

94 Olympics means that was back when they used Amateurs.

Alpine your boy Fabian Joseph was the captain of that team (I think he was the captain that year?)

 

[howeaboutthat]

Do you even know what we are actually talking about when we say dual national?

We are talking about guys who learned all their hockey in one country then went somewhere else to play pro and got citiezenship there.

So country of birth doesn't matter to you then, just where they played their junior hockey?

 

[Siamese Dream]

So country of birth doesn't matter to you then, just where they played their junior hockey?

Yeah, I thought I made that pretty clear? I said it on the previous page

 

[Alpine]

94 Olympics means that was back when they used Amateurs.

Alpine your boy Fabian Joseph was the captain of that team (I think he was the captain that year?)

Yeah and Fabien is ethnic Canadian being 1st Nations.
But my fav was Everett Sanipass from Big Cove the 1st Native 1st Nationa from NB in 1987 to make a HC team. Banned for a brawl against the Soviets...but made the Blackhawks the next year.
Oh wait this isn't Brit hockey

 

[Siamese Dream]

Hey Adam maybe Joey Lewis' new Italian citizenship on EP is so he can go play there and play for their national team

 

[3 Minute Minor]

Hey Adam maybe Joey Lewis' new Italian citizenship on EP is so he can go play there and play for their national team

he'd have to wait a number of years because he already represented GB at IIHF events and play 2 years in Italy, but after that he'll be a star I tell you, a star! (with Italy)

 

[howeaboutthat]

Yeah, I thought I made that pretty clear? I said it on the previous page

My apologies, I didn't spot that. Your rants do tend to blend into one.

I was under the impression you were against all dual-nationals on jingoistic reasons. Now I see you don't mind 'foreigners', you just care where they are 'schooled'. Doesn't make your opinion any less absurd, of course (as always) in my ever-so-humble opinion.

How do you feel about Brit track and field sports persons who move to US colleges in order to improve their performances representing Team GB?

 

[Siamese Dream]

My apologies, I didn't spot that. Your rants do tend to blend into one.

I was under the impression you were against all dual-nationals on jingoistic reasons. Now I see you don't mind 'foreigners', you just care where they are 'schooled'. Doesn't make your opinion any less obsurd, of course (as always) in my ever-so-humble opinion.

How do you feel about Brit track and field sports persons who move to US colleges in order to improve their performances representing Team GB?

Sorry but I don't see how it doesn't make it less absurd being against all dual-nationals would make me a xenophobe. I don't support the national team out of patriotism, I support it because I have a connection to the players, I've played with/against a lot of them, and I've officiated a lot of them. They are supposed to represent the development system of this country. It even says in the IIHF statutes and bylaws "It is the objective of the IIHF that national teams competing in IIHF championships shall reflect the status and standard of the sport as currently played by both citizens of and citizens in the country concerned and to protect the integrity of international competition." I believe a team purely full of players who played junior hockey in that country best "reflect the status and standard of the sport" in that country and "protect the integrity of international competition"

Well they've not gone there until college, a vast majority of their training has been done. That's no different to a British hockey player who goes to Canada when he's a teenager, the early ages of development are just as crucial as the latter. I have no problem with it. With the example of the Perlini brothers, the British junior system coached them to a standard where they were good enough to go back home to Canada and play a high level there.

Though I did laugh at something a poster in the non-hockey section once said "Nastia Liukin did not know how to gymnastics before she moved to USA, Mo Farah clearly knew how to run before he went to England, therefore it's cheating"

 

[3 Minute Minor]

My apologies, I didn't spot that. Your rants do tend to blend into one.

I was under the impression you were against all dual-nationals on jingoistic reasons. Now I see you don't mind 'foreigners', you just care where they are 'schooled'. Doesn't make your opinion any less absurd, of course (as always) in my ever-so-humble opinion.

How do you feel about Brit track and field sports persons who move to US colleges in order to improve their performances representing Team GB?

You're misinterpreting the situation and bringing up an example that doesn't fit what we're talking about.

He's saying that a 29 year old Canadian who played in the EIHL for the last 5 years shouldn't be on a GB national team. The team should be made up of players who are actually British. (at least that's what I understood & have always agreed with)

That's like a Swedish player coming over to Canada to play in the NHL, not represent his country, then decide he's going to represent Canada. That ain't right

 

[howeaboutthat]

He's saying that a 29 year old Canadian who played in the EIHL for the last 5 years shouldn't be on a GB national team. The team should be made up of players who are actually British. (at least that's what I understood & have always agreed with)

I'm sure he is big enough to speak for himself but, as I read it, that's not what he is saying at all. I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) that he is saying he wants Team GB full of products of the GB development system, birth nationality not coming into it.

Therefore, using your example of a 29yo Canadian, if he'd learnt his hockey over here then I think the person you are attempting to speak for would consider them fair game.

That's like a Swedish player coming over to Canada to play in the NHL, not represent his country, then decide he's going to represent Canada. That ain't right

The IIHF (who truth be told, are the only people who matter here) seems to think otherwise. If Mr Swede fulfills the criteria laid down in the articles that have been agreed upon, and voted upon, by a body that is dominated by representatives from non-NA nations then simply, it is 'right'.

Btw, to those who believe 'where you learnt your hockey=who you should play for', how much? I mean, say a kid starts down the junior hockey path in the UK but moves to Canada before he has finished at U18s, what is your cut-off? Do you have to represent the nation whose junior system you spent the most time in or the one you finish under?

I think its a fairly pertinent question given a number of import players children who are learning their hockey over here at the mo.

 

[Siamese Dream]

The IIHF (who truth be told, are the only people who matter here) seems to think otherwise. If Mr Swede fulfills the criteria laid down in the articles that have been agreed upon, and voted upon, by a body that is dominated by representatives from non-NA nations then simply, it is 'right'.

Btw, to those who believe 'where you learnt your hockey=who you should play for', how much? I mean, say a kid starts down the junior hockey path in the UK but moves to Canada before he has finished at U18s, what is your cut-off? Do you have to represent the nation whose junior system you spent the most time in or the one you finish under?

I think its a fairly pertinent question given a number of import players children who are learning their hockey over here at the mo.

Yeah they think otherwise but of course it's my opinion and I think they are wrong and it is an unfair rule.

Well, given in the UK our rule for imports is 2 years minimum of junior hockey played, that would be a good starting point, maybe add another year or two. If you are trained in more than one country you are free to choose, see: Alex Galchenyuk.

 

[3 Minute Minor]

I'm sure he is big enough to speak for himself but, as I read it, that's not what he is saying at all. I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) that he is saying he wants Team GB full of products of the GB development system, birth nationality not coming into it.

Therefore, using your example of a 29yo Canadian, if he'd learnt his hockey over here then I think the person you are attempting to speak for would consider them fair game.



The IIHF (who truth be told, are the only people who matter here) seems to think otherwise. If Mr Swede fulfills the criteria laid down in the articles that have been agreed upon, and voted upon, by a body that is dominated by representatives from non-NA nations then simply, it is 'right'.

Btw, to those who believe 'where you learnt your hockey=who you should play for', how much? I mean, say a kid starts down the junior hockey path in the UK but moves to Canada before he has finished at U18s, what is your cut-off? Do you have to represent the nation whose junior system you spent the most time in or the one you finish under?

I think its a fairly pertinent question given a number of import players children who are learning their hockey over here at the mo.

I know he's big enough to speak for himself... But in this instance I agree with him, am I not allowed to post on this subject?



You're bringing in examples that are irrelevant to the original point. The original point was that people on THF wanted to bring on dual-nationals to have the best possible Senior Mens team possible. Meaning they wanted to bring in players who were born in Canada, grew up in Canada, played all their hockey in Canada, then decided to play in the EIHL when their NHL aspirations were gone.

Those players taking a spot on the GB national team is not fair to the players who actually developed in the GB system.

You say the IIHF are the only ones who matter in this case but really for what we're talking about, it's the guy picking the team who is the only who matters. Just so happens the guy who is picking the team is a GB born & trained player (widely considered the best GB trained player ever & the first to become an NHL draft pick), he played for GB national team when they were promoted and was pissed off at how many dual-national North Americans were on the team because he didn't think it was fair to actual GB players.

 

[3 Minute Minor]

Yeah they think otherwise but of course it's my opinion and I think they are wrong and it is an unfair rule.

Well, given in the UK our rule for imports is 2 years minimum of junior hockey played, that would be a good starting point, maybe add another year or two. If you are trained in more than one country you are free to choose, see: Alex Galchenyuk.

and he tried to change his decision

 

[howeaboutthat]

Yeah they think otherwise but of course it's my opinion and I think they are wrong and it is an unfair rule.

Well, given in the UK our rule for imports is 2 years minimum of junior hockey played, that would be a good starting point, maybe add another year or two. If you are trained in more than one country you are free to choose, see: Alex Galchenyuk.

But if we are going to go down the path of players being free to choose in those circumstances why not allow hockey players, like most other citizens of the world, choose who they ally themselves to using that well used 'test' of taking citizenship?

A junior system is just an education system. One tailored to give a very specific education admittedly but nothing more.

If you can show commitment to a nation, such as by moving to it, taking a job, paying your taxes and otherwise intergrating into society as other cizitens of that nation do why, if you eventually become a citizen, should you be barred from representing said nation as a result of your 'education'?

Once again I fear we aren't going to see eye-to-eye over this.

 

[Siamese Dream]

But if we are going to go down the path of players being free to choose in those circumstances why not allow hockey players, like most other citizens of the world, choose who they ally themselves to using that well used 'test' of taking citizenship?

A junior system is just an education system. One tailored to give a very specific education admittedly but nothing more.

If you can show commitment to a nation, such as by moving to it, taking a job, paying your taxes and otherwise intergrating into society as other cizitens of that nation do why, if you eventually become a citizen, should you be barred from representing said nation as a result of your 'education'?

Once again I fear we aren't going to see eye-to-eye over this.

I'll agree to disagree

 

[3 Minute Minor]

But if we are going to go down the path of players being free to choose in those circumstances why not allow hockey players, like most other citizens of the world, choose who they ally themselves to using that well used 'test' of taking citizenship?

A junior system is just an education system. One tailored to give a very specific education admittedly but nothing more.

If you can show commitment to a nation, such as by moving to it, taking a job, paying your taxes and otherwise intergrating into society as other cizitens of that nation do why, if you eventually become a citizen, should you be barred from representing said nation as a result of your 'education'?

Once again I fear we aren't going to see eye-to-eye over this.

It's meant to be a competition between countries. Letting Canadians be lured into pro leagues, giving them citizenship, then letting them represent the country is pretty much buying an athlete from Canada

This, to me, is idiotic:
http://www.eliteprospects.com/leagu...&season=2012&sort=nation&nation=3&name=Canada

 

[howeaboutthat]

This, to me, is idiotic:
http://www.eliteprospects.com/leagu...&season=2012&sort=nation&nation=3&name=Canada

Picking through that list, can you really say these haven't shown their commitment to the nation they represent?

http://www.eliteprospects.com/player.php?player=18000

http://www.eliteprospects.com/player.php?player=18261

 

[3 Minute Minor]

http://www.eliteprospects.com/player.php?player=18000

He was probably around 50 games in Italy and he was given a spot on an Olympic roster... ye I think I would probably commit to it as well.




The point is you could put a league in Mexico, pay a bunch of Canadians/Americans to come play there, put them on the national team and get them to the top division. Does that really represent hockey in Mexico?

 

[3 Minute Minor]

GB getting relegated actually had some people saying "Maybe we should start focusing on the grassroots programs in GB, grow the game and develop better hockey players so we can compete at a higher level on the international stage."

Other clowns are saying "Well why don't we just buy a roster of dual nationals then we'll do better!"

I'd rather see the game grown in GB > more opportunities handed to Canadians

 

[howeaboutthat]

Other clowns are saying "Well why don't we just buy a roster of dual nationals then we'll do better!"

Whilst I wouldn't be as childish as to call those who have differing opinions "clowns" I do agree with you that 'buying' in a squad full of dual-national players should be discouraged.

If players can show commitment to the country for which they wish to play for though, and fullfill the criteria laid down by the IIHF then yes, they should be allowed to play if its deemed beneficial to the national team.

I'd rather see the game grown in GB > more opportunities handed to Canadians

How do you 'grow' the game if funding is tied to results and results are poor?

 

[Siamese Dream]

We've done alright at growing the game without funding

We're competing at a similar level now with a team full of British trained players as we were a decade ago with a team that was half Canadian trained

Even if we did get the results they are reluctant to give funding to such a joke of an organisation. And as I've illustrated previously in the thread, if we included dual nationals it really wouldn't make us all that much better. The imports who come to the EIHL are fringe AHL players at best, they are not going to make us competitive in the top pool.

 

[3 Minute Minor]

Whilst I wouldn't be as childish as to call those who have differing opinions "clowns" I do agree with you that 'buying' in a squad full of dual-national players should be discouraged.

If players can show commitment to the country for which they wish to play for though, and fullfill the criteria laid down by the IIHF then yes, they should be allowed to play if its deemed beneficial to the national team.



How do you 'grow' the game if funding is tied to results and results are poor?

GB had dual nationals in the past, they managed to get to the top division one time while pissing off all the British born/trained players (I think this has been said multiple times and you have yet to acknowledge it). So they get rid of dual nationals and they're doing no worse. Why go backwards? It honestly makes no sense. They've been able to field a roster that can compete in Div 1 with homegrown talent, why go get Canadians to come in and change nothing? How is it going to help? Will they get promoted to the top division and win games because they have Derek Campbell on their team?!? Do you really think it's better for GB to rely on Canadians to get them to the top division instead of trying to develop their own players?

If the opinion makes me laugh then saying they're clowns is appropriate, is it not? I'm not one of those people who are afraid of clowns