This is not 'politically correct' but it needs to be said...

Ando · Guru

This is not 'politically correct' but it needs to be said...

AB Habman · Guru

Haven't really thought of it that way but yeh, you're probably right!

They are give-me medals to Canadians and USA! The only mystery is who gets the bronze!

Muller93 · Guru

I will stay away from that one. But I will agree that it's a farce having only two teams compete for gold. Stupid really.

But i still watch the gold medal game. It's a pretty good rivalry. Even though most Bantom "A" boys teams would hammer them. I think---Barry? ( I know you coach "AAA"... but the "A" boys?).

jeanthehabtiste · Senior Member

Ando wrote:

"Crazy Eights" should be an Olympic Sport before women's hockey!!! Yes, it is time to put women's hockey out of it's freak'in misery and strip its Olympic accreditation, since only two nations play competitively. In fact, it is just plain degrading to athletes from all other credible sports to have a Gold medal awarded in such an uncontested manner. Just think...baseball is not an Olympic sport...yet, somehow, women's hockey is - GO FIGURE! For those who count this medal as part of Canada's official totals, I figure that there is only one sure-fire way to settle this one........And-o will round-up every 14 year old boy playing road hockey in the neighbourhood and challenge Canada's ladies team to a "winner take all" match (no slappers or body contact). THAT is how much of a joke having women's hockey in the Olympics really is!

Ando.

I agree.

Thank you for bringing this up.

NEWFIEHABSFAN · Senior Member

I totally disagree! why knock womens hockey, just because now there is only two powerhouses(thank god canada is one of them)in time there will be more. it is a growing sport among many nations and the olimplics gives the sport a front row to the world to see! In canada there are over 70,000 girls playing hockey and if they play hard , maybe, just maybe , they will some day play in the olymplics.

Muller93 · Guru

Yes I agree. Not knocking womens hockey. I actually do watch it. I Just find the two teams competing a bit tiresome. But I suppose, in time it will grow.

Ando · Guru

Muller93 wrote:

...in time it will grow.

So does the lawn if you watch it!

My point is though that it truly does erode the meaning of winning a Gold medal!

...and what does it say, for example, to a marathon runner who trains 10 months of the year away from home only to "not qualify" for the Olympics by mere seconds???

Anway...this one is a no-brainer...and, just like soft-ball, it will soon be extinct - good riddance!

Nil d · Guru

Ando wrote:

Muller93 wrote: ...in time it will grow. So does the lawn if you watch it! My point is though that it truly does erode the meaning of winning a Gold medal! ...and what does it say, for example, to a marathon runner who trains 10 months of the year away from home only to "not qualify" for the Olympics by mere seconds??? Anway...this one is a no-brainer...and, just like soft-ball, it will soon be extinct - good riddance!

I guess And-o, to clarify, you are against the fact that only two teams have a shot at the top two spots, so it waters down the value of the medal. This I agree with.

As for the calibre, I saw the Canada.US Gold-medal final in Halifax 3 or 4 years ago, and enjoyed the game immensely (that Canada won helped), not for the high skill level but for the positional play. As for skill level, I would put it at AA or AAA Midget (Team Canada, that is; my old CA League team would have whupped the Italians).

Habtastic · Guru

One person wrote to our local paper and said that there should be a 7 game series between Canada and the US and then the rest of the teams play for Bronze. I think Women's Hockey belongs in the Olympics, but they do need to make changes to the format until the other countries catch up.

Habtastic

Zulrath · Senior Member

The ideal situation would probably be to "suspend" it from the olympics, with the promise of bringing it back at a future date. That way, it gives the other nations a goal to aim for.

Figaro · Guru

Although you make a good point, And-o, it is hard to do this. You can say the same about the Luge (German woman sweep again and they could easily have the top 5-6 spots every time around.) And what about Figure Skating? I think a Russian pair have won gold for 10 or so straight Olympic games.

One thing they might consider is allowing 4 Canadian and 4 US teams compete. Ok, maybe not. I for one love the fact that Canada can destroy the rest of the world in an event, so let's keep it in.

Power · Veteran Member

Habtastic wrote:

One person wrote to our local paper and said that there should be a 7 game series between Canada and the US and then the rest of the teams play for Bronze. I think Women's Hockey belongs in the Olympics, but they do need to make changes to the format until the other countries catch up. Habtastic

Never going to happen. Team Canada and USA players are pros and rest of the world are amateurs and that isn´t going to change any time soon. If i got it right over there= in Canada and USA these ladies play hockey in pro level and in Universitys, right? And here=rest of the world they play it for recreation. Atleast here in Finland womens hockey will never be played what you could say pro level, so the gap is huge now and will always be.

habs93 · Veteran Member

There are approx 130,000 woman playing hockey (organized?) in the world - 65,000 in Canada, 51,000 in USA.Italy the team Canada played first has only 150 and were beaten 16-0. How many other team sports with those numbers are an Olympic sport - I do not know. The Olympic commitee probably thought it would be a fast growing sport it is but only in North America (USA/Canada) The cost is one of the problems - If things do not change more competive games Womens Hockey will be gone after 2010 The Vancouver Games like softball/baseball are now not in The London Summer Games? Ringette would create a better and fairer tournament IMO as I believe in World Championships there can be several countries vying for first place but hockey along with downhill skiing and figure skating are the so-called glamour sports of a Winter Olympic.........

barry33 · Guru

Muller93 wrote:

I will stay away from that one. But I will agree that it's a farce having only two teams compete for gold. Stupid really. But i still watch the gold medal game. It's a pretty good rivalry. Even though most Bantom "A" boys teams would hammer them. I think---Barry? ( I know you coach "AAA"... but the "A" boys?).

I watched some of the "hockey" against Russia...I agree Muller..any boys elite team would easily hammer any womens team I have seen, aside form Canada/USA. We are just so much further ahead in terms of fundamentals and systems. WHat bugs me is yetserday Sweden conceded the game to Canada before it even started. They played their 19 year old back up goalie who has never played internationally. It was like "ok, we are gonna lose this one anway Sven, let's rest the starter for the bronze medal".

24 Rings · Guru

I disagree as well. You can't just take it out of the Olympics because two nations dominate. It is a relatively new sport and the rest of the world will eventually catch up. Anyhow, we always net a medal from this so why are you complaining? Don't watch it!!!

heet_150 · Guru

24 Rings wrote:

I disagree as well. You can't just take it out of the Olympics because two nations dominate. It is a relatively new sport and the rest of the world will eventually catch up.

But that's the point. If it is a new sport, then keep holding the world championships and when other countries start developing stronger teams that can compete, that's when it should become an olympic sport. And, it isn't just that two teams dominate, it's that only two countries actually have players participating on a regular basis.

The reason that baseball and softball have been eliminated is because of the large amounts of atheletes participating in the Summer Olympics and the logistics involved. Juan Antonio Samaranche(sp) said early in his days as IOC commisioner that he wanted to "streamline" the games. With 20-25 players (and add in coaches, trainers, etc.), these were the most logical to eliminate.

plouf · Guru

heet_150 wrote:

24 Rings wrote: I disagree as well. You can't just take it out of the Olympics because two nations dominate. It is a relatively new sport and the rest of the world will eventually catch up. But that's the point. If it is a new sport, then keep holding the world championships and when other countries start developing stronger teams that can compete, that's when it should become an olympic sport. And, it isn't just that two teams dominate, it's that only two countries actually have players participating on a regular basis. The reason that baseball and softball have been eliminated is because of the large amounts of atheletes participating in the Summer Olympics and the logistics involved. Juan Antonio Samaranche(sp) said early in his days as IOC commisioner that he wanted to "streamline" the games. With 20-25 players (and add in coaches, trainers, etc.), these were the most logical to eliminate.

Hey basketball used to be the same way. Now it's a world sport.