Results 1 to 24 of 24

Thread: (Insert Country) finished where it did because....

  1. #1
    IHF Staff Jazz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Southern Canada
    Posts
    6,449

    Olympics (Insert Country) finished where it did because....

    This is a couple of weeks late, anyways.....

    We have threads on reaction why the Canadian (http://www.internationalhockey.net/f...ead.php?t=9331) and Russian (http://www.internationalhockey.net/f...ead.php?t=9363) teams finished where they did.

    Here is a general thread for you to comment on your country's (or any other country's) showing in the Olympic Hockey tournament.

  2. #2
    IHF Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    58
    Germany finished where it finished because of Uwe Krupp. He was a champion as a player but as a coach he managed to induce a losing mentality. As a result the players played like passive chicken which is sad because I'm convinced they have the potential to play much better.

    It was also a mistake to call up Pätzold who's having a much worse season than Ehelechner for example who has been left out.

    But I'm not too sad because after the World Championships Germany will have a different coach and it looks like in the not too distant future we will be able to ice 10+ NHL players.

  3. #3
    IHF Member Spitfire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Croatia
    Posts
    2,068
    Quote Originally Posted by germanhere View Post
    Germany finished where it finished because of Uwe Krupp. He was a champion as a player but as a coach he managed to induce a losing mentality. As a result the players played like passive chicken which is sad because I'm convinced they have the potential to play much better.

    It was also a mistake to call up Pätzold who's having a much worse season than Ehelechner for example who has been left out.

    But I'm not too sad because after the World Championships Germany will have a different coach and it looks like in the not too distant future we will be able to ice 10+ NHL players.

    Sturm, Goc, Hecht, Seidneberg, Erhoff, Schubert, Sulzer, Greiss and other two are ?
    2011/2012. - 50th Anniversary of KHL Medveščak Zagreb !

  4. #4
    IHF Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by Ouellette View Post
    Sturm, Goc, Hecht, Seidneberg, Erhoff, Schubert, Sulzer, Greiss and other two are ?

    Pielmeier has been called up by Anaheim. But I think he's injured now.

    I'm guessing one or two of Dietrich, Schütz, Gogulla, Holzer, Bielke, Müller and Reul will make it. Especially Reul and Müller have improved a lot this season but Reul definately needs to work on his skating. Barring injury Holzer is going to make it.

    Some more names that come to mind are Grubauer, Abeltshauser, Bittner, Kühnhackl and Rieder. But there are more candidates - I don't really know much about Björn Krupp. The CSS has ranked more and more germans lately.
    Last edited by germanhere; 15-03-2010 at 22:04.

  5. #5
    IHF Member rusher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Rezekne
    Posts
    875
    Latvia finished where it finished because we hadn't enough luck, skill and strength to score the decisive goal in the overtime
    Belarus finished where it finished because Schweiz had better skill in shutout as opposed to the game itself
    Slovakia finished where it finished because they overachieved already in the 1/4 finals
    Canada finished where it finished because of Sidney Crosby
    USA finished where it finished because they don't have Sidney Crosby
    Finland finished where it finished because of bad goaltending in the semi.
    Czech Republic finished where it finished because they should've finished already in the 1/8 final :D
    Germany finished where it finished because the team is even less creative than Swiss is

  6. #6
    IHF Member SLAJA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Narva/Нарва
    Posts
    200
    Quote Originally Posted by rusher View Post
    Latvia finished where it finished because we hadn't enough luck, skill and strength to score the decisive goal in the overtime
    Isn't this about the final ranking? because Latvia was last place, second olympics in a row.... (they lost all of their games, had the second lowest goals for, and had the worst goals difference.)

    surely the maroon have more to cause for placement then 1 missed goal vs. Czech. honestly to say that luck was needed is a little bit far from the truth :D.

    I think they finished where they did because of lack of talented forwards (the empty chasm ;D), shaky goaltending (common masalskis you could have been wayyyy better!! putin was mocking you with alex!!), just riff-raff in defence (skrastins is no chara/pronger), and bad coaching by the great 'walrus' Znarokks

    going into this tournament if i had been told that germany, belarus, AND norway were going to finish better then latvia i wouldn't have belived because of the great finish in the 2009 WC...but there we have it, it happened.
    ***СЛАЯ***

  7. #7
    IHF Member SLAJA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Narva/Нарва
    Posts
    200
    Norge:

    braavo norway for fnishing 10th ahead of germany and latvia, yes canada and the US completely dominated aginst norway, but the polar bears had 2 very good games: aginst the dangerous "almost bronze" slovaks, and agaisnt the respectable swiss, who took the champions to overtime, and played well against the US (2x).

    I was very happily surprised at the good play of norway, i hope this decade hockey will grow to the final scandinavian frontier (well.. except for the danes who *I pray* also are waking up and putting on skates).

    good luck in Germany in may!!
    ***СЛАЯ***

  8. #8
    IHF Member Oz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Ragaciems, Latvia
    Posts
    740
    Quote Originally Posted by SLAJA View Post
    Isn't this about the final ranking? because Latvia was last place, second olympics in a row.... (they lost all of their games, had the second lowest goals for, and had the worst goals difference.)

    surely the maroon have more to cause for placement then 1 missed goal vs. Czech. honestly to say that luck was needed is a little bit far from the truth :D.

    I think they finished where they did because of lack of talented forwards (the empty chasm ;D), shaky goaltending (common masalskis you could have been wayyyy better!! putin was mocking you with alex!!), just riff-raff in defence (skrastins is no chara/pronger), and bad coaching by the great 'walrus' Znarokks

    going into this tournament if i had been told that germany, belarus, AND norway were going to finish better then latvia i wouldn't have belived because of the great finish in the 2009 WC...but there we have it, it happened.
    I hope you understand that final ratings are not meaningful when you look at table's 9-12 place, as teams didn't met each another. Latvia had three of elite7 nations. You will never convince anyone that Latvia couldn't have earned a victory against Belarus, Germany, Norway or even Switzerland.

    As Rusher sad ''one lucky bounce in elimination round' and we would have finished eight and you would say how awful is czech hockey nowadays.

    Your points about our failures in OG are valid, but you are drawing wrong conclusions out of unimportant final standings.

  9. #9
    IHF Member SLAJA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Narva/Нарва
    Posts
    200
    Quote Originally Posted by Oz View Post
    Latvia had three of elite7 nations.
    Ok. your point is? every body played elite 7 nations

    Norway played Canada, US, and Slovakia, ( if you watched the slovakia game you would have seen that Norway was playing like a top ten nation [4-3 3rd per. winner])

    when latvia played SVK they just collapsed out of the gate and got pumelled 6-0

    plus grotnes was better so ya i could could argue that Norway would have beaten latvia.

    -in the prelims grotnes let in 14 reg. goals and blocked 115 shots.
    -in the prelims maslaskis let in 19 reg. goals and blocked 121 shots. He finished with the worst GAA, and GA.

    Norway scord 8 goals, latvia scored 6. their offense was better.

    It would have been close but, I think based on stats Norway would have won.

    Belarus similar story, Mezin dominates masalskis the way he was playing, and they have some talent up front where latvia has none.

    Germany, latvia proably could have beaten, but then again deutchland played nicecly against sweden.

    also to say that latvia had a legit. chance agaisnt Switzerland is just not right. Switzerland played very very well they took the champions to overtime and scored 2 beautifull goal on team canada! who have the top by far defence. the ruthemen goal was so nice it just makes switzerland top 8 for ever. :D :D switzerland scored almost 2x the number of goals latvia did. Hiller is so far out of maslaskis league you can't even compare the two.

    switzerland, 99.9% would have beaten latvia.
    Last edited by SLAJA; 16-03-2010 at 17:33.
    ***СЛАЯ***

  10. #10
    IHF Member Oz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Ragaciems, Latvia
    Posts
    740
    I don't know why I bother to respond, but here comes. I'll play by your rules and base my opinion on unimportant speculative bullshit.

    We were the only fourth seed team that faced 3 elite7 nations in the group stage and then faced one another time. Norway had Switzerland, my conclusion Norway had - easier schedule.

    Norway got crushed by Canada, who barely beat Slovakia, who barely beat Czech Republic, who won over us only in extra time. My conclusion - Latvia would barely lose to Canada (at least not by 8 goals like Norway)

    Plus Masalskis had a greater overall stopped shot number than Grotnes, in fact Masalskis was the best in this parameter in tournament. My conclusion - Masalskis played better than Grotnes.

    Norway scored 2 goals more in group stage and that's why it is the best hockey nation ever, hard to argue against this one. But Norway didn't score a single goal against Latvia or Masalskis, so there is no point of speculating who was better. I'll repeat NO POINT AT ALL.


    Tournament ended like this -
    1.........Canada
    2.........USA
    3.........Finland
    4.........Slovakia
    5-8.....Czech Republic, Russia, Sweden, Switzerland
    9-12...Belarus, Germany, Latvia Norway

  11. #11
    IHF Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Fort Lauderdale, Florida
    Posts
    231
    Switzerland finished where it did because they are a step away from eing an elite hockey nation and had a good tournament. Jonas Hiller played extremely well and the Swiss defense constantly frustrated both the Americans and Canadians. Ambuhl, Bartschi and a couple of the other forwards played a physical gritty game, giving them chances for counterattack goals. That being said, Switzerland did a fairly good job of puck possession against the bigger nations as well. Had a bit of a let down game against Norway (maybe due to Norway's desperation for a win) but won it anyways. Almost pulled another monumental upset, and I can't wait to see how they do in 2014 when Nino Niederreiter is there!

  12. #12
    IHF Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Lugano, Switzerland
    Posts
    140
    Quote Originally Posted by germanhere View Post
    Germany finished where it finished because of Uwe Krupp. He was a champion as a player but as a coach he managed to induce a losing mentality. As a result the players played like passive chicken which is sad because I'm convinced they have the potential to play much better.

    It was also a mistake to call up Pätzold who's having a much worse season than Ehelechner for example who has been left out.

    But I'm not too sad because after the World Championships Germany will have a different coach and it looks like in the not too distant future we will be able to ice 10+ NHL players.
    As we have seen in Vancouver , 7 or 10 germans nhl players will not be a great difference.
    Why ? because all nhl germans players(Hecht,Sturm,Goc,Seidenberg,Erhoff etc.) are mediocre player in every of yours nhl team.
    Differently Switzerland had by Olympics only 2 players(Hiller and Streit) , both in defence and nobody in offence : both are but very important players in your nhl team.
    We had in Vancouver no one swiss nhl forward but i mean that the swiss forwards , even if they don't play in nhl , are better skilled then the germans nhl forwards.

  13. #13
    IHF Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by cohiba View Post
    As we have seen in Vancouver , 7 or 10 germans nhl players will not be a great difference.
    Why ? because all nhl germans players(Hecht,Sturm,Goc,Seidenberg,Erhoff etc.) are mediocre player in every of yours nhl team.
    Differently Switzerland had by Olympics only 2 players(Hiller and Streit) , both in defence and nobody in offence : both are but very important players in your nhl team.
    We had in Vancouver no one swiss nhl forward but i mean that the swiss forwards , even if they don't play in nhl , are better skilled then the germans nhl forwards.
    I don't know what the basis for your camparison is. There is just none. I could mention that Germany beat the Swiss soundly last time they met and that was a Swiss team very similar to the one at the Olympics while Germany was entirely made up of DEL players. But that is just as much a comparison of apples and oranges like your comparison of the swiss NLA forwards and the german NHL forwards. So if your whole point was "swiss hockey is better than german hockey" you can stop reading here because there is no point arguing with me because I know about as much about the swiss NLA player than you know about german NHL players.


    in general: I don't think one can judge an individuals talent level based on what you saw at the Olympics of the german team. Like I said before imo the results seen in Vancouver are largely due to bad coaching (just remember that horrendous penalty killing which caused almost all of the goals against Finland) and lack of confidence (inducing confidence being also part of the coaches job). Krupps attitude is basically "we are inferior". With that kind of attitude you can't compete. I'm coaching a soccer team myself and there are a some teams in the league that have a much higher talent level. But if I constantly told my players and the press (hypothetically) that we'll probably lose I'd lower the likelihood of an upset to zero! When it comes to handling your players a good coach has to be an optimist not a realist.

    Furthermore your argument is flawed: You could consider Ehrhoff as the Canucks #1 defender; he's the highest scoring defender there and gets most minutes, his +/- is outstanding. Seidenberg averaged 25 minutes at Florida and averages 20+ minutes at Boston as well. Sturm is the highest goal scorer for the Bruins and still one of the fastest players in the NHL. After a mediocre start Hecht so far had a great season for Buffalo and is being used on the first line a lot. Goc is having the best season of his NHL-career and is considered one of the most underrated players.


    to conclude it: there is no rational basis for the argument that it's individual lack of skill that leads to the poor display by the national team. The reasons for example that we lost to Belarus lie elsewhere: I'd say it's 50% coaching, 40% psychology and 10% badluck (considering we outshot BLR 40-17)

  14. #14
    IHF Member SLAJA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Narva/Нарва
    Posts
    200
    Quote Originally Posted by Oz View Post
    I don't know why I bother to respond, but here comes. I'll play by your rules and base my opinion on unimportant speculative bullshit.

    We were the only fourth seed team that faced 3 elite7 nations in the group stage and then faced one another time. Norway had Switzerland, my conclusion Norway had - easier schedule.

    Norway got crushed by Canada, who barely beat Slovakia, who barely beat Czech Republic, who won over us only in extra time. My conclusion - Latvia would barely lose to Canada (at least not by 8 goals like Norway)

    Plus Masalskis had a greater overall stopped shot number than Grotnes, in fact Masalskis was the best in this parameter in tournament. My conclusion - Masalskis played better than Grotnes.

    Norway scored 2 goals more in group stage and that's why it is the best hockey nation ever, hard to argue against this one. But Norway didn't score a single goal against Latvia or Masalskis, so there is no point of speculating who was better. I'll repeat NO POINT AT ALL.


    Tournament ended like this -
    1.........Canada
    2.........USA
    3.........Finland
    4.........Slovakia
    5-8.....Czech Republic, Russia, Sweden, Switzerland
    9-12...Belarus, Germany, Latvia Norway
    i was talking about one DIRECT matchup evaluation, your talking about 2nd, 3rd time indirect . thats just nonsensical.your sarcasm prooved no point at all.

    why does iihf publish rankings? so they qual the best teams possible for the proper level they belong to. ( the top 9 rankings immediatly qual'd for the Olympics) how do they do it? by looking at the cold hard stats. then they give points based on exact placment, NOT stage placement.

    actually halak had overall greatest shots stopped, not masalskis.

    at least norway has a few goalscorers is my point. 2 goals might not sound like much but its actually 25% more which is statistically significant.

    also you are specualting some more when you say Norway had an easier schedule. you write away the swiss so easily, seems shortsighted.

    regardless of your sarcastic response if the IIHF makes its tourny's based on stats, and players win awards based on stats, ill use stats, and trust the ranking they put out, they're experts, were not.

    (Interesting how you didnt comment on belarus/switzerland. who could have clearly beaten latvia, but you SPECULATED otherwise.)
    ***СЛАЯ***

  15. #15
    IHF Member itry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Seoul
    Posts
    1,144
    Quote Originally Posted by SLAJA View Post
    i was talking about one DIRECT matchup evaluation, your talking about 2nd, 3rd time indirect . thats just nonsensical.your sarcasm prooved no point at all.

    why does iihf publish rankings? so they qual the best teams possible for the proper level they belong to. ( the top 9 rankings immediatly qual'd for the Olympics) how do they do it? by looking at the cold hard stats. then they give points based on exact placment, NOT stage placement.

    actually halak had overall greatest shots stopped, not masalskis.

    at least norway has a few goalscorers is my point. 2 goals might not sound like much but its actually 25% more which is statistically significant.

    also you are specualting some more when you say Norway had an easier schedule. you write away the swiss so easily, seems shortsighted.

    regardless of your sarcastic response if the IIHF makes its tourny's based on stats, and players win awards based on stats, ill use stats, and trust the ranking they put out, they're experts, were not.

    (Interesting how you didnt comment on belarus/switzerland. who could have clearly beaten latvia, but you SPECULATED otherwise.)
    Dude, you yourself were speculating about the match ups that didn't happen. SO there are no clear ways to tell that Switzerland would have beaten Latvia. If we look at the statistics then probably, but games aren't won on paper and every match begins with 0-0 so both sides could win. Then again statistically Latvia should have beaten Norway and Germany (by IIHF world ranking). Without a face to face math-up there was no way to tell which teams were better and which weren't, so the point that Oz noted was absolutely right.
    1.........Canada
    2.........USA
    3.........Finland
    4.........Slovakia
    5-8.....Czech Republic, Russia, Sweden, Switzerland
    9-12...Belarus, Germany, Latvia, Norway

    Then again you are talking about the last place. As long as there is no relegation it does not matter if you are 9th or 12th. What you are doing is that you are taking one tournament and drawing your conclusions based on it. By your logic Kazakhstan was a lot better at hockey then Latvia after Torino, but where were they in Vancouver? Or better yet... where were they all these last 4 years?

  16. #16
    IHF Member Oz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Ragaciems, Latvia
    Posts
    740
    Quote Originally Posted by SLAJA View Post
    i was talking about one DIRECT matchup evaluation, your talking about 2nd, 3rd time indirect . thats just nonsensical.your sarcasm prooved no point at all.

    why does iihf publish rankings? so they qual the best teams possible for the proper level they belong to. ( the top 9 rankings immediatly qual'd for the Olympics) how do they do it? by looking at the cold hard stats. then they give points based on exact placment, NOT stage placement.

    actually halak had overall greatest shots stopped, not masalskis.

    at least norway has a few goalscorers is my point. 2 goals might not sound like much but its actually 25% more which is statistically significant.

    also you are specualting some more when you say Norway had an easier schedule. you write away the swiss so easily, seems shortsighted.

    regardless of your sarcastic response if the IIHF makes its tourny's based on stats, and players win awards based on stats, ill use stats, and trust the ranking they put out, they're experts, were not.

    (Interesting how you didnt comment on belarus/switzerland. who could have clearly beaten latvia, but you SPECULATED otherwise.)
    Jesus Christ. Are you really believe in everything you typed? My sarcastic post just proved that you just don't get it, and why your comparisions are laughable.

    Only thing I really want to respond in your post is this - about what experts you are talking about? Every member here (excluding obviously you) a with a little bit of common sense will say that this rating is relative and purely based on stats you mentioned. Stop trying to convince everybody, that without teams facing each other can be ranked. It is not possible. IIHF do that because they need to somehow award ranking points and avoid scheduling dead rubber games.

  17. #17
    IHF Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Fort Lauderdale, Florida
    Posts
    231
    First of all, how is anyone supposed to know your being sarcastic when your communicating over an online portal. Clearly people don't know your background or level of intellect when it comes to hockey and thus would not be able to differentoate whe your being serious from when your not.

    Secondly, I agree completely with germanhere. A better coach and tactical approach to the game would make Germany much more successful than they have been. While Switzerland has made great strides over the past decade or so, I still believe Germany is the nation that could elevate its international hockey status the fastest. Why? It is a large nation, with plenty of money and development opportunities as well as a much larger ppol of players to select from. Also, Established players like Goc, Sturm, Hecht, Seidenberg, Ehrhoff (who by the way is one of the best defensemen in the NHL), and even Greiss play at the highest level in the world. Now I have heard that the National Federation is badly managed, but if this is so, a new approach, a new direction, some injection of life and enthusiasm into the program, could have pretty quick results. Because of the number of players and again Market share and other economic factors in the country, if an interest can be fostered for the average German fan, and a better coach can be found, the program could take off. Remember, not too long ago it was Germany that was the nation every talked about as being the next "elite" nation.

  18. #18
    IHF Member Oz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Ragaciems, Latvia
    Posts
    740
    Quote Originally Posted by otgoal21 View Post
    First of all, how is anyone supposed to know your being sarcastic when your communicating over an online portal. Clearly people don't know your background or level of intellect when it comes to hockey and thus would not be able to differentoate whe your being serious from when your not.
    They should understand it, when I clearly state, that my post will consist of "speculative unimportant bullshit" as I did. And to be completely sure - by no means I really meant all that I wrote in post #10 (except tournament's final table)

  19. #19
    IHF Member Conesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Currently Moscow, Russia
    Posts
    2,328
    Quote Originally Posted by rusher View Post
    Latvia finished where it finished because we hadn't enough luck, skill and strength to score the decisive goal in the overtime
    Belarus finished where it finished because Schweiz had better skill in shutout as opposed to the game itself
    Slovakia finished where it finished because they overachieved already in the 1/4 finals
    Canada finished where it finished because of Sidney Crosby
    USA finished where it finished because they don't have Sidney Crosby
    Finland finished where it finished because of bad goaltending in the semi.
    Czech Republic finished where it finished because they should've finished already in the 1/8 final :D
    Germany finished where it finished because the team is even less creative than Swiss is
    That and Ryan Miller stood on his head for us
    Twitter: @CSmeeth

  20. #20
    IHF Staff Steigs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Ottawa, Ontario
    Posts
    8,141
    I'm going to go out on a limb here....


    Australia finished where it did, because it didn't play. Not even in qualification.

  21. #21
    IHF Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Fort Lauderdale, Florida
    Posts
    231
    Haha, Steigs I applaud your gutsy statement.

  22. #22
    IHF Member jaaa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    EUSSR :(
    Posts
    2,962
    Slovakia finished where it did, because freaking Pavol Demitra could not tie a game in the dying second even if.......ahh, okay, never mind me.....:D:D
    25th of June 2015 - Worst day in the history of modern hockey in Slovakia

    See you in 2019...perhaps...

  23. #23
    IHF Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Lugano, Switzerland
    Posts
    140
    [QUOTE=germanhere;171274]. I could mention that Germany beat the Swiss soundly last time they met and that was a Swiss team very similar to the one at the Olympics while Germany was entirely made up of DEL players.

    you have right but for over 2004 they have meet 17 times : 2 german win, one tie and 14 swiss win.

  24. #24
    IHF Member kun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,232

    Belarus

    Belarus finished where it did because of this?
    http://www.hbl.fi/text/sport/2010/3/23/w44728.php


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •