EHM The Blue Line

Wow...shots in Canada's 5-0 win over Slovakia were 44-6 just 6 shots in a game is not good

Denmark beat Finland and so last year's champs are now 0 and 2 (I've never really followed the World Juniors closely...I'm not sure if the poor start "matters" or whether everyone makes the playoffs regardless)

After losing 6-1 to the US, Latvia loses 9-1 to Russia

Personally, I'd prefer fewer teams in international competition (including the Olympics) and a true round robin where everyone plays everyone once; top 6 teams seems about right to me, a 5 game round robin and top 4 teams make the playoffs (and never a shootout!)

Finland has only a small chance now to make it to the playoffs... they have to beat the two best in the group now and hope that the others don't take too many points.

What a horrible game from Finland. I stopped watching at 2-0 and started reading a book.

I'm quite surprised by Finland's results, not so much about Latvia's, but it's a disappointing result nonetheless. Hope we can win the game against Slovakia..

nino33 wrote: Latvia loses 9-1 to Russia

What's surprising?

Alessandro wrote:

nino33 wrote: Latvia loses 9-1 to Russia

What's surprising?

Nothing; as I noted in my post, I think 6 teams would be good, and personally would prefer that hockey would stop including so many teams in the "best of the best" international competitions (especially as it could allow "better/fairer" competition, where the elite teams would all play each other in the round robin)

I agree with you Nino that the championship would be more entertaining that way but the lower teams need to have the opportunity to be included.
For their hockey to improve they need to match up with better nations. That way they will see what they need to work on to get better.

Manimal wrote:I agree with you Nino that the championship would be more entertaining that way but the lower teams need to have the opportunity to be included.
For their hockey to improve they need to match up with better nations. That way they will see what they need to work on to get better.

I agree.

Manimal wrote:I agree with you Nino that the championship would be more entertaining that way but the lower teams need to have the opportunity to be included.
For their hockey to improve they need to match up with better nations. That way they will see what they need to work on to get better.

I agree as well. Loved seeing the Swiss upset and the Danes too.... What the heck is Finland doing though? Jeepers

I don't know what Team USA is doing anymore at any level. The WJC team has started making the same dumb, indefensible decisions the senior team makes. I mean, leaving DeBrincat off the roster? Seriously? After the omissions last year? Apparently very little was learned from it...

Manimal wrote:I agree with you Nino that the championship would be more entertaining that way but the lower teams need to have the opportunity to be included.
For their hockey to improve they need to match up with better nations. That way they will see what they need to work on to get better.

IMO they don't need to learn how they match up in the actual few elite tournaments (they can get beat in exhibitions just as easily! and win their "gold medal" with an upset that is ultimately meaningless that way...like the recent victory by the Danes)

They can still add a single "lower team" to Canada, Finland, Sweden, Russia and the US and have a real round robin.....the problem (for me) is how nowadays adding more than one requires "group games" and teams no longer play against every other team (never used to be that way, as I note below); the issue to me is not "entertainment" but the validity of a tournament actually being a "best on best" elite tournament


I don't think there's any more teams in the top tier of hockey now than there was 40-50 years ago (there may actually be fewer!)

The start of "best on best" international hockey was the 1976 Canada Cup & it seems to me the top tier teams is still essentially the same now; Finland and the US are a little better, the Czechs/Slovaks not as good and probably joined by the Swiss (which is why I don't see the Swiss beating the Czechs recently as much of an upset)


I'd really like to see the Olympics/World Cup, the World Championships, and the World Junior Championships all ensure that the initial stage is a round robin where every team plays every other team; that was what it was like for the Olympics/World Championships back in the 70s and you got HUGE upsets like Poland beating Russia in the 1976 Worlds (but now they play fewer games, making "luck" a much bigger factor)

Our (Finland) head coach just got fired in the middle of the tournament when it was confirmed we'll be last in our group.

Things are going well for you.

Beating Latvia in the first relegation match is the true highlight of Finland's ice hockey history.

A9L3E wrote:Beating Latvia in the first relegation match is the true highlight of Finland's ice hockey history.

And only by one goal..

I'll admit this: relegation and promotion is incredibly strange for a U20 tourney. I mean, the turnover is so great from year to year that I don't know that what a country does in one tourney means anything at all the next.

Now, I'm North American obviously, so we just naturally don't do prom./releg. here. So take that with whatever grain of whatever himalayan salt you want I guess. However, I can see its merits in the senior tourney (because turnover is so much less). I just... am not sure of its merits in a junior tourney.

Or you could make it so the loser in u18 WC loses it's spot in the u20.

ClassicSwarley wrote:

A9L3E wrote:Beating Latvia in the first relegation match is the true highlight of Finland's ice hockey history.

And only by one goal..

It's hard to get truly engaged playing opponents that you essentially know can't beat you (for them to win, you have to "beat yourself" essentially...and even then, when you play poorly, they still almost never win)

I remember when I was young North American teams really struggled in such situations, where European/Russian teams would often win such games by large margins...I think the North American way of "don't run up the score/don't embarrass a weaker team" is more universal now & that contributes some to the difficulty in being truly motivated for such games and "doing just enough to win" (like Canada against "Team Europe" in the World Cup)

I think it does not have to do with that. The U20 players do not want to waste the few chances they get to shine in front of NHL scouts.

A9L3E wrote:I think it does not have to do with that. The U20 players do not want to waste the few chances they get to shine in front of NHL scouts.

It wouldn't surprise me if few NHL Scouts are even watching the Finland/Latvia games; their chance to "shine" in front of the Scouts was when their teams played the top teams (quality of competition matters)

There's a Hockey News article out with a headline of "Has the World Junior Championship 'Jumped the Shark'?" http://www.thehockeynews.com/news/artic ... -the-shark

The article notes "Prior to 1996, the WJC was an eight-team tournament that was played on a round-robin format, with the gold medal being won by the team that had the best record after seven games. That made every game meaningful"

While I'm OK with "playoffs too" (or without, though I think a top 3 or top 4 playoffs is good too), IMO the round robin system where everyone plays everyone once is the way to go for the elite tournaments

nino33 wrote:There's a Hockey News article out with a headline of "Has the World Junior Championship 'Jumped the Shark'?" http://www.thehockeynews.com/news/artic ... -the-shark

The article notes "Prior to 1996, the WJC was an eight-team tournament that was played on a round-robin format, with the gold medal being won by the team that had the best record after seven games. That made every game meaningful"

While I'm OK with "playoffs too" (or without, though I think a top 3 or top 4 playoffs is good too), IMO the round robin system where everyone plays everyone once is the way to go for the elite tournaments

And that would be as many games for a team if you make it to the final these days.

In adults world championship Canada is known for chilling the group stage... doesn't matter if they're 4th in the group as they can knock out the 1st one from the other group still.

Then no one could get "lucky" and meet a surprise country in the play-off stage either if you'd play them all.

Nino do you have any input on this one, or anyone else remembering it?! I was just one year old so no.

Just read about this as one of the most known hockey brawls of all time. Theo Fleury, Shanahan, Konstantinov etc.

Both Canada and Russia got suspended so Finland won their first WC. LOL!

I'm certainly aware of it, but don't really have any memory of it "from the time"
I kinda recall Don Cherry ranting about it, but back then neither the World Juniors nor Don Cherry had the profile they do now

Wikipedia notes "Before Piešťany, the junior tournament had a small following in Canada. Only one Canadian reporter flew overseas to cover the 1987 tournament...by the 2005 tournament, over 100 Canadian reporters covered the tournament" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punch-up_in_Piestany


I do fondly recall 1987 and hockey...my beloved Flyers (I was a diehard fan back then) lost to the Oilers (who I hated back then) in the SCF & of course 1987 was the Canada Cup where Gretzky and Lemieux combined to beat the Russians in the Final

I lived just blocks from the Oilers arena and was absolutely crushed (in tears!) when the Flyers lost game 7; it sucked being able to hear the celebrations going on! The 1987 Canada Cup was a happier time, and everybody I knew was following it, and it seemed like it mattered more then (now there's so much more available for entertainment, and the same players play in the NHL that play in international tournaments, but it wasn't so much that way back then...things hadn't reached the point of oversaturation, and still seemed exotic/mysterious and therefore more special/exciting)

nino33 wrote:There's a Hockey News article out with a headline of "Has the World Junior Championship 'Jumped the Shark'?" http://www.thehockeynews.com/news/artic ... -the-shark

The article notes "Prior to 1996, the WJC was an eight-team tournament that was played on a round-robin format, with the gold medal being won by the team that had the best record after seven games. That made every game meaningful"

While I'm OK with "playoffs too" (or without, though I think a top 3 or top 4 playoffs is good too), IMO the round robin system where everyone plays everyone once is the way to go for the elite tournaments

Hockey without playoffs is pornography