Does Olympic Hockey Need a Mercy Rule?

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by HOOT

You could say that about a ton of events!

32 of the last 39 medals and 13 of the last 13 gold medals in mens luge have been German, Italian or Austrian. So should they cancel that event too? Since only a couple countries compete for the top spots.

How do you expect these countries to get better if they never see where they have to get to? I bet if you ask any one of those players who got beat 18-0 at the Olympic games would do it again even if they knew it was going to be 36-0.

Same thing could be said for mens hockey actually.

For 44 consecutive years (11 olympics)the only teams to win gold were the Soviets or the USA.

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by 3 Justin 3

Correct. It is just like when we have guys who are 18-20 participating in their first Olympics and they are totally stoked to get like 9th or 20th place.

Ya it seems silly to cancel any event for that reason. IMO the Gold medal game which is most likely Canda vs. USA is worth having the event in the games as it is.

Seeing these women from other countries get just dominated just shows how much work they do have left before being able to compete. And IMO a lot of the problems for teams like China and Slovakia is they are just not strong enough. They seem to have the sense on how to check, pass, shot and get in the proper positions (for the most part) but when they get into the corners the Canada/USA teams always walk out with it or draw a penalty.

Building an Olympic quality team will take decades and decades before you start to see results. They know were the bar is set when they play Canada/USA and from what I can see and remember is that the other teams are getting better and better with each games. You could even say the same with the bottom teams in the Men's games with teams like Norway, Latvia, etc.

If you don't like it, don't watch it!

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Same thing could be said for mens hockey actually.

For 44 consecutive years (11 olympics)the only teams to win gold were the Soviets or the USA.

I bet if you went through the history of every sport in every Olympics there would be 80-90% of the sports are dominated by the same 2-4 countries. That's just the way it is but you are starting to see the Canada start to finish top 10 events that wouldn't even be imaginable 20 years ago. It takes time for a program to build up and watching the NBC broadcast when the Nordic Combine American won a medal (bronze) they mentioned this medal was 20 years in the making when their program started way back.

IMO the Olympics should have as many events as they can because it is the biggest stage for any sport, not cancel them because a few like to complain about the scores and they probably didn't even watch the game(s). People just like to complain.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Same thing could be said for mens hockey actually.

For 44 consecutive years (11 olympics)the only teams to win gold were the Soviets or the USA.

That actually gets into an entirely different problem of the Soviets cheating and the IIHF being too cowardly to stop them. Certainly any sport competed on an uneven playing field will not be competitive.

[hockeycop]

No to a mercy rule. That soft hearted "oh poor (insert country here)" garbage is detrimental to their programs.

The game tape alone that Slovakia can take back and use all year is of huge value. They have a full 60 minutes that they can pick out game situations and practice. They can both come up with ways to defend against a team with Canada's skill, and they can look at Canada's offensive system and pick out parts that could be used in their program.

A mercy rule would make the whole tape completely irrelevant. They would still try to use it, but instead of having real situations to base coaching efforts off of, they would have a Canadian team on tape who are not trying at all. Coaching based on that means that next year, they'll lose 25-0.

For anyone in favor of a mercy rule, watch the sport with your heads, not your hearts. When you make decisions based on soft and cuddly notions, you build a program that becomes soft.

[Philly06Cup]

Surprised no one has mentioned multiple Canadian / American teams yet.

Why not do a CANADA A, CANADA B, ... , CANADA Z in womens hockey? (And Mens hockey, too, in that case)

[Ducay]

Originally Posted by Philly06Cup

Surprised no one has mentioned multiple Canadian / American teams yet.

Why not do a CANADA A, CANADA B, ... , CANADA Z in womens hockey? (And Mens hockey, too, in that case)

Sweet, then we can beat Slovakia B 36-0 !

[SeeBass]

Originally Posted by HOOT

You could say that about a ton of events!

32 of the last 39 medals and 13 of the last 13 gold medals in mens luge have been German, Italian or Austrian. So should they cancel that event too? Since only a couple countries compete for the top spots.

How do you expect these countries to get better if they never see where they have to get to? I bet if you ask any one of those players who got beat 18-0 at the Olympic games would do it again even if they knew it was going to be 36-0.

No you cant say that about a "ton of events"

How may of the other events have a gap between the top two to the tenth place is 18-0? How many seconds is that in bobsled,downhill skiing,luge. Pick an event and use some thought when you try to think of how huge an 18-0 score is and tell me the gap is just as large.

I am not talking multiple winners here I am just asking for some competitivness. In my opinion it is not competitive enough to be a legit sport.


Just because somebody is ok with getting smoked badly why does that make the sport more legitimate? I would love to go out and play team Canada and I would be ok if they smoked me too, so can I be an Olympic athlete too?

[Red_Baron]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Bet on more goals, that'll keep your interest

I propose that in games likely to be a mismatch, they should have a casino in the concourse with a roulette or craps table of sorts where the heavily favored teams jersey numbers are laid out on a board. You place your chips and what ever number scores next wins.
You could play corners, odd/even, top 1/3, middle 1/3, bottom 1/3, and if the other teams scores, it would be like a 00 or a snake eyes and the house takes. They could even decrease the payout for players that are higher scorers than others.

Who's in?

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by SeeBass

I would love to go out and play team Canada and I would be ok if they smoked me too, so can I be an Olympic athlete too?

Yes.

If you can be one of the best 23 players in your Country then damn rights you can play against them or even for them. Where are you from? Are you a top 23 player in that country? My guess, no!

At least these women are the best their country has to offer and are out there competing to get better and it has been shown that athletes of any kind get better when they player better competition.

How do you expect them to get better if they never know how far behind they really are on the biggest stage for their sport? It has been shown that these programs take time, especially with team events, but come along slowly.

You can look at a ton of events where 20-30 years ago no one but Country A, B, maybe C were the only ones winning medals at the games but now with programs built Country D, E and F are now putting pressure on those top countries and winning medals themselves.

Give it some time and if you don't like it no one is holding a gun to your head to watch it or even pay attention to it!

[SeeBass]

Originally Posted by HOOT

Yes.

If you can be one of the best 23 players in your Country then damn rights you can play against them or even for them. Where are you from? Are you a top 23 player in that country? My guess, no!

At least these women are the best their country has to offer and are out there competing to get better and it has been shown that athletes of any kind get better when they player better competition.

How do you expect them to get better if they never know how far behind they really are on the biggest stage for their sport? It has been shown that these programs take time, especially with team events, but come along slowly.

You can look at a ton of events where 20-30 years ago no one but Country A, B, maybe C were the only ones winning medals at the games but now with programs built Country D, E and F are now putting pressure on those top countries and winning medals themselves.

Give it some time and if you don't like it no one is holding a gun to your head to watch it or even pay attention to it!

I never said I do or don't watch it. Do you need to make things up just so you can satisfy the constant need to dig at people rather than a conversation?
There are 192 women in China playing hockey. Should that be worthy of an Olympic team? "My guess, no!"


Tell you what, if you can use the same explanation on why baseball is now out of the Olympics, due to it not being universal enough, then please explain why women's hockey still is?

[llama64]

Women's hockey outside of Can vs USA is pretty much unwatchable. It's also really hard to cheer for a juggernaut. That's the real problem.

No one likes watching a slaughter-fest. A mercy rule would only harm competition and draw even more attention to mismatches. There is no reason to implement rules simply to make it more watchable.

As the Women's programs in other countries improve, the competition levels will hopefully average out. Until then expect the only real battle to be between the USA and Canada.

[SeeBass]

Originally Posted by HOOT

Yes.

If you can be one of the best 23 players in your Country then damn rights you can play against them or even for them. Where are you from? Are you a top 23 player in that country? My guess, no!

At least these women are the best their country has to offer and are out there competing to get better and it has been shown that athletes of any kind get better when they player better competition.

How do you expect them to get better if they never know how far behind they really are on the biggest stage for their sport? It has been shown that these programs take time, especially with team events, but come along slowly.

You can look at a ton of events where 20-30 years ago no one but Country A, B, maybe C were the only ones winning medals at the games but now with programs built Country D, E and F are now putting pressure on those top countries and winning medals themselves.

Give it some time and if you don't like it no one is holding a gun to your head to watch it or even pay attention to it!

I see you must be a big fan of the Eddie the Eagle.
Sorry to see you expect less of Olympians.

[DownhillGoat]

Same idea I posted in the similar thread,

If you're going to have a 'mercy rule' you may as well hand out Olympic 'participation' medals. Everybody wins!

I'd rather not see women's hockey in the games than implement a mercy rule.

[edn88]

No mercy rule (for all of the stated reasons).

But if I was either the Slovakia when it was 18-0 I would have changed my goalie every time there was five shots against. I would guess that the enourmous shot disparity was part of the reason that the Slovkian goalie got blitzed.

As well, the Slovakian team needed to not shoot the puck the second they got across the blue line.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by SeeBass

I see you must be a big fan of the Eddie the Eagle.
Sorry to see you expect less of Olympians.

The irony here is that everyone on your side of the argument is missing the entire point of the games.

The purpose of the games is to bring the world together in the spirit of competition. We all want to win, of course, but the competition itself is every bit as important as the result.

The other issue, as we saw with the repeated lawsuits regarding women's ski jumping, is the issue of equality. The IOC has been moving away from single gender sports. Frankly, if you are going to pull women's hockey, you might as well pull men's as well. And that ain't going to happen.

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by SeeBass

I never said I do or don't watch it. Do you need to make things up just so you can satisfy the constant need to dig at people rather than a conversation?

What are you talking about digging at you? How is telling you if you don't like it don't watch it a dig? Also I never said you did or didn't watch it, I was stating a fact that there are options if you don't like it.

It's like me complaining about Dancing with Stars, what's the point? I don't watch it and there is other things on so why complain? Just to complain?

There are 192 women in China playing hockey. Should that be worthy of an Olympic team? "My guess, no!"

Well if they beat others teams to get in, yes!

How many women in Canada played hockey 40 years ago? How good were Canadian women at hockey 40 years ago?

Tell you what, if you can use the same explanation on why baseball is now out of the Olympics, due to it not being universal enough, then please explain why women's hockey still is?

Is it true or false that the best baseball players in the world play for their country at the Olympics?

Is it true or false that the best hockey players in the world player play for their country at the Olympics?

So although I don't agree with baseball being out of the Olympics what is the point if you aren't even going to get the best players the world has to offer? The Oylimpic experience is about the best in each country fighting against other countries best. That is ruined when you don't actually have the best competing.

You should take a look at how well the Canadians did in most events in the Winter games about 20-40 years ago and where they finish now. If that doesn't show you that programs take time, I don't know what will. Is China a good hockey market? Nope. Does it have room for improvement? Yep. Are they trying to improve it? Yep. So why deny them the chance to play the best on the biggest stage if they are the best of 8 teams in the world, I honestly don't see what the problem is with giving them that chance.

Oh well, I guess the Olympic experience for me is different than it is for you. I just prefer to give them a shot because if we didn't there would have been a ton of Canadian athletes watching the games on their coach instead of finishing 20th and feeling great about it. Because Canada/USA may be so far ahead of the other teams in 2010 but what about the 2050 games? Olympics isn't always about what a team is doing in this Olympics but what they are working for in 12, 20, 40 years from now.

The best example is the the USA Nordic team which took 86 years of competing to win their first medal. It wasn't until the early 70's until they got their own training facility and actually started training athletes to compete for their country. Almost 40 years after starting their program they win their first medal, should they even have been racing during those 40-80 years since they weren't that good at the sport? Or do you think it was competing against the best in the world to show them where they need to get to so they can finish high?

[SOMBRI2]

they are not kids, mercy rule only applies for kids which from day one i don't buy it. unless it's 200% 'recreational'.

in olympics, amateurs are close-to professionals, they have the pride and they are also ready to take on the goods and the worsts. if i were on team hungary losing 0-82 to slovakia, i would say 'good lesson'. if i were on slovakia losing 0-18 to canada, i would say 'we will be better next time'.

mercy rule is simply a manipulated faking of truth machine. because at the end of the day, every single person knows the result.

mercy rule would over abuse the so-called olympic spirit.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by SeeBass

Tell you what, if you can use the same explanation on why baseball is now out of the Olympics, due to it not being universal enough, then please explain why women's hockey still is?

Baseball/softball was dropped more due to the cost of building a facility with limited reuse potential than anything else. Hosts were chafing at the costs.

[Bertuzzied]

Does Oiler Hockey Need a Mercy Rule? Yes. Not only for the team but for fans of good hockey.


I don't think they should put a mercy rule on olympic hockey but they do need to take woman's hockey out of the olympics. It's pretty hard to watch in their current state.