The Olympics put athletes from less mainstream sports into limelight for two weeks. Sports like luge, skeleton, and bobsled, or the likes of shooting or fencing in the Summer Games, hardly get lots of worldwide exposure apart from their Olympic events which are broadcast on major channels around the world. Even sports like athletics and swimming are more or less niche sports outside the major events, and the likes of Usain Bolt and Michael Phelps wouldn't be such huge stars without their Olympic success, and to a lesser extent their World Championship success.
Ski sports are highly popular in Central and Northern Europe with lots of media coverage even outside the Olympics and the Worlds. But outside their heartlands, the ski sports become mainstream only once in four years during the Winter Olympics. And in the eyes of those once-in-four-years fans, even the greatest career can be seen as mediocre if the success at the Olympics has eluded.
Olympic and World Championship success is a great way to determine athletes' greatness in sports like athletics and swimming. Those are sports where athletes set their goals in succeeding at the major events. I don't really like putting Olympic success way over World Championship success because an unfortunate injury may ruin your Olympic season and four years is a long period until your next chance at the Olympics. You may get fewer chances at the Olympics, though it still takes the same effort to win at the Worlds. Though winning gold medals at two consecutive Olympics probably makes you a bigger legend than gold medals from three consecutive world championships, although both achievements take the same time.
Ski sports are different from athletics or swimming. Regardless of the venue, the running track is 400 meters and the Olympic pool is 50 meters. In ski sports, every venue is different, favoring different athletes. Some alpine skiers do better on steep slopes, others on flat ones. In cross-country skiing a tough course allows the athletes with better endurance to break away from the field while easier courses allow the best sprinters to stay in the leading group throughout the race to win it in the last kilometer. And every ski jumper has hills that suit them better and hills that don't suit them that well.
Besides, the ski sports have highly important season-long circuits, the World Cup tours. In a season-long circuit you will face venues that suit you better and venues that don't suit you so well. The World Cup rewards those who can do well at most venues and have the consistency to perform at their best throughout the winter. You can see one-hit wonders winning Olympic gold medals, though you can't see them winning World Cup titles.
I am one who puts the World Cup titles above everything else in ski sports. If you're good on certain types of hills or courses, you can win multiple gold medals in your career but winning World Cup titles requires a more complete set of skills and season-long consistency. Four-time Olympic silver medalist and the 2003 World gold medalist in slalom, Ivica Kostelić, has said the lack of an Olympic gold medal doesn't matter that much because he's won the biggest prize in the sport, the World Cup overall title. Olympic and World Championship medals are awarded in single disciplines; the overall World Cup title requires success in multiple disciplines in the same season. Kostelić skipping his preferred disciplines slalom and combined at the 2011 Worlds after the super-G bronze medal in order to concentrate on winning the World Cup overall title further highlights the importance of the big crystal globe.
For sure the Olympic and World Championship medals aren't meaningless alongside the World Cup titles. Firstly, especially the Olympics are the most-viewed competitions in the sport. I bet most Americans know Ted Ligety as a two-time Olympic gold medalist rather than as a five-time World Cup giant slalom champion.
Secondly, the major championships are a different challenge compared to the World Cup tour. If you're dominating your sport, you don't need to bring out your best at every race to win World Cup titles. At the Olympics or Worlds, you can't win with mediocrity. Lara Gut is leading the super-G standings in the World Cup, yet 0.12 seconds separated her from the Olympic gold medal, eventually finishing fourth and missing the bronze medal by 0.01 seconds.
Seeing athletes with a big disparity between their World Cup and major championship achievements probably tells something about them. Peter Fill has only three wins on the World Cup tour, though he's won two titles in downhill and one in alpine combined. He doesn't finish in the front very often, though his consistency has won him World Cup titles. Though that's not how you succeed in major championships; Fill's medal record of one silver and one bronze in the Worlds is quite mediocre for one with three small crystal globes.
On the other hand, Mario Matt never won a crystal globe in the World Cup and finished only twice in the top three in the slalom standings, though his two World gold medals and one Olympic gold medal in the span of 13 years plus 15 race wins in the World Cup surely put him above some of the World Cup champions whose heyday lasted only a few years and who never broke into double digits in their victory count.
The Olympics and the Worlds don't present the greatest challenges in the sport to athletes. When the venues need to accommodate men's and women's races in different disciplines, not all major championship slopes can be among the most challenging ones in the sport. The challenge to the athletes isn't even that high on the list of priorities when commercial interests play a big role when selecting the host venue. The Olympics may have the most important single races for the athletes but the Jeongseon downhill course doesn't reflect that, being among the easiest in top-level ski racing.
I am one of those who put winning the Hahnenkamm downhill at least on the level of an Olympic or World gold medal if not even above. That race is the biggest challenge in alpine skiing. A major gold medal doesn't prove you as a skier the way winning on the Streif does. A flawless and fast run on an easy course can win you a gold medal but you may be struggling with the challenges the most challenging courses present. And Hahnenkamm matters to skiers; that's where every downhill skier wants to win.
Didier Cuche won four World Cup titles in downhill plus one in super-G and one in giant slalom between 2007 and 2011. Still his medal record isn't that exceptional; one gold, two silver, and one bronze medal in the Worlds and an Olympic silver medal dating back to 1998. However his four wins on the Streif between 2008 and 2012 show why he was the best downhill skier of that era. You could beat him on easier courses, like Wengen where he never won, though he dominated the most challenging courses.
It's difficult, or rather impossible, to put achievements in any absolute order. I'm one who puts World Cup titles above gold medals, though you need to look at the bigger picture. Sports are about winning; achieving World Cup titles purely with consistency and never succeeding big time at major championships isn't that impressive while a great medal record can make up the lack of crystal globes. Elisabeth Görgl never won a World Cup title, though has a solid medal record from 2009 to 2011 and her double gold medal at the 2011 Worlds shows that success wasn't a fluke. That puts her above some of the weaker World Cup champions in my eyes.
I truly admire Marc Girardelli's career. Five overall titles in the World Cup, two discipline titles in downhill, one in giant slalom, three in slalom, three times the runner-up in super-G, and four times topping the combined standings. That's accompanied by 11 World Championship medals from all five disciplines, including three gold medals in combined and one in slalom plus he's one of the rare skiers to win the downhills in Kitzbühel and Wengen the same season, winning actually two downhill races in Wengen in 1989. But he never won the gold medal at the Olympics, achieving only the silver medals in super-G and giant slalom in 1992. However, the lack of Olympic gold doesn't affect to my impression of his career. The sport is about more than two weeks every four years.
It's the same in other ski sports too. Janne Ahonen is a two-time World Cup overall champion in ski jumping and the five Four Hills titles stand out the most from his resume. In addition to that his medal record features two individual World gold medals, though he's never won at the Olympics or even achieved an individual medal. Still, his achievements show he can deliver under pressure. If anything, the Four Hills titles have required the same abilities than any major gold medal but also consistency. One single bad day can ruin your Four Hills campaign, at the Olympics or Worlds there's still another competition. However needing to have consistency for one week prevents the kind of flukish wins you can see at the Olympics or Worlds. Yes, even Thomas Diethart wasn't a fluke but the best ski jumper in the world for one week.
There's been criticism over Kaisa Mäkäräinen's performance in biathlon in PyeongChang where she failed once again to win an Olympic medal. Some of the criticism is justified. The best result of a 10th place isn't really what you'd expect from the World Cup leader. But never winning an Olympic medal isn't really such a big failure in the big picture of her career. She's won two World Cup overall titles, five discipline titles, a World gold medal, and a total of six medals at the Worlds. If I had to point out a failure from her resume, it's winning only one major gold medal despite all her World Cup success. An Olympic gold medal would have fixed that, a silver or bronze medal wouldn't have. But who am I to blame one of the top biathletes of this decade?
Showing posts with label PyeongChang 2018. Show all posts
Showing posts with label PyeongChang 2018. Show all posts
Monday, February 19, 2018
Tuesday, February 13, 2018
FIS let the speed specialists down in combined. Once again
Men's alpine combined finally started the alpine skiing events at the PyeongChang Winter Olympics. Although it was a close fight between Marcel Hirscher and Alexis Pinturault for the win with the six-time World Cup overall champion Hirscher claiming his first Olympic gold medal by 0.23 seconds, the race was a controversial one with the shortened downhill preventing the speed specialists building enough gap for the slalom leg to race for the victory.
The heavy wind had obviously made it necessary to lower the downhill start and use a racing line bypassing the biggest jumps of the course. The Jeongseon downhill course is already a short one with a run of one minute, 40 seconds; using the super-G start shortened it by further 20 seconds and bypassing the big jumps made it easier for less routined downhill skiers. Yet this is where the logic of the International Ski Federation fails, and this was not the first time. Despite the shortened downhill, the slalom leg was on a full course. This very much handed the medals to slalom specialists. The top six of the race were also the six fastest men on the slalom course.
I'm not sure the top two would've been any different with a full downhill course. Alexis Pinturault was 1.04 seconds and Marcel Hirscher 1.32 seconds behind Thomas Dreßen, the leader after the downhill leg. With downhill specialists losing over three seconds in the slalom leg, they might not have been able to build enough lead even on the full downhill course. Of course, it appeared the wind conditions were affecting the downhill with those starting among the first 10, like Dreßen, Hirscher, and Pinturault, being favored by their starting position.
However, the shortened downhill may still have decided the victory. While Pinturault is better in slalom than downhill, he can finish the downhill leg even on a full course close enough the leaders to overtake them in the slalom. His strength against Hirscher is the downhill. On a full course, he might have been able to build enough gap to Hirscher to stay ahead in the slalom leg.
This was not the first farcical alpine combined at major championships. Last two men's combined races at the World Championships have been won by the 30th skiers of the downhill leg who were able to benefit greatly from being the first skiers on the slalom leg in warm conditions with the course deteriorating rapidly. The Olympic combined could have been different with the slalom course holding up well in the cold Korean weather. A pity it was ruined by a shortened downhill.
I'm not the first to cry about unfair conditions. It's unfortunate for the fans who have come to watch a race to see it canceled. If this had been a regular World Cup race, I'd have been fine with it; do whatever you need to get the race safely carried out. But when it's the highlight of the year, or four years in the case of the Olympics, the athletes deserve a fair race.
I don't think the downhill leg should have taken place as scheduled with the wind affecting the results. They could have started with the slalom leg as scheduled and have the downhill leg another day like has happened before in similar situations. That would actually have been even fairer as the slalom specialists barely making the top 30 in the downhill, like the bronze medalist Victor Muffat-Jeandet, wouldn't get such a big advantage from their starting position. And even if starting with a shortened downhill was the right decision, the slalom leg should have been shortened respectively.
The FIS clearly has a strange view about what is a fair race. The combined format has some major flaws, yet the FIS has done nothing to fix those issues. At least there won't be many farces like this remaining as the alpine combined will likely be gone by the 2021 World Championships. Though it's a pity because it could be a great event. But this is just the tip of the iceberg of examples of how the FIS fails to provide a level playing field for the speed specialists against the technicians.
The men's World Cup has been dominated by technical specialists this decade. After the speed specialist Carlo Janka won the 2010 overall title, technical specialists have claimed the big crystal globe with Ivica Kostelić winning in 2011 and Marcel Hirscher every season since 2012.
The World Cup schedule has more races in technical disciplines than in speed ones. That's nothing new, although the introduction of parallel races has added to the number of technical races. Yet what is different is the evolution of giant slalom. Speed specialists used to have success also in giant slalom, boosting their overall title campaigns. Benjamin Raich in 2006 was the only speed specialist winning the overall title in the 00s. Yet ever since the the GS equipment changed from the 28-meter radius skis to longer 35-meter radius skis in the 2012-13 season, speed specialists have been struggling in that discipline, hurting their overall title chances.
The radius of GS skis was shortened to 30 meters starting from this season. Although the equipment is now closer to the old skis, it seems like the speed specialists are still no longer able to succeed in giant slalom. That is very harmful for their chances for the big crystal globe as meanwhile there are technical specialists like Hirscher or Pinturault who can even win in super-G on some of the more technical courses. When you see a World Cup champion like Aksel Lund Svindal and another Olympic medalist Kjetil Jansrud struggling to make the second round in giant slalom, you know the discipline is different than what it was in their heyday in giant slalom.
With speed specialists no longer succeeding in giant slalom, the only way to give them an equal chance to race for the overall title would seem to be adding speed races into the schedule. An equal number of races in each discipline should be the priority of scheduling, or at least an equal number between speed and technical disciplines. It can't be so difficult. At least the long-term calendar for the 2020-21 season seems better in that regard for men, although the parallel races still skew the schedule in favor of technical specialists.
It's not only the scheduling but also the replacement policy. Last season one of the scheduled men's downhill races ended up being permanently canceled. The schedule should leave enough space for replacement dates because every canceled race is one less scoring opportunity for the specialists in that discipline. And with the speed disciplines more prone to weather-related cancellations, that's yet another factor against speed specialists overall title hopes.
What's even worse is the replacement policy at the World Cup Finals, leading to some farcical season finales. In 2013 the speed races had to be canceled at the Finals in Lenzerheide, denying Aksel Lund Svindal his last opportunity to challenge Marcel Hirscher for the overall title while securing the downhill title without having to race for it. In 2011, also in Lenzerheide, Maria Riesch (now Höfl-Riesch) celebrated her only World Cup overall title by three points over Lindsey Vonn after the season-ending giant slalom was canceled, a discipline where Vonn had the advantage over Riesch.
In both cases, and many others, the final races were not rescheduled because the FIS rules don't allow it. I get it, the TV channels want the titles being decided in Sunday's technical races and there are probably some logistical issues as well. But a cancellation is an unfortunate way to decide the crystal globe. I'm sure the fans would rather have the titles decided by racing, even if they missed it when at work on Monday as a cancellation means they didn't see racing anyway. They don't tune in to see the trophy presented, they tune in to see the skiers racing for the trophy.
I'm not sure what it takes for the FIS to realize the speed specialists are at a disadvantage in the overall title hunt and make it a level playing field between speed and technical specialists. It's a pity that those speed specialists, not only risking their health but even their lives, are constantly being put at a disadvantage by the sanctioning body. The FIS failed to provide a fair race for the Olympic medals in men's combined but that's just one more example of how the FIS lets the weather ruin speed specialists' chances for success.
The Austrian Ski Federation is usually vocal when things don't go their way. Maybe things would start happening if there was a big star in the Austrian speed team. But as long as Austria's biggest star is a technical specialist, the current situation is fine for the ÖSV.
The heavy wind had obviously made it necessary to lower the downhill start and use a racing line bypassing the biggest jumps of the course. The Jeongseon downhill course is already a short one with a run of one minute, 40 seconds; using the super-G start shortened it by further 20 seconds and bypassing the big jumps made it easier for less routined downhill skiers. Yet this is where the logic of the International Ski Federation fails, and this was not the first time. Despite the shortened downhill, the slalom leg was on a full course. This very much handed the medals to slalom specialists. The top six of the race were also the six fastest men on the slalom course.
I'm not sure the top two would've been any different with a full downhill course. Alexis Pinturault was 1.04 seconds and Marcel Hirscher 1.32 seconds behind Thomas Dreßen, the leader after the downhill leg. With downhill specialists losing over three seconds in the slalom leg, they might not have been able to build enough lead even on the full downhill course. Of course, it appeared the wind conditions were affecting the downhill with those starting among the first 10, like Dreßen, Hirscher, and Pinturault, being favored by their starting position.
However, the shortened downhill may still have decided the victory. While Pinturault is better in slalom than downhill, he can finish the downhill leg even on a full course close enough the leaders to overtake them in the slalom. His strength against Hirscher is the downhill. On a full course, he might have been able to build enough gap to Hirscher to stay ahead in the slalom leg.
This was not the first farcical alpine combined at major championships. Last two men's combined races at the World Championships have been won by the 30th skiers of the downhill leg who were able to benefit greatly from being the first skiers on the slalom leg in warm conditions with the course deteriorating rapidly. The Olympic combined could have been different with the slalom course holding up well in the cold Korean weather. A pity it was ruined by a shortened downhill.
I'm not the first to cry about unfair conditions. It's unfortunate for the fans who have come to watch a race to see it canceled. If this had been a regular World Cup race, I'd have been fine with it; do whatever you need to get the race safely carried out. But when it's the highlight of the year, or four years in the case of the Olympics, the athletes deserve a fair race.
I don't think the downhill leg should have taken place as scheduled with the wind affecting the results. They could have started with the slalom leg as scheduled and have the downhill leg another day like has happened before in similar situations. That would actually have been even fairer as the slalom specialists barely making the top 30 in the downhill, like the bronze medalist Victor Muffat-Jeandet, wouldn't get such a big advantage from their starting position. And even if starting with a shortened downhill was the right decision, the slalom leg should have been shortened respectively.
The FIS clearly has a strange view about what is a fair race. The combined format has some major flaws, yet the FIS has done nothing to fix those issues. At least there won't be many farces like this remaining as the alpine combined will likely be gone by the 2021 World Championships. Though it's a pity because it could be a great event. But this is just the tip of the iceberg of examples of how the FIS fails to provide a level playing field for the speed specialists against the technicians.
World Cup skewed in favor of technical specialists
The men's World Cup has been dominated by technical specialists this decade. After the speed specialist Carlo Janka won the 2010 overall title, technical specialists have claimed the big crystal globe with Ivica Kostelić winning in 2011 and Marcel Hirscher every season since 2012.
The World Cup schedule has more races in technical disciplines than in speed ones. That's nothing new, although the introduction of parallel races has added to the number of technical races. Yet what is different is the evolution of giant slalom. Speed specialists used to have success also in giant slalom, boosting their overall title campaigns. Benjamin Raich in 2006 was the only speed specialist winning the overall title in the 00s. Yet ever since the the GS equipment changed from the 28-meter radius skis to longer 35-meter radius skis in the 2012-13 season, speed specialists have been struggling in that discipline, hurting their overall title chances.
The radius of GS skis was shortened to 30 meters starting from this season. Although the equipment is now closer to the old skis, it seems like the speed specialists are still no longer able to succeed in giant slalom. That is very harmful for their chances for the big crystal globe as meanwhile there are technical specialists like Hirscher or Pinturault who can even win in super-G on some of the more technical courses. When you see a World Cup champion like Aksel Lund Svindal and another Olympic medalist Kjetil Jansrud struggling to make the second round in giant slalom, you know the discipline is different than what it was in their heyday in giant slalom.
With speed specialists no longer succeeding in giant slalom, the only way to give them an equal chance to race for the overall title would seem to be adding speed races into the schedule. An equal number of races in each discipline should be the priority of scheduling, or at least an equal number between speed and technical disciplines. It can't be so difficult. At least the long-term calendar for the 2020-21 season seems better in that regard for men, although the parallel races still skew the schedule in favor of technical specialists.
It's not only the scheduling but also the replacement policy. Last season one of the scheduled men's downhill races ended up being permanently canceled. The schedule should leave enough space for replacement dates because every canceled race is one less scoring opportunity for the specialists in that discipline. And with the speed disciplines more prone to weather-related cancellations, that's yet another factor against speed specialists overall title hopes.
What's even worse is the replacement policy at the World Cup Finals, leading to some farcical season finales. In 2013 the speed races had to be canceled at the Finals in Lenzerheide, denying Aksel Lund Svindal his last opportunity to challenge Marcel Hirscher for the overall title while securing the downhill title without having to race for it. In 2011, also in Lenzerheide, Maria Riesch (now Höfl-Riesch) celebrated her only World Cup overall title by three points over Lindsey Vonn after the season-ending giant slalom was canceled, a discipline where Vonn had the advantage over Riesch.
In both cases, and many others, the final races were not rescheduled because the FIS rules don't allow it. I get it, the TV channels want the titles being decided in Sunday's technical races and there are probably some logistical issues as well. But a cancellation is an unfortunate way to decide the crystal globe. I'm sure the fans would rather have the titles decided by racing, even if they missed it when at work on Monday as a cancellation means they didn't see racing anyway. They don't tune in to see the trophy presented, they tune in to see the skiers racing for the trophy.
I'm not sure what it takes for the FIS to realize the speed specialists are at a disadvantage in the overall title hunt and make it a level playing field between speed and technical specialists. It's a pity that those speed specialists, not only risking their health but even their lives, are constantly being put at a disadvantage by the sanctioning body. The FIS failed to provide a fair race for the Olympic medals in men's combined but that's just one more example of how the FIS lets the weather ruin speed specialists' chances for success.
The Austrian Ski Federation is usually vocal when things don't go their way. Maybe things would start happening if there was a big star in the Austrian speed team. But as long as Austria's biggest star is a technical specialist, the current situation is fine for the ÖSV.
Wednesday, December 6, 2017
Neutral Russian hockey team is not truly neutral
The International Olympic Committee has decided to suspend the Russian Olympic Committee because of the systemic manipulation of the anti-doping system in Russia. Individual Russian athletes may still participate in the Winter Olympics in February as IOC-invited "Olympic Athletes from Russia" in both individual and team competitions, yet without Russia's national symbols.
I think the IOC's decision is the right one. Sports were used as a political tool in Russia, and worse still, to achieve the aims Russian sports organizations resorted on cheating with the help of the government. Russia's doping problem is not just an issue of sports organizations, it's a political issue. The only way to penalize Russia was to ban the Russian team and the national symbols at the Olympics.
The IOC's decision still leaves the door open for a neutral Russian team in hockey. Whether or not there will be a Russian hockey team under the Olympic flag is likely a highly political decision. Will Vladimir Putin's government decide to boycott the Games after the humiliating ban on national symbols, or do they want to show that nothing will stop Russia and will send the hockey players to PyeongChang?
Given the nature of Olympic hockey, a neutral team from a banned country isn't really a neutral team. Russian players would still represent Russia, even if they didn't have the national symbols. Clean individual athletes deserve to be at the Olympics but no Russian national teams should be invited to PyeongChang.
There are other team sports like curling or bobsled that are more comparable to individual sports than hockey. For example, in curling there are multiple teams in a country competing for the Olympic spot. On the other hand, in hockey players from multiple teams are aiming to make it into the Olympic team. Curling and bobsled teams are more individual and less of national teams than the hockey team is. Curling and bobsled teams can be neutral, a hockey team can't truly be.
It will be interesting to see if the Olympic Athletes from Russia can compete in relays and other team competitions of individual sports. In my opinion, the Russian athletes stop being neutral if they are competing in relays against other countries.
What makes relays different from the likes of curling and bobsled is that relay teams are more of national teams. Sports like cross-country skiing are individual sports by definition, relays are just a way to enable team competitions.
The IOC's decision allows neutral Russian athletes to get invited to both individual and team competitions, though the invitations are at the IOC's absolute discretion. Even if Russia wanted to send a neutral hockey team, it's still up to the IOC to approve.
I hope the IOC will not invite Russian athletes in sports where that would lead into having a de facto national team, just without national symbols. Clean individual athletes deserve to be invited, disguised national teams not.
I think the IOC's decision is the right one. Sports were used as a political tool in Russia, and worse still, to achieve the aims Russian sports organizations resorted on cheating with the help of the government. Russia's doping problem is not just an issue of sports organizations, it's a political issue. The only way to penalize Russia was to ban the Russian team and the national symbols at the Olympics.
The IOC's decision still leaves the door open for a neutral Russian team in hockey. Whether or not there will be a Russian hockey team under the Olympic flag is likely a highly political decision. Will Vladimir Putin's government decide to boycott the Games after the humiliating ban on national symbols, or do they want to show that nothing will stop Russia and will send the hockey players to PyeongChang?
Given the nature of Olympic hockey, a neutral team from a banned country isn't really a neutral team. Russian players would still represent Russia, even if they didn't have the national symbols. Clean individual athletes deserve to be at the Olympics but no Russian national teams should be invited to PyeongChang.
There are other team sports like curling or bobsled that are more comparable to individual sports than hockey. For example, in curling there are multiple teams in a country competing for the Olympic spot. On the other hand, in hockey players from multiple teams are aiming to make it into the Olympic team. Curling and bobsled teams are more individual and less of national teams than the hockey team is. Curling and bobsled teams can be neutral, a hockey team can't truly be.
Relay teams aren't truly neutral either
It will be interesting to see if the Olympic Athletes from Russia can compete in relays and other team competitions of individual sports. In my opinion, the Russian athletes stop being neutral if they are competing in relays against other countries.
What makes relays different from the likes of curling and bobsled is that relay teams are more of national teams. Sports like cross-country skiing are individual sports by definition, relays are just a way to enable team competitions.
The IOC's decision allows neutral Russian athletes to get invited to both individual and team competitions, though the invitations are at the IOC's absolute discretion. Even if Russia wanted to send a neutral hockey team, it's still up to the IOC to approve.
I hope the IOC will not invite Russian athletes in sports where that would lead into having a de facto national team, just without national symbols. Clean individual athletes deserve to be invited, disguised national teams not.
Tuesday, April 4, 2017
NHL's Olympic decision disappointing but understandable
The National Hockey League has announced it won't break the 2017-18 season to allow its players participate in the Winter Olympics in February. This will be the first time since 1998 when the NHL players won't participate in the Olympics, ending the streak of five Winter Games with nations represented by their best players.
The Olympics in February have seen the players in a good form playing for their nations. The same can't be said about the World Cup of Hockey which is played in the preseason. However, the Olympic dates have been problematic for the NHL. With less than two months to the playoffs, a key player's injury from the Olympics can derail a team's Stanley Cup bid. Also, February is an important month for the NHL as the NFL season has ended and the MLB season hasn't started yet.
With NHL participation, the Olympics have been the best possible international tournament for hockey. The best players playing for their nations at an event as prestigious as the Olympics with global coverage. However the Olympics have not increased the NHL's viewership, making the league not willing to break the season.
The International Olympic Committee has previously paid the insurance and travel expenses of the NHL players in order to get them to the Olympics. A practice unique to hockey among Olympic sports, the IOC isn't willing to pay those expenses in 2018, making the NHL reluctant to have the Olympic break. The International Ice Hockey Federation offered to pay those fees, yet the NHL doesn't want to use IIHF's money for the Olympic participation but wants the IOC to pay for it. In addition to that, the NHL wanted additional monetary compensation from the IOC for the lose revenue during the Olympics. Alternatively the NHL would have liked the official Olympic partner status to use it for commercial purposes.
The NHL players want to play at the Olympics. The NHL has acknowledged that and offered the Olympic participation if the NHLPA eliminated the opt-out clause in the collective bargaining agreement, extending it to 2022. However the NHLPA didn't accept that.
NHL has all the rights to ask for compensation for its players Olympic participation. While the ideal of the Olympics is a festival of sports without business interests, the reality is different. The IOC may officially be a nonprofit organization but it's a huge business, and probably second only to the FIFA in most corrupt major sports organizations. Why should the NHL sacrifice their own business interests to support an event that generates money for the IOC? The NHL did the right thing by not making the IIHF pay for NHL's Olympic participation; that money would have been away from developing hockey worldwide.
Olympics with NHL participation have been the ideal international hockey tournament and it's a pity if the NHL participation ends. But I can't blame the NHL for not participating the Olympics since there is not that much for the NHL to benefit. It's up to the IOC if they want the Olympics to be a pseudo-amateur event with no participation compensation, or if they want to have all the best athletes and are willing to share the revenue with other organizations to make that happen.
The NHL may be more willing to participate the 2022 Olympics, in order to promote itself in the Chinese market. However what I want to see the least is the NHL deciding case-by-case which Olympics to participate. I want to see NHL either committing long-term to the Olympics or starting to build up the brand of the World Cup of Hockey to make it the most important international hockey tournament. Then again, hardly anything can prevent the NHL from participating certain Olympics it feels important if the NHL pays all expenses itself.
The Olympics in February have seen the players in a good form playing for their nations. The same can't be said about the World Cup of Hockey which is played in the preseason. However, the Olympic dates have been problematic for the NHL. With less than two months to the playoffs, a key player's injury from the Olympics can derail a team's Stanley Cup bid. Also, February is an important month for the NHL as the NFL season has ended and the MLB season hasn't started yet.
With NHL participation, the Olympics have been the best possible international tournament for hockey. The best players playing for their nations at an event as prestigious as the Olympics with global coverage. However the Olympics have not increased the NHL's viewership, making the league not willing to break the season.
The International Olympic Committee has previously paid the insurance and travel expenses of the NHL players in order to get them to the Olympics. A practice unique to hockey among Olympic sports, the IOC isn't willing to pay those expenses in 2018, making the NHL reluctant to have the Olympic break. The International Ice Hockey Federation offered to pay those fees, yet the NHL doesn't want to use IIHF's money for the Olympic participation but wants the IOC to pay for it. In addition to that, the NHL wanted additional monetary compensation from the IOC for the lose revenue during the Olympics. Alternatively the NHL would have liked the official Olympic partner status to use it for commercial purposes.
The NHL players want to play at the Olympics. The NHL has acknowledged that and offered the Olympic participation if the NHLPA eliminated the opt-out clause in the collective bargaining agreement, extending it to 2022. However the NHLPA didn't accept that.
NHL has all the rights to ask for compensation for its players Olympic participation. While the ideal of the Olympics is a festival of sports without business interests, the reality is different. The IOC may officially be a nonprofit organization but it's a huge business, and probably second only to the FIFA in most corrupt major sports organizations. Why should the NHL sacrifice their own business interests to support an event that generates money for the IOC? The NHL did the right thing by not making the IIHF pay for NHL's Olympic participation; that money would have been away from developing hockey worldwide.
Olympics with NHL participation have been the ideal international hockey tournament and it's a pity if the NHL participation ends. But I can't blame the NHL for not participating the Olympics since there is not that much for the NHL to benefit. It's up to the IOC if they want the Olympics to be a pseudo-amateur event with no participation compensation, or if they want to have all the best athletes and are willing to share the revenue with other organizations to make that happen.
The NHL may be more willing to participate the 2022 Olympics, in order to promote itself in the Chinese market. However what I want to see the least is the NHL deciding case-by-case which Olympics to participate. I want to see NHL either committing long-term to the Olympics or starting to build up the brand of the World Cup of Hockey to make it the most important international hockey tournament. Then again, hardly anything can prevent the NHL from participating certain Olympics it feels important if the NHL pays all expenses itself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)