Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2017 Women's World Championships

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: 2017 Women's World Championships

    29. Expulsion of a Member National Association

    Congress may revoke a Member National Association’s membership after written notice if it:
     ceases to fulfil the conditions for the respective membership class;
     seriously violates the Statutes, Bylaws, Regulations/Codes or decisions of the IIHF;
     brings ice hockey or inline hockey, where inline hockey is active under the Member National Association, into disrepute internationally or in its own country;
     does not pay the annual subscriptions or meet other financial obligations owed to the IIHF;
     ceases to be an association of a sovereign state; or
     fails to participate in any IIHF activities for four consecutive years.

    Expulsions issued by Council will be submitted for ratification by the next Congress.
    Russell Jaslow
    [Former] SUNYAC Correspondent
    U.S. College Hockey Online

    Comment


    • Re: 2017 Women's World Championships

      And some more exacting rules concerning withdrawing from a World Championship:

      608. Withdrawal from IIHF Ice Hockey World Championships

      1. Participation of Teams:
      A Member National Association that does not intend to fulfil its commitment and indicates such by 1 September of the respective championship season or preceding year will automatically be fined by the IIHF as follows, except in the case of force majeure:
       IIHF Ice Hockey World Championship CHF 50,000
       IIHF Ice Hockey World Championship Division I CHF 15,000
       IIHF Ice Hockey World Championship Division II and III CHF 7,500
       IIHF Ice Hockey Junior and Women Championships CHF 7,500
       Qualifying Events CHF 5,000

      This fine shall double if notification is received at any time thereafter.
      Russell Jaslow
      [Former] SUNYAC Correspondent
      U.S. College Hockey Online

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Russell Jaslow View Post
        And some more exacting rules concerning withdrawing from a World Championship:

        608. Withdrawal from IIHF Ice Hockey World Championships

        1. Participation of Teams:
        A Member National Association that does not intend to fulfil its commitment and indicates such by 1 September of the respective championship season or preceding year will automatically be fined by the IIHF as follows, except in the case of force majeure:
         IIHF Ice Hockey World Championship CHF 50,000
         IIHF Ice Hockey World Championship Division I CHF 15,000
         IIHF Ice Hockey World Championship Division II and III CHF 7,500
         IIHF Ice Hockey Junior and Women Championships CHF 7,500
         Qualifying Events CHF 5,000

        This fine shall double if notification is received at any time thereafter.
        CHF is Swiss Franc. The current exchange rate is almost exactly one for one to the U.S. dollar. So, the fine isn't all that much.

        But, it doesn't mean the IIHF can't charge the "disrepute to the sport" clause on the USA.

        And, at the very least, you will get relegated.
        Russell Jaslow
        [Former] SUNYAC Correspondent
        U.S. College Hockey Online

        Comment


        • Re: 2017 Women's World Championships

          For those who think the money isn't there, this from USA Today not only proves them horribly wrong, but is an embarrassment to USA Hockey:

          What the terms of their new deal will be are still unknown, but they’ll undoubtedly be better than the stunningly awful equivalent of $1,500 per year each player now receives from USA Hockey. You read that right: $1,500 a year.

          This is an organization that brought in revenue of $41.9 million in 2014, according to its tax return. You read that right too.

          It’s natural to wonder how this compares with what other national governing bodies give their athletes. Here’s the answer in a nutshell: Not well.

          U.S. Figure Skating, with revenue of $17.9 million in 2014, pays its elite athletes more than $50,000 a year, and that’s just the beginning. Skating shows, personal appearances and endorsement deals, often put together with the help of USFS, give top U.S. skaters income of well over $100,000 per year.

          How about tiny U.S. Biathlon? Its 2014 revenue was $2.3 million, which makes it hard to give athletes much of anything. But here’s what President and CEO Max Cobb did:

          As part of a sponsorship agreement with the financial services firm State Street from 2014-16, Cobb carved out $90,000 for the NGB’s top performers over those three years, $30,000 per year. The first year, he gave elite athletes Susan Dunklee and Lowell Bailey $15,000 each. The next two years, Dunklee and Bailey were joined by Tim Burke in receiving $10,000 per year.
          Russell Jaslow
          [Former] SUNYAC Correspondent
          U.S. College Hockey Online

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Twolinepass View Post
            That's too bad, I don't understand why some of these players have said no. Former D-III players are not going to ever play on the national team. They are probably not going to play in the NWHL as that is a temporary parking spot for national team players. And besides, they probably could not afford to as they are up to their eyeballs in student loan debt(unlike the national team former D-I players). Your future hockey career is the Saturday night beer league. So why not take a shot? Probably because of fear of what the elite might say about you.
            Obvious you don't get it. It's not about getting a chance, it's about a level of respect and equality

            Comment


            • Re: 2017 Women's World Championships

              Originally posted by Russell Jaslow View Post
              For those who think the money isn't there, this from USA Today not only proves them horribly wrong, but is an embarrassment to USA Hockey:

              What the terms of their new deal will be are still unknown, but they’ll undoubtedly be better than the stunningly awful equivalent of $1,500 per year each player now receives from USA Hockey. You read that right: $1,500 a year.

              This is an organization that brought in revenue of $41.9 million in 2014, according to its tax return. You read that right too.

              It’s natural to wonder how this compares with what other national governing bodies give their athletes. Here’s the answer in a nutshell: Not well.

              U.S. Figure Skating, with revenue of $17.9 million in 2014, pays its elite athletes more than $50,000 a year, and that’s just the beginning. Skating shows, personal appearances and endorsement deals, often put together with the help of USFS, give top U.S. skaters income of well over $100,000 per year.

              How about tiny U.S. Biathlon? Its 2014 revenue was $2.3 million, which makes it hard to give athletes much of anything. But here’s what President and CEO Max Cobb did:

              As part of a sponsorship agreement with the financial services firm State Street from 2014-16, Cobb carved out $90,000 for the NGB’s top performers over those three years, $30,000 per year. The first year, he gave elite athletes Susan Dunklee and Lowell Bailey $15,000 each. The next two years, Dunklee and Bailey were joined by Tim Burke in receiving $10,000 per year.
              Thanks for those numbers Russell. Further proof that USA Hockey doesn't have a leg to stand on
              "So life's a *****. What do you want to do, cry about it? " - Kara "Starbuck" Thrace

              "Wanna go get sugared up on mochas?" - Willow Rosenberg

              Check my website. College hockey; it's what it's all about!

              Comment


              • Originally posted by giwan View Post
                Obvious you don't get it. It's not about getting a chance, it's about a level of respect and equality
                Twolinepass is way offside!

                Comment


                • Re: 2017 Women's World Championships

                  There is/was a meeting between the two sides today in Philadelphia. So far, nothing, which I guess is a good thing.

                  I think this is it one way or the other.
                  CCT '77 & '78
                  4 kids
                  5 grandsons (BCA 7/09, CJA 5/14, JDL 8/14, JFL 6/16, PJL 7/18)
                  1 granddaughter (EML 4/18)

                  ”Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”
                  - Benjamin Franklin

                  Banned from the St. Lawrence University Facebook page - March 2016 (But I got better).

                  I want to live forever. So far, so good.

                  Comment


                  • Re: 2017 Women's World Championships

                    Both sides thought they had reached agreement last Monday. USA Hockey's negotiators could not convince the executive board to vote yes.
                    Last Thursday the executive board, instead of approving the deal, voted to have negotiators go back with counteroffer. Which the players turned down.

                    So today some players are meeting with USA Hockey officials to try again to come to terms.

                    This from Johanette Howard of espnw and Ollie Sutton of HyPelee.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2017 Women's World Championships

                      This might get USA Hockey's attention:

                      16 U.S. Senators reprimand USA Hockey on treatment of USWNT
                      https://www.yahoo.com/sports/news/14...173715894.html
                      Minnesota Golden Gopher Hockey

                      Comment


                      • Re: 2017 Women's World Championships

                        Originally posted by Russell Jaslow View Post
                        For those who think the money isn't there, this from USA Today not only proves them horribly wrong, but is an embarrassment to USA Hockey:

                        What the terms of their new deal will be are still unknown, but they’ll undoubtedly be better than the stunningly awful equivalent of $1,500 per year each player now receives from USA Hockey. You read that right: $1,500 a year.

                        This is an organization that brought in revenue of $41.9 million in 2014, according to its tax return. You read that right too.

                        It’s natural to wonder how this compares with what other national governing bodies give their athletes. Here’s the answer in a nutshell: Not well.

                        U.S. Figure Skating, with revenue of $17.9 million in 2014, pays its elite athletes more than $50,000 a year, and that’s just the beginning. Skating shows, personal appearances and endorsement deals, often put together with the help of USFS, give top U.S. skaters income of well over $100,000 per year.

                        How about tiny U.S. Biathlon? Its 2014 revenue was $2.3 million, which makes it hard to give athletes much of anything. But here’s what President and CEO Max Cobb did:

                        As part of a sponsorship agreement with the financial services firm State Street from 2014-16, Cobb carved out $90,000 for the NGB’s top performers over those three years, $30,000 per year. The first year, he gave elite athletes Susan Dunklee and Lowell Bailey $15,000 each. The next two years, Dunklee and Bailey were joined by Tim Burke in receiving $10,000 per year.
                        I read that swimmers get $3000 a month, which is what they were at last Monday

                        problem is both sides, USA Hockey and the players are giving numbers to shed themselves in the best light to win support
                        what they real facts are we don't know

                        I see now that a bunch of Senators are weighing in on it, as usual, they don't seem to know what's going on either
                        this reminds me of when the Coach Whose Name Shan't Be Said got shidtcanned by UMD and a lot of people were blowing a cork without understanding the facts of the situation

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by D2D View Post
                          This might get USA Hockey's attention:

                          16 U.S. Senators reprimand USA Hockey on treatment of USWNT
                          https://www.yahoo.com/sports/news/14...173715894.html
                          This is fantastic! Is USA Hockey taking its blinders off yet?!

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by pokechecker View Post
                            problem is both sides, USA Hockey and the players are giving numbers to shed themselves in the best light to win support
                            what they real facts are we don't know
                            This.

                            What their real demands are, we don't know either.

                            Its hard to compare with figure skating (their tours sell tickets) and swimming (they have prestige sponsors). Womens hockey needs to aecure one or the other if its going to be a a full time job.

                            Maine Hockey: I want to believe
                            43-21-4 (.662) in games I attended over 4 years as a student
                            104-47-14 (.669) in that time
                            3x FROZEN FOUR

                            11-20-2 in games I've attended since. (2-2-1 under Red)

                            Comment


                            • Re: 2017 Women's World Championships

                              More stuff

                              http://www.sbnation.com/2017/3/27/15...ained-timeline

                              Click on the link where USAH turned down a rematch on national TV after Sochi.

                              UFB
                              CCT '77 & '78
                              4 kids
                              5 grandsons (BCA 7/09, CJA 5/14, JDL 8/14, JFL 6/16, PJL 7/18)
                              1 granddaughter (EML 4/18)

                              ”Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”
                              - Benjamin Franklin

                              Banned from the St. Lawrence University Facebook page - March 2016 (But I got better).

                              I want to live forever. So far, so good.

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2017 Women's World Championships

                                Originally posted by BoSox3066 View Post
                                This.

                                What their real demands are, we don't know either.

                                Its hard to compare with figure skating (their tours sell tickets) and swimming (they have prestige sponsors). Womens hockey needs to aecure one or the other if its going to be a a full time job.
                                the figure skating outfit claimed income of $17 million in 2014, USAH $49 million, thats not hard to understand, ticket sales or not. We know what USAH spends on girls development, $0 and boys $3.5million. we don't know what USAH spends on men because they will not release that but we know what they spend on the women and we know what team Canada spends on women.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X