Blog Wars, part one: State of the Game

They're springing up everywhere, these hockey blogs. Was linked to this article from The Hockey Forum, which is basically a dissection of the game in the UK, from one of the moderators of what is probably the most respected forum on UK ice hockey. Trouble is, I disagree with it slightly, and in the spirit of debate (and the fact that my team are away this Saturday evening and I can't afford to travel) here's my reply, The article, as always, is quoted in italics, with my response below.

"Let's start by just skimming the surface of what we currently have. Amusingly regarded by some as the "top tier", the Elite League is a shambles and a perfect example of how to get things totally wrong. A league where decisions are made and changed from week to week. A league where those involved in it's running are so out of touch with the fanbase and reality, it defies belief. A league where decisions are made on a club basis instead of in the interest of the sport as a whole."

So far, so fair. Possibly a slightly exagerrated view, but essentially the points are echoed by many fans of the EIHL when it comes to the country-wide administration of the sport...But then, it begins to go a little creaky...

A league that offers nothing in the way of variety. A league that is considered 'stable' yet has teams struggling for finances year in, year out. A league that thinks it is bigger than it actually is. A league with a thought process and mentality that does neither the sport nor itself any favours at all.

Variety? To me, ten teams, each with their own style, their own unique histories and rivalries, and their own unique quirks is somewhat varied. As for "teams struggling year in year out", the EIHL has lost one team due to finances in four years (London Racers) -as opposed to the EPL, which, while not actually losing teams, is constantly fraught with rumours of teams being on the brink or players being cut due to money (unless you're Guildford or Slough). There are constant rumours of overspending, but the vast majority of that (as in the Bison case) is over-ambition, not the fact that the product itself is essentially non-viable. As for "bigger than it actually is"-don't forget that the sniping from the EIHL and the EPL comes from BOTH sides, with some EPLers claiming theirs is the true "British" league. You can't criticise one mentality without taking a hard look at the other.

I've been known for quite a while as an 'Elite Hater'. Nothing could be further from the truth. I want the UK sport to be played at it's highest ever level - I want the sport to succeed, not die. In it's present form, it isn't going to survive much longer, the money isn't there to sustain 10 Import Hockey and neither are the fans. If the current trend continues, neither will the teams. Import laden Hockey isn't affordable or sustainable in this country, it's a pipe dream that the UK version of Hockey isn't ready for or can afford. Just to clarify my position though, what I do actually hate is the way that this sport is allowed to be driven into the ground by stupidity, ignorance and arrogance. I also hate the divisions in the sport that have been created.

So that would be the "non-sustainable ten-import hockey" which has run for four years, building on the eight-import BNL which ran for another five years before that? And that lack of fans would be shown by the 5000 who turn up in Sheffield and Nottingham each week, or the 2500 in Coventry, or the 2000 in Cardiff and Newcastle, or the 1000 in Hull or Basingstoke? OK, then. Moving on, read the last line carefully. Then, observe how, in the next paragraph, those divisions are played upon by attacking one single aspect of hockey:

But hey, back to the Elite league and it's faults. I've long been of the opinion that Bison, Caps, Devils, Giants, Phoenix, Stingrays and Vipers are there merely to give Blaze, Panthers and Steelers fans something to do on the weekends when they're not playing each other. They're simply making up the numbers.

OK then-let's look at the winners of the EIHL competitions since 2003/04 (dates are season ends):
2004: Panthers, Steelers, Steelers
2005: Blaze x3 (but realistically, how often is a treble year going to happen?)
2006: Devils, Giants, Vipers, Steelers (some "making up the numbers" job that year, hey? The "big three" had to be satisfied with one of them winning a competition which even the smaller teams derided at the beginning of the year. Blaze Four trophies, four different winners-the Blaze and Panthers didn't even make the playoff weekend-the Giants and the Devils did.)
2007: Blaze, Blaze, Panthers, Devils. (Take into account that the Blaze had to come from twelve points back against a "make-up" side in the Giants, who led the league before self-destructing after Christmas. Also bear in mind that the Panthers only won the playoffs on penalty shots after knocking out the Giants, the Steelers didn't even make the season finale and the Devils destroyed an until-then dominant Blaze side in order to reach the final)

Some make-up performance-out of fourteen trophies, the big three won nine. Just over half. Three each over four seasons, or one a season each. And that is taking into account the Blaze going on a spectacular run of five in three years. All the other teams mentioned regularly beat the "big three" (especially Panthers) and so far this season,Vipers are third (above Nottingham) and Manchester and Hull are fifth and sixth, a maximum of three points behind the Panthers with two games in hand. Surely, following the logic of the "numbers" argument, the table should show the big three way out in front?

I'll make a quick prediction here: Blaze, Panthers and Steelers fighting out the titles between themselves and the only real teams that have a realistic chance. Devils, Giants, Phoenix and Vipers being the middling teams and Bison, Caps and Stingrays fighting for bottom spot. To be fair, it's a relatively easy prediction to make, mainly because that's how it always finishes. So predicatable.

Always finishes? Clearly the Giants title win and Devils several cup triumphs were just mistakes, then. I'll predict that Guildford and Bracknell will make the EPL finals along with Slough and maybe MK or Peterborough, cause three of those five seem to always make it. But no-one is complaining there of "predictability".

There is also no development of British players in the Elite league despite them and their apologists trying to state otherwise. Yes, they do pay lip service by playing Brits - but most of those Brits are cherry-picked after having being developed at other clubs in other leagues. There is nothing clever in that.

You mean, by two-way contracts? That's the same way the "farm" system in America works-does that mean that at the NHL teams don't develop players? Then we have the much-vaunted Cardiff farm system, with graduates such as Stevie Lyle, Matt Myers and Johnathan Phillips, the Nottingham system (James Neil, Paul Moran), and the Coventry system (newly set up a few years ago, it's already producing fruit in Joe Henry). Then we have the Tait brothers (Nottingham), Matt Towe and Ben Morgan (Sheffield) and many more prospects in the North East (eg Dean Holland, Ben Campbell). The development is there if you look for it, rather than choosing to see the EIHL as it was back in the ISL days of import-only rosters.
Second question-if these players don't get ice time at Elite level due to age-do they stayin juniors? Nope-they fill EPL rosters,benefiting the very league which claims they do all the developing-except their juniors are forced out-because why play a junior when you can play a player with Elite pedigree who's already tried and either been found wanting or forced out due to another more promising or younger junior taking his "development" spot (eg Bracknell signing Tom Carlon from Coventry).

After making some good points about the spark being gone for some with the new push for casual fans (a topic on which I see his point, and offer one solution here) the author comes up with this...

Ice Hockey isn't a TV sport. Fact

Excuse me? I have a feeling a few million Canadians would disagree. And so would Grandstand, when it was regularly shown on the BBC in the mid nineties. Plus, just how are fans going to be attracted if they don't know about the sport in the first place?

Then we come to "the answers". Most of which I agree with. However, there is the odd bone of contention. He says:

Drop the Import level to 7, like right now. A league awash with Johnny Foreigner gives no opportunity to developing British players, don't let others try and convince you otherwise.

OK. So instead we should follow the EPL model of "four high-paid imports, a few exorbitantly paid Brits who are cherry picked from those no longer able to play the EIHL for either age or work reasons, and a few veterans. Plus one or two juniors". Just how is that better for British development?

It is basic common sense that Imports are taking up the places of British players.

As they are doing in the EPL-which is surely more of a crime for a league which prides itself on its junior development? Plus, the British players are often veterans looking to combine hockey with another career anyway, not juniors. They play in the ENL.

Then the "template for a new league" is discussed. It makes perfect sense until...

A National league where those clubs in the league can afford to be there without reliance on handouts and more bucket collections.

What is seemingly a dig at Basingstoke's financial problems backfires somewhat-so you'd also exclude Romford, Slough, Chelmsford, Wightlink, Bracknell...all teams who have also suffered financial woes in the past few seasons.

And then, in something of a contradiction...

I also believe that the only way forward for the sport now is regional conferences with crossover games and one National league final.

So, on the one hand there's not enough variety on a ten-team league, so we shall solve this by...playing less teams, more often with the odd crossover game to give the pretence that every team plays every other. Hasn't that been tried before? If it worked so well then, why did teams change?

The post finishes strongly, though-essentially with a pleat to treat every team equally and unite the leagues. Which is something the vast majority (yes, even us EIHL fans) want to see happen. Trouble is, at the moment, fans on both sides are wanting it to happen solely on their league's terms. And the one truth everyone can agree on is that are too far apart already for that, whichever side you blame...