Asunto: Questions & Answers

I agree that this is absurd. You win a league, you get a medal. I mean, perhaps Brotherke would have won the Top division if he had the chance to participate in it, but since he was forced to compete in division II and he won it, he should get a medal for it!

The PPM powers-that-be should have just placed all countries in 1 division. Then nobody would have had a reason to complain.

But since they didn't, they should just hand out a medal to the winners of all 3 divisions!

1 division is tough one, no time for that, at least not during off-season

I disagree. Medals should be only for World Cup top 3. National teams in lower division fight for promotion, not for medal.

The same is true for the clubteams playing in divsions II, III and lower. So if you have your say, let's remove all trophy's for those teams, because the teams in div I are getting jealous! :/

That's absurd comment. Clubs are dirrefent case. There they fight for medals and promotion.

not absurd at all, if we follow your logic then schorpie's absolutely right!

You are just saying that all nations in World Championship (IRL) in div. I, II, or III (Poland, Japan, Mexico etc) should not get any medals because they can promote to a higher level.

So clubs fight for medals and promotion, but nations only fight for promotion? Your logic (or lack of it) is dazzling me...

2 years ago Australia won Gold at the IIHF Division II Group B world championship, and got promoted to the next level league.

Are you saying they did not deserve medals for their efforts to win?

While you may disagree with tacklefin, to say his point isn't logical just inst true.

You really can't compare League Play to the World championships. For League play you get a trophy for regular season. Should you also get a trophy for winning your group in the World championships? If you play in the top division yo get a medal for finishing second. Should you also get a trophy for finishing 2nd in league play?

The point is they are different animals and tacklefin raises a valid point that shouldn't be dismissed as not logical. That's not to say you have to agree with his logic though

I know that in my sons t-ball league EVERYONE GETS A MEDAL!

I think that there is a distinct difference between winning your group in the WC, or winning the WC second division. I agree with you that the first doesn't merit a medal, but the second surely does!

I am an follower of the Dutch National Cricket Team. A team that almost always gets beat by the big countries, but that does occaisionally win the World Championship for B-countries.
They do get medals and a nice cup for that!

And I don't see why you can't compare League Play to the WC. You haven't really given a reason for it.

I didn't know that they give medals in RL. Anyway, I think they shouldn't. May sound harsh, but does those are worth of anything? Is awarding "good losers" good sport? Well, everyone can have opinion.

Just copying the question from trueblue55

2 years ago Australia won Gold at the IIHF Division II Group B world championship, and got promoted to the next level league.

Are you saying they did not deserve medals for their efforts to win?

And if the group winner dont get a medal, why should second place team have one ?

league and NT don't seem the same no, one is season, other is offseason

but they have the same goal: winning your league

league = everyone (champs) gets a cup there

then why don't NT's have that ? I don't see any reason not to get the same "benefits" as with leagues

those who won div 1 and 2 had to fight as well you know... (so did numbers 2 and 3)