Senior: maybe
no chance - LOL
die Schmach des 4ten Platzes letzte Woche ist lange vergessen alle EBEL Clubs decken sich wieder mit Legios ein wo geht, das geforderte umdenken mit Einbau von vemehrt Eigenbauspielen etc. wird nie stattfinden
Tendenz eher Richtung unten
no chance - LOL
die Schmach des 4ten Platzes letzte Woche ist lange vergessen alle EBEL Clubs decken sich wieder mit Legios ein wo geht, das geforderte umdenken mit Einbau von vemehrt Eigenbauspielen etc. wird nie stattfindenTendenz eher Richtung unten
I see a lot of pessimism like this. I recently had a conversation with a Hungarian who was boasting about Hungary beating Austria in the Albert Schutz. When I told him we sent a B team he didn't believe me, so I showed him. This is the Austrian Rosters by rank (highlighted are those who played against Hungary, strongest - weakest)
22 Man A team
Vanek - M. Raffl - Grabner
T. Raffl - Komarek- Lebler
Herburger - M. Geier - Ganahl
Nodl - Hundertpfund - Rotter
Ulmer - Heinrich
Altmann - Iberer
Schlacher - Schumnig
Pallestrang - Unterweger
Lange
Starkbaum
22 Man B team
Koch - Obrist - Schneider
Schiechl - Hofer - Kaspitz
Haudum - Betrik - Netrik
Zwerger - Huber - Kristler
Viveiros - Reinthaler
P. Lakos - Zorec
Peter - Mitterdorfer
Bacher - Brunner
Kickert
Swette
22 Man C team
Fischer - S. Geier - Woger
Oberkofler - Cijan - Wukovits
Hartl - Leiler - Rauchenwald
Pinter - Platzer - Kromp
Wolf - Lembacher
Fechtig - Kirchschlager
Reichel - Kreuter
Jakubitzka - Vallant
Dechel
Muller
Adjusting this for who played in the WC D1A
22 Man A team
Vanek - M. Raffl - Grabner
T. Raffl - Komarek- Lebler
Herburger - M. Geier - Ganahl
Nodl - Hundertpfund - Rotter
Ulmer - Heinrich
Altmann - Iberer
Schlacher - Schumnig
Pallestrang - Unterweger
Lange
Starkbaum
22 Man B team
Koch - Obrist - Schneider
Schiechl - Hofer - Kaspitz
Haudum - Betrik - Netrik
Zwerger - Huber - Kristler
Viveiros - Reinthaler
P. Lakos - Zorec
Peter - Mitterdorfer
Bacher - Brunner
Kickert
Swette
22 Man C team
Fischer - S. Geier - Woger
Oberkofler - Cijan - Wukovits
Hartl - Leiler - Rauchenwald
Pinter - Platzer - Kromp
Wolf - Lembacher
Fechtig - Kirchschlager
Reichel - Kreuter
Jakubitzka - Vallant
Dechel
Muller
Some of the individual rankings are debatable of course, but the premise of the chart is not. Also, I didn't include players like Trattnig or Lakos who I'm not sure are still available. Overall the pessimism around the program is saddening and undeserved. My problem with Coach Ratushny is that he intentionally nominated a team that was significantly worse than the best team available. After this tournament, a tournament where we played 9 A-teamers, 10 B-teamers, and 3 C-teamers I must have seen 100 times people despairing about how Austrian hockey is now "B" level or lower than Hungary or Poland or Italy. First of all, the international community considers the top 8 teams "A" level, so Canada, Russia to Switzerland and Slovakia, so in one sense we have always been a "B" Nation. But to think that Austrian hockey is somehow weaker because the Coach plays favorites, and is unwilling to nominate the best players, that is frustrating. I do not know Coach Ratushny's intentions for his decisions, perhaps even just pride believing that the competition would be far too insignificant as to not even require an A team, but he has started a true firestorm of despair among the fanbase, and an incredible amount of friction between local writers, coaches and imported "Nordamerikaner Teamchefs" of whom he is one and for this reason I think it would be best for him to not return.
I think to get back to the topic however, I think it is almost inevitable that Austria will be promoted next year. I think next year whoever is the coach, even if it is still coach Ratushny, will take the opposition more seriously and set his personal preferences aside. I think with the best possible domestic lineup there is no way any team in that division could come close to Austria.
Don't worry there is no future for him. It's up to Lausanne but don't believe they are happy with the situation.
Last year i was a big fan of ratushny. This year he did a bad Job. he nominated a b-c-team installed a 2-man forecheck austria wasn't able to play well till the last game and with sticking in Div 1a (first time sine 25years) he weakened the reputation of austrian hockey a lot.
Austria needs a full time coach.
Don't worry there is no future for him. It's up to Lausanne but don't believe they are happy with the situation.
Last year i was a big fan of ratushny. This year he did a bad Job. he nominated a b-c-team installed a 2-man forecheck austria wasn't able to play well till the last game and with sticking in Div 1a (first time sine 25years) he weakened the reputation of austrian hockey a lot.
Austria needs a full time coach.
Agreed. I liked him as a person. When Viveiros left, despite being very successful on paper, he left a program that had very low morale. I remember it was after Sochi and there were some unpleasant words exchanged between Suhonen and a leaving Viveiros, and that left Kalt in a very awkward position as well. Also, after Sochi numerous players retired from the NT like Setzinger, and after the Viveiros firing even more players and coachs like Welser and Markus Kerschbaumer retired from the NT (and some I forget), it was basically a mess. Ratushny came in, and made peace with the staff, and regained the trust of many players, trainers and fans in the national program. He also galvanized the fanbase, which was great, he made people proud and excited to cheer for the national team again. I'm glad if he leaves (which it seems he will need to) it will be for promotion because he's a great guy, things just didn't work out for him. As a club coach and a NT coach he was probably too busy, and too many different interests.
This year was just a bad year for the reputation of Austria hockey with the tough situation at the Men's NT level and the weak 98' class. That's why I was hoping next year would be a rebound year. The men's NT will soon be strengthened by players like Haudum, Huber, Zwerger, Wolf, Baltram, Kromp, a large crop of young stars. The junior national teams will also be strengthened by the 00-01 class with Rossi, Baumgartner, Payr, Kandemir, Huber, Harnisch, and looking even farther down Kai Hammerle looks amazing. Despite immediate loses, I at least feel comforted that there seems to be an upward trend.
This is the Austrian Rosters by rank (highlighted are those who played against Hungary, strongest - weakest)
Einen Kader nach dem Klang der Namen aufzustellen, hat es schon in den zehn Jahren vor Ratushny nicht wirklich gebracht. Aber manche lernen es eben nie - oder wollen es nicht lernen. Nur weil etwas am Papier toll klingt, muss es nicht am Eis genauso funtkionieren. Wenn das so leicht wäre, würde nicht auf Vereinsebene in jeder Liga von langjährig Involvierten immer wieder daneben gehaut werden. Und Österreich wäre keine Fahrstuhlnation geworden, denn die individuelle Klasse dieser Generation hätte für den ein oder anderen Nichtabstieg reichen müssen. Dem war aber nicht so, weil diese Generation halt auf Teamebene (genauso wie teils im Verein) - Umfeld hin oder her - die Leistung oft eher nach Lust & Laune abgerufen hat und meist dann nicht, wenn es wirklich darauf angekommen ist. Was daran segensreich für die nächsten Jahre sein soll, entzieht sich meiner Vorstellung, denn die meisten dieser Spieler heben sich mittlerweile ja nicht mal in der LIga so vom Rest ab, dass sich das Hoffen auf Wille im NT auszahlen und rechnen würde.
Im Ende ist jetzt wirlich die beste Zeit zum (teils sicher auch schmerzlichen) Umbau und zum Formen eines Gerüstes, in dem die hoffentlich nachkommenden Jungen eingebaut werden können. Beim weiteren Festhalten an der Fahrstuhlgeneration steht dies Land halt in spätestens 3-4 Jahren ohne dieses Gerüst da und muss darauf hoffen, dass sich a) genug von den jungen Namen dann als tatsächlich teamreif herausgestellt haben und b) diese Jungen dann gleich auch ein Team tragen können. Finde ich jetzt den Jungen gegenüber auch nicht wirklich dienlich. Im Grunde mangelt es in Österreich halt an individueller Klasse, um nicht den Weg des Teamansatzes zu gehen. Was aber auch nicht heißt, dass der ein oder andere Name bei entsprechender Form und Willen nicht wieder seine Rolle im NT finden sollte.
Und was den Coach betrifft: Viveiros hat sicher auch seine guten Seiten gehabt (v.a. was die offensive Spielkultur betraf), im Ende aber vom Resultat wie jeder Coach seit Pöck performed. Nur wenn das Verhältnis zwischen Trainer und Verband (in diesem Fall Suhonen) zerrüttet ist, sitzt der Trainer immer am kürzeren Ast. Ist auch bei jedem Verein so. Darum braucht man auch nicht lange rumjammern, Viveiros hat schlußendlich in Ingolstadt eine wunderbare Chance erhalten. Ratushnys Fähigkeiten als Trainer sollten nach Straubing und Salzburg wohl außer Kriktik stehen, den Ruf nach Lausanne sehe ich als nächsten Schritt. Sicher von außen kein leichter Charakter und nach zwei Jahren NT mag das Bild auch gespalten wirken: nach einer leistungsmäßig guten TopDiv-WM (mit jedoch dem üblichen Ergebnis) folgte heuer ein durchwachsenes Div1A-Turnier. Könnte man natürlich gleich wieder die Reissleine ziehen und den nächsten Mann (mit dem nächsten Konzept) ans Ruder setzen (was auch u.U. gezwungermaßen notwendig werden könnte).
Sollte man aber m.E. (so Lausanne mitzieht) nicht tun (auch wenn die Vorbereitungszeit im Falle eines Finaleinzugs von Lausanne sehr kurz werden würde). Der dauernde Wechsel auf dem Posten in den letzten zehn Jahren war z.B. sicher kein Vorteil für das Team. Ratushny hat weiterhin das Vertrauen von Suhonen (der - ob das manchen taugt oder nicht - aktuell halt das Sagen hat) und dem Verband und führt ja auch deren Auftrag des Umbaus aus. Gerade dieser Umbau ist kein Honigschlecken, denn filter aus dem Wulst des Durchschnitts mal die richtige Mischung raus. Da garantieren keine anderen Namen automatisch eine bessere Wahl - und die Fahrstuhlgeneration ist nun mal (Umbau) großteils kein Thema mehr (auch wenn das für einige schwer zu schlucken ist). Trotzdem geben so Spiele wie gegen Italien und auch Slowenien Hoffnung, dass das Gerüst am richtigen Weg ist, wenn auch die anderen drei Spiele ernüchternd waren und eher Richtung Holzweg gedeutet werden könnten. Aber ich setze mal darauf, dass der Coach auch aus Fehlern lernen kann und wird (dass er bei seine ersten drei Vereinen einen guten Job gemacht hat, deutet für mich schon darauf hin), und dass so ein Umbau innerhalb von zwei Saisonen perfekt ist, ist imo ohnehin blankes Wunschdenken.
Und der wichtigste Grund: finde mal einen besseren, der das mit dem Umbau anscheinend so gern mitträgt und mitmacht, wie ich das beim Ratushny das Gefühl habe. Theoretisch mag es viele bessere Lösungen geben (wie in den letzten zehn Jahre alle zwei Jahre eine theoretisch bessere Lösung Teamchef geworden ist), aber zur praktischen Abwechslung wäre mal eine gewisse Stabilität am Teamchefposten auch nicht so übel. Und die Prämisse des Umbaus wird sich eben nicht ändern und dahingehend finde ich die jetzige Konstellation zumindest nach zwei Turnieren noch lange nicht als so abschließend ungeeignet, um nicht zumindest ein Jahr 3 daran anzuhängen (so möglich). Dauernd Langfristigkeit zu fordern und dann doch immer kurzfristg motivierte Entscheidungen zu verlangen, passt imo nicht ganz zusammen.
Einen Kader nach dem Klang der Namen aufzustellen, hat es schon in den zehn Jahren vor Ratushny nicht wirklich gebracht. Aber manche lernen es eben nie - oder wollen es nicht lernen. Nur weil etwas am Papier toll klingt, muss es nicht am Eis genauso funtkionieren. Wenn das so leicht wäre, würde nicht auf Vereinsebene in jeder Liga von langjährig Involvierten immer wieder daneben gehaut werden. Und Österreich wäre keine Fahrstuhlnation geworden, denn die individuelle Klasse dieser Generation hätte für den ein oder anderen Nichtabstieg reichen müssen. Dem war aber nicht so, weil diese Generation halt auf Teamebene (genauso wie teils im Verein) - Umfeld hin oder her - die Leistung oft eher nach Lust & Laune abgerufen hat und meist dann nicht, wenn es wirklich darauf angekommen ist. Was daran segensreich für die nächsten Jahre sein soll, entzieht sich meiner Vorstellung, denn die meisten dieser Spieler heben sich mittlerweile ja nicht mal in der LIga so vom Rest ab, dass sich das Hoffen auf Wille im NT auszahlen und rechnen würde.
I know it's common for people to appeal to coaches' discretion. "Well the coach knows, because he sits in the practices, and he works out with the players." The problem is this, that is all ok if he's winning. If a coach is using his coaches' discretion and winning then you can say "well he sees something we don't see." The problem is, his discretion was obviously incorrect. We've seen all those players, Nodl, Altmann, Iberer, Rotter, Schumnig, play in tournaments before and we won. We've also seen what happens when Ratushny uses his coach's discretion, failure to ascend.
If I'm understanding correctly, I would have to disagree about Viveiros because between him and Pock was a man named Lars Borgstrom and I think it's safe to say that Viveiros significantly outperformed Borgstrom even though both succeeded Pock.
I would hope Ratushny would be able to adjust, however, the problem isn't coaching ability (see three clubs), the problem is business and too many vested interests. As I said before, intentionally omitting all the Graz players, there seems to be no shortage of bias there, never giving even so much as a look at Patrick Obrist, but Johannes Bischofberger gets a camp invite. If he were successful, that's all ok because we can then trust his judgment. If you look at his stats with quantifiable metrics he has not been successful. Yes, I absolutely understand the principle of Coaches' discretion. But if Marcel Koller (in theory) intentionally decided not to play David Alaba, and Austria began winning tournaments one could say "he is using his coach's discretion. But if Marcel Koller decided not to play David Alaba, and half the starting lineup as well, and Austria failed to qualify for the Euro Cup and World Cup and began losing matches to the USA, Canada can one keep appealing to his judgment that is obviously flawed?
Wenn Alaba und Co über zehn Jahre bei Turnieren teils lustlos agieren und alle zwei Jahre einen neuen Headcoach aufbrauchen, weint denen mit Sicherheit kaum wer eine Träne nach (außer eben diejenigen, für die vergangene Leistungen mit jedem verflossenen Jahr besser als tatsächlich werden).
Also bitte wenn schon Vergleiche, dann solche, die einen Sinn machen (neben der Tatsache, dass gegen die USA sogar mit dem stärksten ÖFB-Kader der Ausgang offen ist). Kollers Team ist das Resultat eines geglückten Neuaufbaus, aus einem nicht mit dem Eishockey vergleichbaren Umfeld raus. Wenn eine Analogie zwischen dem ÖFB- und dem ÖEHV-Kader passt, dann vielleicht die, dass Kollers Truppe am Anfang aus vielen Spielern bestanden hat, die oft in ihren Vereinen noch nicht oder nimmer erste Wahl gewesen sind. Die waren allesamt motiviert, im Team spielen zu können, und haben imo auch etwas Positives für ihre Vereinskarriere aus den Länderspielpausen mitgenommen. Etwas Ähnliches kann man sich u.U. auch vom Kufenkader erhoffen, dass Spieler, die halt in der Liga in hintere Rollen gedrängt werden, davon profitieren, dass sie auf Teamebene in der alleinigen Verantwortung stehen, und davon auch einen Teil für sich in die nächste Saison mitnehmen können.
Aber natürlich kann man das alles bezogen auf Ratushny (und indirekt auch Suhonen) anders sehen, besonders wenn die Sympathie anscheinend sehr deutlich pro dem Vorgänger ist. Nur wo Viveiros Bergström outperformed haben soll, wird mir nicht ganz klar. Beide sind aufgestiegen und dann gleich wieder abgestiegen. Viveiros hat halt eben den Bonus gehabt, ein Jahr mehr zu kriegen, was dann zum Sotschi-Desaster und zumindest einem weiteren Aufstieg geführt hat. Das Nichtverlängern des Vertrages hat ihm dann wenigstens den zweiten Abstieg erspart. Also outperformen sieht bei mir anders aus. Und zwischen Pöck und Viveiros war nicht nur Bergström, sondern auch noch Boni und Gilligan. Alle mit dem gleichen Ergebnis... .
Aber zum Glück müssen wir das eh nicht entscheiden und brauchen für den Beweis unserer Thesen und Meinungen auch nie wirklich den Kopf hinhalten. Nur eines noch: das Wesen von langfristigem Zugang ist es eben auch, dass darin nicht adhoc-Erfolgen Vorrang gegeben wird, sondern sogar kurzfristige Rückschläge eingedacht sind. Weil wenn eh Jahr für Jahr der Erfolg da ist und alles passt (sprich z.B. permanente Top-Div Teilnahme), braucht man auch kein langfristiges Konzept, um was zu ändern.
wenn du das Sotchi-Desaster bei Viveiros erwähnst, mußt du aber eben auch die Qualifikation dafür unter ihm positiv bewerten.
Jo eh, aber ganz ehrlich wäre keine OG-Quali in dem Fall fast besser gewesen... .
The point of the comparison was that the Trainer must be held accountable for nomination decisions he made, not comparing the two programs. I probably shouldn't have used Marcel Koller, I said Koller to make it more relatable, but he is seen as the savior of Austrian football so no doubt your emotions were stirred at the mention of his name even without comprehending the analogy. Another example would perhaps be if the Russian Coach decided not to play Ovechkin, Malkin, Radulov, Kuznetsov...if they won the Gold medal then his vision was correct. However, if not playing those players they lose to a team such as Switzerland or the Czech Republic then one cannot make an appeal to the coach's discretion, because the coach's discretion was very obviously incorrect.
Viveiros came at the onset of the new WC format era. Previously it was just a short group stage, and rank-based so perhaps it was more difficult to win games. Nevertheless, Viveiros performed better from a goals and wins perspective in the WC than Bergstrom as well, and then obviously the Olympics and the Olympi-quali...also the format for the Olympic qualifications changed from 14 to 12 teams so Viveiros is the first Trainer to qualify Austria for the Olympics in the 12 team era. In terms of pure accomplishments I think it is hard to discredit Viveiros, but paper accomplishments are not everything.
Also, the performance at the Olympics was actually quite good hockey. No other team put up 4 goals on Finland, in fact the USA, Russia, and Canada combined for 3 GA, and Sweden had 3 GA. Also, defeating the Vegas Favorite Norway. The only downside of that Olympics was perhaps the stain it left on the image of Austrian sports.
Another example would perhaps be if the Russian Coach decided not to play Ovechkin, Malkin, Radulov, Kuznetsov...
Oh Mann, das Beispiel hinkt ja noch mehr... .
But maybe language-difficulties, so the short (or longer) version in english: I'm not a fan of Koller and not a fan of the Austrian soccer team. But they did really a fine job of rebuilding a squad and making good use of resources, that the hockey community can only dream about. Because the saviour of Austrian football is not Koller, it's the fact, that virtually every cow-village has its turf and its club and finally the academies all over this country started to produce the skilled and trained players the NT and the clubs in the leagues can build around. But this was no overnight success, it took some +20 years to earn the fruits of the decision to invest in the youth-development. But you and some of the members here demand immediate results from Suhonen/Bader/Ratushny, despite the fact, that the shape of hockey in Austria was much worse than that of soccer some 25 years ago. I call this a principally negative attitude/approach.
And for sure, Viveiros was no bad coach during his term, but in the end he struggled the same as every other coach before and still after him: with the exception of one game (which the Austrians nevertheless lost) his squads couldn't deliver, when it counted the most. And with respect to your statistics, it was still more of the same, cause Boni, Bergström and Gilligan were not so bad coaches, too. If the same core of the squad does not (or only temporary or occasionally) perform under four (or with Pöck five) different coaches (all of them won national titles at the club level), there's a very good chance, that the problem were not the coaches but the players. So what makes you think, that this same players (most of them no more on the level they were some years ago) would be suddenly the constant key players, that they never have been, under their fifth coach (a coach, you're questioning after his second season)?
And you're wrong, that coaches should only be compared by nominations and not programs. If a couch has and carries the order and mission to rebuild a squad, he for sure has not the same pool of players to select from. You're still ignoring this fact, so I'm not sure again, what's your mission is at this point. You're defending Viveiros and that's ok with me. As I stated before, he did a fine job with the offense, struggled with the defense and lost control of parts of his team at least at Sotschi. His contract ran out, the ÖEHV decided not to extend (he was for sure not at the same page as Suhonen) and he got a fine chance at Ingolstadt. So where's the problem - that's how this business works. Even you cannot guarantee, that he would've performed better with rebuild than Ratushny. And you seem not to like Ratushny and his choices - and that's ok, too. Ratushny is for sure not a character everybody likes and he tends to make some interesting or irritating decisions - but most of them are successful. So maybe he misjudged some of them before and during the last tournament - but maybe he should (like Viveiros) get his third season, too?
But when you start to compare the general decision, to no longer build the team around the older players from the relegation-generation (a generation, which in total achieved few to nothing), with Koller theoretically leavin' out players like Alaba, Junuzovic or Baumgartlinger (partly younger players with success to start their first big tournament) or - even better - Russia to pass on the likes of Ovechkin, Malkin or Radulov (stars of multiple Top-Div World Championships Titles still in their prime), I question your intention other to discredit Ratushny. 'Cause it's a major difference to go without players, who didn't perform in the past (just read the older posts in this thread or the posts in the NT- and TopDiv-Tournament Threads to know, what I mean) and are mosty past their prime, or to give up on players, who performed and still perform great (like your mentioned Russians) or are the today and the future of a squad (like the austrian soccer-players).
If you criticize Ratushny with your statistics, I can't agree but still can understand. Not everybody sees the things the same way. But your comparisons regarding the squad-selections are so far-fetched and poor, I wonder how on earth someone can compare Iberer, Altman or Nodl with Alaba, Ovechkin oder Malkin. Even if you see and judge it quality-wise isolated, it's not even close in any known way. That are (or would be) totally different decisions.
I think a fundamental disconnect is the way we remember the Viveiros era, both how it happened and how it unfolded. Viveiros coached the team to some of the largest nominal wins in recent history. He was the first coach to qualify for the 12 team Olympics, because before that it had been a 14 team tournament, and he did so as hockey is becoming a more competitive space in the mid-major section. You say he struggled on defense but statistically his last WC team gave up the same number of goals as Ratushny's last WC team...I don't think he struggled like coaches before him. I think he pioneered an upward trend for the national team.
I'm not asking for over-performance, just normal performance would be fine. I have noticed players tend to underperform rather than over-perform for Ratushny. For example, Brian Lebler scored 20 points in 14 International games in 2014 under Manny and scored 12 points in 25 games under Ratushny in the past two years. I don't expect players to perform better under Viveiros, I expect all players to not start performing terribly. To be sure I do not want Viveiros back, but it's common everywhere when a situation is poor to just blame it all on the last head coach.
First of all this older generation that did nothing. I assume by older generation you mean players like (see chart above) Schumnig, Rotter, Obrist, and yes actually older players like Iberer, Koch and then Altmann and Nodl are both 29 I believe. This generation did nothing but beat Slovakia, Latvia, Switzerland, Germany all in the span of 3 years. No Austrian team has ever won a game at the WC going back before 2005 when the team still used imported players. This generation nothing but qualify for the Olympics for the first time in 12 years, and the time they qualified was far more impressive because the field had been narrowed to 12 teams (from 14) from 2002, so as of yet this generation is the only generation to ever qualify for the 12-team Olympics. Then this team went to Sochi and beat Norway and played very respectably against Finland, to become the first generation of Natural born Austrians to win an Olympic game ever since like 1948 or something, long before NHL players played, even before there was an NHL. These players were key contributors to some of the most successful Austrian hockey ever, this is where we truly don't see eye to eye. This was a pioneering generation. Eventually, we didn't stay up, and eventually, Canada won the gold medal, but this generation was the backbone of the Austrian teams that have gone the farthest in the Austrian era. One doesn't need to build one's team around them. The team will remain Brian Lebler's, the team will remain Raphael Herburger's, the team will remain Konstantin Komarek's but the fact that they are not there and new young faces like Niki Petrik, Stefan Geier and Daniel Oberkofler...that is not a rebuild.
I agree with you on a lot but again another fundamental difference is your statement that most of Ratushny's decisions have been successful. Unfortunately when Viveiros left he set a high bar for performance. Being statistically the least productive and lowest ranked team at the WC last year was not a success. Neither was getting beaten by teams like Slovenia and France in the EHC a true success. Losing to Hungary the last 4 friendly matches we have played against them (as my friend cares to remind me), I would not call that a success. Becoming the first Austrian team to fail to ascend to the top division in 25 years, I would not call that a success. I'm struggling to grasp what successes you're speaking of, because I haven't noticed him having much of any success. Naturally if he is having no or limited success, his decision making cannot have lead to success.
I simply struggle with the fact that when Coach Ratushny perhaps misjudged the evaluations, perhaps was influenced by club-related factors, was perhaps even just too busy with the EBEL finals to devote much time to the NT preparations, people began to blame the state of Austrian hockey rather than the Coach who was not nominating players who are generally regarded as better players. People would rather believe that Austrian hockey is "in the dumps" than believe that their coach nominated the wrong players, that to me is not the right assumption. There is finally forward momentum at all levels, both among the youth and starting with Viveiros at the national team. A coach must be held accountable and properly criticized for his decisions. As I stated above, I don't need or want Ratushny fired, but I want him to learn from his mistakes and not repeat them. I'm not confident that will happen however. Perhaps when he is at Lausanne he will not feel pressured by club-related factors. Perhaps he will have more time (because Lausanne is in disarray and will not be champs soon). I just don't believe that the obvious blunder of the coaching staff should be paraded as a picture of the state of Austrian Hockey.
Correction: I just read the headline for a Bernd Freimuller article I had been saving until after work hours. Seems like Ratushny will not be returning. It's not great news for me like you'd think, my hope would be that Ratushny would adjust for his mistake. My problem had been that he wasn't being held accountable for his mistakes, when he does make them as we are all human, and instead blame was passed to the sate of Hockey, Legios, etc... I'm not sure to what extent he was willing to make up for his mistakes...most of the public comments later blamed/scrutinized the state of Austrian hockey not player/coach performance. The "revolving door" is not necessarily a good thing, the next coach will have very little time to study, ID, and prepare for the Olympic Qualifications...that is worrisome.
I think a fundamental disconnect is the way we
... think about hockey in nearly every aspect of this sport. So I don't see any more sense in a discussion from my point (despite the fact that I disagree with virtually the whole statement of yours), cause if there's no common ground after some posts, the rest would be only a replication of the same (and thus a waste of words and time) from both sides. And even if you're right and I'm wrong or vice versa, in the end it doesn't matter: as long as we are no active part of the people, who decide in Austrian hockey (and who invest their time, reputation and often money) - and I'm definitely no part this group (only a very passive fan), it's very hard to say for sure, what is right and what is wrong. Because from the couch, armchair or in front of the desktop everything seems to be so easy and logical - when we only see a small aspect of the whole picture. For sure no Suhonen, no Bader, no Ratushny or no Viveiros (or who else) are perfect in every decision they made (even guys like Scotty Bowman or Glen Sather made their share of mistakes), but nevertheless they are the ones inside the game, who have to stand for their decisions, whereas we in this forum have the luxury to know everything better, without ever have to prove, that we even know anything. Sometimes I, too, forget this point and then have to remember myself, to stress more, that this is only my opinion and not how it is (like the thing with the older players and their success). 'Cause discussions are more fun with a twinkle in the eye and every time I leave this way (mostly - like this time - with some reason, but that does not make it better for me), it leads to nothing and for sure not to something, I enjoy. It's my own old fault ... .
Lol I wonder if you write a long perspective post in german every time you see things different with german posters and I just can't read haha
Of course it's understood that perspective is important and that ours is not particularly relevant (except of course as fans, because fans do have power). If we're going in circles we can change to another topic. How do you like the U20's chances for promotion next year?
Nordiques it's kinda strange u call yourself a very passiv hockey fan. A couple days ago you got sick, just because i told you that stupid passes in the own zone are something even u8-players get punished about. U pretented to be the guy who knows how Junior hockey works. But obviously you don't know, as you call yourself a passive fan. This information doesnt fit your tendency to critisize me for telling you something about Junior hockey. basically everything i wrote here about juniors is something trainers and junior players of wev/Junior capitals told me. All these guys were great - a bunch of guys from Finland, Russia and austria with a lot of experience. Its easy to get in touch with them even if you are a normal guy with no real hockey experience or knowledge. I told you to join these guys and will tell you a second time: give it a try. You're are not behaving like a passive fan-dude as u critize everything and everyone that doesnt fit your mindset or idea of hockey.I recommand you to become a kind of active fan. Especially in vienna it's pretty easy to get in touch with people who know what they are talking about.
Especially in vienna it's pretty easy to get in touch with people who know what they are talking about.
I've noticed this and it's pretty cool. I've wanted to come to Austria for a while to get in on the hockey scene but business, money are obstacles. I think it'd be great for anyone who can to get involved, I would really want to because I think I know as much as anyone can who doesn't live in Austria. Even just getting involved in the fan culture, like visiting a bar in Austria during the Olympic Qualifications and experiencing the passion for the sport and the team with them, would be pretty cool.
Fan interest, the interest of writers drives interest for sports. Most of the fans and writers of the local football team have no idea about the inner workings of the team but are extremely opinionated, and I'm fine with that because even though I have obviously more information than they do it's they that drive interest in the local team. That's actually one of the stated goals in every Suhonen workshop or clinic, "increase the visibility of the National team." This because interest drives participation and participation drives success.
Wie sieht es eigentlich mit diesem Rossi aus, ist es sicher das er überhaupt für Österreich spielt. Sah mir das letzte Schweiz Game an (Stream) und da haben sie auch über ihre Jugendspieler gesprochen und da viel auch der Name Rossi.Oder vielleicht hatte ich den Zusammenhang nicht verstanden. 
I've noticed this and it's pretty cool. I've wanted to come to Austria for a while to get in on the hockey scene but business, money are obstacles. I think it'd be great for anyone who can to get involved, I would really want to because I think I know as much as anyone can who doesn't live in Austria. Even just getting involved in the fan culture, like visiting a bar in Austria during the Olympic Qualifications and experiencing the passion for the sport and the team with them, would be pretty cool.
The few people who have anything like a passion for the national ice hockey team will probably all be in Latvia for the Olympic qualifications and you'll be hard pressed to even find a bar that will show the games. This board is in no way indicative of the interest in the national team, most people don't really care, even a lot of Austrian hockey fans only ever care for their club, not the national team (as evidenced by the dismal spectator numbers in Innsbruck during February's EIHC tournament, and also in Vienna in the games against Hungary and Italy in the lead-up to the Div.Ia. tournament). Only the games against Germany garner some interest because of the rivalry between the two countries, but then again, even a freestyle frisbee throwing contest between these two would be of interest to the general population.
@kabidjan14 One question: what's your position in hockey? Cause comments like 'Some of the individual rankings are debatable of course, but the premise of the chart is not' (mentioned above) sound like you feel very sure, that you know more about that stuff than most of us. Or is this only related to football? ('Most of the fans and writers of the local football team have no idea about the inner workings of the team but are extremely opinionated, and I'm fine with that because even though I have obviously more information than they do ...')
@Langfeld#17 Passt schon, bist eh a coole Socke ...
The few people who have anything like a passion for the national ice hockey team will probably all be in Latvia for the Olympic qualifications and you'll be hard pressed to even find a bar that will show the games. This board is in no way indicative of the interest in the national team, most people don't really care, even a lot of Austrian hockey fans only ever care for their club, not the national team (as evidenced by the dismal spectator numbers in Innsbruck during February's EIHC tournament, and also in Vienna in the games against Hungary and Italy in the lead-up to the Div.Ia. tournament). Only the games against Germany garner some interest because of the rivalry between the two countries, but then again, even a freestyle frisbee throwing contest between these two would be of interest to the general population.
Yeah, the Austria-Germany rivalry is pretty cool. I've definitely noticed that there's more club interest than NT interest. I guess that happens for some sports, perhaps I'll have to wait until the Olympic Winter games haha, then I'm sure they'll show it in the bars.
@kabidjan14 One question: what's your position in hockey? Cause comments like 'Some of the individual rankings are debatable of course, but the premise of the chart is not' (mentioned above) sound like you feel very sure, that you know more about that stuff than most of us. Or is this only related to football? ('Most of the fans and writers of the local football team have no idea about the inner workings of the team but are extremely opinionated, and I'm fine with that because even though I have obviously more information than they do ...')
That comment is asking the reader to observe the general meaning of the chart and not get tied up in semantics. I did not spend, for example 12 hours on this chart. Thus it's not a bullet-proof ranking system, you could probably argue one player over another, for example, you could argue Starkbaum over Lange, but I'm asking the reader to not focus on it as an individual rankings chart but just to observe the general trend, that the best players are not played. Don't lose sight of the forest for the trees in other words.
The second statement is me saying that I think it's ok for fans to be involved, hyped and invested in the sport. I merely give my own experience in football as an example. I don't find invested fans obnoxious or annoying because they're a big part of the equation. I do not work for the federation if you're wondering, I think that's fairly obvious haha. Do I know more than most of you all? Depends on how much you know, how much you want to know. I probably know as much as it is reasonably possible to know about Austrian hockey (as it relates to the NT) as anyone can from the internet, and a few interviews. You all have a unique advantage that you all live in Austria and can access far more information in person than I can, but if you don't use the resources around you though it is possible I do know more.
Der 45-Jährige hofft daher auf ein Umdenken. „Die Clubverantwortlichen müssen verstehen, dass das Nationalteam das beste Marketingwerkzeug für das österreichische Eishockey ist. Mit einem starken Nationalteam kann man mehr junge Menschen begeistern. Dann kommt die Maschine ins Laufen“, so Ratushny
Genau das sage auch ich schon seit Jaaahren.
Leider wird's von den Verantwortlichen nicht überrissen bzw vielleicht will man das auch gar nicht.
Aber Hauptsache, mindestens 10, 12 Legios einsetzen....egal, welchen Stiefel sie dann auch immer abliefern. 
Bravo, Mr Ratushny! 
Endlich ein Teamchef, der Tacheles redet.
Warum Tacheles: ich finde das ein sehr realistisches und vernünftiges Interview, das beide Seite sieht. Genau solche Leute braucht unser Eishockey, aber im Prinzip haben die in Österreich keine Chance auf ein langes Dasein. Da wird schon mal von Tag eins weg gesägt, was das Zeug hält, und nur auf die erste Möglichkeit gewartet, den Störenfried unseres kurzfristigen Denkens wieder loszuwerden.
Ein Eishockeyland braucht ein starkes NT, keine Frage, aber im Prinzip braucht es genauso eine stabile Liga bzw zumindest zwei stabile Ligen. Beides ohne Abstriche da und dort auf einmal (am besten gestern) umgesetzt zu erwarten, ist halt wiedermal typisch für dieses Eishockeyland.
Das mit den zu viel Legios ist ja auch nicht erst seit gestern.
Das verfolgt uns schon Jahre und wurde mit der unsinnigen Punkteregelung nur noch zementiert.
Deshalb findet auch die junge Generation der Spieler weder in der Liga noch im NT zu ihrer Qualität - und fehlen die routinierten Spieler, sind wir nicht in der Lage zweieinhalb Dritteln lang einen 0:1 Rückstand aufzuholen...
Nur, so lange die Liga, dh die Vereine sich querlegen, werden wir mit 10 - 12 Legios pro Verein weiterwursteln und im NT auf ein Wunder warten müssen.
