Jim Kelley

Jim Kelley writes regularly on the NHL for Sportsnet.ca and can be heard on Primetime Sports on the FAN590.

Pardon me if I don’t make it exquisitely clear what bothers me most, the International Ice Hockey Federation’s published criticism regarding North American and European players not participating in the current World Championships or Hockey Canada’s lame response.

Truth be told I wish a pox on both their houses.

In case you’re not aware of the suddenly burgeoning controversy, on May 18, IIHF communications director Szymon Szemberg offered up a blistering commentary on the home page of the IIHF and World Championships official website ripping what he said were no-show players who turned their backs on their national teams, their fans and the hockey organizations that helped them develop.

Szemberg didn’t name a lot of "name players," but he did make a point of calling out Sidney Crosby, including the Pittsburgh Penguins forward in a group he says numbers some 120 that: "say no to representing their country at the world championship without a legitimate reason, turning their backs not only on the team and its fans but also to the system which developed them and made them rich and famous."

Hockey Canada’s response: ""I think it's inappropriate," said Hockey Canada official Scott Salmond, director of men's national teams.

"Inappropriate!" Come on Scott, I realize the championships are in play at the moment and that a war of words can have consequences in the byzantine world of Euro-sport politics, but is that all you’ve got?

You, the organization you represent and arguably Canada’s most noteworthy heart and soul give-back player have just been witch slapped not by IIHF president Rene Fasel or one of his many over-paid and overly pompous minions, but by the group’s resident flak and all you can come up with is: "I think it’s inappropriate?"

What’s next, a white flag and a genuflection in the hopes of getting your parking pass validated? Like I said, I get it, it’s game on and you’re on their turf, but Holy Capitulation Batman how about losing the Canadian "nice" for a moment and verbally knocking this guy into the back row of the back bench of the Belarus National Team or some other "hockey playing entity" (Kazakhstan perhaps?) that couldn’t win this tournament if the competition amounted to France, France and France again?

I get the motivation here and I’ll argue that anyone has a right to his or her opinion no matter how myopic it might be, but this is way out of line and on so many levels it truly defies comprehension.

Let’s start with the allegation "they should pay back but they don’t."

The idea that Sidney Crosby has not given back to hockey and especially Hockey Canada is on par with the one that claims the IIHF tournament is important. Crosby has given back to Canada and Canadian hockey and the National Hockey League as much as any human being can.

He’s also given himself to the Olympics, the IOC’s cash cow that lines its pockets every four years as a player, at the National Hockey League and Hockey Canada’s expense. Correct me if I’m wrong, but the IIHF has its collective hand in the same "for the beauty of sport" till.

And is it any different at the IIFH World Championships level?

The players are asked to give and often under the pressure of "how can you turn your back on your country," but does anyone else in the IIHF, including Mr. Szemberg, work for free? One can make a legitimate argument that some players worldwide perhaps don’t give back to the organizations that helped develop their skills, but by and large I would argue that the majority do. If they do it on their terms and not on the IIHF’s, I’m fine with it.

While there are few on the planet who don’t want to see players play for their respective countries in any sporting event, it’s fair to say that it’s a choice and it’s the player’s choice and that choice, pro or con, deserves to be respected.

And then there’s the question of who owes what to whom. Does Crosby owe his country or Hockey Canada or the IIHF every time someone sounds the call? What about owning a little something to the Penguins as an organization or—and here’s a novel thought—to their fans. Doesn’t a player who’s played a ridiculous amount of hockey in each of the last three years including an Olympics and two Stanley Cup finals owe a little something to his own body and mind?

Doesn’t he "owe" himself a little recuperation perhaps even in the hope that it will pay off for the people who employ him and the fans that pay to see him at his best?

Szemberg makes an argument that a 22-year old shouldn’t be tired, especially if a 34-year-old finds it in his mind and heart to play, but what makes him an authority on fatigue? Playing the Loretta Lynn card he brings up the comparison of a coal miner who works hard every day or a single mom with a job and two young kids as people who have a right to be tired.

Spare me that song. These days everyone works hard and there are legions of people who, if they have a chance to find work, work one, two and even three jobs to make ends meet. Is it tiresome? Of course it is. Is it the same as dragging their buts across two countries night in and night out and having those bodies pummeled by some of the strongest and sometimes most dangerous people in the sports world?

Not even close.

And what happens if that tired -- mentally, physically or both—player gets hurt? Is God or country or the IIHF willing to pay for that? Sure insurance covers some of the immediate loss, but what about the long-term impact, the long-term loss of income and the long-term loss to the fans of an individual team or to NHL hockey? Is the IIHF going to siphon off a few rubles, perhaps from that miner or working mom, to help cover the gap?

And what exactly does the IIHF throw into the mix to make it worthwhile for a player to attend?

By all accounts, the players have their expenses taken care of and are treated to the ways and means to which they have become accustomed, but is it the player’s fault that the tournament is scheduled at a time when they are at their physical and mental low point?

An 82-game schedule in the NHL is no walk in a European park. Throw in an Olympics and the Stanley Cup playoffs and the IIHF is inviting non-participation by a legion of players who have, for the most part, given everything they have. Even when a player wants to answer the call there are times when the body or the mind simply won’t allow it.

If the IIHF found a way to recognize that and schedule the tournament as perhaps a tune-up just before the start of the regular season, perhaps more NHL players would be willing and able to respond.

And then one might make the argument: who needs these guys anyway? How about a world championship that celebrates youth and developing talent rather than the same old, same old? I for one enjoy watching kids, especially emerging talent kids play in the crucible of intense competition. It makes the world juniors an interesting and emotional tournament. Why can’t the IIHF keep some of those teams together and foster competition within those ranks? Or are they already bleeding that money pot dry and need the pros to keep them living in the bloated style to which they’ve become all too accustomed?

Or perhaps the IIHF might turn their back on the Olympic cow and join a movement that says no more pros in a tournament that was founded on the idea of promoting amateur sport. If the pros were out of the Olympics and the good kids who have no place to go after their college or junior competitions are complete were allowed in, then maybe more pro players would have an interest in signing on to a World Championship tournament.

It’s fair to say that ever since the IOC brought pros into the Olympics (with the IIHF’s blessings) the World Championships have been on a path toward becoming a lesser event. Maybe it’s time for the IIHF to not only realize what they’ve created, but to do something about it.

The current policy of trying to shame players who simply have had enough hockey for one season and can’t see the value of giving "something back" to an organization that does precious little for the development programs it professes to support, is never going to work.

Hockey Canada should be one of several organizations who let the IIHF know, in no uncertain terms, that they won’t accept that kind of criticism.

The IIHF has had a hand in creating a second-class tournament. Blaming the players for that just compounds their mistake.

Someone needs to tell them that and in terms that are a lot stronger than the "inappropriate" comments to date.

Anyone seen Bobby Clarke lately?