CanucksCorner.com Forums

It appears part of it is traditional. The Olympic Truce originating in ancient Greek tradition requires competitors to suspend hostilities around the games. Of course one can interpret that in many ways.

The official line from the governing bodies is it's a safety concern, e.g. bombings, harassment, protests, etc.

JelloPuddingPop wrote: ↑Tue Jan 06, 2026 12:39 pm

UWSaint wrote: ↑Tue Jan 06, 2026 11:05 am But no one elected the Olympic Committee or the IIHF to run sporting events and conduct international trade policy, you know?

One would think this gives them even more right to decide who participates and who doesn't.

Any private/non-profit org. that isn't tied to a Government, surely has the right to decide how to run their business no? Even if we disagree with it.

Much like Lululemon. No fat people allowed. IOC can say no Russians, as they make their tights stretch too much?

Wait.. lost the metaphor somewhere there, but you get my point I hope.

I do get the point, and its not a bad one.

I don't think there's any question about "rights;" the question this thread poses is about whether we think their exercise of the right is a good idea or a bad idea. And part of the reason that I think its a bad idea is that it is dead-on-arrival from an effectiveness perspective (influencing Russia) and it is illegitimate for an organization who has its standing because it organizes hockey to play politics, particularly where doing so undermines their raison d'etre (in the case of IIHF, host the best U20 national teams at the World Juniors).

Say what you will about sanctions (I tend to take a pretty dim view generally), but they can be effective and they are a legitimate tool of statecraft. Something short of an embargo or war, but trying to inflict a pain to force a result.

IIHF ain't a state.

And I'd also object to it going to war.

5thhorseman wrote: ↑Tue Jan 06, 2026 1:17 pm The official line from the governing bodies is it's a safety concern, e.g. bombings, harassment, protests, etc.

Manufactured bull shit.

To be sure, there's always some concern about these things at events these days, whether the crazies that are psychologically disturbed and want to be seen, terrorists wishing to fuck virgins in heaven, or the issue-of-the-day. These are baseline concerns -- ones that exist to restrict freedom whenever the state wants the excuse to unleash their inner tyrant. But really there's not a strong signal that there is a substantially increased risk b/c Russian athletes over what's always in the issue-of-the-day category, and if there is some increased risk, you kind of have to nut up if you are the host jurisdiction. You get the money from events, you organize a proper level of security.

Having a Team Russia at the WJC's in the good ol' U S of A would be, if properly managed, a license to print money....

...and that's what's life's all about in the end amirite?

The Benjies??!!

Ban the Yanks for Pearl Harbouring Venezuela and murdering 80 soldiers, just to steal oil. Ban Russia for Ukraine.
Now if we can only find a way to ban Czechia, Sweden and Finland, we’ll be set.

Picker of Cherries wrote: ↑Tue Jan 06, 2026 4:48 pm Ban the Yanks for Pearl Harbouring Venezuela and murdering 80 soldiers, just to steal oil. Ban Russia for Ukraine.
Now if we can only find a way to ban Czechia, Sweden and Finland, we’ll be set.

Hah! Canada wins gold!

Ping Pong diplomacy

Sports is a political tool