With two hockey playing brothers, I have definitely spent my fair share of time shivering in hockey rinks, filling shifts for my parents, being the “chauffeur” to practice, and listening to all of the lovely hockey controversies that arise. Despite this conception, I took a break from the pre-exam cram and was once again cheering on my youngest brother playing the Canadian game this past weekend.
He is only nine-years-old and in atom, so I was slightly aghast at the idea that there is currently an A team and a B team. In my opinion, this is ridiculous. Rep hockey starts at the next stage (pee wee), and at this age, development is vital and incredibly important in comparison to the competition aspect.
Thinking back to my personal involvement in sports during this period, I remember idolizing those high calibre or A ranked players and aspiring to reach their level of play. I achieved this through playing with them, copying their moves and learning from them — not just watching them. Although these atom teams do practice in unison on occasion, I firmly believe that playing with each other would be substantially beneficial to both the “higher” level players and those in a developing stage.
No matter what team one gets placed on, there will always be inequality in terms of skill. This is called diversity. High quality players must learn to teach and inspire, for it is a skill that will need to be present regardless of what team they play for. Those less skilled are not always going to stay that way unless their development is continuously hindered by placing them with others who are similar, rather than with inspirational and skillful players.
Therefore, get rid of this system of A and B teams for atom hockey. Let the kids wait a year or two, for then the intense competition will really begin.
To become a star, one must be placed in the sky with other stars rather than being tethered to the ground.
Ameeta Bhabra
Nelson