Jump to content

  • Articles

    Manage articles
    Show all categories
    Guest

    And The Whitecaps Select...

    By Guest, in West Coast Soccer Podcast,

    A honey crueller! A donut showed up on the club's roster today, it was filling in the spot that could have been filled by an MLS veteran.
    In a statement from Whitecaps Dierctor of Professional Teams, Greg Anderson, he told MLS Reporter Brandon Timko that “we have a plan for how we are building our roster and the types of players that we are looking for in each spot and we didn’t feel that any of the players on the list fit exactly what we are looking for.”
    The Whitecaps are not a big budget team, contrary to common belief, and while their ownership group is made up of several very wealthy businessmen, don't expect them to make too many splashy signings. The clubs policy of building from their youth program, and signing and developing younger players will almost certainly hold to form over the first few seasons that we are in MLS.
    Guest

    It's always Honduras

    By Guest, in 24th Minute,

    Canada drew Honduras in its group for u17 qualifying.
    [PRBREAK][/PRBREAK]
    The team that took the seed from the Canucks ended up drawn alongside them in the tournament, which goes next year in Jamaica.
    However, it's not as bad as it sounds. CONCACAF was nice enough to actually release the format today and it turns out that there are quarterfinals in this thing! So, Canada can lose to Honduras and still have a chance to advance.
    The Canucks are in group D, which crosses over to play group C in the game that decides the World Cup spots. CONCACAF sends four teams.
    Group C is Jamaica, Guatemala and Trinidad & Tobago. Beating one of those sides should be in Canada's grasp. It's in front of them.
    The groups are:
    Group A
    Costa Rica
    El Salvador
    Haiti
    Group B
    United States
    Panama
    Cuba
    Group C
    Jamaica
    Guatemala
    Trinidad & Tobago
    Group D
    Honduras
    Canada
    Barbados
    Guest
    It seems like only yesterday that Long Balls was moaning about a lack of goal production from Canadian footballers abroad. Perhaps then we should be careful what we wish for, as in, we should wish for more goals more often.
    Josh Simpson! Iain Hume! Tomasz Radzinski! The lot of them scored over the weekend. Imagine what they would be capable of packaged together in a tidy front three for our friendly against Greece in February. I have previously argued that 33-year-old warhorse, all-time cap leader and proud national teamer Paul Stalteri should adopt a less prominent role for Canada going forward, so if pushing for 37-year-old striker Tomasz Radzinski appears to barely makes sense, remember this: Radz is playing almost every match for Lierse in Belgium and scoring on average once in every four of them. Stalteri is nowhere to be found for Borussia Mönchengladbach. [PRBREAK][/PRBREAK]
    But we've done Radzinski here at Long Balls. Whether he's defying the natural aging process or tussling about with teammates on the training ground his exploits this season have been duly noted. Ditto for Josh Simpson. He's tied for fourth in Turkey's Süper Lig scoring with eight goals, and he's having a smashing cracker of a season overall.
    But what about Iain Hume? Four goals now in 14 appearances with Championship side Preston North End. Over the past few weeks he's somewhat eclipsed fellow Canadian Simeon Jackson in terms of playing time. Now his loan with PNE is over, and he returns to 10th place Barnsley, which in Championship speak means four points out of the last playoff spot with a game in hand. Vastly better situation if you ask me, unless of course he ends up sitting on the bench. If Hume holds form does he become an alternative to Simeon Jackson in the Canada attack or a compliment to him?
    Elsewhere, as Long Balls noted last week, Serbian-cum-Canadian keeper Milan Borjan only played 60 minutes for Rad in the Serbian top flight. After making some guffaws about how the young Serb is Canada's only keeper getting regular playing time ahead of the Greece friendly, I realized that the Serbian league has a winter break of its own and won't kick on again until late February. Lovely then. We can only hope that whatever it is Haidar Al Shaibani does in between sitting keenly on the bench for Nimes in Ligue Deux will have him in game shape a month and a half from now.
    Elsewhere around the horn of Concacaf, Honduran defender Maynor Figueroa was voted Goal.com's flop of the match for his performance in a 0-0 draw with Everton. I'm not entirely certain what kind of criteria the folks at Goal use to come up with their tops and flops (especially in a 0-0 draw), but any time a Honduran footballer is shamed in the international community we should definitely record it for posterity.
    And finally, two thirds of the Some Canadian Guys took a break from their breathless schedules to indulge in some mid-Monday-afternoon drinking this week, loosely based on the excuse that a high-profile English Premier League match happened to be playing on several screens of the pub they were in. An argument about how much playing time Canada fence-sitter David Hoilett is actually getting with Blackburn this season broke out, and due to the lack of Blackberry service it was never settled. Until now. David Hoilett has played 372 Premier League minutes with Blackburn this season. Three starts and five substitutions, the majority of those coming since the middle of November.
    Graphic credit: Jean Farrugia
    Guest
    In total 11 players were selected in today's MLS re-entry draft, with 10 of 18 teams laying claim to a player.
    Both Toronto and Vancouver passed on the draft.
    The list of players drafted is below the jump. We will have more reaction from Vancouver and Toronto shortly.
    [PRBREAK][/PRBREAK]
    Round 1
    D.C. United: Josh Wolff
    Chivas USA: Jimmy Conrad
    New England Revolution: Ryan Cochrane
    LA Galaxy: Juan Pablo Angel
    Chicago Fire: Cory Gibbs
    Sporting KC: Frankie Hejduk
    Seattle Sounders: Chris Seitz
    Columbus Crew: Jeff Cunningham
    LA Galaxy: Luke Sassano
    Colorado Rapids: Tyrone Marshall
    Round 2
    New England Revolution: Fred
    Guest
    The three Pacific Northwest MLS teams announced today that away supporters travelling for games between Portland, Seattle and Vancouver will be allowed 500 tickets in each of those cities.
    MLS approved the plan for the three clubs, which is an improvement upon the 150 maximum that Seattle was prepared to allocate to its Cascadia rivals next year.
    [PRBREAK][/PRBREAK]
    The main supporters groups for the Cascadia teams - Seattle's ECS, Portland's Timbers Army, and the Southsiders of Vancouver - released a joint statement back in October urging the league and the clubs to consider a larger block of away tickets for matches between the three teams, pointing to traditional football rivalries with large travelling support as a potential catalyst for growing the game in North America.
    The main stumbling block seemed to be Seattle owner Joe Roth, who felt that security and "integrity of the home crowd" were cause for concern. It seems as though the league has been able to ease his fears.
    Is 500 enough? It's certainly better than 150, but given the proximity between the three teams and the inherent sporting rivalries that already exist there, it's likely that they could easily get travelling fans in the thousands for some Cascadia matches.
    Regardless, the league's new policy for the PNW teams is a step forward, as it not only gives those clubs' fans a chance to prove what they've known all along - that the Cascadia three-way rivalry will be special and good for MLS as a whole - but also that it sets a precedent for other MLS clubs to get formal clarification on travelling support.
    The US Northeastern teams are seeing a burgeoning travelling culture, and everyone has seen TFC's 2000+ "invasions" of Columbus to kick off the 2008 and 2009 seasons. With Montreal coming into the league (and just about every supporter group in the Eastern Time Zone already looking forward to visiting La Belle Province), the travelling culture in the East will only grow stronger.
    But first up is Cascadia. The bar has been set by the league, and now its up to supporters of those teams to meet and exceed those expectations.
    To me, it's a slam dunk.
    Guest
    Welcome to this week's edition of Don't Fight The Laws, in which I combine my years of being a referee with my years of being a smartass to provide my answers to your questions about the Laws of the Game, controversial decisions and other odds and ends relating to referees and what they do.
    Got a question? Send it over to canadiansoccerguys@gmail.com. But for this week, we have the following...
    [PRBREAK][/PRBREAK]
    About how much time does a referee allow for an elaborate, choreographed celebration before s/he starts thinking about booking someone for time-wasting? As an example, would you have let the Senegalese players get through their celebration against France in '02? – usafan12


    C'mon man, are you gonna step in and deny these guys their moment of glory, having scored the first goal in their nation's World Cup history, against not only the reigning champions, but their former colonizers? I sure as hell ain't.
    Now, as for how much time the ref should allow for this sort of thing... as with many other aspects of the game, it comes down to the ref's gut feeling, based on the specific circumstances. The Laws instruct refs to "exercise common sense in dealing with the celebration of a goal" -- however, they also say that "the practice of choreographed celebrations is not to be encouraged when it results in excessive time-wasting." So if the ref had jumped into that circle dance himself, fun as it would have been, he'd have gotten a stern talking-to from the match assessor.
    But to me, "common sense" would say that the Senegalese team deserved a moment like this, on the sport's grandest stage, considering how much that goal meant.
    In other situations, however...


    Yeah, meaningless Icelandic league games don't really have the same weight to 'em, and the ref should be a little more proactive in putting his foot down on pre-planned nonsense like this (as hilarious and YouTube-friendly as it may be).
    For what it's worth, the Laws state that celebrations shouldn't be "excessive" (a subjective determination, of course) and that players must be cautioned if they remove their jersey, cover their face with a mask or similar item, climb a perimeter fence or make gestures that are "provocative, derisory or inflammatory."
    So beyond cautioning Bouba Diop for the shirt removal (which actually may not have been in the Laws in 2002), I'm cool with him and his teammates celebrating as they did. Hell, I used that dance for most of the summer of 2002, so I'd be a hypocrite to decry them for it now.
    What (do you think) about the recent trend of yellows for meaningless handling of the ball that occur at midfield? I'm assuming they're applying Law 12, perhaps ITRO, the player may have handled to deliberately break up an opponent's attack or to prevent the opponent from obtaining possession of the ball. I know I've never seen it called as often as it has this year, particularly in the EPL. Perhaps under direction from the FA? – Some Unidentified Person
    Thank you, unregistered comment-leaver, for taking the bait I dangled in the last edition of Don’t Fight The Laws.
    The recent trend of tossing out yellow cards for handballs bugs the living shit out of me, not only in and of itself, but in relation to another disturbing trend, which I’ll get to in a moment.
    The Laws lay out two situations in which a player is to be cautioned for handling the ball: for attempting their own Hand of God (as opposed to a Hand of Suarez, which calls for a red card), or for "deliberately and blatantly (handling) the ball to prevent an opponent gaining possession."
    Now, I've always interpreted this rule to cover situations where a player cynically sticks their arm out to prevent the passage of a nice through ball, or swats away what's going to be a cross into a dangerous area. But these days, you hear uninformed commentators (on both sides of the pond) crowing about players "obviously" deserving a yellow because their handling of the ball was "intentional", regardless of where it was on the field, and regardless of whether anyone else was around.
    No. Stop it.
    A handball being "intentional" (or deliberate) is not the minimum standard for a yellow card to be dished out -- it's the minimum standard for a foul being called at all! If a ball hits a player's hand or arm, and it's deemed not to be deliberate, it's not a foul at all. Play continues. If it is deemed deliberate, the referee's recourse is to award a direct free kick. Only in exceptional circumstances should a yellow or red card be shown.
    I remember hearing about the USSF instructing MLS refs to "crack down" on handballs last season, and it's possible the FA has given similar instructions to its officials (though I haven't heard of any such directive -- has anyone else?) Either way, such a crackdown is beyond idiotic in light of the other disturbing trend to which I alluded earlier.
    Did anyone watch Manchester United play Arsenal on Monday? Remember when Darren Fletcher got pissed off about something (possibly about being forced to live with an ill-formed jawbone)? And remember when he dashed after referee Howard Webb (evoking memories of Michael Ballack chasing after that poor Norwegian sap in the Champions League) and essentially shoved him, demanding an explanation?
    I've seen players sent off for less. And yet Fletcher escaped sanction altogether despite the fact that he physically accosted the match referee.
    Now, I don't bring this up over concern for Webb. Were he so inclined, he could snap Fletcher in half, so it's not his physical safety I'm worried about. It's the physical safety of referees at all lower levels, who need to officiate players that see this sort of behaviour take place week in, week out in the world's top leagues. Players yelling, screaming, swearing at officials, crowding around them in bunches to protest calls... and what do the refs do? They shoo them away with their hands and maybe, maybe, maybe if someone barks for too long, they might show a yellow card. Maybe.
    Well, while the Laws are a bit hazy on handballs and the like, they're pretty clear about one of the situations in which a player should be shown a yellow card: when they show dissent by word or action. I'm pretty sure the ridiculous shenanigans of Fletcher, Ballack, et al. more than meet that definition.
    Before throwing more officials onto the field, as UEFA is trending towards, governing bodies should empower the ones who are already there. Ensure that the officials know they have the power of the Laws (and their bosses) behind them, to nip dissent in the bud before it gets out of hand. The first player who starts bitching in a game? Fuck you, yellow card. Keep your yap shut and play the game.
    That will discourage further nonsense as the game goes along, rather than letting the whole thing snowball and become an utter farce, in which a dipshit like Fletcher gets away with something that, had he done it to Webb outside of a pub, would probably have resulted in severe trauma to his skull.
    But that won't happen. In the contemporary world of soccer, you're more likely to see a player cautioned for swatting at a ball than swatting at the referee. Pathetic.
    Extra time: I'd like to know how it's calculated. It seems so haphazard. Is there a formula they use? Like x number of substitutions = x number of minutes. Or is there just a guy with a stopwatch. Also, last year it seemed like there was an extraordinary amount of extra time awarded in EPL. Any reason for that? – Some Unidentified Person
    Once the ref announces how much stoppage time there will be, they must play at least that amount (can be more, if necessary, but never less). As to how it's calculated to begin with, I believe the formula is:
    Minutes of stoppage time = (D/25) + (C – 115) + (P / 1,000) x WGASIJWI,
    Where D = Legitimate delays in play during the 90 minutes
    C = Home crowd’s volume level, in decibels
    P = Payoff from local authorities to allow time for a late equalizer, and, of course, the
    Who Gives A Shit, I’ll Just Wing It factor.
    In reality, sadly, as you suggest, it’s just a guy (or girl) with a stopwatch. If you want concrete proof that there’s no science to it, note that upwards of 10 or 15 seconds can be wasted on each restart (throw-in, free kick, etc.), not to mention the minutes that can be eaten away by injuries (legitimate and otherwise) and substitutions. All of this tomfoolery usually adds up to three minutes of actual stoppage time added.
    But once you’re in stoppage time, well, if someone goes down and is clearly milking the clock, all of a sudden, their 45 seconds of theatrics result in an actual extra 45 additional seconds (or close to it) of play added on at the end of stoppage time. There’s no rule governing this. The ref just knows everyone will be counting the seconds at that juncture in the game, and he/she better be sure to take each nanosecond into account, lest the fans bring out their torches and pitchforks / batteries / urine bags.
    As with the last question, I'll confess to having no knowledge of the inner workings of the English FA (I'm not sure why anyone reading this site would think I'd have such information, but I'm honoured, I guess), so if there was anything being mandated by the FA in this regard, it's news to me.
    But I will concede the perceived preponderance of stoppage time in the Premiership, which we can boil this down to a phenomenon known as “Trafford Time”. Hold off on that angry email, you United goofballs, let me explain.
    See, when a sport has an incomprehensibly idiotic and antiquated rule like "the referee gets to end the game whenever they feel like it", there are always going to be quirks. For instance, even if the game should be over, you'll rarely see a ref call for full time when one team is in the midst of a great scoring chance. I won't lie, I've added a few extra seconds to games if a team was about to get a shot on goal.
    The psychology is confusing. At the time, my brain says "you've got to let them finish this chance, it wouldn't be fair if you cut it off right here"... but removed from the irrationality of the game, my brain corrects itself: "what you did was not only unfair to the defending team, but against the letter of the law."
    Sure, I'm guessing top-flight refs can suppress their on-field irrationality a lot better than I can. But they're still human. They're still beholden to the atmosphere, the situation and, like anyone else, can be guilty of ball-watching sometimes.
    Before people talk about technology like goal-line cameras and replay reviews, how about instituting technology that's already been in use in other sports for decades? Y'know, like, a clock?
    How much can someone delay on a penalty kick? Some seem to stop dead when they run up, some do lots of stutters – what's allowed? What do the rules say? – Some Unidentified Person

    I'm not only a ref, I'm also a goalkeeper, so few things annoy me more than the freakin' paradinha.
    Thankfully, FIFA has -- just this year -- added a section to the Laws specifically to cover this phenomenon:
    In other words, the stutter-step is OK, as long as the player is continuing to move forward. But the sort of trickery in that video -- where the player stops at the end of the run-up, waits for the keeper to react, and then shoots -- is not allowed, and is punishable by a yellow card. (Note that the above video was posted in 2009, before this rule came into place, which is why the goal stood.)Don't mourn the paradinha. It wasn't all that effective anyway:


    That's it for this week. Send me an email at canadiansoccerguys@gmail.com, and your query may turn up in the next edition of Don't Fight The Laws.
    Guest

    Photoshopped: MLS Re-Entry Draft

    By Guest, in It's Called Football,

    Little is known about the MLS Re-Entry Draft but Canadian Soccer News has uncovered a photo that sheds new light on the process.
    After careful review, the CSN experts agree that, while not without its charm, the MLS Re-Entry Draft certainly doesn't command the ceremonies that the MLS SuperDraft does.
    [PRBREAK][/PRBREAK]
    Held outdoors in beautiful San Jose, teams decide if they want to select a player by depositing a plastic bottle (symbolic of a recycled contract) into the Pass, Sign, or Offer Contract bin.
    MLS Commissioner Don Garber then places the bottle in the bin and teams begin negotiations with the selected player.
    However, things get tricky when a team chooses to Offer Contract. Garber and the league must then crush the bottle down to a 1/10 of its size before it can slide easily into the tightly capped bin.
    All and all it makes for a great day as nobody gets left out. Players who aren't selected get to go for ice cream and some are then offered entry level coaching positions.
    Guest
    Hours away from phase two of the MLS re-entry draft and the biggest focus seems to be on speculating where Juan Pablo Angel is going to end up. He has indicated that he wants to play another year, but he is a risk. His production dropped significantly in the last half of last season.
    Still, it seems likely that someone will take a stab at him. As to what team that might be, we can make an educated guess.
    The club would have to be willing to spend DP money on him and not play on turf (sorry Seattle, New England and Vancouver). It would likely be a team desperate for scoring.
    Based on that here are the odds:
    [PRBREAK][/PRBREAK] 2/1 – Philly
    The Union will be looking to make a big splash in their second season and might feel that they need a secondary option to Sébastien Le Toux. Actually, on paper LeToux and Angel seem a lot like Colorado’s Casey and Cummings and there is a MLS Cup sitting in Denver right now. Philly might also be appealing to Angel as it’s close to New York and would be an easy adjustment for him to re-locate there. Angel is also good friends with Faryd Mondragon, the geriatric Colombian keeper the Union are set to sign.
    3/1 – DC United
    United need help everywhere and will have the first crack at him in the draft. Attendance dropped in 2010 – largely because of the performance on the pitch – and they are still in a battle to raise public awareness in DC to their need for a stadium. A high-ish profile signing might help. On the negative, Angel may not want to go to the team that most NY fans view as their biggest rival.
    5/1 – Chivas
    It’s an LA thing. That and the Goats were woeful on offense. It’s unclear whether the club would be willing to spend the money, but they draft high enough that they may take a crack at him in hopes that a deal can be reached.
    8/1 – Houston
    The Dynamo’s step-back season last year may make them think they need to do something to ease the pain of the rebuilding process. The fan base is used to winning and it’s unclear how they will react to back-to-back losing seasons. Angel, if on form, could be a difference maker. It’s a big move for him though and he may not be interested in playing in the suffocating heat of a Houston summer.
    10/1 – Toronto
    There is little doubt that the Reds need a striker and if he’s still there when it’s time to draft he will be tempting. They also have the money. However, there are a couple things that make it seem like TFC will pass. First of all they may not get a chance to pass. There are a few teams ahead in the draft that seem likely to be interested. Secondly, they already have a DP on the roster and a decision to bring in a second is an awfully big one considering the new GM is not in place yet (unless he is and can’t be announced yet al la Brian Burke and the Leafs). Does Angel want to deal with an international move though?
    20/1 – Galaxy
    I’m sure angel would be interested, but whether LA wants to burn its third DP slot on an older risk is a question. Plus, it would be surprising if he’s still available.
    25/1 – Not drafted
    It’s possible that Angel has let all teams know his terms and none are ready to jump just yet. In that case he’ll go on the market as a full free agent.
    30/1 – Rest of league
    It seems unlikely, but he’s talented enough to attract the attention of teams that may not really need him. The darkhorse pick from the rest of the league? Portland. If he drops that far the Timbers may think ‘why not.’
    Guest
    C'est un peu plate de toujours jouer contre les mêmes équipes, mais tant qu'on gagne, on ne se plaindra pas!
    [PRBREAK][/PRBREAK]
    L'équipe féminine du Canada a encore battu le Mexique cette fois-ci dans le cadre du Torneio Internacional Cidade de Sao Paulo au Brésil. Et encore une fois, Christine Sinclair a marqué l'unique but du match.
    Je vous préviens : ne clignez pas des yeux si vous ne voulez pas manquer son but!


    Le Canada affrontera donc le Brésil dans son dernier match de groupe ce soir, avant de les rencontrer de nouveau en finale ce dimanche.
    Au moins, ce sera une bonne préparation en vue de la Coupe du Monde 2011 en Allemagne.
    Guest
    Ok not really, but he had a much bigger line up for a moment in time than old St. Nick did.
    The Whitecaps paraded their marquee new signing Jay DeMerit in front of the public today in an in-store autograph session at Metrotown Mall.[PRBREAK][/PRBREAK]
    The American International, sat and signed balls, jerseys (#6 and otherwise), and all things Whitecaps this evening, at the club's store in the large suburban mall. Considering that it was 7pm on a Tuesday night, and it was only publicized on Monday morning (to the best of my knowledge), he had a really good turn out.
    By comparison Santa had a few more hot moms, but you can't win them all.
    Guest

    Billings responds

    By Guest, in Onward Soccer,

    The following e-mail was received today from deposed ASA president Chris Billings. It does not address the questions in Monday's open letter, but it certainly advances the discussion.
    As received, unedited:
    [PRBREAK][/PRBREAK]
    Mr. Knight,
    Don't think we've ever met; apologies for my memory if we have.
    I just this afternoon received a link from a friend to the open letter you have posted to myself on the web, along with the article on the state of soccer in Alberta. I have to admit that I try to limit myself in viewing a lot of the postings on the different sites that have come up, as some of them can be particularly inflammatory. Reading those do not give me a particularly good night's sleep....
    I appreciate what you are trying to do in your articles and encourage you to continue to ask questions. It is the fact that questions have been asked, and continue to be asked, that prompted the ASA Membership to vote for change in Jaunary of 2009, and continue to stand up for what they believe is right. (Note that this was the third time in 5 years that the Membership has voted against Charpentier (working alongside Traficante & Kern). In 2005, both he and Traficante were sent from office; in 2006 Charpentier lost to Kevin Lockhart. Anyone in attendance at the 2005 AGM (Sutton Hotel, Edmonton) can certainly attest to the fiasco that ensued during elections. Yet they, and the influences that they hold within the large organizations in the province (EMSA & CMSA) have screwed up Alberta Soccer royally. The singular proof of this? 8 Executive Directors in 7 years. Since Traficante was elected as President in Jan 2003, we have seen come and go: Sampley, Ferguson, Gerhardt, Loga, Letourneau, Axelson, Cammarta, and now Adams (who has been here twice as matter of fact). Not to mention the severe number of other staff in that time that have been removed, forced out or given up all together.)
    I'm sure you have been to the reform Alberta soccer website? http://www.reformalbertasoccer.com/Timeline-2010#8Dec2010 I am completely honest when I say that I do not know who is responsible for that website. (I am accused by Mr. Charpentier's group of being the operator, but I can assure you it is not the case.) Mr. 'Durden' has requested responses from me on many occasions, and I have been as open with him as I will be with you. All of the documentation that I have seen on that website has been accurate, to the best of my knowledge. If you haven't reviewed the documentation, I would encourage you to do so. In particular those documents pertaining to the allegations against me. To date, I have recieved nothing other than the initial 'Notice of Suspension' from Feb 21. My reply to these allegations is listed under March 3. Althought your readers ask for a response to the harrasment that I apparently made, I do not have any details as to what these allegations refer. If you have any details, I would appreciate you passing them along.
    As was stated in one of the responses to your initial article on Dec 2, I most certainly will attempt to answer some of your questions. Anyone who has been directly involved in this matter knows that I or those supporting this cause have been as open as possible in order to get some truths exposed. Unfortunately, the other side rarely responds in writing, other than to slander, intimidate, or spread rhetoric. Not sure if you have seen the latest from Mr. Charpentier, Mr. Innes, Mr. Kern & Company on the allegations of violence being perpetrated. If any of this is true, why would they not inform the RCMP immediately? I know that if anyone on this side of the fence faced something of the nature that they are implying, I would accompany them straight to the police without hestiation. In particular if it was a member of my family!
    For those in Alberta who have stood in opposition to the actions of Charpentier, Innes, Kern & Traficante (as ringleaders of this coup), it has been a difficult time.
    Give me a couple days for a more formal response. If you would like to advise your readers that something is forthcoming, I certainly have no objections.
    Also, if you would like to chat, I seem to have more time on my hands lately while Maestracci & Montagliani have me cooling my heels.
    Regards,
    Chris Billings
    Guest
    Vancouver Whitecaps PDL mainstay Ethan Gage has become the second Vancouver Whitecaps prospect in as many days to win the prestigious National Player of the Year Award for his respective age group.
    Hailing from the Soccer hot bed of Cochrane Alberta, Gage is a Residency Program Product who has answered the bell any time that the 1st team has rang. He filled in impressively for an injured Wes Knight during the Whitecaps playoff run this year. During the 'Caps first round battle with Portland he played a big role in keeping Bright Dike in check and off the score board. He did make 17 appearances in 2009 as the 'Caps were riddled with injuries for a large portion of their campaign, but it was in 2008 when Ethan really made us take note when he played a pivotal role in the club winning their last Second Division Championship.
    [PRBREAK][/PRBREAK]
    While he has only seen limited time with the 'Caps first team he was a constant on the back line for the clubs Residency team which plays in the USL PDL division. While he is able to fill in the midfield role as we saw in the 2008 playoff run, he seems to developing into a strong right back.
    Not always the fastest man on the back line, he does position himself quite well. He is more then capable of handling the physical play of the strongest players of the Second Division (although so far we've only seen it in very limited time).
    Young Mr. Gage is also a member of the National U-20 and U-23 program.
    Guest
    As we head deeper and deeper into the "holiday season", you know what it's time for: year-in-review recaps!
    This year, we're producing a series of podcasts featuring us speaking to soccer fans from across Canada, to get their thoughts on 2010. We've got folks talking about not only our men's and women's national teams, but our domestic pro clubs, the World Cup, regional competitions and, yes, even their local pub leagues.
    The first episode will be released in the coming days, with a new installment hitting the web every day, leading up to the official Some Canadian Guys Year-in-Review special, coming down the pipe on December 28.
    To keep up-to-date, either feverishly click "refresh" at this website 10 times a day, or, subscribe to the show on iTunes. You can also peruse our archives to get an idea of what to expect from the upcoming series.
    [PRBREAK][/PRBREAK]
    Guest

    Things that matter

    By Guest, in Euro File,

    As I wrote last week, the Club World Cup does not get much respect.
    So today's 2-0 upset by TP Mazembe over Internacional is not likely to change many opinions about the value of the tournament (you know, the only event that gives every pro team in the world a chance, however remote, to win). The grumps will be grumpy. Europe doesn't care therefore it doesn't matter.
    One win doesn't change that attitude. However, that attitude doesn't change the significance of the upset either.
    [PRBREAK][/PRBREAK]
    When the history of the Club World Cup is written today will be pointed to as the day when the event started to mature into something more closely resembling a true championship. It's not so much that Mazembe won the game, but rather it's about the way they did it.
    Sure they played a counter game but they looked controlled and organized throughout. The club was tactically aware and had just enough talent to pull off the upset. If you want evidence that the rest of the world is catching up to the traditional powers then today was it.
    When Stoke guts out a 1-0 win at Old Trafford we all (outside of those that support United) smile and enjoy the upset for what it is - a change from the norm. However, Stoke beating United doesn't have any significance after the 90 minutes has ended.
    Today is different. At worst Mazembe has become the answer to a really tough trivia question. At best, they've started a process that will finally give us a true world club championship where everyone is invited provided they earn the invitation.
    And isn't that what sport is all about.
    Guest

    CONCACAF giveth; CONCACAF taketh away

    By Guest, in 24th Minute,

    Last week I wrote about how Canada had been seeded at the u17 CONCACAF qualifying tournament and about how that was good news for the boys as they attempt to get back to the World Cup for the first time in 15 years.
    Scratch that.
    [PRBREAK][/PRBREAK]
    Apparently CONCACAF changed its mind. Canada is no longer seeded and is instead in pot B with the rest of the Central American qualifiers. Honduras is now seeded. Mexico is hosting the World Cup and is therefore excluded from qualifying.
    It's not known whether this was a simple mistake by CONCACAF in the first place -- by merit Honduras likely deserves the seed -- or a case of Canada being outmanoeuvred politically by the Honduran federation.
    Regardless, qualifying just got a whole lot harder. Canadians must hope to be drawn into host Jamaica’s group, or Costa Rica's. Otherwise they will need to get by one of the United States or Honduras to go to the World Cup. Honduras has been to the last three World Cups at this age level (which is why they kind of got screwed before).
    The draw is tomorrow. The new pots are as follows:
    Pot A: Jamaica, Honduras, Costa Rica and the United States
    Pot B: El Salvador, Guatemala, Canada and Panama
    Pot C: Haiti, Barbados, Trinidad & Tobago and Cuba
×
×
  • Create New...