Nats give BMO Field Turf a Yellow Card

[loyola]

quote:Originally posted by youllneverwalkalone

Thanks Rudi. That is what I meant for the most part, but actually the atmosphere was really bad too. Edmonton seems to have a lot of sports fans. Which is great. They do their civic duty and come out and support their events. However, WCQ isn't a big enough event clearly because Honduras only drew 10k. Vancouver was even worse for the last WCQ cycle, but I attended a U20 Brasil/Spain match and the atmosphere was absolutelty electric at the refurbished Swangard. Granted, that has a lot to do with the quality on the pitch, but I do think Toronto's support of TFC has shown that they should be given WCQ matches and I firmly believe the players should STFU about the turf and try to find a way to make it an advantage. I can understand a guy with bad knees not wanting to play 15-20 matches and train on the stuff, but we're talking 3 matches. Grow up Stalteri you wanker of a captain!

Couldn't agree more.

My feeling since the GC is that our players are whinning too much about a lot of stuff. They look to be distracted by a lot of stuff like oppositions for friendly and field turf. They should really be concentrating on the task ahead instead of complaining because this time they won't have an excuse (They're having games and DM is selecting the best players...).

[El Hombre]

quote:Originally posted by Winnipeg Fury

Edmonton should be ashamed of having over 30,000 pro-Canadian fans for Canada's U-20 matches ? Tell me, how many fans did TO have for our U-20 team ? (I will let you count the thousands of Chilean fans because it still won't be close).

The senior men have had ONE game at BMO, and it was half full. To even attempt to compare that to Edmonton's long history of solid support is nothing short of audacious.

Umm...a distinction should be made with regards to the 30,000 "pro-Canadian fans" that you talk about. For the most part they may be considered "fans" however after being told to "shut up" and "show a little respect for the Austrians" by the lady a couple seats down from me, I'd be hard-pressed to admit they were decidedly pro-Canadian. For the most part they were there to watch soccer and weren't really invested either way.

There was at least a modicum of atmosphere at the Congo game only because it was raining and the other "pro-Canadian fans" moved up under shelter which allowed the Voyageurs that were there to congregate and make some noise.

This isn't a slight at Reza or River City who did their best at organizing with what they had, however it was hard to get anything going with us scattered throughout a section like we were. From what I understand this is what happened at BMO for the Chilean game as well.

So, in financial terms, Edmonton can provide a strong crowd however in terms of atmosphere, in my opinion at least, I think the jury's still out.

[Winnipeg Fury]

The problem I have with much of this negative analysis of Edmonton, is that most who have negative comments are drawing on a single match, or not even that.

Edmonton has had dozens upon dozens of national team games at every level, and never have Canadian fans been even close to a minority. Whether you or I may have had fun or figure that the Voyageurs are organized as well, is really irrelevant. The fact is that it is always a strong Canadian crowd.

Is every game over the dozens of games, going to be a sell-out or meet expectations. Of course not. But when one weighs the level of consistent support over the years and dozens of matches at every level, there is simply no comparison.

[El Hombre]

quote:Originally posted by Winnipeg Fury

The problem I have with much of this negative analysis of Edmonton, is that most who have negative comments are drawing on a single match, or not even that.

Yes, but the same can also be said for the positive analysis in that the U20 girls final is usually referenced.

quote:Originally posted by Winnipeg Fury

Edmonton has had dozens upon dozens of national team games at every level, and never have Canadian fans been even close to a minority. Whether you or I may have had fun or figure that the Voyageurs are organized as well, is really irrelevant. The fact is that it is always a strong Canadian crowd.

Is every game over the dozens of games, going to be a sell-out or meet expectations. Of course not. But when one weighs the level of consistent support over the years and dozens of matches at every level, there is simply no comparison.

Right, but my point is more about the style of support. In order to generate some sort of home-field advantage, you have to have a good pro-Canada atmosphere. From my experience, this is easier done in Toronto than in Edmonton. If you look at the Costa Rica game and the Argentina U20 before that at BMO, the south side was pretty full. This wasn't as noticeable when watching on TV as they didn't show that area very often. Nevertheless, as supporter groups have their roots there, it was more amenable to congregating fans who wouldn't sit on their hands.

I would say that the ability of Voyageurs to organize themselves for a home match is very important as (as far as I now) we are the only ones that cheer consistently throughout the game and generate a pro-Canadian vibe. Sell-outs do not interest me if there is no (pro-Canadian) noise.

[Free kick]

quote:Originally posted by Winnipeg Fury

The problem I have with much of this negative analysis of Edmonton, is that most who have negative comments are drawing on a single match, or not even that.

Edmonton has had dozens upon dozens of national team games at every level, and never have Canadian fans been even close to a minority. Whether you or I may have had fun or figure that the Voyageurs are organized as well, is really irrelevant. The fact is that it is always a strong Canadian crowd.

Is every game over the dozens of games, going to be a sell-out or meet expectations. Of course not. But when one weighs the level of consistent support over the years and dozens of matches at every level, there is simply no comparison.

I hate to get drawn into this debate because, as El Hombre mentioned, I too hate to slight people who did their best at organizing with what they had.

But what you are saying is just not true. I was there for Can-Hon and I can tell you that the Honduran presence was very evident in voice and numbers. As far as the 30K for that Can - Aut game, it was clearly demonstarted in this very forum what the true attendance was for that game when someone posted a overhead sky shot of the stadium at the 38th minute. I am sure you saw it. It was captured from the CBC broadcast. Its, from that shot, obvious that the 30K that you are alluding to was there for the second match.

At this point, I couldn't give a rats ass anymore, play all the games there for all i care. I just want the facts to be straight and the misconceptions and myths to be cleared up when it comes to this topic. Why is a touchy subject with me? because for the longest while, I actually bought your argument.

[Daniel]

Another issue with Edmonton is that, excluding maybe the U19 girls in 2002 (because I don't know for sure) they have been chronically plagued with organizational trouble and enormous trouble just getting the spectators into the stadium in time.

If we're playing Mexico in October, you need a soccer crowd to be pro-Canadian, even if the proportion is less Canadian. Edmonton is fun if the team's winning, but for any kind of tight games or when losing by one goal, I wouldn't expect that crowd to rev it up and become the "12th man"...

[Robert]

The turf at BMO field is a joke to any true enthusiasts. A photograph in the magazine "World Soccer" that was taken at last year's U20 championship really illustrates that fact. It appeared on the cover of the magazine's statistical section, and shows an Argentinian and Czech players playing on what looks like a giant Glad garbage-bag. It was only in that match, with a World title on the line, that a player was willing to sacrafice himself by making a sliding tackle, which ultimately could result in nothing other than a massive plastic rug-burn to his thigh. How many readers would be willing to do that? I guess if you like watching quasi soccer, then hey, BMO field is perfect for you. However, if I'm going to follow a bouncing ball for an hour and a half, I prefer girl's beach volleyball instead.

It's a disgrace to call a surface like the one at BMO a national field. Thanks Kevan. It's gonna stay HUGE!

[Scottie]

A special thanks to MLS and USL for scheduling their matches on FIFA dates and greating up the Honduras and Jamaica matches.

[tmcmurph]

quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca

http://www.thestar.com/Sports/Soccer/article/417658

Cathal Kelly pretty well misrepresents the crowd at the Canada vs. Costa Rica match (suggesting it was far less than 9000 and pro-Tico, neither of which are true) but his message is clear.

Not sure I share his faith that Canada vs. Mexico in Edmonton will "easily sell out".

Bad article. How clueless can a writer be? I mean Canada vs Brazil drew under 50,000 so "easily sell out" for Mexico? Soccer has grown and it might happen but there is nothing wrong with 40,000+ paying to see a game! That is a great turnout in Canada.

I am of the opinion that the "National Soccer Stadium" is something of a marketing phrase. It was used as if playing there is mandatory. As far as reality goes the criteria are really simple, seat 40,000+ and have real grass for a surface. So for now Edmonton is it.

I'm glad our MNT get to play on GRASS for the majority of their games because that is what they want and deserve. One less adjustment and one less excuse. I'm sure they prefer it that way too.

[Free kick]

quote:Originally posted by tmcmurph

Well there is another very likely reason. That is that you cant use the word BMO or BMO financial for a FIFA sanctioned event unless BMO pays FIFA for that right. At the U20, every sign or mention of BMO field or BMO finacial was coverred up or removed from view. thats didnt stop an airplane to fly over the field during the game flying a BMO banner behind it.

Similarly we heard stories at the WC in Germany:

1) After customer complaints, stadiums finally were able to serve the beer brand other than the one who was the fifa sponsor. But they had to cover it up with tape

2) Fans from a certain african country who were told that they couldn't wear a certain sweat pants that were given to then by a club because there was a corporate brand name was on them who was not a licensed FIFA sponsor. In conter protest, the fans took them off, enterred the stadium and watched he game in their trousers.

[tmcmurph]

quote:Originally posted by youllneverwalkalone

and I firmly believe the players should STFU about the turf and try to find a way to make it an advantage. I can understand a guy with bad knees not wanting to play 15-20 matches and train on the stuff, but we're talking 3 matches. Grow up Stalteri you wanker of a captain!

Disagree completely! Way too often those who make the decisions do it for a messed up list of priorities. Obviously what surface the players like is way down the list. Name me any soccer player who PREFERS playing soccer on fieldturf! Given a choice they always choose grass.

I would love for someone to tell the Canadian Hockey players to play on astro-ice and call them complainers if they balked! Be quiet Mr. Crosby and do you national team duty. Yea right.

[youllneverwalkalone]

quote:Originally posted by tmcmurph

Disagree completely! Way too often those who make the decisions do it for a messed up list of priorities. Obviously what surface the players like is way down the list. Name me any soccer player who PREFERS playing soccer on fieldturf! Given a choice they always choose grass.

I would love for someone to tell the Canadian Hockey players to play on astro-ice and call them complainers if they balked! Be quiet Mr. Crosby and do you national team duty. Yea right.

What is astro-ice? There is no such thing. I'm not saying field turf is better than grass. But I watch TFC play on it every week to a sold out house and it looks fine to me.

Canadian hockey players would want to play home matches where their support was the greatest. Edmonton is universally recognized as having the best ice in the world. How many Canada Cup matches were played there? Zero, if I recall correctly.

Oh yeah, for Paul Stalteri, I don't recall Wayne Gretzky ever bitching about playing in a venue.

[Whither Canada]

quote:Originally posted by Robert

The turf at BMO field is a joke to any true enthusiasts. A photograph in the magazine "World Soccer" that was taken at last year's U20 championship really illustrates that fact. It appeared on the cover of the magazine's statistical section, and shows an Argentinian and Czech players playing on what looks like a giant Glad garbage-bag. It was only in that match, with a World title on the line, that a player was willing to sacrafice himself by making a sliding tackle, which ultimately could result in nothing other than a massive plastic rug-burn to his thigh. How many readers would be willing to do that? I guess if you like watching quasi soccer, then hey, BMO field is perfect for you. However, if I'm going to follow a bouncing ball for an hour and a half, I prefer girl's beach volleyball instead.

It's a disgrace to call a surface like the one at BMO a national field. Thanks Kevan. It's gonna stay HUGE!

"a massive plastic rug-burn" ?????

I'm not normally a defender of artificial surfaces, but please leave out the hysteria - BMO field isn't exactly CNE stadium or Empire Stadium circa 1974, is it.

Watch the next Toronto FC game played there and you'll see plenty of slide tackling.......and no massive rug-burns.

[Richard]

^ Emotion gets the better of reason and what their eyes are actually telling them with some people [:0]

[Whither Canada]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

^ Emotion gets the better of reason and what their eyes are actually telling them with some people [:0]

Sorry, but I can't tell who your emoticon is directed at - yourself or me.

The first half of your response tells me it's you, but I'm not sure if the second half is directed at me (but be assured that these eyes have yet to see any rug-burns caused by the BMO turf).

[RS]

As someone who has watched dozens of games (already) at BMO Field, and played on that surface at least 10 times, I can tell you that the bounce of the ball is very true. I've slid on the turf, and, although I was initially apprehensive, suffered no such rug burns.

I can imagine the turf getting hot on a mid-summer afternoon (I've only set foot on it at night or under a winter bubble), but other than that the surface is very consistent.

For what it's worth, Stalteri has complained about other surfaces as well. Anyone remember him calling Richardson Stadium a cow pasture?

[matthew]

Free Kick> I don’t think you can say that the 30k were there for the second match. It’s just that they couldn’t get in until the second match. Some didn’t get in at all. This is an obvious problem and is well documented. Against T&T the problem was that it was a beautiful day and the walk-up crowd was massive. For Austria it was the first game at the venue and thousands (possibly five figrues) in the crowd was trying to pick up their tickets for all of the games in Edmonton at one or two will calls. The line went halfway around the stadium — leaving the train the started in the near end zone corner went all the way around the end zone and I had to cut through to get to the west-side entrance I needed. I was worried that was the line to get in. No such worries. There was no one there.

I’ve been to a fair number of Edmonton games, so just to try to compare for people who have been to some:

The atmosphere for the Austria game was the worst I’ve experienced at Commonwealth. The Congo match was similar to the Honduras WCQ at the start, but surpassed it greatly in the second half as anyone who bothered to stick out the rain seemed to be willing to stand up and make some noise with us and have some fun.

There will be away support in Edmonton. I think T&T in 2000 had almost as many supporters as Honduras did, the difference was that T&T were across the stadium, not beside us, and there were 10,000 more Canadian fans for T&T.

If it’s Mexico in Edmonton there will be lots of away support. There’s no way around that. It will be the same anywhere we play them, but with the large capacity at least we have a better chance at out-numbering them in Edmonton.

Out-numbering them and out-cheering them are two different things.

Clearly this is out of our hands. What we can control is how we maximize our support wherever the CSA decides to stick us. We know we’re starting in Saputo, so let’s continue to get organized there.

The thing about the Honduras WCQ and again with the Austria game is that with big gaps bewteen games in Edmonton it’s very much like starting from scratch. The organization for the second U20 game in Edmonton on our end was significantly better and RIver City deserves a lot of credit for that.

But for WCQ we don’t get a warm-up game. We need to be ready to go from the start. Certainly having a good known group of club supporters gives you a head start, but I don’t think it’s exactly the same.

So Montreal has had a recent match and has a good supporters group, so we’ve got a decent start, but it isn’t going to be easy.

cheers,

matthew

P.S. I have no problem with FieldTurf, it's better than the grass I grew up playing on, but for years players from many countries have complained about and balked at playing friendlies on it. I'm surprised the CSA is shying away from BMO for qualifiers. As great as BMO is and as happy as I am it's there anything without grass will always be less than ideal. We're way ahead from where we were even a few years ago.

[Winnipeg Fury]

quote:Originally posted by Free kick

I hate to get drawn into this debate because, as El Hombre mentioned, I too hate to slight people who did their best at organizing with what they had.

But what you are saying is just not true. I was there for Can-Hon and I can tell you that the Honduran presence was very evident in voice and numbers. As far as the 30K for that Can - Aut game, it was clearly demonstarted in this very forum what the true attendance was for that game when someone posted a overhead sky shot of the stadium at the 38th minute. I am sure you saw it. It was captured from the CBC broadcast. Its, from that shot, obvious that the 30K that you are alluding to was there for the second match.

At this point, I couldn't give a rats ass anymore, play all the games there for all i care. I just want the facts to be straight and the misconceptions and myths to be cleared up when it comes to this topic. Why is a touchy subject with me? because for the longest while, I actually bought your argument.

Yes, we all know that the Honduras match at Commonwealth drew 9700. That is not being disputed. Nor does this one match make it inferior to any other stadium in Canada for support. Particularly when they have had dozens of matches with solid support.

As for the U-20 matches, here are the official attendances. I'll post the attendances to clear up any 'myths or misconceptions':

BMO Chile 19,500

Commonwealth Austria 31, 579

Commonwealth Congo 32,508

Tony, you aren't going to kick me in the nuts on June 20, are you ? []

[Cheeta]

quote:Originally posted by Daniel

Another issue with Edmonton is that, excluding maybe the U19 girls in 2002 (because I don't know for sure) they have been chronically plagued with organizational trouble and enormous trouble just getting the spectators into the stadium in time.

If we're playing Mexico in October, you need a soccer crowd to be pro-Canadian, even if the proportion is less Canadian. Edmonton is fun if the team's winning, but for any kind of tight games or when losing by one goal, I wouldn't expect that crowd to rev it up and become the "12th man"...

What Daniel wrote.

As far as I'm concerned after the U20s Edmonton lost all rights to hosting any future MNT matches. It doesn't matter a sausage why the organization of the event in Edmonton was troubled, what matters is that it was. Added to the ho-hum support the Honduras match received last go around I'm done with advocating for Edmonton.

(That being said, if there is a match in Edmonton that may be the only one I make this year so... HURRAY!).

Can't help but feel Edmonton's inclusion has precious little to do with strategic thinking and everything to do with provincial politics within the CSA.

[Richard]

quote:Originally posted by Whither Canada

Sorry, but I can't tell who your emoticon is directed at - yourself or me.

The first half of your response tells me it's you, but I'm not sure if the second half is directed at me (but be assured that these eyes have yet to see any rug-burns caused by the BMO turf).

Nothing was directed at you, I agree with you. Sorry if my post was ambiguous, the emoticon wasn't quite what I expected either. My target is those who constantly whine and go on and on about FieldTurf, many of whom have barely walked on a modern version of it let alone played a competitive game on it.

[tmcmurph]

quote:Originally posted by youllneverwalkalone

What is astro-ice? There is no such thing. I'm not saying field turf is better than grass.

www.icepro.ca or www.coldproducts.com

More commonly known as artificial ice.

I know that fieldturf is FIFA approved. I've had the opportunity to check it out and be on it briefly but I'm no expert. It is softer and an order of magnitude better than the old first and second generation artificial turf but give the players what they want.

Stalteri's point in the video of him last year was that in a country this rich why not have a grass playing surface? It's not like we can't afford it.

I can't honestly think of a player who prefers it to grass (unless they are advertising it).

Oh well at least Montreal and Vancouver (when it gets built) will be real grass so the majority of our MNT games will be on grass.

[Richard]

You don't have to prefer it but a fulltime highly paid career footballer who does little else but play football day after day should be willing and able to adapt to playing the game on almost any reasonable surface and FieldTurf is orders of magnitude better than many, many grass pitches around the world. Only the top few percent or less of the world's pitches are as good as the latest generation FieldTurf pitches. I will have no truck with these prima donna professional athletes who manufacture reasons to object to a perfectly good playing surface. Just get on with it without complaining, you're the best players in the world and should better than anybody, be able to cope with any differences there may be between FieldTurf and natural grass. Stop whining!

[Soju]

Didn't we all have an epic 100 page argument about FieldTurf not so long ago? Grass is better than FieldTurf. BMO has FieldTurf. BMO is the SSS in our country's biggest city. The players will all suit up and play on it when called on, but would like organizers to consider other options. Fair enough.

Nothing to argue about until Stalteri or someone else says "I refuse to play for Canada on FT", which I don't think we're going to hear.

[Winnipeg Fury]

quote:Originally posted by Soju

Didn't we all have an epic 100 page argument about FieldTurf not so long ago? Grass is better than FieldTurf. BMO has FieldTurf. BMO is the SSS in our country's biggest city. The players will all suit up and play on it when called on, but would like organizers to consider other options. Fair enough.

Nothing to argue about until Stalteri or someone else says "I refuse to play for Canada on FT", which I don't think we're going to hear.

Hear, Hear

[SilverSamurai]

Pretty heated debate. Whoa!

LOL

1st off, as has been mentioned, numerous times, the problem w/ the Tico game was that their was no advertising. I only knew about it from the RPB board. 2ndly , they ticket prices were anything but cheap. The only cheap section was the south end where all the Canadian supporters were. We were able to get chants going and unlike the U-20 game, were all together in a spot and not spread out.

As for the Jamaica game, it was expected that the game would be part of the seasons ticket package, but it looks like at best STH will have 1st shot at their seats.

As for turf, sure grass is better, but as many of the TFC players and coaches have mentioned, teams practice on turf, and only play games on grass. Will 90 extra minutes really be the end all be all?

But sure grass would be nice at BMO. Hell while they're at it, get us a roof... []