Canada Pre-World Cup "friendlies" thread: news, gossip and speculation.

[narduch]

Lmfao.

That is non news

[jordan]

23 minutes ago, Club Linesman said:

Not sure what emoji to use at this point. Hopefully its thanks or like but with the CSA one needs to hold off until the opponents are announced and the games are confirmed.

It’s announcing a future announcement 

[Admin]

We are going to play Iran and Panama in Belarus.

[Alex]

Dates are set!!

 

September 23 and 27 in Europe. Opponents will be announced shortly. Also a friendly will be played in November prior to the World Cup. 

[InglewoodJack]

Iceteca 2: Guatemala v Canada in Novosibirsk

[shorty]

You know, given that lack of transparency was a stated grievance (and well-founded) I find this message from the CSA to be a step forward and an olive branch. Having sat at bargaining tables and knowing the delicacy of communication in that context I take this communication to be a good sign — better than no message, and no discernible hidden “digs” at the players about the dispute or the process. Not quite contrite, but close. I’ll take it. 

[Jedi Ram]

Nope @shorty

Sorry I do not agree with that... The fault lies with the players. They should have done this at the beginning of WCQ. And screwing the fans of their tickets, flights, hotel etc... Not to mention the employees at BC Place.   

I do not understand why the players need to know the "funny business" between CSA and CSB as they should have questioned it at the beginning when the deal was announced not like now. 

They are better ways to deal than the walkout...

That's my nickel (it's used to be 2 cents but with inflation...) 

[kacbru]

1 hour ago, Club Linesman said:

Not sure what emoji to use at this point. Hopefully its thanks or like but with the CSA one needs to hold off until the opponents are announced and the games are confirmed.

It is a long way for Ventura County FC to travel for a friendly, but you never know...

FYI the "highlights" from the match that was used to prep for the 2013 Gold Cup, where we opened with a loss to Martinique. How did I make it through this period as a fan?

 

[Watchmen]

6 minutes ago, Jedi Ram said:

Nope @shorty

Sorry I do not agree with that... The fault lies with the players. They should have done this at the beginning of WCQ. And screwing the fans of their tickets, flights, hotel etc... Not to mention the employees at BC Place.   

I do not understand why the players need to know the "funny business" between CSA and CSB as they should have questioned it at the beginning when the deal was announced not like now. 

They are better ways to deal than the walkout...

That's my nickel (it's used to be 2 cents but with inflation...) 

1) The bonus structure should have been done at the start of WCQ, but that's on both the players and the CSA.

2) The players need to know the "funny business" between the CSA and CSB once the CSA (after getting a substantial payment from FIFA) informed them that they couldn't meet their demands. Players don't necessarily need the details on every deal, but if you're suddenly going to inform them "we can't afford you" they're going to want to know why. And plenty of people on this forum had the exact same reaction, a sort of "wait...what does the CSB involve?" despite celebrating it when the deal was signed (or having never heard of it).

3) My feeling is that the strike essentially started on Friday. At that stage, it's on the CSA to work it out. The CSA thought the players were bluffing and failed to address the situation. From listening to former players like Forrest and Brennan, typically the CSA has. They mentioned on their podcast that they almost held out of the Gold Cup in 2000, but the CSA met with them and addressed their concerns. Bontis failed to do that here, and left addressing it until it was too late. Just my 2 cents on that.

 

[Unnamed Trialist]

4 hours ago, Colliedor said:

Legit one of the worst takes I've read here. Canada makes it to their first world cup in over 30 years and you think firing the coach right before the WC would be a good idea? If you thought the Iran and Panama cancellation created controversy, what the hell do you think would happen if they fired Herdman? Players would be pissed, fans would be pissed, media would be all over CSA etc.

GENIUS! Great logic there.

No player and no coach is above a club, a programme, a shirt. Ever. 

I've followed international football for at least 40 years and it was totally an outlier. Not because our players are more demanding or more woke, but because they are as clueless as the CSA, and the captains, on top of that, failed to do their job negotiating the deal properly. 

Herdman colluded with the players in a totally exceptional and unheard of boycott of an official friendly, I think it was a disgusting move on his part, and the players. If you don't know how serious doing that was, you don't understand the game. There are basic etiquettes, and the players and Herdman ignored them. 

But I did say that he should have received an ultimatum. Whatever the urgency from the players' perspective, you do not screw over your own fans and a regional rival--if that had been done to us, if we'd travelled to Panama for a friendly and they'd bailed like that, we'd be livid.

His obligation was to field a team. He didn't, and left thousands of fans in the lurch and that meant a hundreds of thousands in losses for the CSA. He also approved the Iran friendly previously, because he's clueless. The players only complained after hearing public criticism, they were silent for 10 days then chirped in after the fact. 

It's a debacle, and as mentioned, it may come back to haunt us. I think it is hurting us as we sit right now, we are still way behind on friendlies because anyone signing to do one with us is probably making demands for guarantees we are seeing go way beyond normal clauses for such matches. 

Edited July 5, 2022 by Unnamed Trialist

[Unnamed Trialist]

1 hour ago, Watchmen said:

1) The bonus structure should have been done at the start of WCQ, but that's on both the players and the CSA.

2) The players need to know the "funny business" between the CSA and CSB once the CSA (after getting a substantial payment from FIFA) informed them that they couldn't meet their demands. Players don't necessarily need the details on every deal, but if you're suddenly going to inform them "we can't afford you" they're going to want to know why. And plenty of people on this forum had the exact same reaction, a sort of "wait...what does the CSB involve?" despite celebrating it when the deal was signed (or having never heard of it).

3) My feeling is that the strike essentially started on Friday. At that stage, it's on the CSA to work it out. The CSA thought the players were bluffing and failed to address the situation. From listening to former players like Forrest and Brennan, typically the CSA has. They mentioned on their podcast that they almost held out of the Gold Cup in 2000, but the CSA met with them and addressed their concerns. Bontis failed to do that here, and left addressing it until it was too late. Just my 2 cents on that.

 

Basically correct, but you missed an essential detail: the question of tickets and travels for players' families. The CSA has an allotment for Qatar, and since the president is elected mostly by provincial associations, including Nunavut reps, for sure Bontis decided to dedicate a good part of that allotment to keep the national and provincial soccer bureaucrats happy. It is an electoral decision, because they are the ones that voted him in, there is no question he started getting calls from the moment we qualified, and he chose to keep that voting block happy.

To the detriment of the players. Two tickets each and no travel covered is incredibly stingy, and more so because I can assure you Bontis was dishing out the tickets and travel to provincial vice-presidents and sponsor's spouses rather liberally. 

Sometimes minor but highly personal questions are what can trigger a protest of that nature, over and above arguing whether each roster member was to receive 60 thousand or 90 thousand for their Qatar participation. 

Edited July 5, 2022 by Unnamed Trialist

[Watchmen]

46 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Basically correct, but you missed an essential detail: the question of tickets and travels for players' families. The CSA has an allotment for Qatar, and since the president is elected mostly by provincial associations, including Nunavut reps, for sure Bontis decided to dedicate a good part of that allotment to keep the national and provincial soccer bureaucrats happy. It is an electoral decision, because they are the ones that voted him in, there is no question he started getting calls from the moment we qualified, and he chose to keep that voting block happy.

To the detriment of the players. Two tickets each and no travel covered is incredibly stingy, and more so because I can assure you Bontis was dishing out the tickets and travel to provincial vice-presidents and sponsor's spouses rather liberally. 

Sometimes minor but highly personal questions are what can trigger a protest of that nature, over and above arguing whether each roster member was to receive 60 thousand or 90 thousand for their Qatar participation. 

I don't disagree, but I sort of lump that in with the "bonus structure" discussion.  You sort out those details before WCQ starts, not after you've already qualified.

[EJsens1]

“We are also in the final stages of negotiations for the Men’s National Team’s final preparation match in November prior to Qatar 2022™ and will announce publicly the opposition and location when it has been finalized.“

https://canadasoccer.com/news/canada-soccer-july-2022-update/?fbclid=IwAR3YJqu7PHaegkFdsd4Lc-sRZxGoDD9DcwyRopx-ZsififfP5BxwsKbEj3k&fs=e&s=cl

So it’s good to see this will be a reality (well..) and assuming it is, are they setting up shop in Europe first and then heading over to Qatar or just meeting in Doha? My sense would suggest Europe first for a couple days, practise Tuesday/Wednesday game say the Thursday in said country and then fly to Qatar the Friday. I can’t imagine you’d play anything else closer to the opening game.

Would Italy be a pipe dream?

[Joe MacCarthy]

1 hour ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

No player and no coach is above a club, a programme, a shirt. Ever. 

I've followed international football for at least 40 years and it was totally an outlier. Not because our players are more demanding or more woke, but because they are as clueless as the CSA, and the captains, on top of that, failed to do their job negotiating the deal properly. 

Herdman colluded with the players in a totally exceptional and unheard of boycott of an official friendly, I think it was a disgusting move on his part, and the players. If you don't know how serious doing that was, you don't understand the game. There are basic etiquettes, and the players and Herdman ignored them. 

But I did say that he should have received an ultimatum. Whatever the urgency from the players' perspective, you do not screw over your own fans and a regional rival--if that had been done to us, if we'd travelled to Panama for a friendly and they'd bailed like that, we'd be livid.

His obligation was to field a team. He didn't, and left thousands of fans in the lurch and that meant a hundreds of thousands in losses for the CSA. He also approved the Iran friendly previously, because he's clueless. The players only complained after hearing public criticism, they were silent for 10 days then chirped in after the fact. 

It's a debacle, and as mentioned, it may come back to haunt us. I think it is hurting us as we sit right now, we are still way behind on friendlies because anyone signing to do one with us is probably making demands for guarantees we are seeing go way beyond normal clauses for such matches. 

Agreed with pretty much everything you said but I don't think it is too late if they truly put this behind them and get on with it.  Herdman has to get over his funk or whatever was wrong with him the last two times I saw him, deliver to the boys one of his TED Talks and we should be ok.

[Cheeta]

4 hours ago, shorty said:

You know, given that lack of transparency was a stated grievance (and well-founded) I find this message from the CSA to be a step forward and an olive branch. Having sat at bargaining tables and knowing the delicacy of communication in that context I take this communication to be a good sign — better than no message, and no discernible hidden “digs” at the players about the dispute or the process. Not quite contrite, but close. I’ll take it. 

Feeling generous today are we?

[tovan1]

Just watch...the CSA will announce that  Russia and Belarus are confirmed in Moscow and Minsk for Sept and that both federations will pay top dollar appearance fees to help CSA recoup the costs from cancelling Iran and Panama. 

[Obinna]

4 hours ago, kacbru said:

It is a long way for Ventura County FC to travel for a friendly, but you never know...

FYI the "highlights" from the match that was used to prep for the 2013 Gold Cup, where we opened with a loss to Martinique. How did I make it through this period as a fan?

 

I counted at least 8 players who went on to play in the CPL: Bekker, Edgar, Ledgerwood, Nakajima-Farran, Haber, De Jong, Edwini-Bonsu, Petrasso (and I think Aleman?). That's pretty cool.

Playing Ventura County in a friendly? Not so much...

[Cheeta]

2 hours ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

No player and no coach is above a club, a programme, a shirt. Ever. 

I've followed international football for at least 40 years and it was totally an outlier. Not because our players are more demanding or more woke, but because they are as clueless as the CSA, and the captains, on top of that, failed to do their job negotiating the deal properly. 

Herdman colluded with the players in a totally exceptional and unheard of boycott of an official friendly, I think it was a disgusting move on his part, and the players. If you don't know how serious doing that was, you don't understand the game. There are basic etiquettes, and the players and Herdman ignored them. 

But I did say that he should have received an ultimatum. Whatever the urgency from the players' perspective, you do not screw over your own fans and a regional rival--if that had been done to us, if we'd travelled to Panama for a friendly and they'd bailed like that, we'd be livid.

His obligation was to field a team. He didn't, and left thousands of fans in the lurch and that meant a hundreds of thousands in losses for the CSA. He also approved the Iran friendly previously, because he's clueless. The players only complained after hearing public criticism, they were silent for 10 days then chirped in after the fact. 

It's a debacle, and as mentioned, it may come back to haunt us. I think it is hurting us as we sit right now, we are still way behind on friendlies because anyone signing to do one with us is probably making demands for guarantees we are seeing go way beyond normal clauses for such matches. 

To borrow a phrase, a lot to unpack.  Agree with some of what you wrote but will point the finger of blame in a 180 degree different direction.

To my mind, there shouldn't have been the mutiny for the Panama fixture for the obvious reasons you wrote.  Whether that mutiny was more organic than organized doesn't matter.  But that there was, is 100% on the CSA.  That's a failure of leadership and the buck stops at the biggest desk at CSA HQ. 

I take a military view of leadership.  If you lose your command it's always your fault.  Always.  Issues weren't recognized, issues weren't addressed, and it happened under your watch.  Period.  If that ridiculous press conference following the labour action doesn't make my point I'm not sure what else could.

The brass at the CSA hiding behind "the fans", using US as a shield against legitimate player concerns clearly, and I'd suggest FINALLY, is no longer a tenable position.

The deal the CSA struck with CSB isn't the players business and not the players problem.  Don't know.  Don't care.  That's the CSA's problem if that deal interferes with WCQing prize money being distributed amongst NT players.  Sort it out.

As for Herdman, fair enough.  If I recall correctly, it was all radio silence until well after things were done & dusted and all concerned had jetted home.  And at that, played a rather unconvincing "Good Cop" because he had to.  I would suggest he was in an impossible position and will give him the benefit of the doubt, see above comments about leadership.  He may have an unflattering part in all this but then again he may have been Cassandra.  We don't know.

Debacle is understatement.  The language that can come out of my gob, grrrrr.  Debacle hasn't been amongst the mouthing.

P.S.  Don't want to suggest I feel the deal with CSB is a bad one.  Don't know enough to say.  For what little we know I feel it's a good deal for the CSA.  As the light of day shines upon it more my opinion may change.

P.S.S.  Don't want to suggest Herdman has passed or failed at this test of leadership.  Just that he took the most obvious path of least evil.  A-gin, if we ever learn more about this my opinion may change.

 

 

 

[Unnamed Trialist]

1 hour ago, Cheeta said:

To borrow a phrase, a lot to unpack.  Agree with some of what you wrote but will point the finger of blame in a 180 degree different direction.

To my mind, there shouldn't have been the mutiny for the Panama fixture for the obvious reasons you wrote.  Whether that mutiny was more organic than organized doesn't matter.  But that there was, is 100% on the CSA.  That's a failure of leadership and the buck stops at the biggest desk at CSA HQ. 

I take a military view of leadership.  If you lose your command it's always your fault.  Always.  Issues weren't recognized, issues weren't addressed, and it happened under your watch.  Period.  If that ridiculous press conference following the labour action doesn't make my point I'm not sure what else could.

The brass at the CSA hiding behind "the fans", using US as a shield against legitimate player concerns clearly, and I'd suggest FINALLY, is no longer a tenable position.

The deal the CSA struck with CSB isn't the players business and not the players problem.  Don't know.  Don't care.  That's the CSA's problem if that deal interferes with WCQing prize money being distributed amongst NT players.  Sort it out.

As for Herdman, fair enough.  If I recall correctly, it was all radio silence until well after things were done & dusted and all concerned had jetted home.  And at that, played a rather unconvincing "Good Cop" because he had to.  I would suggest he was in an impossible position and will give him the benefit of the doubt, see above comments about leadership.  He may have an unflattering part in all this but then again he may have been Cassandra.  We don't know.

Debacle is understatement.  The language that can come out of my gob, grrrrr.  Debacle hasn't been amongst the mouthing.

P.S.  Don't want to suggest I feel the deal with CSB is a bad one.  Don't know enough to say.  For what little we know I feel it's a good deal for the CSA.  As the light of day shines upon it more my opinion may change.

P.S.S.  Don't want to suggest Herdman has passed or failed at this test of leadership.  Just that he took the most obvious path of least evil.  A-gin, if we ever learn more about this my opinion may change.

 

 

 

That's fair: I probably don't know what "debacle" means. 

I think we all agree that they have to remedy this and we have to do it in the course of 3 games. So will they do it? Even if they don't have the compensation package they want? Even if "uncle Lucas who took me to soccer practice when I was a kid" has to pay his own way? 

Do the players, coach and CSA know what is at stake, or are we going to go 3 Ls and out like in 1986?

[Califax]

Significantly more expensive to travel to Europe now than it was a couple weeks ago when the United States announced.

Once again Canada soccer, you’re doing a bang up job

[Unnamed Trialist]

16 minutes ago, Califax said:

Significantly more expensive to travel to Europe now than it was a couple weeks ago when the United States announced.

Once again Canada soccer, you’re doing a bang up job

Not really, because the Canadian dollar is moving up significantly vs the euro. 

The real problem is that they are spectacularly incompetent in general at the CSA. 

[narduch]

We are playing the September window in Europe to appease the clubs of our Euro based players

[Unnamed Trialist]

52 minutes ago, narduch said:

We are playing the September window in Europe to appease the clubs of our Euro based players

It's still convenient to attract rivals, get a decent stadium, get a crowd in (even if rival fans), as well as take some travel stress off of the European-based players. It is not just their clubs. The MLS guys did the entire WC qualifying without varying more than 3 hours in time zones. 

If we play in the south of France that puts 12-14 players within a 3-hour flight (bit more maybe from Turkey).

[Califax]

1 hour ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Not really, because the Canadian dollar is moving up significantly vs the euro. 

The real problem is that they are spectacularly incompetent in general at the CSA. 

I suppose, but had they announced in a timely manner, those looking to travel would have had the best of both worlds. 

I doubt the euro will offset the jump in fares due to Air Canada's recent cutback announcement. 

Anyhow, I'm happy we're in europe against what I assume will be solid competition.

[EJsens1]

Was told that the game they are hoping to play just before the World Cup is being planned for Dubai