The Importance of the Players vs CSA Pay Dispute

[WestHamCanadianinOxford]

2 minutes ago, toontownman said:

Is that new statement real? "In fairness to the Canadian Soccer Association.."

Sounds like they recorded a pub conversation over pints and turned it into text.  That or they copied one of my copious amounts of posts here when I realized I messed up and have to back down.

Deserved both a haha and a like ...to be fair.

[Aird25]

24 minutes ago, Obinna said:

This has been explained before.

It was reported that Canada Soccer turned down two friendlies in September because they couldn't match the spend on the women's side in the 2023 calendar year. Shitty for the men, but if that's what was agreed on then it is that it is. 

What really ticks me off is that now the Women suddenly have their calendar fully booked for 2023...

So, if I am following this correctly, we TURNED DOWN friendlies because the women never had their friendlies booked, but then they booked their friendlies in the end and we missed the boat in September.

Surely there is something I am not seeing here, because based on what I am understanding this makes zero sense. Someone please clarify. 

If the women are getting more games than the men to ensure the spend is the same between the teams, isn't it logical to assume it costs more for a men's friendly? Most countries in the world aren't adhering to the same equality in spend afaik

Edited August 24, 2023 by Aird25

[Ottawafan]

7 minutes ago, WestHamCanadianinOxford said:

I honestly don't know.  I lived out the country for years and read very little of his stuff in that time. 

I am going off what you said.  It is okay for him to tell one side based on insider information, is what I get going from your posts.  My challenge was to your assertition that all journalists did this.  That's fortunately not true. 

If he is beholden to insiders for his stories and only writes their side, he is just as comprimised as someone literally paid to write the other side.  His job depends on the relationship. Again you take information from such sources but it is not the only way to do it. Or the right way, in my opinion. 

His reputation has always been a fair investigative journo.  The implication from a few here has been he is only telling one side because those posters didn't like the message.  But that doesn't mean he is biased or only telling one side of the story.  He isn't Simmons or Garrioch.

[Mattd97]

38 minutes ago, Obinna said:

This has been explained before.

It was reported that Canada Soccer turned down two friendlies in September because they couldn't match the spend on the women's side in the 2023 calendar year. Shitty for the men, but if that's what was agreed on then it is that it is. 

What really ticks me off is that now the Women suddenly have their calendar fully booked for 2023...

So, if I am following this correctly, we TURNED DOWN friendlies because the women never had their friendlies booked, but then they booked their friendlies in the end and we missed the boat in September.

Surely there is something I am not seeing here, because based on what I am understanding this makes zero sense. Someone please clarify. 

So your post is essentially "this was explained" then continues to "this still isn't explained"?

[Kadenge]

21 minutes ago, Aird25 said:

If the women are getting more games than the men to ensure the spend is the same between the teams, isn't it logical to assume it costs more for a men's friendly? Most countries in the world aren't adhering to the same equality in spend afaik

Apparently not for the 2 games that were in play for Sept as it would have cost the CSA a net of 200K.  We are all speculating as to why friendlies haven't  been scheduled for the men other than Japan.

Edited August 24, 2023 by Kadenge

[WestHamCanadianinOxford]

13 minutes ago, Ottawafan said:

His reputation has always been a fair investigative journo.  The implication from a few here has been he is only telling one side because those posters didn't like the message.  But that doesn't mean he is biased or only telling one side of the story.  He isn't Simmons or Garrioch.

Again going from what you said about how he does things.  But this horse is well and truly dead at this point. 

[Obinna]

39 minutes ago, Aird25 said:

If the women are getting more games than the men to ensure the spend is the same between the teams, isn't it logical to assume it costs more for a men's friendly? Most countries in the world aren't adhering to the same equality in spend afaik

Yes indeed that is one logical conclusion we can make based on what we know. 

24 minutes ago, Mattd97 said:

So your post is essentially "this was explained" then continues to "this still isn't explained"?

I guess.

Here is what I understand:

- it was explained to us that Canada Soccer turned down september friendlies for the men because the women couldn't have an "equal spend" in 2023.

- there will now be money spent by the CSA on the women in the form of friendlies for the remained of the year.

- as @Aird25 and @shorty point out, this may suggest that "equal spend" means an equal dollar figures, not an equal amount of games. However, this hasn't been explained or clarified to us yet. 

As of right now the men are slated to play 11 games and the women are only slated to play 10...but this doesn't include the rumoured friendlies in October and November for the women. If their remaining calendar is "full" it could mean anywhere from 2-4 games, which would bring their total to 12-14 games. Just depends on if they are playing 1 or 2 games each window.

I can imagine it being more costly to pull of friendlies on the men's side of the game - but this was also a World Cup year for the women, which I imagine cost alot, especially if family and friends were flown to the tournment like we saw with the men in Qatar last year.

Curious to know how it all breaks down. Hopefully we get a copy of the budget sometime in the future. 

 

Edited August 24, 2023 by Obinna

[Obinna]

@Mattd97 I guess my overall problem here is that we shouldn't be turning down friendlies we can technically afford. The same should apply for the women too. I don't want either of these teams to turn down games all for a self-imposed limit we are placing on ourselves. 

Like I said before, if it's a calendar year issue, show some flexibility. Turning down games hurts our programs. 

[VinceA]

40 minutes ago, Aird25 said:

If the women are getting more games than the men to ensure the spend is the same between the teams, isn't it logical to assume it costs more for a men's friendly? Most countries in the world aren't adhering to the same equality in spend afaik

Yes I imagine a number of "good teams" want millions or at least high six figures to play us. In particular SA teams would have a huge discrepancy in $$ ask between the men and women programs (Except maybe Brazil)

[Aird25]

25 minutes ago, Kadenge said:

Apparently not for the 2 games that were in play for Sept as it would have cost the CSA a net of 200K.  We are all speculating as to why friendlies haven't  been scheduled for the men other than Japan.

Hasn't it been widely reported that money is the issue?

[Mattd97]

10 minutes ago, Obinna said:

@Mattd97 I guess my overall problem here is that we shouldn't be turning down friendlies we can technically afford. The same should apply for the women too. I don't want either of these teams to turn down games all for a self-imposed limit we are placing on ourselves. 

Like I said before, if it's a calendar year issue, show some flexibility. Turning down games hurts our programs. 

It honestly never seemed like a plausible excuse -- either from them or created for them.  I think it was probably assumptions and broken telephone. You can't run an organization that way.

[Obinna]

17 minutes ago, Mattd97 said:

It honestly never seemed like a plausible excuse -- either from them or created for them.  I think it was probably assumptions and broken telephone. You can't run an organization that way.

Not sure what you mean by that. Are you suggesting the news that we turned down friendlies in September was a case of broken telephone? 

I think it broke in a Tweet. Anyone have it on hand by any chance?

[Ivan]

1 hour ago, Ottawafan said:

His reputation has always been a fair investigative journo.  The implication from a few here has been he is only telling one side because those posters didn't like the message.  But that doesn't mean he is biased or only telling one side of the story.  He isn't Simmons or Garrioch.

His reputation is as an investgative journo, and a good one (he has won numerous awards for his work).  He is a sensationalist, however, as he made his reputation on the dirt within hockey and other sports.  I honestly think he is trying to sensationalize the money issue in Canadian soccer, which is fair, but my (and others) issue is that he is only covering one side.  How many of his stories have now had to be walked back?  At least 3 by my count.  And he is never the one to walk them back.

I heard heard many of the soccer journos (not just the Onesoccer ones) basically mocking his work as someone who knows nothing about the game, Sharman in particular was quite good.

Edit:  But my main issue with his work is that it is mostly read, and taken for gospel, by mainstream and peripheral fans of the sport who don't have a chance to read the other side of the story and make an informed decision of their own.

Edited August 24, 2023 by Ivan
added context

[Ottawafan]

49 minutes ago, Ivan said:

His reputation is as an investgative journo, and a good one (he has won numerous awards for his work).  He is a sensationalist, however, as he made his reputation on the dirt within hockey and other sports.  I honestly think he is trying to sensationalize the money issue in Canadian soccer, which is fair, but my (and others) issue is that he is only covering one side.  How many of his stories have now had to be walked back?  At least 3 by my count.  And he is never the one to walk them back.

I heard heard many of the soccer journos (not just the Onesoccer ones) basically mocking his work as someone who knows nothing about the game, Sharman in particular was quite good.

Edit:  But my main issue with his work is that it is mostly read, and taken for gospel, by mainstream and peripheral fans of the sport who don't have a chance to read the other side of the story and make an informed decision of their own.

As someone who has first hand knowledge of some of the situations he has reported on, I wish he'd actually go further in explaining how much of a mess the CSA is and has been.  But I suppose he will not put out some of what he has learned due to not going too far.

[Mattd97]

1 hour ago, Obinna said:

Not sure what you mean by that. Are you suggesting the news that we turned down friendlies in September was a case of broken telephone? 

I think it broke in a Tweet. Anyone have it on hand by any chance?

I mean that the reason is as straight foward as wed need to book a game for the women if we booked a game for the men and thats why we didnt book more.  That seemed too stupid and simple to be the full story.

[johnyb]

"The base compensation offered by Canada Soccer is not Zero"

lol😅

[Ivan]

1 hour ago, Ottawafan said:

As someone who has first hand knowledge of some of the situations he has reported on, I wish he'd actually go further in explaining how much of a mess the CSA is and has been.  But I suppose he will not put out some of what he has learned due to not going too far.

I know you're having a hard time grasping this, but I am not disagreeing with you that the CSA is a fucking mess and probably much worse than I know. However, I don't think the players are coming across very well in this situation either. Westhead is obviously dealing with a player or former player as his main source (probably more than one). So far, I actually like what Devos is doing and I would think he has some pretty good insider information on what has gone on in Canadian Soccer.

[Kadenge]

There's no winners in this feud. Perhaps mediation is what's required. Anyone know of a  cheap mediator? 

[Obinna]

2 hours ago, Mattd97 said:

I mean that the reason is as straight foward as wed need to book a game for the women if we booked a game for the men and thats why we didnt book more.  That seemed too stupid and simple to be the full story.

This is the CSA we are talking about. 

[Obinna]

We need to book a game for the women if we booked a game for the men....but then we booked games for the women and not the men 

[Ottawafan]

15 hours ago, Ivan said:

I know you're having a hard time grasping this, but I am not disagreeing with you that the CSA is a fucking mess and probably much worse than I know. However, I don't think the players are coming across very well in this situation either. Westhead is obviously dealing with a player or former player as his main source (probably more than one). So far, I actually like what Devos is doing and I would think he has some pretty good insider information on what has gone on in Canadian Soccer.

DeVos outside of the BK comment hasn’t done anything one way or the other publicly.  Outside of a few ruffled fans here not really sure anyone feels the players come across poorly. 

[canuckgbp]

—-

Edited August 25, 2023 by canuckgbp

[WestHamCanadianinOxford]

2 hours ago, Ottawafan said:

DeVos outside of the BK comment hasn’t done anything one way or the other publicly.  Outside of a few ruffled fans here not really sure anyone feels the players come across poorly. 

I have sympathy for the players' position.  In that sympathy, I have to acknowledge that having to make clarification statements means you failed in one or two of your primary tasks - researching then forming a position and communicating that position.  Of course, those failures in your core tasks comes across poorly.

If it is as you say and just "a few ruffled fans here" then we are still in a very sorry state.  Because it means no one else in Canada cared enough to read the statements to try to understand what the players are actually asking for.

Edited August 25, 2023 by WestHamCanadianinOxford

[Ottawafan]

36 minutes ago, WestHamCanadianinOxford said:

I have sympathy for the players' position.  In that sympathy, I have to acknowledge that having to make clarification statements means you failed in one or two of your primary tasks - researching then forming a position and communicating that position.  Of course, those failures in your core tasks comes across poorly.

If it is as you say and just "a few ruffled fans here" then we are still in a very sorry state.  Because it means no one else in Canada cared enough to read the statements to try to understand what the players are actually asking for.

We are in a sorry state thanks to the leadership Canada Soccer.  Players finally pushing back on the CSA is a good thing.  

[WestHamCanadianinOxford]

25 minutes ago, Ottawafan said:

We are in a sorry state thanks to the leadership Canada Soccer.  Players finally pushing back on the CSA is a good thing.  

Honestly, mate, that's a hollow sound bite.

Please address the points I made.  I am fine with the players pushing back, I welcome them making the CSA accountable.  However, if they do it poorly, like they did in this case, pretending they didn't does not do them or soccer in Canada, generally, any favours in the long run. Would you agree?