The Importance of the Players vs CSA Pay Dispute

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

Some food for thought on whether $11k on a custom suit is really necessary in this particular context. Here is "Ryan Giggs" from my former avatar expressing his angst as president of Montenegro's FA that everybody else at what appears to be a FIFA or UEFA event is wearing ties:

Even though that doesn't actually appear to be the case. It's real football we are talking about here. I seriously doubt that you need to dress like a motivational speaker from an infomercial to be taken seriously.

Edited October 27, 2022 by Ozzie_the_parrot

[red card]

The French players have submitted a new proposal for image rights.

The French are a decade ahead of Canada on this issue as they signed an image rights agreement in 2010. Now, the players are asking to be able to choose which national team sponsors they want to represent. They also want to shorten the length of agreements to 2 years so that it can be looked at before every World Cups & Euros.

 

https://www.sportbusiness.com/news/france-players-submit-revised-image-rights-proposal-to-fff/

 

[narduch]

Watching EPL on Fubo and the half time has the previously mentioned Gatorade ad that features both men's and women's national team players.

Perhaps the situation isn't as acrimonious as the media (and some on this site) is portraying it to be and they will eventually hammer out a deal.

 

Edited October 29, 2022 by narduch

[WestHamCanadianinOxford]

26 minutes ago, narduch said:

Watching EPL on Fubo and the half time has the previously mentioned Gatorade ad that features both men's and women's national team players.

Perhaps the situation isn't as acrimonious as the media (and some on this site) is portraying it to be and they will eventually hammer out a deal.

 

Was beginning to think my brother was pulling my leg or going crazy as no one else seemed to have seen it.

But I guess West Ham v Bournemouth during the day on a Monday, has a very specific appeal.  (He was "making lesson plans", by the way.)

[narduch]

35 minutes ago, WestHamCanadianinOxford said:

Was beginning to think my brother was pulling my leg or going crazy as no one else seemed to have seen it.

But I guess West Ham v Bournemouth during the day on a Monday, has a very specific appeal.  (He was "making lesson plans", by the way.)

They showed it about 6 or 7 times

[WestHamCanadianinOxford]

1 minute ago, narduch said:

They showed it about 6 or 7 times

Good, I guess.  Who all was in it? 

[narduch]

12 minutes ago, WestHamCanadianinOxford said:

Good, I guess.  Who all was in it? 

Sorry I was half watching. Eustaquio,  Adekugbe, Huitema. Quite a few more

[Watchmen]

On 10/23/2022 at 3:58 PM, Bison44 said:

Westhead needed a catchier title to his article to get you to click on it, something like "Davies shares his top 5 poutine recipes" and the article will still be about how incompetent the CSA is.  And I am with you, this does detract from all the good stuff we should be feeling and Westhead wasnt writing any articles on soccer before he sniffed out a potential scandal he could break.  

 I predict that on the 28th we'll get another article like this one right before the CPL final.  

You didn't get "another article like this" just before the final.

[Bison44]

31 minutes ago, Watchmen said:

You didn't get "another article like this" just before the final.

Sure I did.  He has already lost interest in soccer and moved on to the next scandal with Water polo canada.  The Davies/CSA thing wasnt juicy enough to keep his interest.  

[Watchmen]

55 minutes ago, Bison44 said:

Sure I did.  He has already lost interest in soccer and moved on to the next scandal with Water polo canada.  The Davies/CSA thing wasnt juicy enough to keep his interest.  

Sure.  However, your implication was that he was targeting the CSA/CSB and that he'd drop another article about them "right before the final" as if had a vendetta against them.

[Bison44]

11 minutes ago, Watchmen said:

Sure.  However, your implication was that he was targeting the CSA/CSB and that he'd drop another article about them "right before the final" as if had a vendetta against them.

I dont think he has a vendetta, he has a nose for scandal and knows it'll get him traffic/clicks.  Which I guess makes him good at his job.  

[Watchmen]

19 minutes ago, Bison44 said:

I dont think he has a vendetta, he has a nose for scandal and knows it'll get him traffic/clicks.  Which I guess makes him good at his job.  

Fair enough.

[Ruud]

16 hours ago, Bison44 said:

Sure I did.  He has already lost interest in soccer and moved on to the next scandal with Water polo canada.  The Davies/CSA thing wasnt juicy enough to keep his interest.  

In this case I understand some water polo players are using the media rather than the other way.  Careful what you read as some players dispute what other players are suggesting 

[Ruud]

Just now, Ruud said:

In this case I understand some water polo players are using the media rather than the other way.  Careful what you read as some players dispute what other players are suggesting 

Not to suggest anyone on this chat isn’t careful at what they read in the media 

[jonovision]

15 hours ago, Bison44 said:

I dont think he has a vendetta, he has a nose for scandal and knows it'll get him traffic/clicks.  Which I guess makes him good at his job.  

I don't think he necessarily has a nose for scandal either. He was the first to report on the Chicago Blackhawks situation and built a reputation on that. I suspect that reputation has led to him being sent tips/inside info from Canada Hockey, CSA, water polo, etc. I very much doubt he discovered any of this info on his own.

[SpursFlu]

I think the whole custom suit thing was a bit of a jumping of the shark moment for him. That's basically him saying, sorry guys I got nothing here.

On to the next ambulance to chase

Edited October 31, 2022 by SpursFlu

[ensco]

Why does anyone think that the suits story isn't a story? All this minimizing, and caterwauling about the nerve of a reporter, to report something when interest is high...

It's absolutely a story if our federation is crying poor all day every day, then benchmarking personal expenditures against the practices of the worst Fifacrats in 1974. I don't really care if Argentina or Italy do it either, btw. It's both real money ($10K matters in our starved youth soccer system) and hugely symbolic.

Expenditure by suits on stuff for themselves is just not right.

Even if the CSA had 100x the budget, they can wear their own suits or whatever, with a Canada scarf, in Doha. Same as the rest of us.

Edited October 31, 2022 by ensco

[RS]

The suit thing was just a small part (three total sentences) of a much larger article about Davies asserting control over his image rights and the overall dispute between the players and CSA, but many latched on to it because of that tone deaf video that later made the rounds on Twitter.

That some are trying to dismiss it as Westhead not having anything of substance to report on is telling, but not at all surprising.

[Free kick]

1 hour ago, ensco said:

Why does anyone think that the suits story isn't a story? All this minimizing, and caterwauling about the nerve of a reporter, to report something when interest is high...

It's absolutely a story if our federation is crying poor all day every day, then benchmarking personal expenditures against the practices of the worst Fifacrats in 1974. I don't really care if Argentina or Italy do it either, btw. It's both real money ($10K matters in our starved youth soccer system) and hugely symbolic.

Expenditure by suits on stuff for themselves is just not right.

Even if the CSA had 100x the budget, they can wear their own suits or whatever, with a Canada scarf, in Doha. Same as the rest of us.

Yes.  If we were talking about, for example Italy,  then it wouldnt be an issue for me.   If it was the FIGC (The Italian equivalent of the CSA), then who cares?  They overseas the most popular sport in the country (by far) and something of a cultural institution in teh nation.  I bring up this example because there was reference to a similar case In Italy several pages back.  But they will never have to cry poor, and the same can be said for several others of the bigger western nations.   But its another story when we talking about the CSA.

Edited October 31, 2022 by Free kick

[SpursFlu]

1 hour ago, RS said:

The suit thing was just a small part (three total sentences) of a much larger article about Davies asserting control over his image rights and the overall dispute between the players and CSA, but many latched on to it because of that tone deaf video that later made the rounds on Twitter.

That some are trying to dismiss it as Westhead not having anything of substance to report on is telling, but not at all surprising.

But he purposely misrepresented the Davies situation insinuating that the CSA tried to use Davies image for a Gatorade commercial without his consent but the situation had just as much or more to do with Davies signing his own commercial deal with direct competitor Biosteel. The problem is he's putting forth situations as if its one example after another of the CSA trying to rip people off or they're just a bunch of greedy goofs but the reality is its a bunch of half truths or just people having a look at how things are done with no real perspective on each situation. So they produced a documentary promoting the hell out of the players? Oh and TSN didn't want to air it because they thought Mediapro might sue them. CSA tried to get TSN to air a doc following the national teams historic run to the World Cup that will be aired on TSN knowing if they showed it Mediapro will sue 😉 yah sure. So oh.. what a waste of money by those idiots at the CSA am I right or am I right?  sure my man. 

Maybe it's time to move on to PingPong Canada. I hear there are some unthinkable injustices going on over there. It'll be a national scandal.. everyone clutch your pearls

[RJB]

2 hours ago, ensco said:

Why does anyone think that the suits story isn't a story? All this minimizing, and caterwauling about the nerve of a reporter, to report something when interest is high...

It's absolutely a story if our federation is crying poor all day every day, then benchmarking personal expenditures against the practices of the worst Fifacrats in 1974. I don't really care if Argentina or Italy do it either, btw. It's both real money ($10K matters in our starved youth soccer system) and hugely symbolic.

Expenditure by suits on stuff for themselves is just not right.

Even if the CSA had 100x the budget, they can wear their own suits or whatever, with a Canada scarf, in Doha. Same as the rest of us.

You had me until the last part.  I don't mind them buying themselves matching suits if we are healthy financially, but it's that they asked for gear back from the players, and are claiming essentially to not have the money to pay them a fair deal. 

[Soro17]

17 minutes ago, RJB said:

You had me until the last part.  I don't mind them buying themselves matching suits if we are healthy financially, but it's that they asked for gear back from the players, and are claiming essentially to not have the money to pay them a fair deal. 

When was the gear back from the players thing though? Kaylyn Kyle’s gripe is at least 5 years ago. 

[DoyleG]

53 minutes ago, Soro17 said:

When was the gear back from the players thing though? Kaylyn Kyle’s gripe is at least 5 years ago. 

Even if I find the evidence being thin (training camps are hardly a good reason for players to keep their kit), this is nothing new in the world of Canadian Soccer.

Seems more the problem is those complaining are still action like the women who got "kicked to the curb" for something younger and hotter. They have no problem engaging ins some "sleaze" for their "investigative" journalists.

[RS]

1 hour ago, Soro17 said:

When was the gear back from the players thing though? Kaylyn Kyle’s gripe is at least 5 years ago. 

It was part of the same article that mentioned the suits.

[SthMelbRed]

56 minutes ago, RS said:

It was part of the same article that mentioned the suits.

Yes, it's in the same article,  but it's mentioned as something that's happened at a vague time in the past. If it had happened last week, it'd be something, but if it happened 10 years ago, largely irrelevant to the matter at hand.