Canadian Soccer Business (CSB)

[Watchmen]

33 minutes ago, grigorio said:

I get this line of thinking but I don’t really buy it. We have shat the bed after having our hopes up countless times before. Most of us also thought Herdman was crazy and hell he himself probably thought the same when he started talking WC 2022 as a possibility and we knew about a Phonzie and David at the time.  
 

To think that two players would change the course of this program’s history in such a dramatic way is a stretch. In fact, in the end it probably wasn’t even because of these players but Herdman himself and NO ONE predicted his success in getting CanMNT to where they are now. 
 

It’s like for the very first time ever our optimism actually panned out and we instantly forgot about the 1000 times we were heartbroken just before it. 

I get that, and I maybe didn't emphasize it enough: I'm not saying *no* deal should have been signed with the CSB.  I'm saying that even members of Canada Soccer recognized that the deal in front of them wasn't a good one and there needed to be some negotiation.  That could have been as simple as something we've all talked about here: the CSA getting a percentage of marketing revenue above a certain threshold. Maybe that provision does exist, but if it does the CSA sure isn't talking about it now.  This is where the transparency from the CSA is needed.

[SF]

I think the argument would be that the CPL does not exist absent this subsidy from the CSA.

Whether that's in the best interests of the CSA and its constituents is a discussion, for sure.

Almost certain that the CSA gave away too much and absolutely certain that they weren't even remotely transparent about the process.  Also quite clear that the lack of transparency has destroyed any trust between the organization and the players. Which is a pretty serious problem, to say the least. 

[Ally McCoist]

https://canadasoccer.com/news/canada-soccer-update/

[SpursFlu]

6 minutes ago, Ally McCoist said:

https://canadasoccer.com/news/canada-soccer-update/

CSA "Ah fk my life.. can somebody please tweet something out to satisfy and shut up these cry babies so we can get back to focusing on actual work like preparing for the World Cup and building a professional league"

Edited July 13, 2022 by SpursFlu

[TOcanadafan]

On this edition of Nick & Ed Talks…

16 minutes ago, Ally McCoist said:

https://canadasoccer.com/news/canada-soccer-update/

I actually preferred the entertainment level provided by “live Nick on tilt” much more than reading this re-hash and rebuttal of Rick Westhead articles and tweets.

Edited July 13, 2022 by TOcanadafan

[Colonel Green]

8 minutes ago, Ally McCoist said:

https://canadasoccer.com/news/canada-soccer-update/

This is sort of an aside at this point, but:

Quote

The Men’s National Team proposal included a request of 40% net of taxes of an estimated $10 million prize pool, which equates to $8 million given an estimated marginal tax rate of 50% on average. Given Canada Soccer’s commitment to pay the Women’s National Team the same dollar funds for each major tournament (and vice versa), this would have equaled a $16 million commitment based on a $10 million source of funds. This was, and still is, untenable. Canada Soccer reiterated its position of fairness and equity in several discussions with the Men’s National Team leading up to the scheduled Panama match.

The Westhead article seems to confirm that this is in fact what the players were asking for.

But in some of the players' subsequent interviews they have been making it sound like they want a deal equivalent to what the US did. Somebody really needs to nail down the players' position on this issue.

[Big_M]

Remember when we repeated over and over and over about the 40%? about equal pay? about CSB having nothing to do with prize money? about the demands of players being untenable and ppl just didnt want to understand? Well here it is, coming straight from CSA exactly how we explained it...now do you wanna get it or not?

 

FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022™ Prize Money
It is important to clarify that the CSB agreement and the negotiation of FIFA World Cup prize money are independent and have no bearing on each other.

 

The initial proposal received by the Men’s National Team on 4 June 2022, was untenable because it did not: a) consider any distribution of prize money for the Women’s National Team; and b) was not financially viable once a consideration of the Women’s National Team portion was accounted. 

The Men’s National Team proposal included a request of 40% net of taxes of an estimated $10 million prize pool, which equates to $8 million given an estimated marginal tax rate of 50% on average. Given Canada Soccer’s commitment to pay the Women’s National Team the same dollar funds for each major tournament (and vice versa), this would have equaled a $16 million commitment based on a $10 million source of funds. This was, and still is, untenable. Canada Soccer reiterated its position of fairness and equity in several discussions with the Men’s National Team leading up to the scheduled Panama match.

It is critically important to reiterate and be abundantly clear: fairness and pay equity is at the heart of our ongoing negotiations and we are committed to finding a resolution that meets both of those values. We look forward to updating media, our fans and all Canadians as we continue to work towards a resolution.

[Gian-Luca]

I had to chuckle about the CSA's release trying to make it sound like their update is just another of a series of regular updates, rather than being prompted in response to the Westhead article. I think they can afford to be transparent on that one, since it is pretty bloody obvious as they respond to each one of Westhead's attacks. I mean, I don't blame them for doing so, but its ironic that they don't just admit outright this given everyone using the buzzwords of honesty & transparency.

As an aside to this (since I guess this is more of a topic for the Women's Team section of the forum), but the timing of the attacks on Bev Priestman are also somewhat strange. You'd never know from that TSN article that she is coming off an Olympic Gold Medal win and just had the team win its WCQ group for 2023. Strange time to be trying to make it sound controversial, while still dredging up the 8-1 loss to Honduras from 10 years ago in the same article.

[Shway]

So with the women qualifying for AUSNZ 23 the total qualification money is 12 Million.

In the spirit of fairness, the CSA is looking to split a percentage…let’s say 60% of that with 48 or so players?

Do I have that right?

[Cheeta]

1 hour ago, ag futbol said:

I can understand this. 2022 no certainty, however, there was upside for the reasons listed. And 2026 was an absolute certainty. And everyone has seen the general growth of the game in NA, the increase in MLS’s success and the rise in franchise values. 

You add up all the factors and at the time it was a sweetheart deal for the next 10 years.

Throw in the renewal option to bring the contract term to 20 years in total? With zero escalation in the amount paid? Exercisable entirely at the option of CSB? 

What was their inspiration for that? Churchill Falls??

It’s very hard (I would say practically impossible) to believe this was done in the best interest of the sport in this country. And I say this as someone who analyzes financials and pores over legal contracts for a living… 

Okay, Churchill Falls is fu'kin funny.  Well played, sir. 

 

Regardless.  A lot of very seperate issues are getting blended together where it might be helpful if they remained seperate. 

Transparency at the CSA.  Player compensation at the CSA.  And, the deal with CSB.

If transparency at the CSA isn't issue #1 than it's issue #1.1.  Right behind the player compensation question. 

The deal with the CBS troubles me only in regards to the tranparency question raised above.  And there are important questions there which may, which should, have some real world consiquences for certain individuals and a certain organization. 

Why doesn't it matter to me if CSB might have "rooked" the CSA?  Easy.  Because any deal that takes money out of the disfunctional CSA's pocket and puts it into the control of the CPL clubs doesn't trouble me in the least.  Any deal which puts monies into the real grassroots of Canadian football is OK by me.  Putting millions of dollars into player salaries each year in Canada is a bad thing?  The more the better as far as I'm concerned. 

Short Answer; Sack the CSA.  

Long Answer;  We've, as fans, have never had it so good as this last round of WCQing.  And in a very large part, like it or no, that wouldn't have happened without the deal with CSB.

 

 

 

 

 

[DoyleG]

3 hours ago, grigorio said:

I get this line of thinking but I don’t really buy it. We have shat the bed after having our hopes up countless times before. Most of us also thought Herdman was crazy and hell he himself probably thought the same when he started talking WC 2022 as a possibility and we knew about a Phonzie and David at the time.  
 

To think that two players would change the course of this program’s history in such a dramatic way is a stretch. In fact, in the end it probably wasn’t even because of these players but Herdman himself and NO ONE predicted his success in getting CanMNT to where they are now. 
 

It’s like for the very first time ever our optimism actually panned out and we instantly forgot about the 1000 times we were heartbroken just before it. 

Unfortunately, we live in Canada.

You can't celebrate any real successes or accomplishments with the Karen's show up and taking a shit on things.

As for people bitchcing about the CSB deal, don't cry when the playbook they learned from has "MLSE" and "TFC" all over it.

[Watchmen]

20 minutes ago, Cheeta said:

Okay, Churchill Falls is fu'kin funny.  Well played, sir. 

 

Regardless.  A lot of very seperate issues are getting blended together where it might be helpful if they remained seperate. 

Transparency at the CSA.  Player compensation at the CSA.  And, the deal with CSB.

If transparency at the CSA isn't issue #1 than it's issue #1.1.  Right behind the player compensation question. 

The deal with the CBS troubles me only in regards to the tranparency question raised above.  And there are important questions there which may, which should, have some real world consiquences for certain individuals and a certain organization. 

Why doesn't it matter to me if CSB might have "rooked" the CSA?  Easy.  Because any deal that takes money out of the disfunctional CSA's pocket and puts it into the control of the CPL clubs doesn't trouble me in the least.  Any deal which puts monies into the real grassroots of Canadian football is OK by me.  Putting millions of dollars into player salaries each year in Canada is a bad thing?  The more the better as far as I'm concerned. 

Short Answer; Sack the CSA.  

Long Answer;  We've, as fans, have never had it so good as this last round of WCQing.  And in a very large part, like it or no, that wouldn't have happened without the deal with CSB.

I know where you're going with this, but I can almost guarantee you that CPL owners will not include any CSB revenue in negotiations with the CPL players, much like MLS owners have done with SUM.  They will treat it as a separate revenue stream which they may (or may not) use on their CPL team, at their discretion. 

And yes, transparency is rather critical from the CSA in all of this.

[Gian-Luca]

One other thought about that Westhead article - while on the one hand I should probably be grateful that he's being such a shit-disturber because it is prompting the CSA to be more transparent, leading to the fanbase getting more information out of this, on the other hand the "johnny-come-lately" aspect of him writing about Canadian soccer now for a sports network that had to be paid to show Canada games & showed no interest in a national league (at least once since the days of Vic & Graham) doesn't sit well with me.

Case in point, it is highly ironic (to put it politely) that his article is all about the CSA's lack of transparency (to the point it is even featured in the title of the article), but he's quoting a former board member about how much better & transparent the hiring process of hiring Herdman to coach the men's team supposedly was.

That comment almost beggars belief. When we talk about the lack of transparency by the CSA, the hiring of Herdman to coach the men should be considered the poster boy example of a lack of transparency, rather than the other way round. It still annoys me to this day that we never got transparency from the CSA on why the decision was made, since of course it wasn't simply a matter of hiring Herdman to fill a vacant position but also firing the ass of Zambrano who had been in the role for such a short time and had shown marginal improvement in that time vs. his six-CB per match predecessor. The fact that Herdman's hiring necessitated Zambrano's firing is, I suspect a reason why it was debated and discussed much more than the hiring of Priestman which did not come with this extra dimension, and at the very least is a crucial bit of context that was left out of Westhead's article and in the interests of fairness and yes, even transparency, should have been included.

It is difficult to say whether this crucial context was left out deliberately by Westhead because it doesn't suit an agenda that he has (and it seems obvious now that he has an agenda given the one-sided reporting), or because he's simply unaware of this past context precisely because he's a johnny-come-lately to covering Canadian soccer now that it's "big news" for the Canadian sporting world as a whole. Which is a shame because one can't help but ask where he was with this investigative journalism when Zambrano was canned and all we got since then were vague, unsubstantiated rumours of the reasons for it. (And before the usual suspect chimes in, I'm not complaining that Herdman was hired or second guessing the CSA for that hire, I am referring to the lack of transparency of the part of the process that involved canning Zambrano).

 

Edited July 13, 2022 by Gian-Luca

[gigi riva]

6 hours ago, SpursFlu said:

CSA "Ah fk my life.. can somebody please tweet something out to satisfy and shut up these cry babies so we can get back to focusing on actual work like preparing for the World Cup and building a professional league"

AMEN to that

[ag futbol]

9 hours ago, SpursFlu said:

CSA "Ah fk my life.. can somebody please tweet something out to satisfy and shut up these cry babies so we can get back to focusing on actual work like preparing for the World Cup and building a professional league"

So was this a prepared speech read from a podium or do you have to drop to your knees to say it to have full effect?

Edited July 13, 2022 by ag futbol

[Sal333]

7 hours ago, Gian-Luca said:

One other thought about that Westhead article - while on the one hand I should probably be grateful that he's being such a shit-disturber because it is prompting the CSA to be more transparent, leading to the fanbase getting more information out of this, on the other hand the "johnny-come-lately" aspect of him writing about Canadian soccer now for a sports network that had to be paid to show Canada games & showed no interest in a national league (at least once since the days of Vic & Graham) doesn't sit well with me.

Case in point, it is highly ironic (to put it politely) that his article is all about the CSA's lack of transparency (to the point it is even featured in the title of the article), but he's quoting a former board member about how much better & transparent the hiring process of hiring Herdman to coach the men's team supposedly was.

That comment almost beggars belief. When we talk about the lack of transparency by the CSA, the hiring of Herdman to coach the men should be considered the poster boy example of a lack of transparency, rather than the other way round. It still annoys me to this day that we never got transparency from the CSA on why the decision was made, since of course it wasn't simply a matter of hiring Herdman to fill a vacant position but also firing the ass of Zambrano who had been in the role for such a short time and had shown marginal improvement in that time vs. his six-CB per match predecessor. The fact that Herdman's hiring necessitated Zambrano's firing is, I suspect a reason why it was debated and discussed much more than the hiring of Priestman which did not come with this extra dimension, and at the very least is a crucial bit of context that was left out of Westhead's article and in the interests of fairness and yes, even transparency, should have been included.

It is difficult to say whether this crucial context was left out deliberately by Westhead because it doesn't suit an agenda that he has (and it seems obvious now that he has an agenda given the one-sided reporting), or because he's simply unaware of this past context precisely because he's a johnny-come-lately to covering Canadian soccer now that it's "big news" for the Canadian sporting world as a whole. Which is a shame because one can't help but ask where he was with this investigative journalism when Zambrano was canned and all we got since then were vague, unsubstantiated rumours of the reasons for it. (And before the usual suspect chimes in, I'm not complaining that Herdman was hired or second guessing the CSA for that hire, I am referring to the lack of transparency of the part of the process that involved canning Zambrano).

 

I guess the Habs were not transparent when they fired Ducharme only to hire Marty St. Louis. Or to bring it back to soccer when the Impact fired Biello and Remi Garde? Did they really have to say they lost faith in one coach so are going with another? When have you read about one team firing one coach and hiring another and then bringing out the dirty laundry. It's on  rare occasions  team s- either club or country - shit on their outgoing people. The standard line is we would like to thank Sadsack Joe for his contribution to our team but we decided to go in another direction.

So that's a ridiculous point you're making.

 

 

[SF]

7 hours ago, Gian-Luca said:

One other thought about that Westhead article - while on the one hand I should probably be grateful that he's being such a shit-disturber because it is prompting the CSA to be more transparent, leading to the fanbase getting more information out of this, on the other hand the "johnny-come-lately" aspect of him writing about Canadian soccer now for a sports network that had to be paid to show Canada games & showed no interest in a national league (at least once since the days of Vic & Graham) doesn't sit well with me.

Case in point, it is highly ironic (to put it politely) that his article is all about the CSA's lack of transparency (to the point it is even featured in the title of the article), but he's quoting a former board member about how much better & transparent the hiring process of hiring Herdman to coach the men's team supposedly was.

That comment almost beggars belief. When we talk about the lack of transparency by the CSA, the hiring of Herdman to coach the men should be considered the poster boy example of a lack of transparency, rather than the other way round. It still annoys me to this day that we never got transparency from the CSA on why the decision was made, since of course it wasn't simply a matter of hiring Herdman to fill a vacant position but also firing the ass of Zambrano who had been in the role for such a short time and had shown marginal improvement in that time vs. his six-CB per match predecessor. The fact that Herdman's hiring necessitated Zambrano's firing is, I suspect a reason why it was debated and discussed much more than the hiring of Priestman which did not come with this extra dimension, and at the very least is a crucial bit of context that was left out of Westhead's article and in the interests of fairness and yes, even transparency, should have been included.

It is difficult to say whether this crucial context was left out deliberately by Westhead because it doesn't suit an agenda that he has (and it seems obvious now that he has an agenda given the one-sided reporting), or because he's simply unaware of this past context precisely because he's a johnny-come-lately to covering Canadian soccer now that it's "big news" for the Canadian sporting world as a whole. Which is a shame because one can't help but ask where he was with this investigative journalism when Zambrano was canned and all we got since then were vague, unsubstantiated rumours of the reasons for it. (And before the usual suspect chimes in, I'm not complaining that Herdman was hired or second guessing the CSA for that hire, I am referring to the lack of transparency of the part of the process that involved canning Zambrano).

 

I think you're correct on the Herdman hiring and why it was more debated internally. I am no employment law expert, but my sense was always that there must have been a bilateral confidentiality agreement on his way out.

I think Westhead, however, is commenting on the lack of transparency within the CSA - indeed, among its own directors.

The transparency/trust relationship with the fans, players, etc. was broken a very long time ago and it's only getting worse. That the same issues exist among the proverbial inner circle is another (very shitty) layer to this whole mess.

I honestly don't know how the senior leadership can rescue this - trust is hard to build and easy to break and almost impossible to restore once broken. 

I'm not one to call for heads in the face of a storm, but if the top people have even an ounce of self awareness, they would decide to move on.  The sport in Canada would be better for it.

[narduch]

7 hours ago, Gian-Luca said:

One other thought about that Westhead article - while on the one hand I should probably be grateful that he's being such a shit-disturber because it is prompting the CSA to be more transparent, leading to the fanbase getting more information out of this, on the other hand the "johnny-come-lately" aspect of him writing about Canadian soccer now for a sports network that had to be paid to show Canada games & showed no interest in a national league (at least once since the days of Vic & Graham) doesn't sit well with me.

Case in point, it is highly ironic (to put it politely) that his article is all about the CSA's lack of transparency (to the point it is even featured in the title of the article), but he's quoting a former board member about how much better & transparent the hiring process of hiring Herdman to coach the men's team supposedly was.

That comment almost beggars belief. When we talk about the lack of transparency by the CSA, the hiring of Herdman to coach the men should be considered the poster boy example of a lack of transparency, rather than the other way round. It still annoys me to this day that we never got transparency from the CSA on why the decision was made, since of course it wasn't simply a matter of hiring Herdman to fill a vacant position but also firing the ass of Zambrano who had been in the role for such a short time and had shown marginal improvement in that time vs. his six-CB per match predecessor. The fact that Herdman's hiring necessitated Zambrano's firing is, I suspect a reason why it was debated and discussed much more than the hiring of Priestman which did not come with this extra dimension, and at the very least is a crucial bit of context that was left out of Westhead's article and in the interests of fairness and yes, even transparency, should have been included.

It is difficult to say whether this crucial context was left out deliberately by Westhead because it doesn't suit an agenda that he has (and it seems obvious now that he has an agenda given the one-sided reporting), or because he's simply unaware of this past context precisely because he's a johnny-come-lately to covering Canadian soccer now that it's "big news" for the Canadian sporting world as a whole. Which is a shame because one can't help but ask where he was with this investigative journalism when Zambrano was canned and all we got since then were vague, unsubstantiated rumours of the reasons for it. (And before the usual suspect chimes in, I'm not complaining that Herdman was hired or second guessing the CSA for that hire, I am referring to the lack of transparency of the part of the process that involved canning Zambrano).

 

I'm speculating Herdman may be one of Westhead's sources

[SF]

3 minutes ago, Sal333 said:

I guess the Habs were not transparent when they fired Ducharme only to hire Marty St. Louis. Or to bring it back to soccer when the Impact fired Biello and Remi Garde? Did they really have to say they lost faith in one coach so are going with another? When have you read about one team firing one coach and hiring another and then bringing out the dirty laundry. It's on  rare occasions  team s- either club or country - shit on their outgoing people. The standard line is we would like to thank Sadsack Joe for his contribution to our team but we decided to go in another direction.

So that's a ridiculous point you're making.

 

 

A little unfair to say its ridiculous. Sure, you don't normally comment and probably have legal constraints as well.

But, if you have a history of being opaque with your stakeholders you should expect criticism when something like this happens.  No benefit of the doubt unless you've earned it (i.e. the CSA has not earned it).

[Sal333]

24 minutes ago, SF said:

A little unfair to say its ridiculous. Sure, you don't normally comment and probably have legal constraints as well.

But, if you have a history of being opaque with your stakeholders you should expect criticism when something like this happens.  No benefit of the doubt unless you've earned it (i.e. the CSA has not earned it).

The point the article was making had nothing to do with the transparency of firing one coach and hiring another. The point of the article was that the minute Wilkinson started to ask touchy questions and before she even took to the pitch she was replaced by Priestman.  (NOTE: I'm a big, big Priestman fan).

That was a completely different scenario from the Zambrano-Herdman situation. That was a case of we want to thank Zambrano for his work with the NT but we decided to go in another direction. Every freaking team does that. Not every freaking team fires a coach because they ask questions about things you want to keep hush hush.

Edited July 13, 2022 by Sal333

[Sal333]

7 minutes ago, Sal333 said:

The point the article was making had nothing to do with the transparency of firing one coach and hiring another. The point of the article was that the minute Wilkinson started to ask touchy questions and before she even took to the pitch she was replaced by Priestman.  (NOTE: I'm a big, big Priestman fan).

That was a completely different scenario from the Zambrano-Herdman situation. That was a case of we want to thank Zambrano for his work with the NT but we decided to go in another direction. Every freaking team does that. Not every freaking team fires a coach because they ask questions about things you want to keep hush hush.

Something occurred to me. After the NT qualified, Bontis admitted on national TV that Herdman not only managed the team but he went out and begged (on bended knee) for money to help the team.

I have a question. Since that money can be considered as sponsorship money shouldn't it have gone to the CSB and not the NT?

[Colonel Green]

8 hours ago, Gian-Luca said:

One other thought about that Westhead article - while on the one hand I should probably be grateful that he's being such a shit-disturber because it is prompting the CSA to be more transparent, leading to the fanbase getting more information out of this, on the other hand the "johnny-come-lately" aspect of him writing about Canadian soccer now for a sports network that had to be paid to show Canada games & showed no interest in a national league (at least once since the days of Vic & Graham) doesn't sit well with me.

Westhead is one of the best sports journalists in the country. He is coming off having broken one of the most important stories in years by exposing the Blackhawks. And somehow you reduce him to who he works for? That doesn’t matter even a little bit.

[Gian-Luca]

1 hour ago, Sal333 said:

I guess the Habs were not transparent when they fired Ducharme only to hire Marty St. Louis. Or to bring it back to soccer when the Impact fired Biello and Remi Garde? Did they really have to say they lost faith in one coach so are going with another? When have you read about one team firing one coach and hiring another and then bringing out the dirty laundry. It's on  rare occasions  team s- either club or country - shit on their outgoing people. The standard line is we would like to thank Sadsack Joe for his contribution to our team but we decided to go in another direction.

So that's a ridiculous point you're making.

 

 

It's not a ridiculous point at all. The hiring of Herdman for the men vs. the hiring of Priestman for the women was directly compared by a former board member in the article - "When John Herdman was hired to coach the men’s team, the board discussed and debated before approving that hire. That didn’t happen with the women’s team coach" - despite there being a fundamentally crucial difference in the situations, a context which was suspiciously missing from the article, presumably for one of two possible reasons that I have already articulated. Of course, someone just reading that article less familiar with Canadian soccer history will be unaware of this.

The CSA were hammered by what little soccer media there was at the time over the lack of transparency, with even the likes of Kristian Jack saying it was impossible to get any information as to what the reasons were for Zambrano's dismissal When NHL coaches are fired, it's normally because the team has a shit record so the need for transparency isn't there - even if you can equate a professional sports team with that of a national sporting association (which I'm not sure that it makes sense to do so).

And while I take SF's point that Westhead in this particular instance is writing about a lack of transparency within the CSA's internal leadership, the missing context still is fundamental to the comparison in this regard. The board member is saying there is an expectation within the CSA that the board would be part of the decision making process for the hiring of a national team coach, but she is basing this on the Herdman hiring which wouldn't have been a normal hiring decision or process by any stretch of the imagination. It involved a firing and swapping the women's team coach over to the men's (unprecedented in soccer, if not any sport) which also brought with it another extra dimension to it, which is the loss of the coach to that programme. So its not hard to see why an unusual situation brought far more discussion to it that it normally would or might normally be required.

But best not to mention the vital facts in an article, because that might come across as a fair, unbiased and objective analysis, and who wants that?

Edited July 13, 2022 by Gian-Luca

[RS]

9 hours ago, Gian-Luca said:

As an aside to this (since I guess this is more of a topic for the Women's Team section of the forum), but the timing of the attacks on Bev Priestman are also somewhat strange.

It's been a couple of days, but I didn't read it as "attacks on Bev Priestman," but rather an attack on the CSA seemingly changing their mind on hiring Rhian Wilkinson simply because she asked some questions. Priestman was named in the article as the person they eventually hired, to give fuller context.

8 hours ago, DoyleG said:

As for people bitchcing about the CSB deal, don't cry when the playbook they learned from has "MLSE" and "TFC" all over it.

Ah yes, "MLSE" and "TFC." Famously known for usurping the sponsorship and marketing money from a national sport federation.

Bringing club rivalries (or your well-known anti-Toronto sentiment) into this subject is ridiculous, even for you.

1 hour ago, SF said:

I think Westhead, however, is commenting on the lack of transparency within the CSA - indeed, among its own directors.

Bingo.

[Gian-Luca]

13 minutes ago, Colonel Green said:

Westhead is one of the best sports journalists in the country. He is coming off having broken one of the most important stories in years by exposing the Blackhawks. And somehow you reduce him to who he works for? That doesn’t matter even a little bit.

I am pointing out that he has his biases, just like everyone else, and I'm demonstrating why that is the case  with factual examples. The fact that he ignored Canadian soccer until now I personally find annoying, because there was actually a need for this kind of stuff before (but with the only agenda being exposing the truth).