narduch Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 (edited) 13 minutes ago, CanSoccfan11 said: I am curious why some people think this will lead to change or the CSB deal getting thrown out. They aren't suing the CSA or CSB, they are suing individuals, many of which are no longer on the board and have nothing to do with overseeing the organization. The best they can hope for is for resignations from people named in the suit that are still on the board. UT said it best above, CSB is a straw man for people who don't understand what is really happening. Also these kind of cases take years to get settled. Edited February 22 by narduch johnyb, Metro, Ivan and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metro Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 (edited) 6 hours ago, Soro17 said: For the non-lawyers out there, please spend two minutes and google ‘business judgment rule Canada’. In short, courts in Canada are loathe to interfere in business decisions made by directors In the absence of fraud or bad faith, it is a difficult obstacle to overcome which is why the legal action will almost certainly fail. To hold the directors personally liable for board decisions is even a step beyond. This suit seems like an ill-advised stunt A longer explainer: The business judgment rule rests on the related notions that (i) directors and officers of corporations often have business expertise that the courts lack, and (ii) they should be free of courts' interference in their deliberations to the extent possible. In the 2004 case of Peoples Department Store Inc. (Trustee of) v. Wise, the Supreme Court of Canada recognized that many decisions made in the course of business, though perhaps ultimately unsuccessful, are reasonable and defensible at the time and under the circumstances in which they were made. Moreover, business decisions are sometimes made under significant pressure and in the absence of detailed information. It is easy to see unsuccessful business decisions as unreasonable or imprudent with the benefit of hindsight. The business judgment rule is intended to guard against this bias. While the court will not defer to a decision that it deems wholly unreasonable, it will respect a business decision made (i) independently and without a conflict of interest, (ii) in good faith, (iii) on a reasonably informed basis, (iv) based on information available at the time, and (v) where the decision falls within a reasonable range of options available at the time. As Weiler J.A. put it in the case of Maple Leaf Foods Inc. v. Schneider Corp., the court will look to see whether the directors made a reasonable decision, not a perfect one. Thank you for this but I think we need to distinguish these cases with the fact that the CSA is not a "for profit business", but rather a non-profit organization where the Directors are volunteers. I am not sure if there is a prescribed precedent for what the level of expertise should be but I would be very surprised if it is the same as what these judgements indicate. Short of blatant fraud, I don't know how the women are making the argument that they even have standing to file such a claim. I would love to read it. Incompetence is not illegal. Edited February 22 by Metro Shway, canuckgbp, CanSoccfan11 and 3 others 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanSoccfan11 Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 4 minutes ago, narduch said: UT said it best above, CSB is a straw man for people who don't understand what is really happening. Also these kind of cases take years to get settled. Agreed, the only ones who win in these are the lawyers who get years of work. Ivan, johnyb and Shway 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadaFan123 Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 (edited) Lawyer here and this claim is laughable. Frankly embarrassing that members of a national team would even be involved in this. Surely their lawyers advised that it was meritless but they went ahead and made a vexatious claim to get some headlines in an attempt to hold the CSA hostage. Absolutely toxic. And let’s not forget this is from a women’s team that has been plain awful and is compensated more than adequately. Good luck with that women’s league. They’ll get their share of sponsorship money from corporations looking for a moment in the spotlight but who would ever want to be involved in business with these losers? If we’re to ever move forward it is imperative that the men’s and women’s business is separated ASAP. Edited February 22 by CanadaFan123 Shway, narduch, Ivan and 9 others 11 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Diego Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 The only legacy this lawsuit will have is that it pushed Alyson Walker out of the general secretary role. Not sure that's the legacy the women want. Also, I guess I owe an apology to Walker (not that it is worth anything). narduch 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ottawafan Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 I think the players are looking for answers to questions they have been asking for years. Some members of the CSA pushed for this deal with CSB while others weren't part of the process or felt it wasn't a good deal for the CSA. Players have dealt with officials at various levels and are quite familiar with how some, not all, officials aren't in their positions for the betterment of the game. In the end, the players want what's best and fair for the game and will fight for it. SF 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadaFan123 Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 6 minutes ago, El Diego said: The only legacy this lawsuit will have is that it pushed Alyson Walker out of the general secretary role. Not sure that's the legacy the women want. Also, I guess I owe an apology to Walker (not that it is worth anything). It may also have a legacy of scaring away investors for women’s football. Let’s face it, as an investor you’re already taking a risk and now you have to deal with being turned on if the women don’t get their way. And you just know the league will be up for a year or two before they ask for “equal pay” or whatever the play of the day is. I know this group doesn’t think critically but surely this was contemplated. Does this mean that the women aren’t getting investors or progress they want with their league? Likely IMO. narduch 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
narduch Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 19 minutes ago, El Diego said: The only legacy this lawsuit will have is that it pushed Alyson Walker out of the general secretary role. Not sure that's the legacy the women want. Also, I guess I owe an apology to Walker (not that it is worth anything). I suspect it may be part of why Dino Rossi left too to70 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozzie_the_parrot Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 31 minutes ago, CanSoccfan11 said: I am curious why some people think this will lead to change or the CSB deal getting thrown out. They aren't suing the CSA or CSB, they are suing individuals, ... It's more complicated than that. Here are some key snippets from the TSN story: https://www.tsn.ca/soccer/cspa-files-40-million-lawsuit-against-current-and-former-canada-soccer-board-members-1.2079230 ...The CSPA filed a notice of application against Canada Soccer on Feb. 16 and a statement of claim against the 15 current and former board members on Feb. 20. Both documents were filed in Ontario Superior Court in Toronto... ...On Jan. 30, a lawyer for the CPSA wrote Canada Soccer again and gave the federation a 14-day deadline to take legal action against its 2018 board, the lawsuit says. When the lawyer received no response from the federation, the players decided to move ahead with a lawsuit against the current and former board members.... ...“Notwithstanding their mandate to do so, Canada Soccer's negotiating team never recommended to the 2018 Canada Soccer board that the CSB agreement be approved,” the statement of claim says. “The CSB agreement was executed by a single signatory of Canada Soccer (contrary to Canada Soccer's bylaws) in January 2019, without any further steps having been taken by the 2018 Canada Soccer Board to obtain proper approval of its terms.” After members of Canada Soccer's board retroactively approved the CSB agreement in February 2019, five members of the board are reported to have taken the position that the CSB contract was never properly approved, the statement of claim said... This appears to be about going after even the current members of the CSA board because they haven't made any tangible moves to cancel the CSB deal based on the angle of proper procedures not having been followed by the 2018 board. How that would affect the CSA financially would revolve around what insurance policies are in place to protect board members from legal action and who pays out on that under what circumstances, if the legal action is successful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigandy Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 11 hours ago, EJsens1 said: Yes because we’ve been attracting quality people for decades with the status quo. I think a lot of good people would like to join, just not under the current approach and regime. Recent resignations suggest that. The point is, a complete reformation and culture change needs to happen. As I said above a long term solution will be required. If this starts that process I can live with it. Sadly this is all happening in what should be out finest moment (‘26). Do you believe tinkering with the current way the CSA is run will solve much? So have I. Players are amongst the most informed and knowledgeable, especially professionals who play at a high level. They know the game and what is going on behind the scenes. Does anyone really think they aren’t getting advice from informed lawyers and agents? Of course they are. I’m pretty confident there’s a lot more going in on here behind the scenes that we aren’t privy too rememeber when the women tried to strike but didnt get proper legal counsel on how to properly do so...... That proves that they are not informed of their own rights and procedures, much less having proper legal counsel and/or knowing on whats behind the scenes. I mean, it took a whitehead article for the players to even learn about the CSB deal that was 4 years old. narduch, jhoops__, johnyb and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
narduch Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 1 minute ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said: It's more complicated than that. Here are some key snippets from the TSN story: https://www.tsn.ca/soccer/cspa-files-40-million-lawsuit-against-current-and-former-canada-soccer-board-members-1.2079230 ...The CSPA filed a notice of application against Canada Soccer on Feb. 16 and a statement of claim against the 15 current and former board members on Feb. 20. Both documents were filed in Ontario Superior Court in Toronto... ...On Jan. 30, a lawyer for the CPSA wrote Canada Soccer again and gave the federation a 14-day deadline to take legal action against its 2018 board, the lawsuit says. When the lawyer received no response from the federation, the players decided to move ahead with a lawsuit against the current and former board members.... ...“Notwithstanding their mandate to do so, Canada Soccer's negotiating team never recommended to the 2018 Canada Soccer board that the CSB agreement be approved,” the statement of claim says. “The CSB agreement was executed by a single signatory of Canada Soccer (contrary to Canada Soccer's bylaws) in January 2019, without any further steps having been taken by the 2018 Canada Soccer Board to obtain proper approval of its terms.” After members of Canada Soccer's board retroactively approved the CSB agreement in February 2019, five members of the board are reported to have taken the position that the CSB contract was never properly approved, the statement of claim said... This appears to be about going after even the current members of the CSA board because they haven't made any tangible moves to cancel the CSB deal based on the angle of proper procedures not having been followed by the 2018 board. How that would affect the CSA financially would revolve around what insurance policies are in place to protect board members from legal action and who pays out on that under what circumstances, if the legal action is successful. But even if this suit is successful they won't be getting the CSB deal canceled Bigandy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ottawafan Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 11 minutes ago, CanadaFan123 said: It may also have a legacy of scaring away investors for women’s football. Let’s face it, as an investor you’re already taking a risk and now you have to deal with being turned on if the women don’t get their way. And you just know the league will be up for a year or two before they ask for “equal pay” or whatever the play of the day is. I know this group doesn’t think critically but surely this was contemplated. Does this mean that the women aren’t getting investors or progress they want with their league? Likely IMO. Which group are you referring too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kent Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 8 hours ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said: That's a bit of a stretch to put it mildly. The issues that led to the Panama game strike were the finer details of the CSB deal that only started to enter the public domain after qualification for Qatar was secured. Quote from the "Dear Canada" letter when the men's strike cancelled the Panama game in 2022. "We have recently learned that in 2018, Canada Soccer signed an agreement with Canadian Soccer Business that has completely compromised their ability to leverage the on-field success of our senior national teams." That doesn't sound like it being about the finer details. johnyb and narduch 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanSoccfan11 Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 21 minutes ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said: It's more complicated than that. Here are some key snippets from the TSN story: https://www.tsn.ca/soccer/cspa-files-40-million-lawsuit-against-current-and-former-canada-soccer-board-members-1.2079230 ...The CSPA filed a notice of application against Canada Soccer on Feb. 16 and a statement of claim against the 15 current and former board members on Feb. 20. Both documents were filed in Ontario Superior Court in Toronto... ...On Jan. 30, a lawyer for the CPSA wrote Canada Soccer again and gave the federation a 14-day deadline to take legal action against its 2018 board, the lawsuit says. When the lawyer received no response from the federation, the players decided to move ahead with a lawsuit against the current and former board members.... ...“Notwithstanding their mandate to do so, Canada Soccer's negotiating team never recommended to the 2018 Canada Soccer board that the CSB agreement be approved,” the statement of claim says. “The CSB agreement was executed by a single signatory of Canada Soccer (contrary to Canada Soccer's bylaws) in January 2019, without any further steps having been taken by the 2018 Canada Soccer Board to obtain proper approval of its terms.” After members of Canada Soccer's board retroactively approved the CSB agreement in February 2019, five members of the board are reported to have taken the position that the CSB contract was never properly approved, the statement of claim said... This appears to be about going after even the current members of the CSA board because they haven't made any tangible moves to cancel the CSB deal based on the angle of proper procedures not having been followed by the 2018 board. How that would affect the CSA financially would revolve around what insurance policies are in place to protect board members from legal action and who pays out on that under what circumstances, if the legal action is successful. Still it doesn't tangibly impact the CSA or force the org to do anything. It's about getting money pure and simple from individuals or the insurance provider. You can bet the insurance provider's lawyers will fight this tooth and nail and it will drag our for years. narduch 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigandy Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 I think its pretty easy to talk about the financials and see that the CSB deal was good at the time (if you ignore the length of time). The article states that there was a 56% increase in revenue in 2015.... obviously. We hosted a WWC. No one was predicting the success of the mens or for this increase to continue. Some context during the signing of the CSB deal. future players 1. Davies was a teenager in vancouver 2. David was unknown and a dual 3. Staq was a uncommitted dual 4. Buchanan wasnt anywhere near being a pro 5. Miller was just finishing up university 6. Johnston was playing league 1 7. Larin moved to besiktas but was waiting for his debut 8. Laryea was struggling to find a game at the mls level 9. MAK was in his debut pro season 10. Millar was not a pro yet 11. corbeanu was playing league 1. Team at the time of csb signing 1. aird, straith, jackson, james, petrasso, jakovic, de jong, tiebert, piette 2. No one could have predicted the sharp jump in quality 3. no world cup hosting 4. no pro league 5. no sponsorship revenue 6. pay for broadcasting Without hosting the WC, do we get staq to commit? without staq and our momentum, do we get david? corbeanu? Does ali get to celtic without our world cup run? Whether right or wrong, the CSB deal massively helped out getting eyes on the sport, securing a WC, securing a pro league, and tapping into sponsorship revenue. We can make the case that the CSB did waaaay too good of a job (with tons of help of herdman) and now that we have hindsight, we say that we deserve more. If we dont sign the CSB deal and get herdman as coach, then we dont qualify for the WC and no one complains about the CSB deal..... qualifying for the WC was probably the worst thing that could have happend to the CSA. dyslexic nam, canuckgbp, prairiecanuck and 10 others 11 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ottawafan Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 8 minutes ago, Kent said: Quote from the "Dear Canada" letter when the men's strike cancelled the Panama game in 2022. "We have recently learned that in 2018, Canada Soccer signed an agreement with Canadian Soccer Business that has completely compromised their ability to leverage the on-field success of our senior national teams." That doesn't sound like it being about the finer details. Do you read that and think the players just learned about the deal between CSA/CSB that was struck years before or that they just learned details about how compromised the whole procedure was? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aird25 Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 Are the women still negotiating with the men too? Where's the money for these legal disputes coming from? narduch 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
costarg Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 14 hours ago, kacbru said: Agreed - I can't see how they can win this lawsuit. But I also think that is not the intention - rather the lawsuit is designed to crack the cone of silence from the CSA over this whole matter. “To date, despite a request from the Players' Association for information, Canada Soccer has failed to confirm definitively which of the proposed defendants was in fact responsible for approving the CSB agreement, and whether any of the proposed defendants voted against approval of the CSB agreement," the lawsuit says. The women from the outset have been asking for information and transparency over the process. The CSA has kept quiet hoping this would all go away. You get it. I don't feel it's about win or lose. The goal from the beginning is transparency and getting things out in the open. The CSA has been hiding details and protecting themselves from day 1. Their entire game plan is keep their heads in the sand and hope this goes away. This is more than just incompetency, and letting the chapter end without an investigation and consequences is a mistake. Many of these people still hold their positions, that is ridiculous. How do you expect the insanity to end? Consequences could even just be getting their names tarnished, dragged through the mud and out in the open so a google search when they apply for their next board or position affects them. shorty, Ottawafan and Cadeau 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigandy Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 3 minutes ago, Ottawafan said: Do you read that and think the players just learned about the deal between CSA/CSB that was struck years before or that they just learned details about how compromised the whole procedure was? Based on the fact that one of the major requests of the Dear canada letter is the players asking for the details of the procedure and terms, I think its fair to say that its more of the former. Kent and narduch 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozzie_the_parrot Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 2 minutes ago, Ottawafan said: ...or that they just learned details about how compromised the whole procedure was? ...which only became obvious when an unforeseen 2022 World Cup qualification meant that the CMNT's earning potential and expenses went through the roof at the same time. Given most of the sponsorship related money went to CSB at that point rather than the CSA because a fixed annual payment rather than a percentage had been written into the agreement, the CSA was saddled with the latter without access to most of the former. Ottawafan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 1 hour ago, Metro said: Thank you for this but I think we need to distinguish these cases with the fact that the CSA is not a "for profit business", but rather a non-profit organization where the Directors are volunteers. I am not sure if there is a prescribed precedent for what the level of expertise should be but I would be very surprised if it is the same as what these judgements indicate. Short of blatant fraud, I don't know how the women are making the argument that they even have standing to file such a claim. I would love to read it. Incompetence is not illegal. From my recollection of reading the case law (which is admittedly a little dated), it's not that much different, but they might be inclined to grant volunteers even more deference. Metro 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 1 hour ago, CanadaFan123 said: Lawyer here and this claim is laughable. Frankly embarrassing that members of a national team would even be involved in this. Surely their lawyers advised that it was meritless but they went ahead and made a vexatious claim to get some headlines in an attempt to hold the CSA hostage. I can vouch for you being a lawyer from seeing your use of the term "vexatious". You left out its companion term "frivolous". It's rare that I ever see those two words not accompanying each other with the word "and" between them. Metro, ray, johnyb and 2 others 2 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
costarg Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 14 hours ago, prairiecanuck said: This is the most ridiculous lawsuit I've ever seen. They haven't just named paid positions. There are 15 board members named, which would include volunteer board members. The financials are publicly available. You can look the last 20 years. I just clicked through the years. The broadcasting rights were squat. The deal in 2018 increased the guaranteed amount coming from the broadcast of the games. It can be argued that the creation of a domestic league was critical to securing the world cup bid that allowed Canada to be a host nation. The smoking gun would be if the CSB bribed board members for them to secure the deal. Did that happen? No. Were they negligent because they didn't foresee a teenager in Davies playing for Vancouver turning into a world class player. They didn't foresee David turning into a world class striker. They didn't realize a college player in Buchanan would play for one of the top clubs in Europe. How about the lack of foresight of seeing a player yet to commit to Canada turning into one the top midfielders in our programs history and now playing with FC Porto. The deal was too long. It lacked some foresight. Negligence suggest that the board members didn't believe they were acting in the associations best interests and the decisions made were so obviously wrong. You know how I know neither of those statements are true. The players didn't make a single complaint when the deal was signed. What do they hope to get out of this lawsuit? They aren't going to get any money from the people they've named. The association is going to incur legal costs. This is wasteful and is tormenting board members and costing money. Who in their right mind would ever join the board after the players have brought this lawsuit on. I'm incredibly disappointed in the players. You can have questions. You can lobby to try and get out of the deal. There should be some opportunities legally to pursue this, but to sue the board members like they are doing. Shameful. A lot of good points here. However, I feel we're being a little naive. Do you feel its ok that the same board members that approved and agreed with the CSB deal remain onboard? Yes, the financials are open to the public, but nothing about the process is open. If that is not addressed the same thing will just keep happening. Everywhere I've worked has had post-mortems when major F-ups happen. We can spin it anyway we want, but this was a major f-up and CSA has been trying to sweep it under the rug ever since. That does not work other places, and we should not accept it. The goal of the lawsuit is to bring this stuff out into the open. Its about accountability and incompetency. They're board members, responsible for making major decisions, not burger flippers who might forget a slice of cheese. Do you really believe Canada needed It's own separate domestic league to also participate in hosting the World Cup? Like MLS doesn't count or factor into that in any way? So the NHL also doesn't count as a domestic hockey league? Ottawafan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpursFlu Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 (edited) It's just to create the perception of chaos and disruption at the CSA so people avoid doing business with them. Any day of the year just Google "Canadian Soccer" 95% of what you'll see is just negative headlines. Even if the content of the article is disproven or settled after the fact the headlines and articles remain floating out there to solidify people's perspective on all things Canada Soccer If the CSB dissolved the CPL tomorrow everything would magically turn glowing Edited February 22 by SpursFlu scooterlawrence5 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadaFan123 Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 (edited) 3 minutes ago, SpursFlu said: It's just to create the perception of chaos and disruption at the CSA so people avoid doing business with them. Any day of the year just Google "Canadian Soccer" 95% of what you'll see is just negative headlines. Even if the content of the article is disproven or settled after the fact the headlines and articles remain floating out there to solidify people's perspective on all things Canada Soccer This is the world we live in. Simpletons just see “CSA sued for $40 million” and don’t need to read past it. Guess the claim must be legit! Edited February 22 by CanadaFan123 scooterlawrence5, narduch and h coach 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now