Gold Cup 2023

[Olympique_de_Marseille]

34 minutes ago, hodgkiss said:

The fix is in even before it starts

(Atiba was onside!)

Do you remember the Mexico-Canada match of the 2021 Gold Cup, where Mexico got the winning goal at 90 + 9' ?

One of the best memes:

https://www.facebook.com/Bolavip.soccer/posts/we-have-yet-another-usa-mexico-gold-cup-final/4725022904223254/

[gigi riva]

Not to sound Negative here but I wonder which game Canada will get the royal screw job  

[gigi riva]

13 hours ago, hodgkiss said:

That's so strange... wouldn't it be amazing if the USA played against Mexico in the final?
It would be such a great venue! Garbage Cup. The fix is in even before it starts

 

(Atiba was onside!)

And Lets not forget about 2021 when Mexico scored  in the 9 th minute of extra time 

[Shway]

8 hours ago, gigi riva said:

Not to sound Negative here but I wonder which game Canada will get the royal screw job  

I would say with VAR it’s not as easy…but we saw what happened in the World Cup. 

[Metro]

I actually had a dream the other night when a Canadian was voted in as CONCACAF president and all the unfairness Canada faced in tournaments like this suddenly disappeared!!

[InglewoodJack]

10 minutes ago, Metro said:

I actually had a dream the other night when a Canadian was voted in as CONCACAF president and all the unfairness Canada faced in tournaments like this suddenly disappeared!!

In reality, this dream ends up with president nick bontis embezzling money to pay for a new soccer stadium for his kid’s U12 team

[gigi riva]

17 hours ago, Metro said:

I actually had a dream the other night when a Canadian was voted in as CONCACAF president and all the unfairness Canada faced in tournaments like this suddenly disappeared!!

Dream on , I have had that same dream too, With millions of dollars at stake we will always find corruption , CONCACAF has got to please Mexico, and The USA .

 

17 hours ago, Shway said:

I would say with VAR it’s not as easy…but we saw what happened in the World Cup. 

Watch There will no VAR at this Tournament . until something happens to either the USA or Mexico.

[gigi riva]

What pisses me off about the Gold Cup is this could be a great chance for our region to Showcase  itself around the Globe and unfortunatly its not , Instead its making us look like amatuers , Sure  UEFA, AFCON , And CONEMBOL.have had there moments of contraversy , but at the Gold Cup it seems to a regular thing and it is so obvious sometimes , and  of course always being played in the USA kind of sucks too, and it always makes it for a US V Mexico final everytime  just another example of how annoying it is. If I am the CSA I would instruct Herdmann to bring a B squad with some first team regulars just use this tournament to evaluate certain players not that its going to matter anyway , Only in CONCACAF that a dirt bag nation like Honduras is treated more respectifully than Canada, Panama, & Jamaica combined .  

[Unnamed Trialist]

20 hours ago, Metro said:

I actually had a dream the other night when a Canadian was voted in as CONCACAF president and all the unfairness Canada faced in tournaments like this suddenly disappeared!!

Imo we got very favourable reffing in the qualifying tournament and it clearly benefitted us. It was freaky it was so positive. The World Cup was quite different, though if we'd scored that damn penalty it may not have mattered. Or it might have been better (that push on Johnston in the air vs. Morocco would have gone to VAR if we'd been fighting to qualify still).

Concacaf: we did  not deserve the penalty in our favour vs. Honduras at home, we deserved to have one called against us, Tajon in the box vs. El Salvador. The linesman keeping that ball in that Davies nabbed. Very important details. Refs also put up with our blatant and often silly time wasting. Even that red to MAK was probably deserved and it came at a point where we were basically through anyways. I think it was very obvious we were getting treated well.

[BearcatSA]

23 hours ago, Shway said:

I would say with VAR it’s not as easy…but we saw what happened in the World Cup. 

Exactly!

[Bigandy]

2 hours ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Imo we got very favourable reffing in the qualifying tournament and it clearly benefitted us. It was freaky it was so positive. The World Cup was quite different, though if we'd scored that damn penalty it may not have mattered. Or it might have been better (that push on Johnston in the air vs. Morocco would have gone to VAR if we'd been fighting to qualify still).

Concacaf: we did  not deserve the penalty in our favour vs. Honduras at home, we deserved to have one called against us, Tajon in the box vs. El Salvador. The linesman keeping that ball in that Davies nabbed. Very important details. Refs also put up with our blatant and often silly time wasting. Even that red to MAK was probably deserved and it came at a point where we were basically through anyways. I think it was very obvious we were getting treated well.

Ummmm what are you talking about. We 100% deserved the penalty vs hondouras. Hoilett touches the ball away from the defender and he slides in and hits him. If sliding a player without touching the ball is not a penalty, then what is? 

The linesman followed the rules. The ball was not out of play. That isnt favourable reffing. That is fair reffing. Which i guess fair vs favourable is often confused in concacaf. 

The Red card to MAK also does not point to favourable reffing. If it was favourable, we wouldnt have gotten the red. You could make a case that it was slightly harsh and therefore unfavourable reffing. 

As for Tajon's non call. I could see it either way. However the other player is already falling down and inviting a shoulder bump to send him to the floor. If its not in the box, I think no one bats an eye that a player who was already going down, continued to fall from a shoulder bump. Its not like tajon tripped his legs or anything like that. It was a simple shoulder bump. 

If youre point is that the reffing this year was not as awful as it has been in the past, then i agree. However, I disagree with your examples being favourable. 

[Unnamed Trialist]

10 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

Ummmm what are you talking about. We 100% deserved the penalty vs hondouras. Hoilett touches the ball away from the defender and he slides in and hits him. If sliding a player without touching the ball is not a penalty, then what is? 

The linesman followed the rules. The ball was not out of play. That isnt favourable reffing. That is fair reffing. Which i guess fair vs favourable is often confused in concacaf. 

The Red card to MAK also does not point to favourable reffing. If it was favourable, we wouldnt have gotten the red. You could make a case that it was slightly harsh and therefore unfavourable reffing. 

As for Tajon's non call. I could see it either way. However the other player is already falling down and inviting a shoulder bump to send him to the floor. If its not in the box, I think no one bats an eye that a player who was already going down, continued to fall from a shoulder bump. Its not like tajon tripped his legs or anything like that. It was a simple shoulder bump. 

If youre point is that the reffing this year was not as awful as it has been in the past, then i agree. However, I disagree with your examples being favourable. 

That Honduras penalty was soft af. The Tajon non-call was outrageous, apart from being a real boner by Tajon.

Name just one bad call, or even doubtful, that hurt us in qualifying?

There's a long history of what we are talking about, we've Concacafed for decades, ie, screwed royally.

The simple fact they used the pretext of Covid to get us back into the qualifying tournament, and our favourable reffing, shows having a Canadian at the helm helps. It helped get us the World Cup, helped get Vancouver back in as a host, it will help going forward. 

Another thing that would help is if were not so damn naive and preppy at times. That ridiculous call vs. Belgium where they said they wouldn't review a foul in the box because it was offside, when the ball was played by a Belgian player, they even thought that was a major error on Spanish TV. You absolutely have to make a proper stink, that is part of playing the game. Then VAR reviews. If Johnston had stayed down after being shoved in the air getting the Atiba crossbar rebound, if we'd stoppped the game right there, we would have gotten a VAR review. They didn't because they figured "Canada is out, they are weak, they won't care". And we can't let that happen, we have to be greedy for the results.

[TOcanadafan]

On 1/3/2023 at 3:09 PM, Olympique_de_Marseille said:

Do you remember the Mexico-Canada match of the 2021 Gold Cup, where Mexico got the winning goal at 90 + 9' ?

One of the best memes:

https://www.facebook.com/Bolavip.soccer/posts/we-have-yet-another-usa-mexico-gold-cup-final/4725022904223254/

One of the most often queries/critiques I heard from casual fans during the World Cup was regarding the game clock / extra time ‘rule’.  If it’s too radical to switch to two 30 minute stop clock halves, then why not at least make the accumulation of extra time public using a second clock that is controlled by the 4th (or another) official?  The only reason in this age not to is because powers that be want to influence match results.

[Bigandy]

5 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

That Honduras penalty was soft af. The Tajon non-call was outrageous, apart from being a real boner by Tajon.

Name just one bad call, or even doubtful, that hurt us in qualifying?

There's a long history of what we are talking about, we've Concacafed for decades, ie, screwed royally.

The simple fact they used the pretext of Covid to get us back into the qualifying tournament, and our favourable reffing, shows having a Canadian at the helm helps. It helped get us the World Cup, helped get Vancouver back in as a host, it will help going forward. 

Another thing that would help is if were not so damn naive and preppy at times. That ridiculous call vs. Belgium where they said they wouldn't review a foul in the box because it was offside, when the ball was played by a Belgian player, they even thought that was a major error on Spanish TV. You absolutely have to make a proper stink, that is part of playing the game. Then VAR reviews. If Johnston had stayed down after being shoved in the air getting the Atiba crossbar rebound, if we'd stoppped the game right there, we would have gotten a VAR review. They didn't because they figured "Canada is out, they are weak, they won't care". And we can't let that happen, we have to be greedy for the results.

Why is it soft af. The player slid into hoilett and didnt get the ball. What is soft about that? If you slide a player in the box and dont make contact with the ball, its a penalty every time. 

How is the Tajon non call outrageous. The player is already going down and all tajon did was go shoulder to "shoulder". I can see it being given but to call it outrageous is not accurate. Look at the reactions of the player and other el salvador players. No one is losing their mind which they all wouldve been doing if it was outrageous. Look at what the elsalvador player does. He has both feet stationary and in a long lunge position. He throws himself forward and at an angle into tajon, fully knowing that the second he makes contact, he will fall the rest of the way down. He even has his hand wrapped around the inside of Tajons thigh which shows that his shoulder is at thigh height at the moment of impact. Tajon fights for position on the ball but doesnt come in overly aggressive, with feet, with arms/hands. All Tajon does is go shoulder to falling "shoulder".  

Also, not having bad calls that hurt us does not mean its favourable. It means that it has been fair (more or less) or that the bad calls were not as important since we found solutions to win. 

Just because we have a long history of being screwed, does not mean we had favourable reffing when refs are making fair calls. Favourable reffing is helping us in an unjust way. Fair reffing is not screwing us. Hoiletts pen is fair. Tajon non penalty is fair imo but I am willing to concede that one could be viewed as favourable. The linesman not making an incorrect call is fair, not favourable. MAK getting a red card is fair or even unfavourable but never ever ever is it favourable. 



The rest of your post is unrelated to favourable reffing but I agree. 

 
we benefited from qualifying structure change. Thats not a ref. Thats admin. 

We were naive and shouldve made a bigger deal of it. However, I fully disagree that the guys in the VAR booth chose not to look at it because Canada is weak and doesnt care. Thats nonsense. Everyone could see the passion we had and no one at that level (world cup VAR booth) is so dumb that the cant understand and see on field passion. What likely happened is that the booth looked at it and didnt think it warranted the ref to have a second opinion. Fair play. It has to be 100% convincing to overturn a on field call and a small shove on johnston isnt 100% a penalty. 

[Unnamed Trialist]

5 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

Why is it soft af. The player slid into hoilett and didnt get the ball. What is soft about that? If you slide a player in the box and dont make contact with the ball, its a penalty every time. 

How is the Tajon non call outrageous. The player is already going down and all tajon did was go shoulder to "shoulder". I can see it being given but to call it outrageous is not accurate. Look at the reactions of the player and other el salvador players. No one is losing their mind which they all wouldve been doing if it was outrageous. Look at what the elsalvador player does. He has both feet stationary and in a long lunge position. He throws himself forward and at an angle into tajon, fully knowing that the second he makes contact, he will fall the rest of the way down. He even has his hand wrapped around the inside of Tajons thigh which shows that his shoulder is at thigh height at the moment of impact. Tajon fights for position on the ball but doesnt come in overly aggressive, with feet, with arms/hands. All Tajon does is go shoulder to falling "shoulder".  

Also, not having bad calls that hurt us does not mean its favourable. It means that it has been fair (more or less) or that the bad calls were not as important since we found solutions to win. 

Just because we have a long history of being screwed, does not mean we had favourable reffing when refs are making fair calls. Favourable reffing is helping us in an unjust way. Fair reffing is not screwing us. Hoiletts pen is fair. Tajon non penalty is fair imo but I am willing to concede that one could be viewed as favourable. The linesman not making an incorrect call is fair, not favourable. MAK getting a red card is fair or even unfavourable but never ever ever is it favourable. 



The rest of your post is unrelated to favourable reffing but I agree. 

 
we benefited from qualifying structure change. Thats not a ref. Thats admin. 

We were naive and shouldve made a bigger deal of it. However, I fully disagree that the guys in the VAR booth chose not to look at it because Canada is weak and doesnt care. Thats nonsense. Everyone could see the passion we had and no one at that level (world cup VAR booth) is so dumb that the cant understand and see on field passion. What likely happened is that the booth looked at it and didnt think it warranted the ref to have a second opinion. Fair play. It has to be 100% convincing to overturn a on field call and a small shove on johnston isnt 100% a penalty. 

Spoken like a true fan, love it.

[Bigandy]

5 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Spoken like a true fan, love it.

Ah i see what you did here. 

You chose to be condescending to my opinion and use a statement that can wipe off all my arguments without you having to defend yours. Spoken like someone who has now realized they cant defend their stance and now has to change the topic of the debate. Love it.

I used descriptions that are in line with the laws of the game to talk about 3 penalty incidents. Hoillet, Buchanan, AJ. I agree with 2 that go our way and agree with 1 that goes against us. 

I am still waiting to hear any descriptions as to why any of these 3 are wrong calls, other than "soft af" and "outrageous" which i cant find in any rule books.  

If you don't want to debate, we dont have to. But dont be condescending towards my opinion just because you cant articulate and defend your stance properly. Get a grip buddy. 
 

[Unnamed Trialist]

2 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

Ah i see what you did here. 

You chose to be condescending to my opinion and use a statement that can wipe off all my arguments without you having to defend yours. Spoken like someone who has now realized they cant defend their stance and now has to change the topic of the debate. Love it.

I used descriptions that are in line with the laws of the game to talk about 3 penalty incidents. Hoillet, Buchanan, AJ. I agree with 2 that go our way and agree with 1 that goes against us. 

I am still waiting to hear any descriptions as to why any of these 3 are wrong calls, other than "soft af" and "outrageous" which i cant find in any rule books.  

If you don't want to debate, we dont have to. But dont be condescending towards my opinion just because you cant articulate and defend your stance properly. Get a grip buddy. 
 

I don't agree but for me it's not a critical disagreement. I recognize your version of fanatic support and find it perfectly legitimate.

I realize I can be snarky and sarcastic but the "we deserve everything we get good and nothing we get bad" is pretty standard, I can have a drink over that.

[Bigandy]

Just now, Unnamed Trialist said:

I don't agree but for me it's not a critical disagreement. I recognize your version of fanatic support and find it perfectly legitimate.

I realize I can be snarky and sarcastic but the "we deserve everything we get good and nothing we get bad" is pretty standard, I can have a drink over that.

Its not fanatic support. Its by definition of the game.  I legit have said 1 good penalty i agree with (hoilett), 1 good penalty non call i agree with but can see it both ways (Tajon), and one bad penalty non call i agree with as well (AJ). Thats 1 good-1 neutral-1 bad. To say that im being fanatical at 1-1-1 and that i think we deserve everything good and nothing bad is so delusional. 

You clearly struggled with this debate as you have not yet provided one argument thats centered around why or why not the penalty calls should have been made. 

Your again being condescending and implying my interpretation of the rules of the game is fanatical, rather than addressing my actual points. 

This is called an ad hominem fallacy. You're trying to make the debate about my inability to seperate fandom and interpretations of the rules by insulting my "fanaticism", so that you dont actually have to defend your points. 

I realize how difficult it is to eat humble pie and consider that you may be wrong, but utilizing logical fallacies to debate is quite weak. 

[solsous]

On 12/20/2022 at 9:48 PM, Olympique_de_Marseille said:

We have threads for the COPA America 2024, the 2025 Gold Cup and the 2026 World Cup but none yet for the 2023 Gold Cup!

When is it?
June 24th to July 16th 

Have we qualified?
No. We will know more in March. If we beat Curaçao or if we get two draws we will qualify
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022–23_CONCACAF_Nations_League_A

When is the draw?
Friday, April 14th

What is the schedule?
The schedule has not yet been released but we can guess that it will be:
Group A Matchday #1 June 24th
Group B Matchday #1 June 25th
Group C Matchday #1 June 26th
Group D Matchday #1 June 27th
Group A Matchday #2 June 28th
Group B Matchday #2 June 29th
Group C Matchday #2 June 30th
Group D Matchday #2 July 1st
Group A Matchday #3 July 2nd
Group B Matchday #3 July 2nd
Rest Day July 3rd
Group C Matchday #3 July 4th
Group D Matchday #3 July 4th
Rest Day July 5th
Rest Day July 6th
Rest Day July 7th
Quarter-finals July 8
Quarter-finals July 9
Rest Day July 10th
Rest Day July 11th
Rest Day July 12th
Semi-finals July 13th
Rest Day July 14th
Rest Day July 15th
Final July 16th

What cities will host?

The greater Los Angeles area will host the final match.
https://www.concacaf.com/gold-cup/article/sofi-stadium-awarded-2023-concacaf-gold-cup-final/

Based on the MLS schedules released today, my crystal ball tells me:

Frisco, Texas may host the playoff tournament. Or part of it. Last time, in 2021 it was in Ft. Lauderdale.
https://www.mlssoccer.com/clubs/fc-dallas/schedule/

Ft. Lauderdale will host the playoff tournament or some group stage matches:
https://www.mlssoccer.com/clubs/inter-miami-cf/schedule/

Chicago may host (maybe Mexico?) Group Stage matches:
https://www.mlssoccer.com/clubs/chicago-fire-fc/schedule/

Austin may host a group Matchday #3 &/or a Quarter-final:
https://www.mlssoccer.com/clubs/austin-fc/schedule/

Philadelphia may host a group Matchday #3 &/or a Quarter-final:
https://www.mlssoccer.com/clubs/philadelphia-union/schedule

St-Louis may host a Quarter-final:
https://www.mlssoccer.com/clubs/st-louis-city-sc/schedule/

Cincinnati may host a Quarter-final:
https://www.mlssoccer.com/clubs/fc-cincinnati/schedule/

Atlanta may host a Quarter-final or Semi-final:
https://www.mlssoccer.com/clubs/atlanta-united/

Orlando may host a (non-Mexico?) Semi-final:
https://www.mlssoccer.com/clubs/orlando-city-sc/schedule/

 

 

Will we see some new faces? Will Hutchinson be back for one last tournament?

I imagine that we will have a veteran squad, but what do folks think of blending the U-20's with players that will be on the 2026 squad?

[Watchmen]

10 hours ago, gigi riva said:

What pisses me off about the Gold Cup is this could be a great chance for our region to Showcase  itself around the Globe and unfortunatly its not , Instead its making us look like amatuers , Sure  UEFA, AFCON , And CONEMBOL.have had there moments of contraversy , but at the Gold Cup it seems to a regular thing and it is so obvious sometimes , and  of course always being played in the USA kind of sucks too, and it always makes it for a US V Mexico final everytime  just another example of how annoying it is. If I am the CSA I would instruct Herdmann to bring a B squad with some first team regulars just use this tournament to evaluate certain players not that its going to matter anyway , Only in CONCACAF that a dirt bag nation like Honduras is treated more respectifully than Canada, Panama, & Jamaica combined .  

I think you are overestimating the amount this tournament actually showcases the region.  Even if there were no controversies, I don't think you're getting a global audience. The quality of the region just isn't there for that kind of interest. 

[Bison44]

8 hours ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Imo we got very favourable reffing in the qualifying tournament and it clearly benefitted us. It was freaky it was so positive.

I understand what you mean here.  Even if Andy is 100% correct on those calls being correct, most of us are conditioned to expect a complete AS$$#CKING by CONCACAF refs somewhere along the line, and it didnt really happen.  So an addition by eliminating the expected subtraction..if that makes any sense.  I thought for sure at Edmonton, Mexico was going to get a last second "phantom" penalty, but for once they didnt.  

[Unnamed Trialist]

48 minutes ago, Bison44 said:

I understand what you mean here.  Even if Andy is 100% correct on those calls being correct, most of us are conditioned to expect a complete AS$$#CKING by CONCACAF refs somewhere along the line, and it didnt really happen.  So an addition by eliminating the expected subtraction..if that makes any sense.  I thought for sure at Edmonton, Mexico was going to get a last second "phantom" penalty, but for once they didnt.  

I'd like to take this whole debate to another level, however much some of the purists (the ones who were happy with 36 years with no World Cup) might object. Two things.

You have to make your own luck with refs. If you have a dominant player who attacks defenders, if he's being hacked and fouled, you can't let it slide. You have to insist on that yellow to condition the guy marking him, or else he'll do it all day. If you can get into the box, like we did vs. Belgium and you are fouled, same thing: you have to call for that penalty. I am sick of Canadians being nice when no one else is, and least of all in our region, which is mostly nasty with reffing.

Then, if you are a team with prestige, and winning, then the refs will take notice and give you certain breaks. All strong teams, and traditionally strong teams in all leagues, get breaks. There is a double standard. The point is not to expect fair reffing, that is a mistake; you want to be on the right side of slightly biased reffing.

There is another thing, which is playing at home. No ref wants to feel that heat from a home crowd if he errs. If it is a small team, he may say screw it, but we have seen even teams that are not huge in Central America get those breaks at home, national teams and clubs. So home crowds, very important. And our press has to ask questions, our stars do indeed need to be in the media. We have to be there so they know they'll be a reaction, a headline. If the stupid Hondurans could create a story out of drones spying on them in Toronto, that proves it is not that hard. 

If Herdman does not complain, or the players are silent, then the CSA president does have to make a statement, although Bontis is such a dolt he has no idea what this means (players react from the pitch experience, the coach as a technical observer up close, the federation as an institution). 

I am a fan of a team that gets breaks, as do all the big clubs. I see it and don't deny it. But it does not always work, you have to make it work. Sometimes we've had players, other times coaches, sometimes the club president, or a vocal vice president who is charismatic. Instead we had Bontis dragging his wife around Qatar like some Florida retiree off a cruise ship, useless. You can't get calls that way. We are getting calls in Concacaf because of 1-higher presige players 2- more possession and attack 3-the Concacaf president being Canadian 4-hosting in 2026, and the list goes on from there.

Edited January 5, 2023 by Unnamed Trialist

[Bigandy]

42 minutes ago, Bison44 said:

I understand what you mean here.  Even if Andy is 100% correct on those calls being correct, most of us are conditioned to expect a complete AS$$#CKING by CONCACAF refs somewhere along the line, and it didnt really happen.  So an addition by eliminating the expected subtraction..if that makes any sense.  I thought for sure at Edmonton, Mexico was going to get a last second "phantom" penalty, but for once they didnt.  

I was on the far side of the stadium from our box (2nd half) and everytime there was anything happening, i was sure it would be a penalty as well. 

100% agree with you. It was shocking how not terrible it was. I was thinking why?
1. VAR helps (especially in away games) 

2. our new identity demanded respect from opponents. Does this influence the ref to become more 50/50? Or maybe it prevents us from complaining about calls that will never come and we take matters into our own hands. 

3. We concacafed at home - Iceteca. Less dark arts when central american players are cold? 

[Bigandy]

1 minute ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

I'd like to take this whole debate to another level, however much some of the purists (the ones who were happy with 36 years with no World Cup) might object. Two things.

You have to make your own luck with refs. If you have a dominant player who attacks defenders, if he's being hacked and fouled, you can't let it slide. You have to insist on that yellow to condition the guy marking him, or else he'll do it all day. If you can get into the box, like we did vs. Belgium and you are fouled, same thing: you have to call for that penalty. I am sick of Canadians being nice when no one else is, and least of all in our region, which is mostly  nasty with reffing.

Then, if you are a team with prestige, and winning, then the refs will take notice and give you certain breaks. All strong teams, and traditionally strong teams in all leagues, get breaks. There is a double standard. The point is not to expect fair reffing, that is a mistake; you want to be on the right side of slightly biased reffing.

There is another thing, which is playing at home. No ref wants to feel that heat from a home crowd if he errs. If it is a small team, he may say screw it, but we have seen even teams that are not huge in Central America get those breaks at home, national teams and clubs. So home crowds, our press has to ask questions, our stars do indeed need to be in the media. If Herdman does not complain, or the players are silent, then the CSA president does, although Bontis is such a dolt he has no idea what this means (players react from the pitch experience, the coach as a technical observer up close, the federation as an institutional rep). 

I am a fan of a team that gets breaks, as do all the big clubs. I see it and don't deny it. But it does not always work, you have to make it work. Sometimes we've had players, other times coaches, sometimes the club president, or a vocal vice president who is charismatic. Instead we had Bontis dragging his wife around Qatar like some Florida retiree off a cruise ship, useless. You can't get calls that way. We are getting calls in Concacaf because of 1-higher presige players 2- more possession and attack 3-the Concacaf president being Canadian 4-hosting in 2026, and the list goes on from there.

Much too long of a post. 

[Unnamed Trialist]

1 minute ago, Bigandy said:

Much too long of a post. 

I never read yours.