Bxl Boy Posted June 22, 2003 Share Posted June 22, 2003 After the 2005 edition in Germany, the competition will be held on the 4 years, one year before the World Cup and organized by the same country. That's what says Sepp Blatter The complete interview (in french) : http://www.dhnet.be/dhsports/article.phtml?id=74260 Also, look at the lat question "Why aren't 5 substitutions allowed" Blatter answers "Because it's an official competition" So, I guess the A-League isn't an official competition ? What's that new mess ??? ___________________________ http://www.impactsoccer.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mimglow Posted June 22, 2003 Share Posted June 22, 2003 As far as I know (and someone will surely correct me), the A-League and CPSL are the only pro leagues in the world that allow 5 subs. I've always found it strange that these leagues would allow 5 subs. They (A-League) should fall in line with the rest of the universe. Why change the rules everybody else plays by? Mimglow, Ottawa _________________________ Where are the weapons of mass destruction? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted June 22, 2003 Share Posted June 22, 2003 We could still host a Confed. Cup if we were awarded the World Cup. Not likely, but theoretically possible... Mike D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jeffery S. Posted June 22, 2003 Share Posted June 22, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Mimglow As far as I know (and someone will surely correct me), the A-League and CPSL are the only pro leagues in the world that allow 5 subs. I've always found it strange that these leagues would allow 5 subs. They (A-League) should fall in line with the rest of the universe. Why change the rules everybody else plays by? Maybe it has to do with the schedule, which would be illegal (yes, illegal) in almost all leagues. Back to back games are terrible for players and in fact rob fans of quality as there is no way you can play a hard running, attacking game two nights in a row with your starters. Or those 3 in five days. Most teams use the day after to rest, or to do a light workout and check on knocks, possible muscle strains. Given this circumstance, which is mostly to reduce costs of road trips, 5 subs seems acceptable. After all, if it means more fresh legs it should be better for fans. I don't see anyone here outraged by the schedule, which in sporting terms is criminal. So what are you all complaining about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mimglow Posted June 22, 2003 Share Posted June 22, 2003 Come to think of it, that's a really good point Jeffrey. And there's no way getting around the schedule for now, because of the cost of travel. Mimglow, Ottawa _________________________ Where are the weapons of mass destruction? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bxl Boy Posted June 22, 2003 Author Share Posted June 22, 2003 About the Confed Cup : I also don't like this competition and find it useless. The only interest it has is to allow a country to "prove" its talents as host, like Canada did last year with the U19 girls. As Canada "lost" for a reason it's not responsible the 2007 Women World Cup, I thought Confed Cup would be a good tournament to give weight at a World Cup organization file... But also that won't be possible ___________________________ http://www.impactsoccer.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bxl Boy Posted June 22, 2003 Author Share Posted June 22, 2003 Personnaly, I don't like this schedule and I think it could be a lot more simple. And, yes, it's true in some countries it would be illegal as rules say that a team has the right to have 72 hours between two fixtures (european cups included). And that has no relation to travel costs, for example Montreal played friday in Rochester and both teams are meeting each other today in Montreal... (I hate thoses "series") As all teams in the season meet almost all the time the same teams, I suggest such a calendar (with, like this year, 28 matches) : 20 week-ends based, with 1 match = 20 matches on Friday (almost for FSW) or, if possible, Saturday or Sunday, just what the team prefers 2 of these week-ends are "double" : a long travel with two away matches in cities near of each other (for exemple Virginia Beach and Richmond or Portland and Seattle) 20 + 2 = 22 6 wednesdays (the same 6 for all the league) 20 + 2 + 6 = 28 That's it and the number of matches in a few time should decrease a lot ! I also think 5 substitutions are too much Maybe include the goalkeeper in it : 3 (or 4) + the gk ? ___________________________ http://www.impactsoccer.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJT Posted June 22, 2003 Share Posted June 22, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Massive Attack The Confederation Cup should be scrapped all together. It serves no purpose, and no one cares about it except for people in the participating countries. Well, the same could be said about the Gold Cup. Even some Voyageurs don't care about it much, suggesting that we should approach it as an opportunity to prepare for World Cup qualifying and nothing more (so what people want to do is focus on nothing but the World Cup for four years, then eight years, then twelve years --- we are perpetually waiting because what we have isn't good enough? sorry, that's not my philosophy on life). I like the Confederations Cup. I think it does serve a purpose: it is an alternative-format World Cup, and it provides some global competition between World Cups, otherwise all we'd have are intra-confederation games for four years (friendlies don't cut it for me). See my suggestion for a four-year cycle of international competitions that I posted in some other thread --- I think this balances things nicely so that no tournament really gets in the way of anything else. What I think is a horrible idea is to have the Confederations Cup hosted by the World Cup host. Since the World Cup is too big to be hosted by 90% of the world, these smaller tournaments should be made available to the rest of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthew Posted June 22, 2003 Share Posted June 22, 2003 I think the Confederation Cup is useless, except that it kind of holds off on Blatter's dream of a World Cup every two years. Jeffrey's bang on that the A-League schedule necessitated the five subs. I don't mind really, especially since the large number of subs seems to allow a lot of the young Canadian players get some time in games. cheers, matthew The secret of life is to find moments of levity and grace in what is, ultimately, a tragedy. Watching Canadian soccer is good practice for this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bxl Boy Posted June 22, 2003 Author Share Posted June 22, 2003 Not difficult to understand that some people don't consider the Gold Cup at the value it has to be (a Continental Championship, thus the second most important national teams event after the World Cup) : because the leagues (A-League for example) are still playing at the same time ! Who's responsable of this (another one, I don't count them anymore) stupidity ? ___________________________ http://www.impactsoccer.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted June 23, 2003 Share Posted June 23, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Bxl Boy Not difficult to understand that some people don't consider the Gold Cup at the value it has to be (a Continental Championship, thus the second most important national teams event after the World Cup) : because the leagues (A-League for example) are still playing at the same time ! Who's responsable of this (another one, I don't count them anymore) stupidity ? ___________________________ http://www.impactsoccer.com But that wasn't the case in the past few Gold Cups, playing during the months of January & February when the A-league & MLS wasn't on, and yet some people still didn't take those Gold Cups too seriously. Which leads me to think that the timing of the tournament isn't a huge factor in leading those people to take the tournament less seriously. Even the wolf can learn. Even the sheep can turn. Even the frog can become at last the prince. - Peter Hammill, Over (1977) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jeffery S. Posted June 23, 2003 Share Posted June 23, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Massive Attack I think the Gold Cup is important because it decides our Confederation's Champion. Right on. The only thing we ever won and people are knocking it? I can tell you that the simple fact that New Zealand beat the Aussies has given them a bit of respect, and it would not be known if they didn't have a Confed to show off their OFC title in, even though their results are bad. Same for us. For two weeks in 2001 fans and press the world over repeated the fact that Canada won the Gold Cup by beating the likes of Mexico and Colombia. That gave us huge respect (we have partially squandered it, but it is still there as an accomplishment). Gold Cup as well has helped our players get signed to good contracts, like Hirschfeld. Add to that the fact that winning it means an automatic invitation to the Copa America, plus Confed if it is held in 2005. Even average results at either will mean more exposure, more chances at players getting noticed and signing to better leagues and clubs (as happened with Costa Rica players after the last Copa). My feeling is that we have five games to try to win a championship. Only five. It is worth trying to do our absolute best and win it, as frankly getting to the World Cup is much harder, and it is a basket we simply cannot put all our eggs in. Given we can play GC with the same team, all working together, intensely, it is better for us that the here and there matches with altered teams and conditions that WCQualifying entails, even harder for us without a domestic league in conditions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mimglow Posted June 23, 2003 Share Posted June 23, 2003 Yes! Yes! Everything Jeffrey said! Mimglow, Ottawa _________________________ Where are the weapons of mass destruction? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon Posted June 24, 2003 Share Posted June 24, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Jeffrey S. Right on. The only thing we ever won and people are knocking it? I can tell you that the simple fact that New Zealand beat the Aussies has given them a bit of respect, and it would not be known if they didn't have a Confed to show off their OFC title in, even though their results are bad. Same for us. For two weeks in 2001 fans and press the world over repeated the fact that Canada won the Gold Cup by beating the likes of Mexico and Colombia. That gave us huge respect (we have partially squandered it, but it is still there as an accomplishment). Gold Cup as well has helped our players get signed to good contracts, like Hirschfeld. Add to that the fact that winning it means an automatic invitation to the Copa America, plus Confed if it is held in 2005. Even average results at either will mean more exposure, more chances at players getting noticed and signing to better leagues and clubs (as happened with Costa Rica players after the last Copa). My feeling is that we have five games to try to win a championship. Only five. It is worth trying to do our absolute best and win it, as frankly getting to the World Cup is much harder, and it is a basket we simply cannot put all our eggs in. Given we can play GC with the same team, all working together, intensely, it is better for us that the here and there matches with altered teams and conditions that WCQualifying entails, even harder for us without a domestic league in conditions. I'd agree with you Jeffery, if Canada played 12+ friendlies a year and gave opportunity to younger players with potential to be blooded in those sorts of games. Lets take this year for example. If Canada wanted to "win" the Gold Cup, an expereinced international like Carlo Corrazin would be a good selection over an inexperienced young buck like Iain Hume. At this level, the experience in invaluable. But Hume scored more goals in the same League as Corrazin and his upside is much greater. I'd rather see Hume than Corrazin because Iain can use the experience and he can make Canada a better deeper team. Now I am a fan of brining the young guys in reasonably slowly, and wouldn't want to sacrifice a guy like Radzinski or DeRosario to give Hume some burn. And having them sit on the bench and sub in occasionally in a successful Gold Cup run is a good way to develop a winning attitude. Holger did this pretty well last time around. I also think that building a winning tradition in CONCACAF goes a long way to aiding in the tough WC qualifying games as well, at least in terms of the pyschology of winning. But we also have to develop players that will make us better and as we play so few friendlies our Gold Cup games have to be included in the development plan. That has to be the balance. Edit add: Predicting Hume to score 15 this year (all competitions) and help Tranmere into the First Division. The opinions expressed above are just that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.