Ian Kennett Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 In the November issue of World Football Pages, Frank Yallop indicated to me that Jim Brennan was asked to join the national team for the WCQ, but that Brennan would attend only if he was guaranteed a starting position. Yallop's response was that he guarantees nothing to players, as is appropriate, and that Brennan would not acsept that. Hence, Brennan refused the coach, not the other way around. As for Nsaliwa, I have no answer, but it does seem odd to me that Tam was not considered unless he was terrible at the last European camp. As for the Guatemala match, I am surprised that Pizzolitto has been recalled given that he was burned twice on goals in the first match of the series. One other player whom I might have brought in would have been Rhian Dodds of Kilmarnock, but Yallop has not seen him, and there is lots of time between now and Gold Cup. Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redhat Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Ian Kennett As for the Guatemala match, I am surprised that Pizzolitto has been recalled given that he was burned twice on goals in the first match of the series. One other player whom I might have brought in would have been Rhian Dodds of Kilmarnock, but Yallop has not seen him, and there is lots of time between now and Gold Cup. Thanks for confirming the Brennan issue. Although I would have preferred him in the matches, Yallop can't really be faulted in taking a stand. As for Nevio, maybe it's some sort of way to redeem himself. Everyone was flat against Guatemala including Onstad, Stalteri, de Guzman, Simpson, Watson, and Nevio, so his inclusion is not a surprise really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ed Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 I don't buy that. Brennan had a spot to lose, not the other way around. Poor man management by Yallop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelownaguy Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 Well that explains some of it anyways, I'm sure there's more behind the scenes we don't know about... I agree that Brennan should have been a starter, but I also have to side with Frank in that once you have the players starting to call the shots and demand to be starting or their not playing it's a quick way to lose control of the ship...Where do you draw the line when all the other players start making demands ?? How well do you think it would have gone over with Holger had Brennan made those same demands...LOL.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paddy Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 Was Brennan the only player demanding to start? I would bet that Radzinski would have had a similar demand. Hit the road Yallop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 Yeah, well, he IS Jim Brennan. I think he's earned an automatic spot on the side. Midfield or in the back. Wherever we need him. I can't think of a starting lineup without him(if he was available). I just figured his job at Norwich was on the line or something. I don't know how much fact is involved in this rumour but he's been missed whatever the reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 I'm siding with the coach here. Unless you're dying or it's a no-brainer - Onstad (in Yallop's mind), deVos, Radz - (as in Radz's case, although he didn't score ONCE in the semis), you can't let the players call the shots. Brennan is good, but should he have been guaranteed a starting spot? No, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Beaver Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 Fascinating to see that individuals who complain about team loyalty and dedication are the first to crap all over Yallop for trying to uphold these values. I'm not sure what is wrong with Brennan's head, but his ultimatum to Yallop was selfish, juvenile and out of line. Jim needs to earn his spot on the squad. He could have done that easily if he'd kept his trap shut. I am not impressed. Still, with that said, I hope Yallop and Brennan can get this sorted out. Brennan's addition could be useful if he gets his noggin straight. Our national hockey team, loaded with egos and stars etc, would not let anyone get away with this--and looking at our last few teams, I don't think we've had an individual who dared play the card that Jim did. Very sh.tty on his part. Smarten up, Jimbo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paddy Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 quote:Originally posted by The Beaver Fascinating to see that individuals who complain about team loyalty and dedication are the first to crap all over Yallop for trying to uphold these values. I'm not sure what is wrong with Brennan's head, but his ultimatum to Yallop was selfish, juvenile and out of line. Jim needs to earn his spot on the squad. He could have done that easily if he'd kept his trap shut. I am not impressed. Still, with that said, I hope Yallop and Brennan can get this sorted out. Brennan's addition could be useful if he gets his noggin straight. Our national hockey team, loaded with egos and stars etc, would not let anyone get away with this--and looking at our last few teams, I don't think we've had an individual who dared play the card that Jim did. Very sh.tty on his part. Smarten up, Jimbo. Ok..we don't know exactly what was said between the two. I think that there is a lot that can be interpreted. I am going to give Jim the benefit of the doubt in this matter as he has always shown up for us. I would think that Jim would want to know if he is going to start and may not want to put his tenuous position with his PREMIER team in jeopardy. If Jim had such demands in the past do you think that Holger would have played him. Think about it. Jim probably just wanted assurances that he would not be losing both his staring place with Canada coupled with losing a spot on Norwich. Jim is good enough and if Yallop can't see this...ah whats the point - were out anyway and I doubt I will follow this team again until Yallop and the current administration is gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrennanFan Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 True, theres got to be more to this issue. Remember the article posted here a while back, he was 100% willing to play for Canada (like always) but he said the team chose to go in a different direction. For some reason, yallop liked DeRo on left wing (even though he can't cross, or defend, and we were thin up front), so he probably saw the writing on the wall, and opted out. in that situation, its better to give young simpson the opportunity to have the limited time as left mid back up. Yallop is a novice coach, not fit to manage a team at the international level, plain and simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrennanFan Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 True, theres got to be more to this issue. Remember the article posted here a while back, he was 100% willing to play for Canada (like always) but he said the team chose to go in a different direction. For some reason, yallop liked DeRo on left wing (even though he can't cross, or defend, and we were thin up front), so he probably saw the writing on the wall, and opted out. in that situation, its better to give young simpson the opportunity to have the limited time as left mid back up. Yallop is a novice coach, not fit to manage a team at the international level, plain and simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 If things are exactly as Yallop says I would back him on this point. Noone including Radzinski and Stalteri deserves a guaranteed spot. I like Brennan and he would be on my initial 11 but would also be on the bubble because we have a number of other possibilities at his position. While he has played well for the MNT I don't think he has ever been a dominating player. Competitors on the left include DeGuzman, DeRosario, Jazic, Grande, Simpson and Bircham. However, we have not heard Brennan's side of the story. Even from our position as fans it seems like some players were guaranteed starting spots some of whom were far poorer players than Brennan, i.e. Onstad and Watson. This sets a precedent for other players to make demands. This also gives players the impression that performance is not the only determinant of whether one plays or not. In this atmosphere I could understand a player battling for a spot at a Premiership club wanting some guarantees that he will be treated fairly. It would certainly seem like there is some lack of confidence in Yallop as a coach among a section of players. There were many players who disliked Ossieck but I don't remember any of them questioning his competence but I have the impression that a number of players lack confidence in Yallop's abilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 If things are exactly as Yallop says I would back him on this point. Noone including Radzinski and Stalteri deserves a guaranteed spot. I like Brennan and he would be on my initial 11 but would also be on the bubble because we have a number of other possibilities at his position. While he has played well for the MNT I don't think he has ever been a dominating player. Competitors on the left include DeGuzman, DeRosario, Jazic, Grande, Simpson and Bircham. However, we have not heard Brennan's side of the story. Even from our position as fans it seems like some players were guaranteed starting spots some of whom were far poorer players than Brennan, i.e. Onstad and Watson. This sets a precedent for other players to make demands. This also gives players the impression that performance is not the only determinant of whether one plays or not. In this atmosphere I could understand a player battling for a spot at a Premiership club wanting some guarantees that he will be treated fairly. It would certainly seem like there is some lack of confidence in Yallop as a coach among a section of players. There were many players who disliked Ossieck but I don't remember any of them questioning his competence but I have the impression that a number of players lack confidence in Yallop's abilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ed Posted November 13, 2004 Share Posted November 13, 2004 quote:Originally posted by The Beaver Fascinating to see that individuals who complain about team loyalty and dedication are the first to crap all over Yallop for trying to uphold these values. I'm not sure what is wrong with Brennan's head, but his ultimatum to Yallop was selfish, juvenile and out of line. Jim needs to earn his spot on the squad. He could have done that easily if he'd kept his trap shut. I am not impressed. Still, with that said, I hope Yallop and Brennan can get this sorted out. Brennan's addition could be useful if he gets his noggin straight. Our national hockey team, loaded with egos and stars etc, would not let anyone get away with this--and looking at our last few teams, I don't think we've had an individual who dared play the card that Jim did. Very sh.tty on his part. Smarten up, Jimbo. Well as I was the first to not say 'Well done Frank. You certainly showed Jim who the boss is!', I assume you have me in your sights here. My hope is that the coach be able to field the best team possible for WCQ; clearly Yallop did not. A decent manager knows when to stroke and when to bite. I was not among those supporting the player mutiny against Holger but I was certainly calling for a change as I saw our team going nowhere. Our team under Holger in most cases looked pretty good compared to what Yallop has put out. Why is criticism of player selection, player handling and tactics met with such hostility here?? If you support Yallop's choices, fine. I might be less critical if we'd looked even close to winning a SINGLE game in this semi final round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheeta Posted November 13, 2004 Share Posted November 13, 2004 What Ed said. Except I think we could've maybe pulled one off all things considered. I think JB, who if I remember correctly got limited time against even Belize, was on EVERYONES starting 11 until Yallop excluded him. Jazic was playing his way into left 'back so that forced Brennan onto the wing. Worthington said last season JB, despite missing a good part of Norwich's campain, had a place in the Premiership if he wanted it. Pricking around on international duty where he's not even playing isn't showing that old fox back in Norwich that you want "it". Given the time he got against Belize, and the fact he should have been on everyones list of 5 or 6 players who're automatic starters in any Canadian squad, yeah, I think JB had the right to ask his manager if he intended on starting him. As much as Frankie didn't like it. Questioning his competance and authority and what not. How he reacted, and not just the answer, would've told JB everything he needed to know. Guess Frankie didn't pass Brennan's test. And given we're not going to any Hex matchs, oh yeah, and finishing dead last in the group, I guess Frankie also didn't pass the WCQ test. Hmp. Wonder who was right. Brennan or Yallop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted November 13, 2004 Share Posted November 13, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Cheeta Given the time he got against Belize, and the fact he should have been on everyones list of 5 or 6 players who're automatic starters in any Canadian squad, yeah, I think JB had the right to ask his manager if he intended on starting him. As much as Frankie didn't like it. Questioning his competance and authority and what not. How he reacted, and not just the answer, would've told JB everything he needed to know. Guess Frankie didn't pass Brennan's test. As critical as I am of Yallop I have to disagree with Ed's assessment that we didn't look close to even winning a single game. I think we did come close to winning at least three games although coming close is not the same as actually winning. In fact I think a bit better coaching may have turned coming close into victories. As much as I like Brennan and would probably include him in my starting eleven I really don't see how he could be considered an automatic starter. What has he done for the MNT or his club side in the last couple of years to warrant this? At the club level he has started for a mid table 2nd tier club in England, subbed and mostly sat on the bench for a better 2nd tier club and played on their reserve squad after they promoted to the Premiership. I attended both games in Kingston and was generally pleased by Brennan's play but wouldn't say he was outstanding or deserving of a guaranteed starting spot. Lets be realistic about who we are talking about here, Brennan isn't anywhere near the level of Radz or DeGuzman. I would actually consider Nsaliwa a more obvious automatic starter due to our weakness at the back but we all know what happened there. While Ossieck might have been too extreme in his demand for discipline there has to be some discipline maintained and players can not run the show. Frank did indeed fail the WCQ test but Brennan as a player is not in a position to "test" the coach. As much as I am willing to wait and hear Brennan's side before making up my mind on the issue, I still think he should have showed up just like I think Aguair should not have withdrawn from the selection pool whether Yallop was justified in not calling him for Wales or not. The chance of playing in a World Cup doesn't come very often and every player should see the chance to play for their country as an honour. The players that I have the most respect for are those who have always showed up regardless of the club consequences and the coach. I would put Stalteri and DeVos in that category. The players should be playing for Canada and its fans even if the coach is crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massive Attack Posted November 13, 2004 Share Posted November 13, 2004 I've said it once, and I'll say it again, Frank Yallop snubbing Fernando Aguiar should have been the first warning sign of Yallop's insanity. Canada isn't a world soccer power, we can't afford to snub players like Aguiar, Nsaliwa, Brennan, etc. When you take a look at the players we used instead, it was pretty obvious that we needed the players that Frank didn't call. World Cup qualifying isn't the time to start going on hunches and calling unproven young players unless it's absolutely necessary. As for Brennan, I really don't care about his club situation. Jim earned his guaranteed spot on the national team over the last couple of years. It should have been his to lose. Greece won Euro 2004 with a lot of players who were barely playing for their club teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redhat Posted November 13, 2004 Share Posted November 13, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Massive Attack I've said it once, and I'll say it again, Frank Yallop snubbing Fernando Aguiar should have been the first warning sign of Yallop's insanity. I submit to you that the Aguiar situation was unique and his personal email to me offered more insight to what happened. Let's just say that Yallop has a distinct way of coaching that aims to appease everyone, but of course will NOT make everyone happy. Fernando Aguiar made his decision and I just wish him the very best. But it's Fernando's decision, not Yallop's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelownaguy Posted November 13, 2004 Share Posted November 13, 2004 I've said it before and I'll say it again,, nobody should be above the team and guaranteed anything, especially when your nation is ranked #95 in the world... Were not exactly a soccer powerhouse here where our starting lineup is set in stone with star players. Once again, where do you draw the line with players demanding things ?? A lot of people like to cut down frank here and bring up the term "old boys club" (cause of Watson, Onstad, etc...) , well when you start guaranteeing starting positions to veterans like Brennan how different is that really from the "old boys club"??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ed Posted November 13, 2004 Share Posted November 13, 2004 To Grizzly, I'll admit I was a little over the top in saying we weren't even close to winning one game. Saying we had a shot in 3 is no less of a stretch I might add. However, rating a player like Brennan based on the two games against the grocery clerks from Belize is a mistake. I would bet the house that some of the players were not going full-out in that opening series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stacks Posted November 13, 2004 Share Posted November 13, 2004 Redhat, It may of been Fernando's decision but even if he wanted to play, he wouldn't of made the lineup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted November 13, 2004 Share Posted November 13, 2004 I am not rating Brennan solely on the Belize series. I like him and think he should be on the team but think many posters are vastly overrating him. I still fail to see what he has done for club or country to guarantee him a starting spot. He has played one EPL game as injury cover for a club that has not shown itself to be of EPL quality and whose lineup he couldn't crack even in the former 1st division. He is a player of a similar level to DeRosario in that he could be a starter or sub and must perform well to maintain a starting spot. He is nowhere near the level of Radz, DeGuzman or Stalteri who are firm starters. One day he might prove himself to be a EPL starter and top player but at the moment he has not. If he up and up just demanded to be a starter Yallop should have said no. However, there is probably more to the story and I don't think Yallop should be taken off the hook for this at the moment either. Whether or not he is an obvious starter in my books there is no doubt that Yallop played a number of players during qualifying who were far weaker than Brennan and some other available players. There is also no doubt that our team would have been better with Brennan than without. It is part of Yallop's job to field as strong a team as possible without hurting team discipline or losing authority as a coach and I am not convinced that he achieved this. We have Brennan and Aguair who don't want to play for him and some rumblings of discontent from DeVos, DeRosario and Hume. This is starting to be a list that Holger could be proud of and Yallop has only been on the job for less than a year. I am sure everyone on the team must have noticed that Onstad and Watson had guaranteed starting spots and this must have led to some discontent. Still whether Yallop is totally incompetent or not, I still think Brennan should have accepted the call and Aguair should not have removed himself from selection. Such actions regardless of their background reduce the players in my eyes. Those that wouldn't play under Holger are also not as high in my esteem as those who played for Canada regardless of the coach or situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ed Posted November 13, 2004 Share Posted November 13, 2004 You said it yourself: "Whether or not he is an obvious starter in my books there is no doubt that Yallop played a number of players during qualifying who were far weaker than Brennan and some other available players. There is also no doubt that our team would have been better with Brennan than without. It is part of Yallop's job to field as strong a team as possible without hurting team discipline or losing authority as a coach." It's part of a coach's job to massage EPL or Championship sized egos and get the talent on the field. So far, Yallop has shown he is not up to the task. I suppose he will have several years to show us he can learn, but he has certainly got off to a rough start in the international arena. The coach is responsible for team selection, who plays, where they play, and (to a less extent) how they play and compose themselves on the field. IMHO, he has failed in team selection, who starts, where they play and in how they compose themselves. He has less control over how they play once the game starts and blowing three leads in 5 games is not entirely his fault. His team composure I might add was also terrible with Hume and Stalteri in particular costing us valuable man-games missed due to lack of discipline. You could talk till you are blue in the face but I think Brennan not being on this team is indeed a horrendous coaching mistake, nothing else. I feel the same way about Tam but Tam does not have the pedigree which I believe (and you obviously do not) Brennan has earned in his previous MNT appearances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redhat Posted November 13, 2004 Share Posted November 13, 2004 quote:Originally posted by stacks Redhat, It may of been Fernando's decision but even if he wanted to play, he wouldn't of made the lineup. Not true, but it's a mutual decision. BTW, did you get an email to tell you otherwise? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stacks Posted November 14, 2004 Share Posted November 14, 2004 How old is he now? 42 hah! Carl Fletcher is better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.