Robert Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 Experiencing the reality of being a Canadian soccer supporter, life is just now returning back to normal in the Great White North. It has been a busy year by our standards. Five World Cup qualifying games on Canadian soil. Third World Belize selling us their home game got us a double header in Kingston. How the level of optimism soared with our quasi-fans after those two 4-0 victories. You couldn't say a bad word about Kevan Pipe & Co. without being vilified. Kevan & Andy had hired the right coach and all was peaches and cream. Then came the acid tests. Guatemala came to Swangard and embarrassed us in our own back yard. The lack of our preparation was exposed to the world. Still the quasi-ones were optimistic that we could progress. This was followed by Honduras stealing a point in Edmonton and the quasi-ones crying foul, the Latin ref had done us in. It was a CONCACAF conspiracy. At all cost was Canada not allowed to progress to the Hex. Two home games down, one point to show for it. This is where the calculators started to come out. It was still possible according to those diehard quasies, so off to Costa Rica we go for a do or die match. Really gotta like those odds. Sportnet had already given up on Canada at this point and decided to let us wait until midnight if we wanted to see the tape-delayed 1-0 loss. Most of us can start to see the white flag coming out when our coach announces that the next round is still possible is IF we win our three remaining matches. In Honduras, the CSA finally delivered us something, their hard work got us an American ref. Didn't make a horsepoop of a difference, right Andy? Another tape-delayed only broadcast. Even at this stage there where those quasi-ultras proclaiming they wouldn't give up till the ship had gone down. What a pathetic joke. So I'm left with a $46 dollar match ticket I couldn't even give away to see Costa Rica. Kevan didn't even have the decency to show-up for this one. In the merciful final match, our youthful North American based players showed heart in a meaningless match in Guatemala, that Sportsnet didn't even bother with at all. They had a hockey lockout to attend to. And now you quasiassed Voyageurs don't even want to talk about it because you're all bummed out. AWWWWWWWWW! Can't wait to see all those baby pictures. No guys, we can't talk about lynch mobs. Someone please call the mod. Robert must be silenced. Lock this thread. Ban his IP number. And you call yourselves soccerfans hah! Merry Christmas Kev and to all a goodnight! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 My new best friend on the board: this image. To use with EXTREME prejudice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redhat Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 Coal in your stocking this Christmas, Robert? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juaninho Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 Well, I am not certain if I can give an appropriate quasi-response to your quasi-critique. But given the nature of your pseudo-rant, I should at least place a few semi-decent pro-words in my pseudo-defence. I am not a proto-sage, semi-divine, or a sub-oracle, so, seeing how everything was pro-hunky-dory post-Belize, why not be hyper-optimistic about Canada's poly-chances in the next stage of WC qualification? Does this make me a demi-fan for not thinking intra-realistically or sub-bleakly? Is optimism a proto-disease or the mark of a mis-informed fan, or is it something else altogether? If I am wrong about holding the opinion i had, please notify me before another pre-qualification campaign re-convenes. It would help clarify any pseudo-meta-opinions I may have. Thank You. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HamiltonSteelers Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 Rather articulate in an indirect, non-threatening, non-partizan kind of manner... sort of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Beaver Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 Juaninho, that was uber-facetious and mega-sarcastic in a very post-modern meta-sort-of-way. I get the impression that you are un-impressed--but this is mostly a pre-cognigtive assumption, so I am only quasi-certain. In truth, I cannot afford to buy any more beer for Voyageurs, quasi-beer or otherwise. If we are quasi-Voyageurs, pray tell what is a real Voyageur. I mean, what is the Voyageurness that predicates a Voyageur? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juaninho Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 Well Beaver, the audi-intention of pre-giving a pseudo-beer is much appreciated by my auto-self. No, the beer ledger shall remain be-cleaned vis-a-vis this chrono-occasion. Since your beer promise cup runneth over, how about i owe you a gin-and-tonic, and yes, it'll be at least a double. Ah yes, what/who is the 'ideal' or 'meta' Voyageur? What makes a person more 'fan' then 'poseur'?These are a few questions to pre-digest over while i tele-port food in my mouth during a mid-diurnal snack. To give a quick answer, i think the fact that people post here and try to get some degree of ideas,perspectives, and share them in discussions on the whole Canadian soccer scene speaks to some degree of fidelity to the idea of being a fan in the authentic sense. I don't think the idea of what it means to be a 'fan' should manifest itself in only one way - that would be too dictatoresque for my liking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
savagebeast Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 We've just lost the Concacaf U 17 hosting rights to Mexico. Did Kevin & the CSA give it up , or was it taken away? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Beaver Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 quote:Originally posted by juaninho Well Beaver, the audi-intention of pre-giving a pseudo-beer is much appreciated by my auto-self. No, the beer ledger shall remain be-cleaned vis-a-vis this chrono-occasion. Since your beer promise cup runneth over, how about i owe you a gin-and-tonic, and yes, it'll be at least a double. Ah yes, what/who is the 'ideal' or 'meta' Voyageur? What makes a person more 'fan' then 'poseur'?These are a few questions to pre-digest over while i tele-port food in my mouth during a mid-diurnal snack. To give a quick answer, i think the fact that people post here and try to get some degree of ideas,perspectives, and share them in discussions on the whole Canadian soccer scene speaks to some degree of fidelity to the idea of being a fan in the authentic sense. I don't think the idea of what it means to be a 'fan' should manifest itself in only one way - that would be too dictatoresque for my liking. Excellent--truth of the matter is that beer gives me immediate headaches, though I love the stuff. I'd gladly take you up on the gin-and-tonic offer. Further reason for all of us to gather soon. And yes, I agree about defining the MetaVoyageur, or some sort of Ur-Voyageur. I am sure you got this, but my posting was entirely rhetorical. I do not see the point in determining who is a real fan or who is a "quasi-fan." I certainly know who I respect, and many of you fall under that category, but I see no point in marginalizing anybody--other than the Beast--because they do not exhibit this or that specific set of "proper fan qualities." Then again, who cares what I think? This is a fan site. It'll be what it is. (Damned profound, eh? I've got more of those, too.) Peace out to the Voyageurs. [^] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canso Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 Gin and Tonic? Are you sherioush? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ted Posted December 17, 2004 Share Posted December 17, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Robert ... And now you quasiassed Voyageurs don't even want to talk about it because you're all bummed out. AWWWWWWWWW! Can't wait to see all those baby pictures. No guys, we can't talk about lynch mobs. Someone please call the mod. Robert must be silenced. Lock this thread. Ban his IP number. And you call yourselves soccerfans hah! Merry Christmas Kev and to all a goodnight! WTF was that about Robert? When we met in Victoria I thought I could work with you. Now I am being insulted and vilified in an incoherant diatribe that spews venom at anyone who does not agree with your views 100%. Because I think that Yallop has not been given a fair chance to show what he can do I am now the enemy? Because some of us dare to talk about something other than Kevan Pipe's incompetance as the holiday season starts we are all poseurs? I was willing to work with you to improve the situation with mature, reasoned action Insulting, immature rants get us nowhere. This posting tells me that you are not interested in thoughtful, effective action. It tells me you are more interested in starting verbal fights that getting anything done. As for banning your IP, obviously you hate the Voyageurs. Perhaps you should just start your own Canadian MNT fan group? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted December 17, 2004 Author Share Posted December 17, 2004 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheeta Posted December 17, 2004 Share Posted December 17, 2004 quote:Originally posted by canso Gin and Tonic? Are you sherioush? One of the all time, top-three panty removers. I think he's serious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
analyst Posted December 17, 2004 Share Posted December 17, 2004 I won't criticize Kevin and the CSA for the amount of funding provided for the MNT. Yallop could have tried to start his WCQ training camp earlier, but the key players would not have arrived earlier because they were committed to their European club teams. Our opponents also faced this problem, their players also had other commitments, but they overcome the challenge and won. Does anyone think Radzinski would have played better if he had flown first class? Under Osieck, the CSA got a big increase in funding for its Blueprint for Success Program. Thats why StephenHart was able to take teams of 15 and 16 year old players to Florida, El Salvador and Mexico this fall. Kevin and the CSA financial people will have lasting legacy that will help soccer in Canada - a 20,000 seat stadium in Toronto, without a track around it, to make it more fan friendly and bring in more gate revenue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Beaver Posted December 17, 2004 Share Posted December 17, 2004 quote:Originally posted by ted WTF was that about Robert? When we met in Victoria I thought I could work with you. Now I am being insulted and vilified in an incoherant diatribe that spews venom at anyone who does not agree with your views 100%. Because I think that Yallop has not been given a fair chance to show what he can do I am now the enemy? Because some of us dare to talk about something other than Kevan Pipe's incompetance as the holiday season starts we are all poseurs? I was willing to work with you to improve the situation with mature, reasoned action Insulting, immature rants get us nowhere. This posting tells me that you are not interested in thoughtful, effective action. It tells me you are more interested in starting verbal fights that getting anything done. As for banning your IP, obviously you hate the Voyageurs. Perhaps you should just start your own Canadian MNT fan group? Ted, I think I need to voice some concern here, which you can either dismiss or consider closely. There are a number of EXCELLENT individuals here who could play large and important and effective roles in Voyageur-led initiatives. I can count a good couple dozen individuals who I'd want to involve. I must admit I found your decision to meet with Robert--no slight to Robert intended--questionable, even if it was done in a very "transparent" fashion. I know the meeting was simply "a get to know you" meeting, but the optics of such a meeting may have alienated other Voyageurs who may have liked to play a vital role in future initiatives, including playing a formative role in establishing an active arm of the Voyageurs. I, for one, had been very excited about being involved, am confident I've got tonnes to offer, but took your quiet Victoria meeting as a sign that the "founders" had already been determined. Now, I do not say any of this to chastise you--that is not my interest, and I respect you too much, and I simply do not see that it is warranted. (Who am I to chastise anyone other than my buddy Canso, who for some reason has painted me as some bastardly politically-correct cop? ) What I want to do is to encourage you--and everyone here--NOT to give up on this idea. I want to be involved, but I do not want to be kept on the sidelines like some supersub--poor Pesch--or wallowing in the reserves for an opportunity to bring my various talents, connections and ideas to the fore. And, I dare say, there are others straight across the country who are chomping at the bit to get involved, to offer their skills, ideas, time and talents. In fact, the only way to truly make future initiatives work is to have people involved in every province and major city of the nation. I, too, am surprised by Robert's posting here. It certainly is not a useful tactic. If it was meant as a rallying cry, well I think it has worked, but not in the way that Robert will appreciate. I am a very busy man, with a number of my own ventures in process--including a baby due in June--but I am very passionate about soccer in Canada, and am convinced that bold, intelligent action has genius in it--to paraphrase Goethe--and that with good people and a solid vision, we can accomplish great things for soccer in Canada. There are many others out there who want to be involved to varying degrees, and I think it is vital for these people to voice their interest right now. Ted, let's be certain that we take steps to keep these good people involved, to make sure they feel they are playing an important role, to make sure their ideas and their talents do not go unused. This is the rallying call! This is the beginning! Let's hear from the rest of you right away! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massive Attack Posted December 17, 2004 Share Posted December 17, 2004 Well, if you've been following Robert's postings on the old forum over the last few months, this thread would be of no surprise to you at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Beaver Posted December 17, 2004 Share Posted December 17, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Massive Attack Well, if you've been following Robert's postings on the old forum over the last few months, this thread would be of no surprise to you at all. I've not been back to the old forum for a long time. Would you be willing to give me an overview of what Robert's been posting there? (You don't have to--I'm just interested.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted December 17, 2004 Author Share Posted December 17, 2004 <center>Let it to Beaver</center></u> -There are a number of EXCELLENT individuals here who could play large and important and effective roles in Voyageur-led initiatives. I can count a good couple dozen individuals who I'd want to involve. Where are they and what are you waiting for? -I know the meeting was simply "a get to know you" meeting, but the optics of such a meeting may have alienated other Voyageurs who may have liked to play a vital role in future initiatives, including playing a formative role in establishing an active arm of the Voyageurs. I, for one, had been very excited about being involved, am confident I've got tonnes to offer, but took your quiet Victoria meeting as a sign that the "founders" had already been determined. Who, besides our egos, cares who the founders are? -What I want to do is to encourage you--and everyone here--NOT to give up on this idea. I want to be involved, but I do not want to be kept on the sidelines like some supersub--poor Pesch--or wallowing in the reserves for an opportunity to bring my various talents, connections and ideas to the fore. My initial post to see if there was interest in a Voyageurs meeting was open to everyone's participation. -If it was meant as a rallying cry, well I think it has worked, but not in the way that Robert will appreciate. Again, my ego is not looking for appreciation. You entirely welcome to all of it. I want affirmative action and I'm hoping that there similarly inclined Voyageurs. If my eloquent words ignite action and exclude me from further participation, I will be happy with myself. -This is the rallying call! This is the beginning! Let's hear from the rest of you right away! I wish you success and have taken no slight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Beaver Posted December 17, 2004 Share Posted December 17, 2004 Robert, are you absolutely certain that your approach--the one that kicks off this thread--is at all an effective way of effecting the sort of change that you'd like to see in Canadian soccer? As soon as you voiced strong interest in meeting with Ted, you in effect positioned yourself as a "founder" or "leader", even if only informally, and by doing so automatically raised expectations of how you would behave. Perhaps it is unfair, but this is the reality of perception. It is a key leadership and management concept, for what that's worth. All this to say, Robert, that your passion and desire for real change could certainly be a real benefit for anything we choose to do, but I wonder at your tactics. Frankness is great--and you are certainly entitled to your opinions--but leadership of any kind requires responsibility and vision, and I feel that in the post that began this thread you've NOT displayed the sort of leadership our initiatives will require. Perhaps this is not a mistake on your part, though I cannot quite see the benefits of this strategy. If you go back to the thread you started some time ago about the Voyageurs taking action, you will see that I was very much present and supportive and clear in my interest in being involved. (As were others, CurrentChamp for one, but many others too). This has never been an issue of ego for me: I know too well that it is vital to pick your fights wisely, and the moment you and Ted decided to meet I got the very quick impression that this might not be the right place for me to be involved, if only because the process suggested the sort of dynamic that I simply cannot be a part of. I appreciate and respect your initiative in meeting, but I wonder why others were not invited. (And don't tell me they were.) Like I said, I think you'd be an excellent person to have involved, but I just question your tactics in crapping all over the very people we need to make any initiatives a real success (ie, via this post, and apparently, others). Perhaps there is a context that I am missing. If so, please fill me in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Beaver Posted December 17, 2004 Share Posted December 17, 2004 quote:Originally posted by The Beaver Robert, are you absolutely certain that your approach--the one that kicks off this thread--is at all an effective way of effecting the sort of change that you'd like to see in Canadian soccer? As soon as you voiced strong interest in meeting with Ted, you in effect positioned yourself as a "founder" or "leader", even if only informally, and by doing so automatically raised expectations of how you would behave. Perhaps it is unfair, but this is the reality of perception. It is a key leadership and management concept, for what that's worth. All this to say, Robert, that your passion and desire for real change could certainly be a real benefit for anything we choose to do, but I wonder at your tactics. Frankness is great--and you are certainly entitled to your opinions--but leadership of any kind requires responsibility and vision, and I feel that in the post that began this thread you've NOT displayed the sort of leadership our initiatives will require. Perhaps this is not a mistake on your part, though I cannot quite see the benefits of this strategy. If you go back to the thread you started some time ago about the Voyageurs taking action, you will see that I was very much present and supportive and clear in my interest in being involved. (As were others, CurrentChamp for one, but many others too). This has never been an issue of ego for me: I know too well that it is vital to pick your fights wisely, and the moment you and Ted decided to meet I got the very quick impression that this might not be the right place for me to be involved, if only because the process suggested the sort of dynamic that I simply cannot be a part of. I appreciate and respect your initiative in meeting, but I wonder why others were not invited. (And don't tell me they were.) Like I said, I think you'd be an excellent person to have involved, but I just question your tactics in crapping all over the very people we need. Perhaps there is a context that I am missing. If so, please fill me in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted December 17, 2004 Author Share Posted December 17, 2004 quote:Originally posted by The Beaver Robert, are you absolutely certain that your approach--the one that kicks off this thread--is at all an effective way of effecting the sort of change that you'd like to see in Canadian soccer? As soon as you voiced strong interest in meeting with Ted, you in effect positioned yourself as a "founder" or "leader", even if only informally, and by doing so automatically raised expectations of how you would behave. Perhaps it is unfair, but this is the reality of perception. It is a key leadership and management concept, for what that's worth. What initially started my thought process was another thread on this board, which focussed on how dead these boards had become since our elimination from the World Cup. What followed was, in my opinion, a bunch of verbal diarrhoea that was becoming less and less pertinent to Canadian soccer. I chose to respond, albeit in a shock value manner, to try and kick start the process of focussing on our common interests again, and in that case it has been effective. I am obsessive when it comes to our passion and can not put it on hold. I have no illussions of being a self-proclaimed leader. I believe that leaders are democraticly elected to serve for short periods of time. Thus, as I am not an elected leader, how can you have developed any expectations of me. I have not campaigned for any office or made any promises. I only initiated an idea and went to meet one other person who expressed an interest to do so. My understanding of perception is that we all have one, collectively these points of views can lead to great things. Just FYI your views do hold worth with me. All this to say, Robert, that your passion and desire for real change could certainly be a real benefit for anything we choose to do, but I wonder at your tactics. Frankness is great--and you are certainly entitled to your opinions--but leadership of any kind requires responsibility and vision, and I feel that in the post that began this thread you've NOT displayed the sort of leadership our initiatives will require. Perhaps this is not a mistake on your part, though I cannot quite see the benefits of this strategy. I certainly agree that any kind of leadership requires responsibility and vision. In my opinion, this is where our national association is lacking, otherwise I wouldn't be spending my time on this forum. The only reason I am here is because I love and care about Canadian soccer and I have been frustrated by the lack of responsibility taken and the lack of vision displayed by the CSA for the last 18 years. I would like to see that change. If you go back to the thread you started some time ago about the Voyageurs taking action, you will see that I was very much present and supportive and clear in my interest in being involved. (As were others, CurrentChamp for one, but many others too). This has never been an issue of ego for me: I know too well that it is vital to pick your fights wisely, and the moment you and Ted decided to meet I got the very quick impression that this might not be the right place for me to be involved, if only because the process suggested the sort of dynamic that I simply cannot be a part of. I appreciate and respect your initiative in meeting, but I wonder why others were not invited. (And don't tell me they were.) I am sorry you didn't speak up earlier and felt excluded. Like everyone else, I am not perfect and make many mistakes. Where I differ from many is that I can admit to my shortcomings and listen to others. I am sorry that a "sort of dynamic" (I'm not entirely clear by what your implying here) prevented you from partaking. I would appreciate some insight here so that I may learn from the experience. Apparently my social skills require some attention also. Like I said, I think you'd be an excellent person to have involved, but I just question your tactics in crapping all over the very people we need to make any initiatives a real success (ie, via this post, and apparently, others). Perhaps there is a context that I am missing. If so, please fill me in. I apologize to all for my Quasi Modo crapping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Beaver Posted December 17, 2004 Share Posted December 17, 2004 Excellent! Two positive gestures result in forward momentum and other good stuff. I am happy to get this response from you. It proves your quality. I'll take issue with your definition of a "leader" as a democratically elected person. This is only one sort of leader or leadership. Like it or not, you started leading the moment you started the thread and took action to meet Ted. You may not find it fair, but perception is what it is and all leaders must manage perception as carefully as possible. That is one of the responsibilities of a leader. Your "quasi" attack was not a useful leadership tactic. This is one of the drawbacks of leading towards a vision--sometimes for the sake of the vision you have to measure carefully your words and tactics. I know that you've not asserted yourself as grand leader, but that is beside the point. I hope you and Ted can talk personally--outside of the forum--and see if you can solve what is likely just a miscommunication or misfiring or something missed. As for "dynamics"--sorry for the lack of clarity. In this case, I simply did not want to force myself onto a situation--your meeting--when I felt it had been amply clear throughout the originating thread that I was damned interested in playing a significant role. Perhaps you and Ted missed my posts--not sure how, mind you--or simply felt that the heat was between the two of you and that's all you really needed. Whatever the case, it doesn't really matter at this point. What matters is that we are all careful at this point to be as inclusive as we possibly can WHILE we take steps to move forward. Remember, our goal--in part--is to grow support for Canadian soccer, not scatter the existing support through divisive "quasi" rants. I know you see this, but I just wanted to explain myself. This is a good thread, Robert. I hope that Ted chimes in soon, as well as others. Cheers, mate. [^] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted December 17, 2004 Author Share Posted December 17, 2004 This is a good thread, Robert. I hope that Ted chimes in soon, as well as others. Cheers, mate. [^] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massive Attack Posted December 18, 2004 Share Posted December 18, 2004 quote:Originally posted by The Beaver I've not been back to the old forum for a long time. Would you be willing to give me an overview of what Robert's been posting there? (You don't have to--I'm just interested.) Here's a sampling of some of Roberts best work: http://www.network54.com/Forum/message?forumid=4693&messageid=1092895153 http://www.network54.com/Forum/message?forumid=4693&messageid=1094082803 http://www.network54.com/Forum/message?forumid=4693&messageid=1094013119 There's other stuff, like continually calling Kevan Pipe a drunk. I just pulled off a few for you to see. He seems to have gone insane after Aug. 18 (the day of the Can-Gua game). Basically if you don't totally agree with Robert, you are a detriment to Canadian soccer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redhat Posted December 18, 2004 Share Posted December 18, 2004 Regarding the second post above: Hopefully Fulham regates and Radzinski gets traded by Robert to a respectable club (not owned by some sand-N) team which operates according to FIFA regulations. Death to Fulham! Posted on Sep 1, 2004, 12:31 AM from IP address 24.69.255.236 What exactly is a "sand-N" club? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.