An Observer Posted March 8, 2005 Author Share Posted March 8, 2005 i continually amazed how many idiots on this site frequently comment on matters such as national immigration law for which they know nothing about. Its pathetic and these people are the real ememies of Canadian soccer (not the CSA...they are quite professional in comparison). If you don't like the MLS, that's fine. Voice your opinion. Make your argument for your Canadian league and vision for Canadian soccer but please do not comment on things you dont have a clue about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 quote:Originally posted by WilfPTheReal99 Looking at the Lynx roster, there isnt a single player to lose their job, so that is not worth worrying about. Well, coming from "the only one that counts" that's a big relief. It's a comfort to hear that Toronto can successfully support both the Lynx and a MLS team which would get the big shiny new stadium. Maybe the Lynx could play there too, if they can schedule dates around when the MLS team would be using the place. Maybe not a single Lynx season ticketholder would desert the team for the bigger MLS product. I see your point, just looking at the roster, these current players don't have nothing to worry about.[:0][}][:0][}][:0] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 The comments from Bruno, particularly about 10,000 maximum, are hilarious. Not only did the Blizzard frequently get higher than that on average in the days when Toronto had a smaller population (& fan base) to draw from, the Lynx didn't even come close to that when they where playing in a venue that seated 9000. So what's their excuse, if they were being operated & marketed so properly? And what in the name of bloody hell does he want the new stadium for, and why have you been waiting for it, if the Lynx have no intentions, hopes or plans of getting it half-full, never mind filling it? As for his suggestion that they have a pretty good idea of who buys what when it comes to soccer, I think that speaks for itself. This is the first time the word "Lynx" has appeared on the front page of the sports section of the Toronto Star, to my knowledge. That's saying something. Interesting that its Allan Ryan, not their new soccer reporter, who has done the article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosehead Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 what is mls, i thought it was a real estate housing database? why not create our own league with a normal name? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free kick Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Moosehead what is mls, i thought it was a real estate housing database? why not create our own league with a normal name? Multiple Listing Service. You have to wonder if there would be a copyright issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Free kick I was not aware that the Lynx had so many fans accross the country. Its incredible all the nice things that people have been saying about the Lynx more and more as the MLS talks progess. We never used to read similar accolades here before the MLS talks started. Can we count on seeing you at the home opener? Paul Stalteri An extremely versatile performer, Canadian Paul Stalteri can play on the right or left of midfield or defence. He has even been known to be deployed up front. National team Stalteri represented Canada at the 1993 FIFA Under-17 World Championship and the 1997 FIFA World Youth Championship and has also appeared for his country's Under-23 Olympic team. He won his first senior cap in 1997 against Iran and since then has been a regular performer in FIFA World Cup qualifiers. Helped Canada win the 2000 CONCACAF Gold Cup. Club Began his career with Toronto Lynx, top scoring with eight goals in 1997. 1997: In October, Stalteri signed for German Bundesliga side Werder Bremen. Spent three seasons in the reserves, clocking up 71 appearances and 14 goals. Won promotion to the first team in 2000/01 and by 2002/03, when he made 33 appearances, he had become a firm favourite. 2003/04: Appeared in 33 league matches as Bremen wrapped up a league and cup double and also weighed in with two goals. Did you know? Stalteri's first international goal was scored against Guatemala in June 1999. No, I will not be attending the Lynx home opener, and I will also miss the Toronto MLS home opener if and when that ever happens. However, I will see the Lynx when they play against the Whitecaps at Swangard. Maybe you should expand the sources from which you select your reading material from.[8D] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoyleG Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Free kick Multiple Listing Service. You have to wonder if there would be a copyright issue. The house swindlers have a trademark on MLS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoyleG Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 quote:Originally posted by An Observer i continually amazed how many idiots on this site frequently comment on matters such as national immigration law for which they know nothing about. Its pathetic and these people are the real ememies of Canadian soccer (not the CSA...they are quite professional in comparison). If you don't like the MLS, that's fine. Voice your opinion. Make your argument for your Canadian league and vision for Canadian soccer but please do not comment on things you dont have a clue about. If you so high and mighy, then state the statues of Canadian law and any legal decisions (not opinions). If you can't do that, then just keep quiet. It seems that enemies to you is those who won't support MLS. We voice our opinions yet you shoot us down as beening enemies a tratiors to Canadian soccer. Get you head out of your rear and think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
An Observer Posted March 9, 2005 Author Share Posted March 9, 2005 I have stated the status of immigration laws (being a former immigtation lawyer in Canada myself) very many times on this Board...so I wont again as DoyleG you are a complete waste of space on this issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sstackho Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 From today's Globe: New Toronto team could be magnet; CSA sees possible expansion club as hothouse for Canadian talent DAVID NAYLOR 671 words 9 March 2005 The Globe and Mail S5 English All material copyright Bell Globemedia Publishing Inc. or its licensors. All rights reserved. A Major League Soccer team in Toronto would provide a chance to house and develop the core of Canada's national team, according to Canadian Soccer Association chief operating officer Kevan Pipe. “It would offer the opportunity to play full-time, to work full-time, to eat and sleep full-time, making good money playing soccer in Canada,” Pipe said. “And if we were able to have a pool of players from Canada there then we wouldn't have the jetlag that we have now when players [coming from Europe] face a 10-hour time adjustment within 48 hours to prepare.” On Monday, Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment president Richard Peddie confirmed that his organization was looking to an MLS expansion team to coincide with the opening of a new stadium at York University in 2007. The stadium will also be the new home of the Canadian Football League's Toronto Argonauts. While nothing is official, Peddie said MLSE representatives have met three times since the fall with MLS commissioner Don Garber. Garber was unavailable for comment yesterday. “We're really attracted to the owners, the commissioner and the way the league has started,” Peddie said of the 10-year-old circuit. “We're attracted to the sport of soccer and the icing on the cake is the new stadium.” Currently, the 12 MLS teams in the United States are required to be roughly 75-per-cent stocked with Americans. Pipe sees no difficulty meeting that kind of quota with Canadians, given the strength of Canada's development teams and the possibility of players returning home from Europe. “Those discussions have already taken place between MLS and MLSE so what's in it for us is that there would be a bulk number of Canadian players,” Pipe said. “We've been asked if we have those players. . . . There are strong indicators that Canada has the players and we believe that. “The vision of a Toronto franchise as being the core of the Canadian team has been accepted in principle.” Professional soccer has had a checkered past in Toronto, as it has in most North American cities, with several teams coming and going. The Toronto Lynx of the 12-team United Soccer League plays out of Centennial Stadium on the western outskirts of Toronto before crowds of roughly 2,000 a game. Peddie is confident his group can make it work. “The MLS model is a good one,” Peddie said. “We've done research that indicates there's a lot of potential for MLS in this market. Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment has never tried [soccer]. We have a lot of marketing and sports experience and we believe if anyone can do it, we can.” Neither Peddie nor MLSE would comment on how much a franchise would cost. However, published reports suggest the league's latest two expansion teams, which begin play this spring, each paid a $10-million (U.S.) expansion fee. “We don't expect sellouts in year one,” Peddie said. “We've got a lot of work to do in the community, trials and then ultimately to convert them into season tickets. “It's all in flux. We're making some progress but we're still a long way away from making this deal.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew W Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 quote:Originally posted by DoyleG If you so high and mighy, then state the statues of Canadian law and any legal decisions (not opinions). If you can't do that, then just keep quiet. It seems that enemies to you is those who won't support MLS. We voice our opinions yet you shoot us down as beening enemies a tratiors to Canadian soccer. Get you head out of your rear and think. This is not a wind-up post but merely a suggestion as to whether you might find your above response a little hypocritical. You were asked by Gordon previously in this thread, after he explained how you dismissed the information he earlier offered you, to provide the information that clearly states how MLS would be able to operate in Canada with rules that clearly discriminates against Canadian players. You responded with: "Where's the laws then that force a Canadian team to take on Canadian players? Laws dealing with doctors or professional athletes aren't one in the same." Yet, you provide no link or quotes to back up your statement. So we come back to the above post where you are asking people to provide you with factual information that supports their opinions, yet you are unwilling or unable to do so yourself. The "burden of proof" isn't a one-way street here if you are going to start demanding it of others. If those are going to be the ground rules for this then I'd suggest that you let us all in on the secret now and provide the proof you demand of others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoyleG Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 If you can't provide concrete proof to counter me otherwise, then you have no basis to argue. You can prove it, post it. Quit trying to argue your way out of the hole your in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L.T. Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 Face it Andrew, we've been minorsoccer.com'd.... there is no defence!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massive Attack Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 Well, if someone has the time, here's a link to the HRSDC regulations on hiring foriegn workers: http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/asp/gateway.asp?hr=en/epb/lmd/fw/tempoffers.shtml&hs=hze Like I've stated before, the best example for MLS in Canada is CFL expansion to the U.S when considering labour restrictions. Despite this excellent example, I still got laughed at by the resident biggot (who probably still thinks I'm Kevan Pipe) and his free dominion, I wish my flag still had a union jack on it, friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RS Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 More from Perkins: Latest soccer bid sad, familiar Stadium motivates MLSE's proposal Your friends at Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment can smell taxpayers' money, so here they come again with their hands out. MLSE eyes $35 million in our money that, pending an outbreak of good sense, will be thrown away on a 25,000-seat stadium at York University. MLSE snaps its fingers and says, "Hey, let's try something that's never been done before. Pro soccer in Toronto. How could it miss?" Thus the silliness that MLSE, having driven its basketball team into the ground, now plans to seriously look into an expansion team for 2007 from Major League Soccer. No one — repeat, no one — can pee in your ear and tell you it's raining quite like the troops at Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment. Richard Peddie, MLSE's mahatma of marketing, suggests that the board not only "is interested in winning championships, but in increasing enterprise value." To that end, MLSE is "running out of runway in how to grow revenue." Well, how about starting by selling those 5,000 empty seats for the Raptors most nights? How about making that team attractive to sponsors, advertisers and TV viewers? That's a start. Peddie, remember, was part of the crew that acquired Rob Babcock, whose tenure as general manager has been utter disaster so far. This team is dead last in the worst division in basketball — some say in the history of basketball — and, like the other night in Dallas, gets embarrassed by other teams' second- and third-stringers. If this keeps up, the coach will soon run out of players to fight with. So what about fixing this mess first? Anyway, we were talking soccer and Peddie, who should know better, repeats that old chestnut about soccer being "a sport of the future." Why? Because so many kiddies play it. This has been a constant in the 32 years yours truly has been hunting-and-pecking sports in this city. The number of kids who play soccer is trotted out as every answer to any soccer question. In reality, it means nothing. Soccer is a great game for kids and a cheap one to participate in, but one-time childhood participation does not translate into support for professional soccer. Never has and never will. For whatever reasons, pro soccer, which has been tried a million times, doesn't go here. Support for the beautiful game is compartmentalized; the Premier League fans don't watch Serie A and so on. Big-name international teams on one-time appearances sell well. A league is a different story. As Bruno Hartrell of the Toronto Lynx told colleague Allan Ryan, "We've tried to sell soccer tickets in this market for nine years and have a pretty good idea of who buys. ... We're not missing anything." MLSE, despite the drivel about kids playing soccer and so on, knows exactly what this is about. That planned York venue. Whatever a soccer team costs — possibly $9 million (U.S.) for starters — and whatever it loses are easy tax write-offs. What MLSE really seeks, as main tenant, ahead of the Argonauts, would be some kind of control of another taxpayer-built stadium. MLSE came swooping in after the Roadrunners went toes up and plucked the chickens who went ahead with city money for the Ricoh Coliseum — which, please notice, sits idly now, providing zero local pro hockey alternative as the NHL lockout drags on. MLSE now has Ricoh in its pocket. It already owns the Air Canada Centre. Just last week, it made the big pitch to get the contract to run the proposed $45 million Oshawa Gardens — unless city councillors in Oshawa see the light and run for their lives. Remember, too, when the mighty Leafs were willing to pitch in for the proposed Varsity arena/stadium project — and meanwhile take those 180 metres of commercial retail space on Bloor St. off U of T's hands. Just to be neighbourly. Now it's casting eyes northward toward York and if it's soccer that gives them the foot in the door for another new venue paid for by somebody else, well, soccer it is. Do you know how many kids play it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 Sounds like an embittered, cynical journalist to me whose primary interest is helping sell his paper or whatever he publishes in. MLSE is a for profit business just like Perkins' paper, not a sports charity. Of course they are going to look out for profit opportunities. Clearly the new Varsity Stadium project didn't fit their business plan so they made the right decision to pull out. I note with interest no other group stepped up to replace them on the Varsity project - I wonder why? I would prefer MLSE took over government funded facilities than have governments run them at a loss at taxpayer's expense. You can be sure that if governments could make money with these facilities they wouldn't be so ready to sell them off. Without MLSE there would be no NBA team in Toronto, never mind 5,000 empty seats at games - what about the 13,000 filled ones? Clearly MLSE like it or not is a successful (read profitable) business or it would not still be around. Without them (or a group like them) there will be no MLS franchise either and Toronto will be left with a USL franchise that struggles to market itself well enough to sell more than 2,000 seats per game. I know which option I would prefer. Get a life Mr. Perkins, you could do with a swift attitude change! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canso Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 profit business just like Perkins' paper and like all good columnists he takes a stand and makes an argument, whether he actually believes in it or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 “It would offer the opportunity to play full-time, to work full-time, to eat and sleep full-time, making good money playing soccer in Canada,” Pipe said. “And if we were able to have a pool of players from Canada there then we wouldn't have the jetlag that we have now when players [coming from Europe] face a 10-hour time adjustment within 48 hours to prepare.” Currently, the 12 MLS teams in the United States are required to be roughly 75-per-cent stocked with Americans. Pipe sees no difficulty meeting that kind of quota with Canadians, given the strength of Canada's development teams and the possibility of players returning home from Europe. “Those discussions have already taken place between MLS and MLSE so what's in it for us is that there would be a bulk number of Canadian players,” Pipe said. “We've been asked if we have those players. . . . There are strong indicators that Canada has the players and we believe that. “The vision of a Toronto franchise as being the core of the Canadian team has been accepted in principle.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoyleG Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Massive Attack Well, if someone has the time, here's a link to the HRSDC regulations on hiring foriegn workers: http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/asp/gateway.asp?hr=en/epb/lmd/fw/tempoffers.shtml&hs=hze Like I've stated before, the best example for MLS in Canada is CFL expansion to the U.S when considering labour restrictions. Despite this excellent example, I still got laughed at by the resident biggot (who probably still thinks I'm Kevan Pipe) and his free dominion, I wish my flag still had a union jack on it, friend. Yet CIC has Athletes and Coaches on it's exempt list for a work permit. If the best you can do is slag someone because of their poltical beliefs, your nothing mroe than a bigot. Plain and simple. As for CFL example: In 1999 the roster limit was increased to 39 players, of whom 3 must be identified as quarterbacks with 36 others players, of whom not more than 17 may be imports. The special teams category was revived to apply to the 17th import. http://www.sunmedia.ca/CFLHistory/importquota.html 17 Imports + 3 American QB's= 20 Americans on a 39 man roster. Thus a majority of the teams roster are Americans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massive Attack Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 DoyleG, you really are hard headed. I'm not talking about the import restrictions for Canadian teams in the CFL. I was talking about the import restrictions for American based CFL teams. Thanks for that link anyway. As it basically proves my point with the following quote: "28. In 1993, the League expanded to include a team from the USA, based in Sacramento, California. This immediately brought into question how the import rule could be interpreted. While the Sacramento Club expressed willingness to include non-import players on its roster, competent legal observers challenged the principle of a quota and expressed the opinion that it would be in contravention of both California and US federal laws to deny an American player the right to play because of a required quota of aliens. Consequently, the Sacramento Club was permitted unrestricted use of import players, while the Canadian based Clubs were still required to adhere to the limits established in 1990." I contend that a Candian MLS team would not have to have 75% American players, just like an American CFL team was not forced to dress 20 Canadians. P.S. Being called a bigot from a member of Free Dominion is the funniest thing I've heard all week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew W Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 The exemption on the CIC site states simply: Foreign teams, athletes and coaches may compete in Canada without a work permit. http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/work/exempt-1.html#athletes To me that covers the athletes who come to Canada to compete in professional tennis and golf tournaments, pro league hockey, basketball and baseball games and a variety of other pro sports where money is earned. As far as the CFL example, there is a limit on Americans that can play in the league. In other words there's an enforceable quota placed on the number of Americans who can play football in Canada. But there is no language that limits the number of Canadians that can play. There is nothing in the language of the rules of the CFL preventing a team from fielding an entire team of Canadians if said team so chooses, but the rules specifically state said team may not field an entire team of Americans. They were able to do so with the American franchises that briefly dotted the league because the rules were not enforceable under US labour laws. The arguement that MLS could not force a Canadian franchise to impose a quota on Canadian players is still valid and is not invalidated by the phrase "Foreign teams, athletes and coaches may compete in Canada without a work permit" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJT Posted March 10, 2005 Share Posted March 10, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Rudi More from Perkins: Already posted elsewhere. We really need to create one MLS thread or something because these multiple threads are driving me nuts. Oh, and a reminder to everyone: stop the name-calling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoyleG Posted March 10, 2005 Share Posted March 10, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Massive Attack DoyleG, you really are hard headed. I'm not talking about the import restrictions for Canadian teams in the CFL. I was talking about the import restrictions for American based CFL teams. Thanks for that link anyway. As it basically proves my point with the following quote: "28. In 1993, the League expanded to include a team from the USA, based in Sacramento, California. This immediately brought into question how the import rule could be interpreted. While the Sacramento Club expressed willingness to include non-import players on its roster, competent legal observers challenged the principle of a quota and expressed the opinion that it would be in contravention of both California and US federal laws to deny an American player the right to play because of a required quota of aliens. Consequently, the Sacramento Club was permitted unrestricted use of import players, while the Canadian based Clubs were still required to adhere to the limits established in 1990." I contend that a Candian MLS team would not have to have 75% American players, just like an American CFL team was not forced to dress 20 Canadians. P.S. Being called a bigot from a member of Free Dominion is the funniest thing I've heard all week. I haven't been posting there for over a year and I no longer have the link. So if you can't do anything else than name calling, don't bother replying. If not, then provide the statutes under Canadian Law or any Canadian court case that forces a Canadian team to have a Canadian roster. Same goes with anyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthew Posted March 10, 2005 Share Posted March 10, 2005 quote:Originally posted by DoyleG As for CFL example: In 1999 the roster limit was increased to 39 players, of whom 3 must be identified as quarterbacks with 36 others players, of whom not more than 17 may be imports. The special teams category was revived to apply to the 17th import. http://www.sunmedia.ca/CFLHistory/importquota.html 17 Imports + 3 American QB's= 20 Americans on a 39 man roster. Thus a majority of the teams roster are Americans. I'm not sure I continue to wade into this argument, especially since I'm not necessarily in favour of MLS in Canada. However . . . the CFL limit is on foreigners. Not Canadians. If Canadians suddenly all became better at football than Americans (stictly for a hypothetical arguments sake), there wouldn't still be 19 Canadians and 20 Americans. There could be 39 Canadians. There can just be no fewer than 19. Current MLS rules would say there can be no fewer than X Americans. It's the same thing as the CFL. You could dress all Americans if you wanted. But you have have a certain minimum number. But bringing that to Canada is the problem, because you can't guarantee a certain number of jobs for foreigners. That's the argument. And no I can't provide a legal basis because frankly I'm too lazy and I don't care that much, but it's common sense that you can't reserve jobs for a certain ratio of foreigners or cap the number of local citizens that work there. cheers, matthew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.