RS Posted June 20, 2005 Share Posted June 20, 2005 I think a valid question to ask was whether this year's squad was in fact just a stepping stone for the nucleus of 2007's team. It seems rather odd that so many key players are eligible for the next tournament. Could it be that the CSA is so concerned about doing well at home that they virtually sacrificed this year's tourney to advance the experience of the next group? In every u20 team there are always a few underagers peppering the roster, but never have I seen such a large number playing key roles. We had Johnson as the lone true striker, Peters as the main weapon on the wing, Edgar as a midfield general, and so on. All of these guys will be counted on to lead the team on home soil in two years, and what better way to give them crucial experience than by thrusting them into action? In a couple of cases, the younger guys would have been there anyways (Peters is the most obvious example), but surely there were 20 year olds that were more advanced than the half dozen underagers that Canada brought to this year's tournament. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted June 20, 2005 Share Posted June 20, 2005 It's possible that Mitchell deliberately played U-18 players to get them experience for 2007 ahead of better U-20 players. However, it's also possible that the U-18 players who played in this tournament were the best options at their positions. It could be that our 1985s and 86s were a little thin and we had some 87s who were better. Peters, Johnson and Edgar are all 87s and I think all three of those guys deserved to play. The only 87 who I don't think deserved to play so much was Lombardo - perhaps Uccello would have been a better choice for this tournament but I'm glad Lombardo will have this experience under his belt for 2007. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeanKeay Posted June 20, 2005 Share Posted June 20, 2005 I asked that exact question at the press conference and I got scoffed (sp?)at. Though i still believe that is was just a buildup for 2007. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jeffery S. Posted June 20, 2005 Share Posted June 20, 2005 Building for the future is a permanent theme on this site. It basically means that the present sucks. Since the present sucks so much for us lately, we write it off saying we are trying to prepare for another day. Dale's job is put the most competitive team together possible for the best possible result. Noone said that we were thinking about 2007 when we qualified undefeated for this event; so why does this diversion tactic come up now? Because we underperformed? Why don't we just say that Dale called up players who were not ready, missed a few others that could have been there, and that we fell short of our objectives by about a goal (vs. Syria). That would have put us through to quarter finals vs. Brazil and noone would have asked for more or come up with silly excuses about 2007. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RS Posted June 20, 2005 Author Share Posted June 20, 2005 For the record, I think that 'building for the future' is a cop out, and if that is actually what the CSA pressured Dale Mitchell into doing, then I think they're wrong. That being said, do you not think that what I asked is a valid question, since so many of this year's team are eligible for the Canadian-hosted tournament in two year's time? Perhaps your comprehension is off, because nowhere in this thread (or any thread) have I presented any 'silly excuses' (as you call them) for this year's abysmal showing. Asking questions and making excuses are two entirely different things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jeffery S. Posted June 20, 2005 Share Posted June 20, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Rudi For the record, I think that 'building for the future' is a cop out, and if that is actually what the CSA pressured Dale Mitchell into doing, then I think they're wrong. That being said, do you not think that what I asked is a valid question, since so many of this year's team are eligible for the Canadian-hosted tournament in two year's time? Perhaps your comprehension is off, because nowhere in this thread (or any thread) have I presented any 'silly excuses' (as you call them) for this year's abysmal showing. Asking questions and making excuses are two entirely different things. Rudi, I am not particularly ranting at you, just letting off in general. So sorry if you took it that way. It is just that I am getting rather tired of the constant excuses given by many on this board that we are building for the future. I mean, we are getting into a rather odd cliché here where people say "de Guzman is good, sure, but just wait until his little brother joins the nats!". It is really pathetic at times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RS Posted June 20, 2005 Author Share Posted June 20, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Jeffrey S. Rudi, I am not particularly ranting at you, just letting off in general. So sorry if you took it that way. It is just that I am getting rather tired of the constant excuses given by many on this board that we are building for the future. I mean, we are getting into a rather odd cliché here where people say "de Guzman is good, sure, but just wait until his little brother joins the nats!". It is really pathetic at times. I agree. I wouldn't be asking the question is the circumstances were any different (ie. Canada was not hosting the 2007 WYC). This team deserves whatever (constructive) criticism is thrown at it. While you bring up the cliché of many people looking to the future too much, I can also point to the overwhelming lack of tact thrown around by certain posters (who love nothing more than to sh!t on Canadian soccer). These are the people who say ridiculous things like "Canada lacks passion, which is why we will always lose." Neither view is really helpful, as one is a rose-coloured picture while the other is the exact opposite. the truth is somewhere in the middle. Canada is a small country soccer wise, and we ARE showing signs of improvement, albeit very small steps. we will not be able to challenge the Brazils or Italys of the world on a consistant basis, probably in any of our lifetimes. Until everyone can accept this, we will continue to get knee-jerk reactions from the eternal optimists and pessimists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alberto Posted June 20, 2005 Share Posted June 20, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Jeffrey S. Building for the future is a permanent theme on this site. It basically means that the present sucks. Since the present sucks so much for us lately, we write it off saying we are trying to prepare for another day. Dale's job is put the most competitive team together possible for the best possible result. Noone said that we were thinking about 2007 when we qualified undefeated for this event; so why does this diversion tactic come up now? Because we underperformed? Why don't we just say that Dale called up players who were not ready, missed a few others that could have been there, and that we fell short of our objectives by about a goal (vs. Syria). That would have put us through to quarter finals vs. Brazil and noone would have asked for more or come up with silly excuses about 2007. I agree not only did he blow it with the players he choose and his objectives it also left a soar taste in players minds that he even would consider thinking or talking about 2007 before the Holland rounds even has finished. Players have feeling as well they no better then us what is and what is not. Basically what the mister is saying is that we don't have a chance here. At the end of the day you have to ask yourself can this mister be trusted to turn around a game he is playing from more then just running as fast you can in a kick and run game to a entertaining game that spectators can see and enjoy. Remember that spectators are the ones that pay for the ticket and when they see poor quality of futbol as Canada has demonstrated in these past 3 games. They do not watch the game or even attempt to buy a ticket the next time around, I would not and neither would you. And he wants to do it 2 years with these players I don't think so! Its way to late to get a good team together to teach the basic fundamentals of the game such as passing and kicking and keeping possession. Looking at the under 17 that played here in a tournament just months ago for preparation for the under 17 that was just held. There outings in these games which was the best of Canadian team U17 vs club teams like roma, Parma, Milan, etc etc.... was the same result if not worse as these club team where one year younger then the Canada Under 17 team, and not the best of the Italian Under 17 group. It confirmed and showed in the qualifying round for the u17 where ever it was held. Same result. The only good thing is that you don't have to prepare for qualifying that's free bee and you can focus on more on other things to get ready for this 2007. But you cannot squeeze juice from a stone that is Dry and nor can you teach a player how to play the game with less then two years. Canada's focus on 2007 would have been realistic maybe in 2009 or 2011 but not this early. A good start woould be playing game here vs club teams in high standings in Italy, Sweden, France, Portugal, Spain, Mexico, and let the results speak for themselves...... But that would not happen because then he would have to justify his position and the players he choose and his visions of the good game called Futbol.............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beachesl Posted June 20, 2005 Share Posted June 20, 2005 Yes, it is a valid question, but i don't think there is any real evidence that what Mitchell did was forgo success here for 2007. In fact, the tenor of his comments in the short FIFA post-mortem of the group , http://fifa.com/en/news/feature/0,1451,107845,00.html?articleid=107845 (given AFTER elimination ,which is fine), is just to the opposite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthew Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 This is entirely premature and speculative, but isn't that the point of this kind of a web site. Who's in the running for 2007? I have a piecemeal list that's likely incomplete. Throw in names, details, guesses, etc. I feel like I must be missing some 87s, especially on the back end, but I'm not sure who . . . . Goalkeepers (4) Asmir Begovic (87) — Portsmouth (England) Adam Catley (87) — U20 Developmental/Ont Zach Kalthoff (88) — Southampton (England) Lorenzo Borella (88) — U20 Developmental/Que Defenders (8) David Edgar (87) — Newcastle (England) — CB/d-mid Stephen Lumley (87) — U20 Developmental/Ont — Kyle Bartkus (87) — U20 Developmental/Alta Masumi Turnbull (87) — U20 Developmental/BC Joseph Awuakye (88) — — RB Nana Attakora (89) — — CB Alex Suprenant (89) — — LB Kent O'Conner — 1860 Munich (Germany) Midfielders (17) Jaime Peters (87) — Ipswich (England) — r-mid Jonathan DeGuzman (87) — Feyenoord (Netherlands) — a-mid Manny Gomez (87) — River Plate (Argentina) Kerr McLeod (87) — Vitesse (Netherlands) Hector Contreras (87) — U20 Developmental/Quebec NTC Vince Petrasso (87) — U20 Developmental/Ont Tosant Ricketts (87) — Santiago Morning (Chile) Jonathan Beaulieu-Bourgault (88) — U20 Developmental/Que — DM/Def Jacob Lensky (88) — Celtic (Scotland) Robert Kerek (88) — SC Frieburg (Germany) Carlo Seminara (88) — Salernitana Sport (Italy) Kyle Oliveira (88) — — d-mid Pierre-Rudolph Mayard (88) — — left mid Keegan Ayre (88) — Marinko Maras (89) — — left mid Michael Pereira (89) — — a-mid Calvin Rosario — Tours FC (France) Forwards (8) Will Johnson (87) — Chicago (US) Andrea Lombardo (87) — Atalanta (Italy) Mike D'Agostino (87) — Kentucky (NCAA) Alex Elliott (87) — U20 Developmental/BC Massimo Di Ioia (87) — U20 Developmental/Que Kevin Courcelle (88) — Royal Excelsior Mouscron (Belgium) Shane Lammie (88) — Johnson Akuoku (88) — Players mentioned below I either have no idea on an age or a position. Or they may or may not merrit consideration. I have no idea. They're mostly names on the Canucks Abroad list. Michael Abusabal — Bolognesi (Peruvian Premier League) (1) U16 Maxim Grootenboer-Gagnon - Rio Branco Americana (Brazil Championship Série C) (3) U17 Fabian Knezevic Jr. - Kamen Ingrad (Croatian 1.HNL Ozujsko) (1) Youth Thomas MacLean - FC Burnley (English The Championship) (2) Youth Gavin McCallum - Yeovil Town (English League One) (3) Youth Amir Haroon - Energie Cottbus (German Bundesliga 2) (2) Youth Troy Gardezy - Lower Island U18 Selects (BC Select Soccer League) Christian Schimdt (87) - Santiago Morning (Chile) Adam Loga (87) - Santiago Morning (Chile) Stephon Alingue - Torcy Football Club cheers, matthew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 Great list Matthew. I would like to add a few names, and subtract Rosario, who was reported on this board to be an 86. Goalkeeper David Monsalve (88) - Shared keeper duties with Kalthoff in Italy. Injured for U17 WC qualifying. Defenders Bruno Napoleao (88) - Going to TWU. Injured for U17 WC qualifying. Kennedy Owusu-Ansah (89) - Shone vs. Scots in Vaughan. Forwards Jason Devonish (87) Queen's College, T & T A.J. Gray (88) - U17 WC team. Markus Haber (89) - U17 WC team. Derek Gaudet (89) - Boca Juniors Youth Gavin Russell (88) - Shelbourne (Ireland) Youth Cheers Ivan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashton Gate Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 At 16-18 years the training environment is absolutely critical, therefore I expect Shaun Saiko from Edmonton ('89) to come through as he will be in the Middlesbrough FC academy starting in November. Amongst the FA academies, Middlesbrough is developing a strong reputation for player development. Their academy director Dave Parnaby is superb, the best coach I ever saw working with young players and smart to boot. In short, the training environment at Middlesbrough is top notch. Shaun S. has strong ball skills, allied to a killer first touch, if he can handle the physical/mental side of the game in England he will emerge in time for 2007. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcsoccer101 Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 With regards to Shaun Saiko going to Middlesbrough, Keegan Ayre is also going to Middlesbrough around the same time as Shaun is. Talking with people who know him, he's leaving around middle July. It's nice to see two canadian players going to the same club!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashton Gate Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 Yes thats very good news, Shaun goes over in july for pre-season training and orientation before starting officially in November (his 16th Birthday). These guys will also have David Edgar just up the road at Newcastle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.