Women's Team in Turmoil?

[loyola]

Just saw the reports on soccercentral. Christine Sinclair and Andrea Neil words weren't very supportive of the 3. Pellerud and Bobby L. denying any wrong doings in the dispute. Hooper's claiming that Pellerud made pressure for players to play in Vancouver

Nothing really new apart from the Sinclair comments about the players taking as an insult the fact that the 3 players didn't shoed up against China.

[The Ref]

quote:Originally posted by loyola

Just saw the reports on soccercentral. Christine Sinclair and Andrea Neil words weren't very supportive of the 3. Pellerud and Bobby L. denying any wrong doings in the dispute. Hooper's claiming that Pellerud made pressure for players to play in Vancouver

Nothing really new apart from the Sinclair comments about the players taking as an insult the fact that the 3 players didn't shoed up against China.

I think that in lieu what happened to Sharolta, no player will dare support the 3. Recently another member of the coaching staff resigned for undisclosed reasons. I think final resolution will rest on the hands of the coach as the CSA may ask him to go back to the table and solve this matter. If he is not able to communicate with the 3, he may feel compelled to quit.

[Richard]

From what I have read, despite all the impassioned posts here, I don't think there are any legal grounds to demand Pellerud's resignation over this affair.

[near_post]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

I fear you could be right. The scenario you outline is entirely possible, but perhaps not best for all.

As was noted on SoccerCentral this morning by Gerry, the truth is likely somewhere in-between. And as Craig noted in his closing remarks, it is indeed a shame.

It is also a sad commentary for our youth players that power, influence, and money trump the appearance of fairness.

I'd also have been a lot more comfortable if this situation had not reinforced the perception of a system run by men dictating terms to young women.

[loyola]

quote:Originally posted by The Ref

Recently another member of the coaching staff resigned for undisclosed reasons.

Who's that? The GK coach Shel Brodsgaard? I haven't seen his name in the staff for a while.

[john tv]

Devastating news to see our women's team beig ripped apart.It seems that two camps are developing and as someone said this is a very competitive sport and will carry on into the inappropitae rooms. This has to be solved as soon as possible,otherwise the damage will linger for many years to come.

[Richard]

It has got nothing whatsoever to do with whether it is men or women dictating terms to these players in case that's what you were trying to imply.

The CSA is responsible for operating the national team programs and it is their responsibility to set the terms for participation which the players are free to accept or reject. The national team coach and staff are agents of the CSA. Players are invited to join the program, they are under no legal obligation and cannot be compelled. They are free to decline the invitation or leave at any time for any reason or no reason at all. Carded elite athletes certainly have some conditions attached to their carding money but can leave the program any time.

As for Hooper and crew, if they were unhappy with the terms for continued particiaption in the national team program they were free to leave at any time. Trouble is the money became too much of a temptation and they chose to threaten legal action when they realised their continued involvement was in jeopardy as was the $38,000 per year plus any bonuses for participation in competitions that may be forthcoming.

[Richard]

Based on what has been published in the media to date I doubt any judge would be willing to hear the case, if indeed Hooper's lawyers can even make a strong enough case to present to a judge.

Hooper and crew careers with the national team are likely over, as is the income from the program they have been enjoying. The CSA and the national team program will continue and these players will be replaced, even if they are briefly missed in the short term. Public memory is fickle. If the team does moderately well without them in Korea and the Gold Cup and qualifies for the World Cup in China, Hooper and crew will be forgotten, left to be added to the ever growing list of former national team players but with an unfortunate footnote.

[Cheeta]

Took me two whole beer to read this topic.

What a bloody mess.

Doesn't matter if there's anything to it all or not (but I strongly suspect there is. And something terrribly rotten) that this should have been allowed to even evolve to this is damning for Pellerud and the CSA.

And we're not talking about a single player here. This is mutiny. And the face of the WNT, Charmaine Hooper is attached to it? Oy.

Poor Mr. Kerfoot. Clearly he's the WNT most important benefactor. And clearly his sponsorship of the WNT is criticaly important to the program and the CSA.

But that this generosity, and it is an excellently placed and much needed generosity, should be allowed to become a weapon of sorts against players is wretched. Pellerud comes off as an overzelous Toddie. Bending over backward to show the benefits of sponsorship to Kerfoot and Company.

There is of course another side to this whole tragidy. But for now, I'll side with the rebels. Players who play the game for the love of the game and quite clearly, not for profit.

Because if half of what's been said is true, only half, it's enough to send Pellerud packing and have the rebels reinstated.

With an apology.

Rant out.

[Richard]

Cheeta if you base your conclusions solely on what you've read in this thread and in the media (only one side presented) then you will get a skewed picture. Of course if you are already prejudiced against the CSA no matter what, then you will of course pre-judge them and their agents solely to blame for everything that has happened, which it appears you have.

Aside from a couple of very brief clips on Soccer Central this morning (and Hooper wasn't very convincing), none of us has heard any evidence from the CSA's point of view. I refuse to jump to conclusions and pass judgement until I have both sides of the story. The CSA is by no means staffed by saints but so far we have only had the three players' side of the story presented through newspaper stories plus a lot of metaphorical opinionated hot air in this forum.

[terpfan68]

It seems to me from reading ALL of the postings that most of the contributors have already made up their minds. Some people see the CSA as always wrong and other people will never critize them. What I would like to know is is it possible that some compremise might be reached or does one side or the other have to "win". Institutions (such as CSA) never like to admit that they make mistakes or that situations have been mishandled. Star players (like you know who) are often difficult to deal with if they do not get their own way. Not knowing all of the fact does make it difficult to comment, but that has not stopped many people as we have six pages of comments already with I suspect many more to come. Could someone make a timeline of known events and not alleged events? That would help the rest of us make up our minds as to who the villians are here. I suspect that there is enough blame for everyone.

[The Ref]

quote:Originally posted by loyola

Who's that? The GK coach Shel Brodsgaard? I haven't seen his name in the staff for a while.

Sorry, I don't know. This is all I know.

[The Ref]

Here is today's latest from the Globe and Mail

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20061021.SOCCERWOMEN21/TPStory/Sports

It appears some players are turning their backs to their own teammates. Very unfortunate. I personally know that Charmaine always had her teammates at heart and wished for their success before hers.

[Richard]

The 'some players' are the same three led by Hooper who started this whole fiasco. There have no further defections from the team in camp.

[Richard]

The 'some players' are the same three led by Hooper who started this whole fiasco. There have no further defections from the team in camp. Hooper can call all she likes for whatever she likes, she has made herself a has-been as far as the national team is concerned. Sad but she has made herself the author of her own destruction.

[Guest Ed]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

Cheeta if you base your conclusions solely on what you've read in this thread and in the media (only one side presented) then you will get a skewed picture. Of course if you are already prejudiced against the CSA no matter what, then you will of course pre-judge them and their agents solely to blame for everything that has happened, which it appears you have.

Aside from a couple of very brief clips on Soccer Central this morning (and Hooper wasn't very convincing), none of us has heard any evidence from the CSA's point of view. I refuse to jump to conclusions and pass judgement until I have both sides of the story. The CSA is by no means staffed by saints but so far we have only had the three players' side of the story presented through newspaper stories plus a lot of metaphorical opinionated hot air in this forum.

You preach reason and not jumping to conclusions and yet you brand Hooper as 'not very convincing'.

[Grizzly]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

I refuse to jump to conclusions and pass judgement until I have both sides of the story.

The following is your so called impartiality???????

quote:The 'some players' are the same three led by Hooper who started this whole fiasco. There have no further defections from the team in camp. Hooper can call all she likes for whatever she likes, she has made herself a has-been as far as the national team is concerned. Sad but she has made herself the author of her own destruction.

I have to agree with Ed on this. You are entitled to your own opinion and interpretation of the matter but noone on this thread is more partial than you are. State your opinion but save us the arrogant claims of impartiality which you seem to think give your arguments more credibility. The majority of posters here are not morons and don't need to read "This is my opinion and it is right because I am the only impartial one."

As far as hearing both sides of the story, I think there are three issues

1) the W-League playoff game

2) the China game

3) the residency program

I agree we do not have all the information about the 2nd and 3rd issues and thus can not fully judge who is right. However, by not fully judging I also mean not condemning the players (as you are doing) nor the CSA. I think the first issue is pretty clear because everyone can see that Ottawa got to keep its players while New Jersey wasn't able to so the players are right at least in one of the three issues. Regardless of who is right or wrong we saw with Ossieck that once players start to revolt that the end is usually near. This may be the start of the end for Pellerud or the end itself but I think within 2 years at the most he will be gone. Also working against Pellerud is that he is not only unpopular with a portion of the team (and the Globe article implies that although Neil and Sinclair are fully behind him others are not) he is unpopular with the fans. Many of the fans don't regard him as a good coach which is probably why many are also willing to jump to conclusions about him being the culprit without all of the facts (just as you are jumping to conclusions about the players being the culprit without all of the facts). The end result is that the ground under Pellerud is getting less solid. Hooper may have played her last national team game because of her age but I think we will see Latham and Nonen again.

[Richard]

Grizzly, expressing the opinion that these three players' careers with the national team are over is not condemning the players or judging them as the culprits as you put it, it is merely expressing a pragmatic opinion. I have not asserted that they are guilty of any transgression other than acting unwisely, neither have I condemned the CSA or its agents. If you can find a post of mine that genuinely contradicts this please point it out. Until then you might hold back on your self-righteous accusations.

You on the other hand appear more than willing to express far from impartial opinions and make judgements. Beware the pot calling the kettle black.

[KK_Fan]

Richard,

I am sure people have said that Charmaine's career was over with the NT many times, when she had the previous coach replaced, when she gave birth...yet she still plays

I highly doubt that her career is over. Players on the team may not like her, but who likes everyone they work with anyway? and if she can score three goals against sweeden, that is still really good for a striker in anyone's mind. the fact that she is only one in the US-Canada game that really worked her butt off to try to make something happen, she could have easily mailed that game in and blamed the heat like a few Canadian players did.

As for it only being about the money...

Charmaine can easily make 3X the amount of money doing her other proffesion and speaking engagements or she could coach. I would not question that her motives are money

[Kaylee]

I am new to this board -- one of the few women, it seems. I usually hang out at Go Big Red but a friend told me about this discussion forum a few days ago.

I follow the WNT closely. And I've seen them play too, many times. I have always admired Charmaine for her strength of character on and off the field. She is a role model for many young women.

I have read every single post here and I have to say that you, Richard, stand out as the most prejudiced and narrow-minded person on the forum. You actually remind me of a lot of older men coaches I've seen in action. You are the boss. Your opinion is the only one that counts. "If you don't do what I say, you will be benched." I hear that echoing in my mind in all your posts.

Your comments that "the CSA should stick to their guns" that "Charmaine Hooper is "too big for her boots and has brought the other players down with her" that "the players that didn't show up should be fired" that "the behaviour of Hooper and the other two should cost them their future with the national team" shows that you have already made up your mind despite urging everyone to not make judgments without hard facts.

[KK_Fan]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

Any player that is unwilling to accept the terms laid out for participating in a national team program is welcome to decline the invitation any time. Same applies if you don't like the way the program is run, the personnel involved or the money you will or won't receive. There is no need whatsoever to whinge to the media and threaten to sue because you don't like the terms, there are always plenty of others waiting in line to take your place.

You are so transparently against Hooper that anything she did should end her career with the NT.

I doubt that the CSA has another player with Charmaines ability and her reputation internationally.

this is a employer-employee battle

Sounds like the CSA needs contracts with it's players like the USA has, that way the coach can't threaten the players and expectations are on a binding document for all parties.

BTW, The USA has had players speak out against the coach and they ended up on the Olympic team anyway after going to US SOCCER and asking for them to fire her. after the olympics several US players staged a coup and had her fired.

[The Ref]

quote:Originally posted by Kaylee

I am new to this board -- one of the few women, it seems. I usually hang out at Go Big Red but a friend told me about this discussion forum a few days ago.

I follow the WNT closely. And I've seen them play too, many times. I have always admired Charmaine for her strength of character on and off the field. She is a role model for many young women.

I have read every single post here and I have to say that you, Richard, stand out as the most prejudiced and narrow-minded person on the forum. You actually remind me of a lot of older men coaches I've seen in action. You are the boss. Your opinion is the only one that counts. "If you don't do what I say, you will be benched." I hear that echoing in my mind in all your posts.

Your comments that "the CSA should stick to their guns" that "Charmaine Hooper is "too big for her boots and has brought the other players down with her" that "the players that didn't show up should be fired" that "the behaviour of Hooper and the other two should cost them their future with the national team" shows that you have already made up your mind despite urging everyone to not make judgments without hard facts.

Hey welcome Kaylee, glad you joined this bunch of opinionated fans.

I agree with all your comments. I no longer argue with poster Richard, it is a waste of time. I just ignore his posting as much as posible.

[Richard]

quote:Originally posted by Kaylee

I am new to this board -- one of the few women, it seems. I usually hang out at Go Big Red but a friend told me about this discussion forum a few days ago.

I follow the WNT closely. And I've seen them play too, many times. I have always admired Charmaine for her strength of character on and off the field. She is a role model for many young women.

I have read every single post here and I have to say that you, Richard, stand out as the most prejudiced and narrow-minded person on the forum. You actually remind me of a lot of older men coaches I've seen in action. You are the boss. Your opinion is the only one that counts. "If you don't do what I say, you will be benched." I hear that echoing in my mind in all your posts.

Your comments that "the CSA should stick to their guns" that "Charmaine Hooper is "too big for her boots and has brought the other players down with her" that "the players that didn't show up should be fired" that "the behaviour of Hooper and the other two should cost them their future with the national team" shows that you have already made up your mind despite urging everyone to not make judgments without hard facts.

My my, we have another fiery new poster - that's good.

You're welcome to your opinions and to expressing them here like the rest of us. We don't have to agree with you.

I offer the following rebuttal...

- Charmaine Hooper is an intelligent woman, familiar no doubt with the ways of the world. She is free to speak out as she sees fit if something is bothering her but surely she knew that by doing so in this instance there would be consequences. The CSA and the national team program are not self-managed co-ops, and national team selection is not a democratic process no matter how much you or I for that matter, might wish they were.

- She has been the one out of the three who has addressed the media regularly, by doing so she has assumed a leadership role never mind her history of doing so. Since her and the other's actions have already resulted in their suspension from the national program she has indeed taken the others down with her.

- By accepting carding money and presumably also the Kerfoot sponsored stipend there was a de facto contract between her and the national team program. To be called up for a national team game and not show with apparently no prior explanation is a clear breach of that contract and justifiable grounds for suspension or being dropped from the team, never mind the dispute over attending the resident camp in Vancouver etc.

- Am I wrong in concluding pragmatically from what has transpired to date according to the media reports that their future with the national team is very likely in jeopardy? Others here seem to be in agreement with me at least on this. Players are routinely selected to and dropped from the program without any public explanation required and at the sole discretion of the coach - that's the way it works whether we or Charmaine Hooper like it or not.

Despite your virulent allegations against me, nothing of what I have written in this thread passes any judgment on the actual accusations Charmaine Hooper and the other two have levelled in the media against the CSA and the national team staff. Until we know both sides of the story we don't have enough facts upon which to base any fair judgement and that has been my consistent position.

Drawing conclusions from and expressing an opinion about the fact that such public accusations have been made and legal action reportedly threatend on the other hand is perfectly reasonable and quite a different matter. Don't confuse these two issues.

What happened in the USA is irrelevant in this instance and would not be considered in a court of law where this will be settled if they carry out their threat to sue. It will be interesting to see whether the CSA calls their bluff on this. Any legal action brought carries with it the risk of an unfavourable outcome for the complainant and the costs could be substantial.

None of this in any way detracts from Charmaine Hooper's acknowledged outstanding record on the field of play or that of the other three or their contributions in years past.

[Trillium]

Well lets just see where all this goes folks, espcially once the players approach Sport Canada's arbitration panel, which the CSA must participate in or lose all its carded athlete and government funding.

Peleruds emails will be seen for what they are poor managerial communication with the atheletes, the disorganised organisation of the players movement to Vancouver etc. will be seen as evidence by the arbitration panel that the National Association has some problems. Once the panel reaches out and interviews other team members and examines the relationship between the CSA and Whitecaps there will be a cancelation of the Vancouver residency program under Kerfoots funding.

Its a mess, and unfortunatly its going to lead to Fifa getting upset when the Canadian Government entitity gets involved, remember to FIFA if I am not mistaken has a rule about people in Soccer going to courts rather then FIFA controlled dispute resolution, if the CSA somehow avoide arbitration (binding ) and the players go to Federal Court to get the issue dealt with FIFA will be stuck going down the suspension road for the CSA.

Please Richard from your obvious insider, old boys from over home view, realize Sepp Blatter does not want one of the Worlds greatest womens soccer player being ill treated as a result of back door deal with money passed in payments to the national association, to get players to be chattel and slaves to the Whitecaps...indeed Pelerud might be in for a shock from the CSA if the messages start flowing to Blackberries in South Korea at the wonderfully named Peace Cup from the nomes in Switzerland.

Be sure Kevan Pipe has outlasted many a problem in the CSA and offering up Pellerud to the over home President ...to clean up the problems as the scapecoat will work out just fine.

Final outcome ?

Pellerud gone in 4 months, leaving to pursue other oppourtunities, Hooper named back to the National team, a new coach installed with background in English men's soccer to satisfy the ex-pat old boys ... oh and shock of shocks the womens team not qualifying for the next World Cup.

[Richard]

"Please Richard from your obvious insider, old boys from over home view"

I can assure you I am no insider and I quite agree - let's see where this all goes - but without prejudging the outcome which other people including you seem unwilling to do. And I would be very careful calling the Kerfoot sponsorship a backdoor deal, it has been public knowledge from the beginning.