Gian-Luca Posted June 18, 2007 Share Posted June 18, 2007 This article summarily dismisses Canada & pretty well the entire tournament. Perhaps if we see similar articles we can all post them here and then send the thread to the team manager with the CSA or to somebody who is close to someone on the team. Nothing like getting extra inspiration. http://www.americansoccerdaily.com/freekicks/samgolcup.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john tv Posted June 18, 2007 Share Posted June 18, 2007 This is it seems another way that these yo yo's are trying to discredit soccer and give it that very negative slang. It is indeed sickening to read this article and I don't know what was going through his mind, maybe those pictures of the Americans killed in Iraq must have made him that depressed to write this crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadasBest Posted June 18, 2007 Share Posted June 18, 2007 Clearly written by a writer that has watched 4 games so far this tournament. He has obviously NOT watched any of Mexico's games, who probably only qualified to the semi finals thanks to a card happy American referee. We can only hope that the rest of team USA underestimates us in the same way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massive Attack Posted June 18, 2007 Share Posted June 18, 2007 I actually wonder if he even watched the USA-Panama game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Spiers Posted June 18, 2007 Share Posted June 18, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Massive Attack I actually wonder if he even watched the USA-Panama game. Particularly when he says the score was 3-0!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Beaver Posted June 18, 2007 Share Posted June 18, 2007 How about this from the CBC website? An article predicting how Canada would fare in this tournie. Not only are they way off--which is understandable--but they've got all sorts of facts wrong. For instance, the bulk of our starting 11 are in fact starters with their clubs. ----- Costa Rica should win this group with little trouble, which means Canada and Haiti will battle it out for second place (minnows Guadeloupe have little chance of drawing a game, let alone winning one). Canada's final game of the round robin against Haiti will likely decide second place in the group. It's a contest Canada can ill afford to lose, as it would stand less of a chance of advancing as one of the third-place teams. Even if Canada progresses from the No. 3 spot, it would likely face Mexico or the U.S. in the quarter-final, two teams that Canada has historically struggled against. Canada doesn't have a great deal of depth, especially up front, or experience, as the majority of its players don't see regular first-team action for their pro clubs. What's more, the Canadian Soccer Association has basically written off the importance of this tournament. During a recent conference call, CBC Sports Online asked CSA president Colin Linford why it took 11 months to name a new coach - former coach Frank Yallop quit last June - pointing out that the CONCACAF Gold Cup was just around the corner. Did the CSA not see the Gold Cup as an opportunity to build some momentum for a national program that has been lacking in direction? Apparently not, as Linford essentially shrugged off the importance of the CONCACAF tournament, stating qualification for the 2010 World Cup was Canada's top priority and that the CSA was putting all its eggs in that basket. With all of this in mind, it's hard to imagine Canada advancing beyond the quarter-finals - and reaching the final eight might even qualify as a minor miracle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Beaver Posted June 18, 2007 Share Posted June 18, 2007 Here's the email I sent to the author of the article. (Not necessary to send him a note, I know, but I felt I'd give him some mild heat). ----- Mike, You might want to tidy up your article a bit. Right off the top: The US scored two goals, and won the game 2 – 1, not 3 – 0. Canada beat Guatamala 3 -0, and did so with flare and class and real cohesion. They did what the US could not do effectively, and that is break down a Guatamalan bunker with relative ease. Other things you might want to clean up: This is clearly not the US “A” team; if it is, then the US is in sorry shape. The Canadian team should not be under-estimated: they have scored an outstanding 10 goals in their last 5 games, and they are doing so with a “B” squad. We’ve a handful of our top players playing in this tournie, but we are missing our Bundesliga players, Radzinski from the EPL, our top TFC player (Jim Brennan), as well as a handful of our U20 lads who will certainly form the nucleus of this team very soon. Yes, the US should be favoured to win, but they will NOT make easy work of Canada. They never do, especially in recent meetings (the last being a draw). This will be a very tight affair, and it will show you two things about the US program: it is the class of the region, but not as good as it thinks it is AND Canada is coming of age. (The top teams in CONCACAF, in my humble estimation, and in order: 1) USA 2) Mexico 5)Canada, Costa Rica, Honduras 6) T&T 7) Panama 8) Guatamala 24) All the rest. I know that nobody will really challenge you on this post, that your public—like ours—could give a rats ass about soccer, but to give the game some credibility YOU (and whatever other scant media pays attention to the game) must do much better, must get the facts straight, and must look more closely at what is actually happening in the games. Canada handled Costa Rica quite comfortably in their first match, disposed of a hardworking Haitian team with workmanlike efficiency, and OWNED the Guats. The Canadians are playing cohesive and dynamic football. You cannot write them off so quickly. When the US loses on Thursday, you’ll need to know why, and to answer that question, you need to look more closely at the opponent than you have. I wish you the best with soccer coverage. You must, at times, feel like a voice in the wilderness. Keep it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Spiers Posted June 18, 2007 Share Posted June 18, 2007 quote:Originally posted by The Beaver Mike, You might want to tidy up your article a bit. Right off the top: The US scored two goals, and won the game 2 – 1, not 3 – 0. Canada beat Guatamala 3 -0, and did so with flare and class and real cohesion. They did what the US could not do effectively, and that is break down a Guatamalan bunker with relative ease. Maybe they do listen! Article has now been corrected to show the correct score. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearcatSA Posted June 18, 2007 Share Posted June 18, 2007 Great reply, Beaver! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
striker Posted June 18, 2007 Share Posted June 18, 2007 After browsing what the American fans are writing about Canada on bigsoccer, I can only hope Bob Bradley is writing us off in the same fashion. Sadly, I do not think that is the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Beaver Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 Turns out the dude who wrote the article ain't half bad. Here's his reply to my email: ---- Thanks for writing in - I don't know how the heck that 3-0 score made it in there, but it did - mistakes in an article are never good, but the first sentence is defintiely the worst place. As far as it being the US "A" team, with LD, DMB, TT, Demps, Gooch, Boca, Bornstein,Bradley,Maestro (Feilhaber), Ching, EJ, it sure is an A team - and yes they are in sorry shape. Now, what I was trying to say in the article was that the US should beat Canada, not that we will. I did try and point out that Canada did against Guatemala what we have not been able to do in two games. Anyway, I HOPE you guys beat us, and I'll be pulling for you b/c I think our guys DO think they are that good. One of my best friends is from St. John's - even had 500,000 year old ice cubes up there. One of his favorite lines with me is "Oh, so and so? He's Canadian." The recent one for me was Captain Kirk. Peace --- Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 Here's an article that should provide the Canadians with a little extra incentive... OPINION: U.S. Too Good for CONCACAF http://www.soccernewengland.com/articles/view_article.php?id=2591 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jeffery S. Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 quote:Originally posted by MikeD Here's an article that should provide the Canadians with a little extra incentive... OPINION: U.S. Too Good for CONCACAF http://www.soccernewengland.com/articles/view_article.php?id=2591 Read that and you think: hold the entire Gold Cup outside the US and they would go back to struggling like in the 90s. They have set up a distortion that favour them, then draw conclusions from their own distortions. All their points from GC in the Fifa ranking, for example, are as if it were a neutral venue, instead of home. Sorry to say that myopia is very typical of the US in a lot of things, but it happens to be true here as well. Since it seems clearer and clearer that the next Gold Cup will be in Canada, entirely it seems, it will be great to see how even being here will make it harder on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen LaRose Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 quote:Originally posted by MikeD Here's an article that should provide the Canadians with a little extra incentive... OPINION: U.S. Too Good for CONCACAF http://www.soccernewengland.com/articles/view_article.php?id=2591 Hold the Gold Cup outside the Continental United States and have him get back to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted June 19, 2007 Author Share Posted June 19, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Jeffrey S. Read that and you think: hold the entire Gold Cup outside the US and they would go back to struggling like in the 90s. They have set up a distortion that favour them, then draw conclusions from their own distortions. All their points from GC in the Fifa ranking, for example, are as if it were a neutral venue, instead of home. Sorry to say that myopia is very typical of the US in a lot of things, but it happens to be true here as well. Agree entirely. It's amazing to me that the writer doesn't even acknowledge the huge home field advantage for every Gold Cup that the US gets. It's also quite strange to see these articles coming out now. I mean, I could see it if it is after they have won the tourney, but before the semi-finals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted June 19, 2007 Author Share Posted June 19, 2007 Here's another article - though this one isn't so bad as it does single out Canada for some praise, while generally condemming the rest of Concacaf outside of the US & Mexico. But we are still virtually being written off: http://www.pe.com/sports/soccer/stories/PE_Sports_Local_D_soccer_column_19.3fb1ed7.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted June 21, 2007 Author Share Posted June 21, 2007 This was posted by Can. in UK in another thread, but I have to say that it perhaps belongs here moreso than any other article posted in this thread. Apparently we suck really badly! http://www.thestar.com/Sports/article/227715 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soju Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 Are we really that mismatched with the US on paper? Howard's a great keeper. Onstad's on form lately and wants to shine. Their back four looks more stable with Boca and Guch with top level experience at center back, but Canada has good full backs in Stalteri and Jazic. Looking at mid I'll take Hutch over Mastroeni. DeRo and Dempsey are similar players. Both teams have match winners in DeGuz and Lando, and both teams have finishers up front. I think these writers need to stop writing about the past, stop writing about the nations involved, and start writing about the 22 guys that are going head to head. Canada can win this match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redhat Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Soju Are we really that mismatched with the US on paper? Howard's a great keeper. Onstad's on form lately and wants to shine. Their back four looks more stable with Boca and Guch with top level experience at center back, but Canada has good full backs in Stalteri and Jazic. Looking at mid I'll take Hutch over Mastroeni. DeRo and Dempsey are similar players. Both teams have match winners in DeGuz and Lando, and both teams have finishers up front. I think these writers need to stop writing about the past, stop writing about the nations involved, and start writing about the 22 guys that are going head to head. Canada can win this match. The US back is quite suspect, with Onyewu being too slow and too physical for many of our attacking forwards and mids. Hume should drive them crazy, and Nakajima could draw a few of these fouls. Our defence has not been stellar, however they have been more cohesive as the tourney went on, and unlike the U.S, more mobile with Stalteri and Jazic moving up a lot and getting involved with the play. For those writers who follow the Canadian team will definitely notice the changes in our style of play, and for those who don't well, they write whatever they think people would want to read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.