The Arbitrator decision (Hooper vs CSA)

[fan]

There is nothing to enjoy Richard and what there was to enjoy is gone. You have made yourself look ridiculous with your calls for identity before and others have tried to clarify it for you it is just embarrassing now in your lone inane pursuit.

Hatred, blindness, evil, hate filled, fevered all terms representing nothing I stated here and clearly represent others.Try at least to maintain a basic comprehension and level of maturity that deserves a response.

I agree the players on the womens team seem to have no courage or respect for their teammates and now represent a weak character.

I will support Canada but I do not respect most of the Canadian women or Pellerud.

[Richard]

What a sad and misguided specimen of humanity you are Fan, you must be a very unhappy person living with all that hatred and vitriol. You may represent a few other misguided people but you are in a tiny minority. Just survey the posts in this forum and figure it out for yourself.

I still wonder about your identity whether you like it or not. The fact that you are not even willing to email me privately and identify yourself as an indication of your commitment and sincerity is quite illuminating about your own cowardice and weakness of character. You're a fine one to be slinging such accusations at the WNT players and staff.

Show some real character, email me at editor@bcsoccerweb.com, I have no reason to hide behind anonymity and have nothing to be ashamed of or fear and will not reveal your identity publicly without your consent.

[Vic]

Perhaps I'm wrong, but I don't think you can get anywhere calling someone a "sad and misguided specimen of humanity," talking about their "cowardice and weakness of character," and then in turn ask them to show you some real character, let alone asking them to trust you. Surely you can see where it has no choice but to escalate.

There's nothing wrong with disagreeing with people. But there is a lot wrong with not doing it civilly and respectfully. I hope you both take the finger off the trigger and step back from the personal attacks. It's not much fun to read.

[CoachRich]

Fan, I think you are missing one of the most important points of what went on w/ the WNT & the Hooper 3, Hoopergate or whatever we want to refer to this sad day in WNT.

The important point is that the WNT is a teaam of players that bring someting to the team, while there they learn & contribute to the team then when they leave they hold their head high & walk away w/ more than they brought. That is a team & sometimes while there you fit in to the team or you don't. The don't was a team decision made by the team members that formed the team & felt they didn't get the support & respect they deserved from the 3. That was the teams decision & I'm sure the 3 understand it as they have been around the game long enough.

Anytime a team or a coach has to cut a player or a group of players from a team because they don't fit into the core of the team & the direction of the team is a sad & tough moment. I've had to do it at the youth & senior levels & it's something that I find harder to do than firing someone from a 9-5 job. The reality is that was the best decision for the WNT & that is what took place here regardless of all the fluff that when on around it.

On a personal note, I've been around the WNT team & I totally respect Even as a coach having seen first hand how he treats the players. He is a players coach, caring for the players & not some control freak, he involves them in decisions & in some of them like this one where it involves social dynamics, he leaves them on their own to work it out as a group w/ the player reps. All of the players have my respect as they are very committed to one another & their program. More importantly, as individuals & a team they know what their challenge & goal is. That is evident when they practice as they are playing full out to help one other reach their goals.

[Richard]

quote:Originally posted by Vic

Perhaps I'm wrong, but I don't think you can get anywhere calling someone a "sad and misguided specimen of humanity," talking about their "cowardice and weakness of character," and then in turn ask them to show you some real character, let alone asking them to trust you. Surely you can see where it has no choice but to escalate.

There's nothing wrong with disagreeing with people. But there is a lot wrong with not doing it civilly and respectfully. I hope you both take the finger off the trigger and step back from the personal attacks. It's not much fun to read.

Review Fan's history of posts and think again.

There is no such thing as civil, rational discourse with this person.

About time somebody called him/her to account and gave back some of his/her own medicine that he/she is all too ready to dish out to others. If you're going to dish out ugly, vitriolic and unsubstantiated attitude towards anybody and everybody associated with the current WNT the way this person does then you had better be prepared to take it back in spades without complaint. I am fed up with him/her and so I believe are other people here.

[fan]

I see that you have learned nothing and continue to refer exaggerated emotional terms to me that I have not used but you and a few others do. I do not "hate" anyone on here or involved in the CSA past or present. You on the other hand seem to be full of something resembling hatred.Again using the phrase "gave back some of his/her own medicine" you are in a forum there is no street brawl here at least not from me. You think your or anyone else's responses have some "large" emotional impact on me? I dont bring it to the table or this forum to that extent.Its a chat room of no consequence about a sport in Canada, try to gain some perspective.

I know what you mean Coachrich but these players have behaved poorly in my eye as teammates and Pellerud may indeed be all those things you say but what he did in my eye was disrespectful, manipulative and full of ego.

I know some of the people on here and working in the CSA personally and there are lots of excellent committed people working and volunteering in the CSA. When people make bad decisions and behave poorly I will always address it.When people make good decisions and behave well I will commend them as I said recently Colin has made some good choice in his short tenure and I am watching him and the CMNT in a very positive light. Same thing with the TFC which has been fantastic to see and witness first hand.

You are free Richard to comment about my posts However do it with perspective and maturity not silly name calling, well maybe a little silly name calling is fun. But dont expect that it will become personal.Seriously I like you but I dont want to become that intimate with anyone in here. However I have heard that Vic is pretty sexy in a dress.

[CoachRich]

"I know what you mean Coachrich but these players have behaved poorly in my eye as teammates and Pellerud may indeed be all those things you say but what he did in my eye was disrespectful, manipulative and full of ego."

I understand how you can feel this way but it's a team sport & we have to move on for them & ourselves. I think a lot of us would have loved to see the 3 play but that's not how it worked out. I think everyone here on the forums, on the WNT & Even wish the 3 the very best in their new direction.

I appreciate your other comments & feel they are centering things so let's call a truce or better still kiss & make up to move forward

[The Beaver]

Amazing how ego blinds. There is a reason why Lucifer's greatest sin was pride: it tends to be the greatest sin for most of us.

Mind you, this is all from some dude who refers to himself in the third person as The Beaver. And, contrary to Richard, I will NOT reveal my true identity, but it is fairly safe to say that I am not a former or current player for the WNT, or Wayne Gretzky, or Albert "freaking" Einstein.

[KAS]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

KAS, methinks you are looking for ghosts where there are none.

Richard, please explain. My two previous posts contained numerous points, so I do not know which one(s) you are refering to. The main elements of my last post were a question about what happened with the other members of the team, and a criticism of Pellerud choosing to rent a home from Kerfoot, and under such favourable terms.

If by "ghosts" you are refering to the idea that the other players decided to sell-out Hooper and Latham, or that the coaching staff bullied them into agreement, I made it clear that those are only possibilities, and that there is no real evidence to support it. I pointed out that many of the players already live in Vancouver, so agreeing to that camp would have been easy for them. I also suggested that it might have been a lack of communication from the other players which led Hooper and Latham to believe that everyone was sticking together, as their E-mails had called for, when that was not the case.

I don't know what happened with the other players during that first week of August, and why Hooper and Latham didn't know that the other players were ignoring their idea and agreeing to the camp. The report reveals this gap in our knowledge without actually explaining it, and I therefore find this part of the timeline to be the most interesting. What happened later, when the players were pissed because the three made the HUGE mistake of skipping Newfoundland, is perfectly understandable. I want to know what the thinking and discussions were among the other WNT players during the first week of August when they decided to join the camp while Hooper and Latham believed that everyone was unified against outright acceptance without negotiations.

The other possible "ghost", is my writing about Pellerud renting from Kerfoot. I am not saying that it is a bribe, or that Pellerud is biased and in Kerfoot's back pocket. All I am saying, is that the rental deal is so incredibly generous, that it gives the possible APPEARANCE of something unprofessional. Everything might be fine, but IT LOOKS BAD. Pellerud makes enough money to buy a home - or atleast rent from someone who does not own a W-League team. For the sake of appearances, and to remove further doubt and future accusation, steps should be taken to create a clear separation in the relationship between the WNT coaching staff, and the Whitecaps organization.

So what are the ghosts that I am chasing?

[Richard]

I am referring to your apparent need to question and undermine anything and everything to do with Pellerud, the WNT and Kerfoot's contribution to the program including his bundling of a rent subsidised house for the head coach and free accommodation for the team members in one of his False Creek condominium complexes into the sponsorship package. It is all public knowledge and above board, nobody is cheating or on the take and there is nothing wrong with the optics. Those are the ghosts you're chasing needlessly.

[fan]

The optics are a huge problem and anyone who has any common sense will comprehend that. Again with ethereal words like "ghosts" that are meaningless here. Dont bother interpreting such vague juvenile references?

"False Creek condominium" that is just too funny just goes to show reality is often more entertaining than fiction.

Your points were clear and well said KAS.

[CG]

posted by KAS "other players decided to sell-out Hooper and Latham, or that the coaching staff bullied them into agreement,

Yes, the players did not follow Hooper and Lathams plan. They had information to base their decision on that you didn't have, and likely will never have. So accept it. Either that or pop on a tinfoil hat and adress your speculations to the 9/11 conspiracy nuts who think Americans planned and executed the operation. You'd fit right in.

Ditto for Pellerud. Though here you might want to redirect your energy towards the NDP. They love finding ways to spend wealthy peoples money and I am sure you are full of better ideas on how to spend Mr. Kerfoots.

Run along now. I'm certain Christine and her teammates will not play better with your crass accusations ringing in there skulls.

[Vic]

quote:

They had information to base their decision on that you didn't have, and likely will never have. So accept it.

Craft must have clothes, but truth loves to go naked.

~ Thomas Fuller

My innuendo is the information you refer to is not public knowledge because it is slanted.

But in the interest of openness, I do hope you correct me and provide it for everyone to assess.

[CG]

"the information you refer to is not public knowledge because it is slanted."

I only refer to the fact that KAS was not in the dressing room nor any of the team meetings. I am not at all sure how you know the information they based their decision on was "slanted". Do you know what was said in the meetings? I surely don't? Nor does KAS as he admits.

Over to you Vic. Unless my assumption is juvenile and does not warrant a response.

[Vic]

quote:

Unless my assumption is juvenile and does not warrant a response.

Actually, the only part that doesn't warrant a response is that part

Your original post that I quoted reads like you knew of additional information. And I did what I always do when people in the middle of presenting a point intimate they know more without providing any substance, which is bait them to provide it.

Not only do I not know what was said in those meetings, I didn't even know there were meetings. I find that interesting. I always presumed they would have gone after the players one by one, starting with the ones they knew were in their pocket, and then going to the others in order of difficulty saying X, Y and Z have already signed.

[Vic]

quote:

rent subsidised house for the head coach and free accommodation for the team members in one of his False Creek condominium complexes into the sponsorship package

You must be mistaken Richard. There was no mention of a rent subsidized house in the SDRCC report. And surely if there was, the CSA, being an ethical organisation, would have mentioned that. Especially in a case involving his bias toward the provider of the subsidized house.

[Richard]

Since it has been quoted here countless times and used as ammunition by the anti-Pellerud lobby it is public knowledge. The fact that the rent is public knowledge is a credit to the openness of the parties concerned - what a landlord choses to charge his tenant in rent is private. I was throwing a sop to those who have been trumping up the charges against Pellerud, Kerfoot and the CSA. It is all tilting at the wind anyway.

How Pellerud selects his team is entirely his prerogative and has been shown to be free of bias etc. etc.

The lack of CSA openness about their financial statements or at best failure to respond to request from members for same is inexcusable but is an entirely separate issue.

[CG]

Geez Vic, read the arbitration report will you. And don't start parsing the meaning of the word "meeting"

August 1 (Charmaine Hooper, to team)

"As we discussed a few weeks ago in Minneapolis, we would not agree to any terms set forth by the coaching staff until a contract was written up. We will then, as a team, along with the coaching staff, agree and all sign the proposed contract."

"There was no mention of a rent subsidized house in the SDRCC report."

Give it up Vic. You can't accuse Richard of being mistaken about "subsidization" when you assert that his renting cheaply proves bias.

[Massive Attack]

So, is 'Vic' actually Hooper? Or her Husband?

Is that what's being implied in this thread?

It makes sense then why Vic doesn't want to admit Hooper had any blame in this mess, even though she deserves a lot of it.

[KAS]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

I am referring to your apparent need to question and undermine anything and everything to do with Pellerud, the WNT and Kerfoot's contribution to the program including his bundling of a rent subsidised house for the head coach and free accommodation for the team members in one of his False Creek condominium complexes into the sponsorship package.

Well, for starters Richard, "anything and everything" is a huge exaggeration when I have been focusing on two very specific points - and I am not undermining anything. I have never mentioned the False Creek condominiums even once, and I don't have a problem with it. Obviously, the camp requires the provision of accommodations for the players, and the fact that Kerfoot owns the complex is not only acceptable, it is efficient and therefore logical.

The "bundling" of a rent-subsidised house into the sponsorship package, however, is a problem. Unlike the players, Pellerud receives a very substantial salary which enables him to afford adequate accommodations at market rates. Putting him into a $6.5M mansion does not improve the team. It does not create a defender with pace, or a winger who can cross. If the subsidised rent really was a formal part of the sponsorship deal with the CSA (to the extent that Pellerud's salary from the CSA was negotiated with this provision included), then that would be one thing, but I don't think that is the case.

quote:It is all public knowledge and above board, nobody is cheating or on the take and there is nothing wrong with the optics. Those are the ghosts you're chasing needlessly.

I have been very careful to not accuse anyone of cheating or being on the take, so please stop with the strawman arguments. I also disagree with you on the issue of optics. Like it or not, it does look bad in the eyes of some, and that only leaves the door open to future accusations.

I am sure that you are familiar with the term "it is not enough for justice to be blind, it must also appear to be blind". This is why judges and arbitrators will recuse themselves whenever there is any possible personal connection to a case which could potentially create the APPEARANCE of bias. Like it or not, Pellerud is a form of judge in his capacity as WNT coach. I would like to see him take a few simple steps to remove the appearance of a conflict-of-interest so that the program will not be so open to accusation in the future.

Soccer is a growing sport in Canada, but most people and the media are largely ignorant of the sport and how it is run here. Under these circumstances, accusations and the "optics" that surround them have the ability to do alot of damage even when they are later proven to be false. An EXTREME example: many people on these forums are or have been involved in youth coaching, but an accusation of molesting children could end that coaching career even if it was later proven to be completely false. I know that is very extreme, but my point is that an accusation does not have to be true to cause damage. Improving the optics would keep fuel away from the fire of any future accusations.

[Richard]

You're making a mountain out of a molehill. Get over it.

[KAS]

quote:Originally posted by CG

posted by KAS "other players decided to sell-out Hooper and Latham, or that the coaching staff bullied them into agreement,

It is fun to see someone hack a sentence (that I wrote inside a lengthy and detailed post) in such a way as to attribute to me a position that I never actually took. CG, either you are being intellectually dishonest here, or you need to reread the post that you took that hacked quote from.

quote: Yes, the players did not follow Hooper and Lathams plan. They had information to base their decision on that you didn't have, and likely will never have.

I agree with you completely on this. Infact, the purpose in pointing out the gap in our collective knowledge was to reveal the limitations on our understanding of this matter - with an outside chance that someone might have some additional information that would shed some light on the subject. The rest of the paragraph that I took your above quote from is not worth commenting on.

quote:Run along now. I'm certain Christine and her teammates will not play better with your crass accusations ringing in there skulls

First of all, I have the right to express my views and not "run along now". Second, Christine Sinclair is a world-class talent, and even if she or her teammates do read this forum, it will not stop them from playing well in China. I think you give the posters here, including yourself, far too much credit. Elite athletes do not underperform or overperform because of the musings of a few guys with too much time on their hands on an internet forum!

[Vic]

Massive Attack

"So, is 'Vic' actually Hooper? Or her Husband?"

The fact that anyone would think they are actually talking to the people they're talking about is pretty telling pschologically in terms of that person's mental ability to grasp a world with the existence of thought outside theirs.

I've read all your comments in the womens forum here, and they all have the same thing in common - you spend all your time repeating other people's earlier points and slapping their asses. There has to be something in life you can do with your time where you have more independent thought and creative reward.

CG

If you read the context of my statement, it's fairly obvious I was talking about early August AFTER Minneapolis. Again, your original post sounded like you knew of additional information.

"You can't accuse Richard of being mistaken about "subsidization" when you assert that his renting cheaply proves bias."

If i get this wrong, my apologies, I can't follow the meaning of that sentence. But regardless, I never said renting cheaply proves bias. I said either Pellerud or the CSA should have mentioned it, and it's unethical and telling they didn't.

[Massive Attack]

quote:Originally posted by Vic

Massive Attack

"So, is 'Vic' actually Hooper? Or her Husband?"

The fact that anyone would think they are actually talking to the people they're talking about is pretty telling pschologically in terms of that person's mental ability to grasp a world with the existence of thought outside theirs.

I've read all your comments in the womens forum here, and they all have the same thing in common - you spend all your time repeating other people's earlier points and slapping their asses. There has to be something in life you can do with your time where you have more independent thought and creative reward.

LOL

You are so full of yourself that it is almost sickening. Do you think you are the first player to post here? I've interacted with many other players and player's relatives on this forum. I've never had any problems before.

The irony is that before the arbitrator's decision, I thought Hooper and friends were hard done by. But now I know that Hooper and friends made a tremendous gamble and lost. I made this deduction using independent thought. I don't have any agenda or pride to blurry my vision.

[Vic]

Yeah, that's right, I'm a player. As long as it helps, keep telling yourself that.