Linford encouraging JDG2 to play for Holland

[ag futbol]

First of all if we're all going to play the "born there, play there card" where's the outrage at all the foreign born players on our roster? We can huff and puff all we want about our players defecting but when we accept someone else to play for us and look the other way, we're no better.

Edit: I'll support people who want to play for Canada regardless of where they were born as long as they have a connection to our country. Looking at it from the opposite perspective JDG definately has that sort of connection to Holland, so if he wants to make that his choice, then fine with me.

The CSA being a backwards organization doesn't help either. Being on a higher profile NT will help his career, and carying a EU passport will make it easier for him to work. It's a very different situation playing for the CSA.

[VPjr]

quote:Originally posted by ag futbol

First of all if we're all going to play the "born there, play there card" where's the outrage at all the foreign born players on our roster? We can huff and puff all we want about our players defecting but when we accept someone else to play for us and look the other way, we're no better.

100% agreed. I've mentioned it as well. We gladly take loophole players on our team. Do we look at them negatively? Will Johnson spent a few months of his life in Canada before his parents moved to the UK. We brought him into our U20 squad. Is he Canadian?

What about Bircham? What about Issey?

[Whither Canada]

quote:Originally posted by VPjr

100% agreed. I've mentioned it as well. We gladly take loophole players on our team. Do we look at them negatively? Will Johnson spent a few months of his life in Canada before his parents moved to the UK. We brought him into our U20 squad. Is he Canadian?

What about Bircham? What about Issey?

Too right!

Remember Bircham scored for Canada before he ever set foot in the place.

I can't believe the extent to which some of the commenters on this thread are slagging Linford over this one statement. Why is it everything else he said is fine and dandy but with this he's way out of line? Sorry but I don't buy that. I think everything he's said is dead on.

[Paddy]

quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca

Which for me, is simply an inexcusable statement.

Rallying for change in a country's FA is one thing, encouraging kids to turn their back on their country is another altogether.

Hmmm…I disagree. I think he is making an honest statement born out of the frustration he felt while president of the CSA. I mean, who better to give us this opinion than someone who actually tried to institute change and was met with egocentric provincial heads more concerned with maintaining their turf.

I/we have felt for years that the CSA wasn’t doing enough for the men’s team and players. Now we have proof in a resignation of the president of the organization backed with statements about its inner workings.

Really, what is left to do? Put someone like Pipe back in there who is along for the ride and will do nothing while it continues to falter? No thanks, we have had more that enough of that.

I hate to say it, but there comes a time when you can’t just support something due purely to loyalty, especially when it is not reciprocated (this is in relation to present and future players). If you know that your best interests are not a concern then why bother. After everything that has happened in the last year I can no longer hold it against any player who doesn’t want to be apart of this fiasco.

In all honesty I don’t want players to abandon Canada, but I think the CSA has done more to encourage this than Linford’s one statement – let’s place blame where it is due. I think it is about time someone actually from within the CSA criticized its inner workings. He has put his own neck on the line as I doubt anyone will be lining up to hire someone who isn’t afraid to speak the truth about the incompetence of an organization. I could be wrong; maybe he already has another job.

Reasoning with the CSA has failed and apparently they need to be shamed into action…perhaps his statements will do more than he could have done as president.

[Moosehead]

Why would anyone want to play for an organization that was a joke. An organization that was not into the pursuit of excellence and catering to the elite athlete, but just doing the bare minimum so it could justify itself. One can love ones country and not want to be involved in bull****. Someone just needs the courage to set up a new Federation with a better structure that will cater to the elite soccer athlete and the national teams. What gives the CSA the monopoly on representing Canada? When it has failed miserably in this area and could care less how well Canada was represented throughout the world.

It may take some time, but the Canadian Football Federation could start out as representing elite soccer clubs throughout Canada. If you are member of an elite soccer club you would be entitled to 1 vote in the new organization. Fans that paid an annual membership would also be entitled to 1 vote. There would be no Provincial involvement at all. There would be an executive and board. The shareholders would be the elite soccer players and fans that would appoint the Board. National team players would have added voting power (once this status was achieved).

[Gian-Luca]

I love how all the great patriots in this thread are sticking up for what Colin Linford reportedly said & justifying why he would do it even though a much more reliable source is indicating that he is claiming was essentially mis-quoted & didn't mean that at all & doesn't share those sentiments at all.

[kclee]

quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca

I love how all the great patriots in this thread are sticking up for what Colin Linford reportedly said & justifying why he would do it even though a much more reliable source is indicating that he is claiming was essentially mis-quoted & didn't mean that at all & doesn't share those sentiments at all.

It is obviously a hard concept for everyone to grasp. I cannot believe, under any circumstances, why any Canadian supporter would encourage young Canadian players to abandon playing for Canada. Screw the CSA, when Canada beat Costa Rica at the Gold Cup, the scoreline read Canada 2 Costa Rica 1, not CSA 2 Costa Rica 1. Other than hockey (that is very well organized and supported because they care and want to win), whenever Canadian athletes do well internationally they do well because of their dedication and perserverance. Rats abandon ship.

[Paddy]

quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca

I love how all the great patriots in this thread are sticking up for what Colin Linford reportedly said & justifying why he would do it even though a much more reliable source is indicating that he is claiming was essentially mis-quoted & didn't mean that at all & doesn't share those sentiments at all.

So...a great patriot is someone who tows the line? Sorry, but I am not into blind patriotism, its effects are disastrous (be it in sport or otherwise). I would say that real patriots question what is going on and make a stand about it because they care. Trying, caring and questioning gets one nowhere with the CSA, so whats next? Wait for the next in line to take the helm and hope for the best. I think not.

Regardless now of whether he did or didn't say or mean those things, the sentiment rings true for a lot of people on this board who know change is needed and question why anyone would want to be apart of such an organization. If the CSA cannot be voted out then other action has to be taken - player and fan action is about all that is left.

Patriotism...please, it goes well beyond that.

[Marc]

quote:Originally posted by Moosehead

Why would anyone want to play for an organization that was a joke. An organization that was not into the pursuit of excellence and catering to the elite athlete, but just doing the bare minimum so it could justify itself.

By English/UK standards the FA is a complete joke and a half too, but England players aren't withdrawing due to the FA's uselessness. Nobody on the pitch in a Canadian shirt is playing for the CSA. That's the least valid/compelling/relevant argument for Canadians playing for foreign nations.

[Gian-Luca]

quote:Originally posted by Paddy

So...a great patriot is someone who tows the line?

Says who? There is an enormous, huge, wide, fat, obese universe between "towing the line" & encouraging people to turn their back on their country. In fact the two options aren't even in the same universe. It is hardly an either/or proposition.

[Paddy]

quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca

Says who? There is an enormous, huge, wide, fat, obese universe between "towing the line" & encouraging people to turn their back on their country. In fact the two options aren't even in the same universe. It is hardly an either/or proposition.

Says who? - You are implying this (or at least your sarcasm is for those who don't have a problem with what Linford did or didn't say. You are drawing the line and defining patriotism).

At this point it is not wait and see. One is either buying what the CSA is selling or not. I don't think in this case that there is a middle ground. The middle ground has been tried for years.

What can be "percieved" as turning ones back on ones country often isn't. It is done for the exact opposite reason. It enacts change. It is not people turning their back on their country; it is people turning their back on something corrupt within their country.

I personally find it offensive when ones patriotism is questioned. I hear enough of that crap from down south.

[Gian-Luca]

quote:Originally posted by Paddy

Says who? - You are implying this (or at least your sarcasm is for those who don't have a problem with what Linford did or didn't say. You are drawing the line and defining patriotism).

Whereas you are seemingly defining what it means to "tow the line".

In any event, if anyone is offended I apologize.

quote:

What can be "percieved" as turning ones back on ones country often isn't. It is done for the exact opposite reason. It enacts change. It is not people turning their back on their country; it is people turning their back on something corrupt within their country.

You will have to forgive me however, if I don't buy this in the slightest. "I played for England in order to help Canada" is the least persausive argument I have ever seen on this issue.

If we encourage Canadians not to play for Canada but to play for other countries instead, I don't even know what we are doing here. It is completely contradictory, the polar opposite of what we are trying to achieve. Canada's team, for me, is the raison d'etre of why I am here.

It's the same argument that people were making a few months ago that the worst thing that could happen to Canada would be to make the World Cup in 2010 because doing so would be some sort of vindication for the CSA & Mitchell and that we'd be stuck with both. When people make those comments they suggest to me they are more interested in the administration behind the scenes than the actual product on the field.

Well, who knows maybe some people are more interested in that. I certainly am not.

[Guest Jeffery S.]

You can understand making a comment out of frustration in a frustrating moment, but I am very surprised to hear anything close to that from a CSA executive, if he did insinuate anything.

Especially since it is the excuse players give, the cop out excuse, instead of being gracious and saying how much you love Canada but things just worked out differently. I am thankful for the few guys who have chosen other nations who have not gone out and immediately slagged Canada on top of it. They are rare though.

But anyone who has seen us lose players and hear them slag us, and especially the CSA and its program so many times, should know better and should be careful to say something different. Like what a great bunch of players we have, what a great future we should have with these guys, and that thankfully we have talent still dedicated to Canada in spite of what they have to put up with at times. That would be a better way to put it, and I'd be surprised if Linford, who has been meditating resignation for months I'd say, had not at least mused over a more gracious way to go out.

[The Beaver]

Hey, whoever has the ability to change things on the home page, would you make sure we are spelling "ridiculous" correctly? We look foolish when we make spelling errors like that. Honest mistake, I know, but let's get it right.

On that note, why don't we have somebody proofread things before we post them on the site? It'll take only a few seconds to do so, and I'm sure we've plenty of talented individuals who could help in this regard. I'll volunteer my services. (Credentials: I am a writer (published), work in book publishing, am also an editor and writing teacher.)

[Ivan]

quote:Originally posted by VPjr

100% agreed. I've mentioned it as well. We gladly take loophole players on our team. Do we look at them negatively? Will Johnson spent a few months of his life in Canada before his parents moved to the UK. We brought him into our U20 squad. Is he Canadian?

What about Bircham? What about Issey?

Personally, I think this is hogwash. I would not mind if Johnson, Bircham, Issey (although I don't think he is as much of a loophole) and DeJong do not play for Canada. However, the Hargreaves' born and raised Canadians and those that were born and raised for the majority of their lives, come back in the off season and have brothers playing on the Canadian National Team, I believe, are turning their backs on their country.

The key here is that it is my opinion, and it is shared by many others on this board. Similarly, your opinion is also shared by many on this board.

[Whither Canada]

quote:Originally posted by Ivan

Personally, I think this is hogwash. I would not mind if Johnson, Bircham, Issey (although I don't think he is as much of a loophole) and DeJong do not play for Canada. However, the Hargreaves' born and raised Canadians and those that were born and raised for the majority of their lives, come back in the off season and have brothers playing on the Canadian National Team, I believe, are turning their backs on their country.

The key here is that it is my opinion, and it is shared by many others on this board. Similarly, your opinion is also shared by many on this board.

Gee, funny how the players you don't care about playing for Canada aren't quite as good as Hargreaves and JDG2. Just a coincidence surely.

But you're right, we agree to disagree.

[Ivan]

quote:Originally posted by Whither Canada

Gee, funny how the players you don't care about playing for Canada aren't quite as good as Hargreaves and JDG2. Just a coincidence surely.

But you're right, we agree to disagree.

You're right, it is a coincidence. But then again, we really don't know how Johnson, DeJong and JDG2 are going to turn out, do we?

[Paddy]

quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca

Whereas you are seemingly defining what it means to "tow the line".

In any event, if anyone is offended I apologize.

You will have to forgive me however, if I don't buy this in the slightest. "I played for England in order to help Canada" is the least persausive argument I have ever seen on this issue.

If we encourage Canadians not to play for Canada but to play for other countries instead, I don't even know what we are doing here. It is completely contradictory, the polar opposite of what we are trying to achieve. Canada's team, for me, is the raison d'etre of why I am here.

It's the same argument that people were making a few months ago that the worst thing that could happen to Canada would be to make the World Cup in 2010 because doing so would be some sort of vindication for the CSA & Mitchell and that we'd be stuck with both. When people make those comments they suggest to me they are more interested in the administration behind the scenes than the actual product on the field.

Well, who knows maybe some people are more interested in that. I certainly am not.

Yep...I have no problem in defining what towing the line is. Accepting the current state of affairs is just that.

You can bring up Hargreaves if you wish, but that is not the point I am making. When he opted for England I think the circumstances were different and nothing similar to the fiasco of the past year had occured. The CSA could handle the loss of one player, it was an anomally. If many players leave they will be held accountable - eventually - and will have to disband or change.

Also, I think you have totally missed the point about the pitfalls of Canada making the World Cup under the current administration. If all you want in your life is for Canada to make it again, well, maybe you'll get your wish. I'd rather see some consistancy, not a mathematical fluke.

[Gian-Luca]

quote:Originally posted by Paddy

Yep...I have no problem in defining what towing the line is. Accepting the current state of affairs is just that.

So now if you aren't in favour of encouraging players to play for foreign countries, that means you are accepting the state of affairs & towing the line?

quote:

The CSA could handle the loss of one player, it was an anomally. If many players leave they will be held accountable - eventually - and will have to disband or change.

We don't need players to play for other countries in order for the CSA to be held accountable. If this is the strategy we should adopt perhaps we should start asking our committed players to start throwing qualifying games while we're at it?

quote:

Also, I think you have totally missed the point about the pitfalls of Canada making the World Cup under the current administration.

I haven't missed any point. If you'd rather not see Canada make the World Cup because you want to see the bureacracy & administration change.....well good luck to you. That's not for me.

[Paddy]

quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca

So now if you aren't in favour of encouraging players to play for foreign countries, that means you are accepting the state of affairs & towing the line?

If you aren't in favour of radical change, then yes you are towing the line. The CSA has had its chance(s) and blown it. Why waste your time as a player on an organization that just doesn't care. Really, what more do we need from the CSA to prove that they are incapable of taking the men's team where it needs to go.

I would never have said it before, but it is time for the players to take care of themselves. You don't have to support this idea, but you have to admit that something drastic needs to change.

quote:

We don't need players to play for other countries in order for the CSA to be held accountable. If this is the strategy we should adopt perhaps we should start asking our committed players to start throwing qualifying games while we're at it?

So...how else are they going to be held accountable, a stern letter from the Voyageurs?

quote:

I haven't missed any point. If you'd rather not see Canada make the World Cup because you want to see the bureacracy & administration change.....well good luck to you. That's not for me.

I still think you have.

If Canada makes it and nothing changes then we are no further ahead. Qualifying for the World Cup alone won't change anything. We need to consistently produce and support good players, not just rely on the odd good crop showing up every decade or two. We also can not rely solely on European clubs to rear our players.

Scenario: we qualify, the CSA pats each other on the back and then we spend the next 20 years in the wilderness again – this is apparently ok with you, no?

[Gian-Luca]

quote:Originally posted by Paddy

You don't have to support this idea, but you have to admit that something drastic needs to change.

I've long held the view that there needs to be changes at the CSA. It is perfectly possible to hold that view and at the same time be totally opposed to encouraging our players to play for other countries, because the latter, as far as I am concerned, that defeats the very purpose of being a supporter.

quote:

So...how else are they going to be held accountable, a stern letter from the Voyageurs?

They certainly can't be held accountable by players who are playing in England or Holland. As for how else - check out the other suggestions that have been dominating the board recently. They aren't hard to find!

quote:

I still think you have.

No I haven't. I got you the first time. I just don't agree with your point.

quote:

If Canada makes it and nothing changes then we are no further ahead.

That is an impossible scenario. If Canada makes it, everything changes. We will be further ahead. Especially in this day & age. 1986 this is not.

In any event, it's obvious we won't agree on this. If you want to cheer against Canada making the World Cup in 2010 because you think it will be bad for us in the long run, you go right ahead. It's no skin off my nose.

[Paddy]

quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca

That is an impossible scenario. If Canada makes it, everything changes. We will be further ahead. Especially in this day & age. 1986 this is not.

In any event, it's obvious we won't agree on this. If you want to cheer against Canada making the World Cup in 2010 because you think it will be bad for us in the long run, you go right ahead. It's no skin off my nose.

How is this an impossible scenario? What is the "everything" that will change? I can feel pretty assured that nothing will change (regardless of the year). I really haven't the vaugest idea what you feel will change under the current leadership. Perhaps the CSA will give themselves a pay raise - I guess that could be considered a change.

[TOcanadafan]

It was nice to hear from Greg Sutton on the FAN590 (Toronto) soccer show tonight. He certainly was glad to see Linford go, citing that there was a problematic communication gap between he and the MNT. (Linford never spoke one-on-one with the members of the MNT, and didn't get anything done from the wish list of the MNT)

Not that the players should be running the show, but at least have the decency to make it look like you care about the members of the flagship team of the program.

[Cheeta]

quote:Originally posted by The Beaver

On that note, why don't we have somebody proofread things before we post them on the site? It'll take only a few seconds to do so, and I'm sure we've plenty of talented individuals who could help in this regard. I'll volunteer my services. (Credentials: I am a writer (published), work in book publishing, am also an editor and writing teacher.)

Damit, man. You shouldn't be proof reading Home Page material, you should be writing it.

Well ****. We'll be holding you to that.

Sending you an e-mail, Mr. Beaver. Let me know if you don't get it.

(many hands make for light work)

[Gian-Luca]

quote:Originally posted by TOcanadafan

It was nice to hear from Greg Sutton on the FAN590 (Toronto) soccer show tonight. He certainly was glad to see Linford go, citing that there was a problematic communication gap between he and the MNT. (Linford never spoke one-on-one with the members of the MNT, and didn't get anything done from the wish list of the MNT)

Thanks for the heads up on that. I'll be interested in listening to that once they archive it.