RS Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 quote:Originally posted by Fort York Redcoat STFU? I'll be hard pressed to improve my standing with you that way. Perhaps my phrasing was unrefined but you must agree the topic inspires strong feelings from us all. Let me come at this from a different angle. It appears the largest attendance for CMNT games is at Commonwealth, agreed? Fine then call it National stadium when the team plays there and make it the only place they play till it snows. I still ask if its possible to have a stadium in Vancouver for at least winter dates. As 2, 5, 10 yrs ago I was in the woodwork like you said. Now I'm looking forward to going to all the Lynx games at Varsity. i hope you'll permit me to attend and cheer loudly. It has nothing to do with "permitting" anyone to do anything. They way you were referring to other parts of the country in regards to their support of soccer smacks of the same kind of elitism that is rampant amongst TFC fanboys on BigSoccer. Some of your points are valid, especially from this post quoted above, but you're not going to get anywhere by insulting parts of the country that have traditionally supported soccer very well. Commonwealth has called itself the "National Soccer Stadium" (or something to that effect) in the years when a lot of games were being held there. It is simply impractical to limit ourselves to Edmonton only, given the distance from Europe. Hence why the majority of important games during the Euro season should be played in the eastern half of the country. That being said, the rest of Canada should not get completely shut out of games, either. For summer time matches, cities in the west should get consideration as much as any other, on a case-by-case basis. Coming from someone who waited 7 years between national team appearances in Toronto, I know how frustrating and disconnecting it can be to not see your team play live for such an extended period of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redhat Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 quote:Originally posted by Rudi It has nothing to do with "permitting" anyone to do anything. They way you were referring to other parts of the country in regards to their support of soccer smacks of the same kind of elitism that is rampant amongst TFC fanboys on BigSoccer. Some of your points are valid, especially from this post quoted above, but you're not going to get anywhere by insulting parts of the country that have traditionally supported soccer very well. Commonwealth has called itself the "National Soccer Stadium" (or something to that effect) in the years when a lot of games were being held there. It is simply impractical to limit ourselves to Edmonton only, given the distance from Europe. Hence why the majority of important games during the Euro season should be played in the eastern half of the country. That being said, the rest of Canada should not get completely shut out of games, either. For summer time matches, cities in the west should get consideration as much as any other, on a case-by-case basis. Coming from someone who waited 7 years between national team appearances in Toronto, I know how frustrating and disconnecting it can be to not see your team play live for such an extended period of time. Well said, Rudi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fort York Redcoat1555362293 Posted March 8, 2008 Author Share Posted March 8, 2008 I'll say it nicely. Winnipeg, why is it there no clubs in the west when 30k go to watch the MNT? Vancouver has a team and a league ( who I hope can become a part of a national league one day). Rudi humour me. Without hurting anyone's feelings what do you think is more important: The team playing in the East for travel time or that every city gets a turn. Just pretend you control this for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winnipeg Fury Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 quote:Originally posted by Fort York Redcoat I'll say it nicely. Winnipeg, why is it there no clubs in the west when 30k go to watch the MNT? Vancouver has a team and a league ( who I hope can become a part of a national league one day). Rudi humour me. Without hurting anyone's feelings what do you think is more important: The team playing in the East for travel time or that every city gets a turn. Just pretend you control this for me. I believe Vancouver is in the West. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fort York Redcoat1555362293 Posted March 8, 2008 Author Share Posted March 8, 2008 Not the education i expected from such a veteran supporter. So there is no reason? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SthMelbRed Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 ^I started typing a longer response to your continual, inane babbling on this issue, FYR, but I've decided against continuing. I have learned that there is no point engaging someone in a debate who displays no ability to reason. However, before writing you off completely, I will allow you an opportunity to rescue your standing in my eyes by posing you a single, simple question. If you can formulate a half-way decent answer, there may be hope for you yet. So, what correlation is there between the existence of a professional football club in a given city and that city's ability to show strong support for the national team? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free kick Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 quote:Originally posted by Winnipeg Fury I have been there once to see an international match (ie.: 2004 WCQ), and that was certainly NOT the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fort York Redcoat1555362293 Posted March 8, 2008 Author Share Posted March 8, 2008 Inane babbling. Not much motivation there but here goes. The correlation between having a pro club and ability to support the CMNT SHOULD be soccer support. We haven't seeen that yet. Strong club support but poor National support. Or in Edmonton's Commonwealth case good National support without any clubs to speak of. The correlation you mention is not a prerequisite for National support but I'm asking why the two are exclusive? What this thread is concerned with is strength through consistency. Clearly there are many who think we should continue to pass around our National team to be fair. I disagree. I hope in the future the National team can find a worthy home and fans from all over the country can know in advance where they want to go to see our countries team play the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fort York Redcoat1555362293 Posted March 8, 2008 Author Share Posted March 8, 2008 Inane babbling. Not much motivation there but here goes. The correlation between having a pro club and ability to support the CMNT SHOULD be soccer support. We haven't seeen that yet. Strong club support but poor National support. Or in Edmonton's Commonwealth case good National support without any clubs to speak of. The correlation you mention is not a prerequisite for National support but I'm asking why the two are exclusive? What this thread is concerned with is strength through consistency. Clearly there are many who think we should continue to pass around our National team to be fair. I disagree. I hope in the future the National team can find a worthy home and fans from all over the country can know in advance where they want to go to see our countries team play the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadianSwede Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 I think there should be only one national stadium for World Cup Qualifiers. That stadium is for now BMO field. Maybe for friendlies we can move about but I can tell you now that many teams play in ONE stadium for WCQ. England, Scotland, Ireland, France, to name a few play in one stadium. Furthermore, Its better for european players since it involves less flying time. With these arguments in hand i think we have a clear cut answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SthMelbRed Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 quote:Originally posted by CanadianSwede I think there should be only one national stadium for World Cup Qualifiers. That stadium is for now BMO field. Maybe for friendlies we can move about but I can tell you now that many teams play in ONE stadium for WCQ. England, Scotland, Ireland, France, to name a few play in one stadium. Furthermore, Its better for european players since it involves less flying time. With these arguments in hand i think we have a clear cut answer. The difference between Canada and those countries you mention is geography. If France are playing a match in Paris, you can expect supporters from all over the country to travel to watch the match live. The trip can reasonably made by train or car and can be done as a daytrip. The same applies to England matches at Wembley, Scotland matches at Hampden, or Rep. of Ireland matches at Lansdowne, or wherever they are playing these days. This can't be said for Canada. If the decision was made that BMO would host all future home matches for Canada, you would eventually see a disconnect from the national team for fans outside of southern Ontario, and maybe parts of Quebec. If the national team isn't seen by fans across the country as representing them, it is bad for the sport, from the grass roots right up to the professional level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadianSwede Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 quote:Originally posted by SthMelbRed The difference between Canada and those countries you mention is geography. If France are playing a match in Paris, you can expect supporters from all over the country to travel to watch the match live. The trip can reasonably made by train or car and can be done as a daytrip. The same applies to England matches at Wembley, Scotland matches at Hampden, or Rep. of Ireland matches at Lansdowne, or wherever they are playing these days. This can't be said for Canada. If the decision was made that BMO would host all future home matches for Canada, you would eventually see a disconnect from the national team for fans outside of southern Ontario, and maybe parts of Quebec. If the national team is seen by fans across the country as representing them, it is bad for the sport, from the grass roots right up to the professional level. Yes geography does pose a problem. But I would argue you that for WCQ keep it simple, BMO field. Of course for other friendly games in the future, traveling around the country is important for the growth of the sport. But in cases such as France, if I were living in Marseilles and wanted to see a match it would still take me four hours by train to get to Paris. 4 Hours from Vancouver to Toronto as well, the only difference is that you are traveling by plane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SthMelbRed Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 There is no problem with making the decision based on the best interests of the team on a case by case business. If we've got a one-off, mid-week qualifier in the middle of the European season, play it at BMO or Saputo. However, when playing matches where there is more lead up time, games should be played at Commonwealth and Swangard/Waterfront. Fans on the west coast will buy into it if matches are played in Toronto because it reduces the competitive disadvantage that the team faces in qualifying, but not if it has the smell of regional favouritism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winnipeg Fury Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 Having a strong home field advantage is where we should be playing the key matches. I would rather see 25,000-30,000 Canadian fans at Commonwealth (and on grass, which the team prefers) over a stadium that has a third, filled with opposing fans. (and yes, it is easier and cheaper for me to fly to TO) If the team has more than a few days preperation time, then I think that also negates the travel arguement. Frankly if we don't have at least a single game at out three main venues (Saputo, Commonwealth, BMO) I will be dissapointed. I love Vancouver and have attended matches at Swangard (good results. good memories) but I think we have moved beyond the tiny confines of intimate Swangard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RS Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 quote:Originally posted by CanadianSwede 4 Hours from Vancouver to Toronto as well, the only difference is that you are traveling by plane. They discontinued the Concord. I've flown Toronto to Calgary, and that is a 5.5 hr flight. Add an extra hour or more to get to Vancouver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadianSwede Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 Are you serious Rudi, you must have had bad weather or something. I lived in calgary for 18 years of my life and have flown many times from Toronto and it has NEVER taken that long. 3h30 to 3h45 max. I often go back to Calgary still from ottawa and it only takes 4 hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 quote:Originally posted by Rudi They discontinued the Concord. I've flown Toronto to Calgary, and that is a 5.5 hr flight. Add an extra hour or more to get to Vancouver. quote:Are you serious Rudi, you must have had bad weather or something. I lived in calgary for 18 years of my life and have flown many times from Toronto and it has NEVER taken that long. 3h30 to 3h45 max. I often go back to Calgary still from ottawa and it only takes 4 hours. Rudi is flying his own private Cesna . According to Air Canada the flight from Vancouver to Toronto is 4 hours and 25 minutes. Calgary to Toronto is 3 hours 50 minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadianSwede Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 ^ But knowing how bad Air Canada is I can see how it would take 5.5 hours Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tarnado1555362291 Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 takes 4.5 hours going west, 3 hrs 50 minutes going eastbound. Differences due to the jetstream. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youllneverwalkalone Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 Not enitrely sure what this thread is about or even whether I've posted these exact sentiments already (forgive me, if I have) but I'm pretty excited about this Montreal stadium. The natural grass, the capacity, and the proximity to Europe, TO, and Ottawa make it the best venue. Well, maybe that's an overstatement being that it's not yet built and hasn't housed a single match, but it has the potential. With BMO, you have a bunch of Man United supporters in disguise who haven't proven they can be bothered to show up and fill those extra 8,000 seats for a MNT fixture. Realistically, many of the U-Sector/Canada supporters from Toronto will likely travel to Montreal anyway, picking up the slack for those Ultra Belgium supporters who aren't interested in their country of residence. Being from Vancouver, and having witnessed two poorly attended qualifying matches in 2004 at Swangard that were overrun with opposition supporters and cocksucker RCMP protecting their behaviour, I really would recommend staying away from Vancouver until the new stadium is built. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winnipeg Fury Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 quote:Originally posted by youllneverwalkalone Not enitrely sure what this thread is about or even whether I've posted these exact sentiments already (forgive me, if I have) but I'm pretty excited about this Montreal stadium. The natural grass, the capacity, and the proximity to Europe, TO, and Ottawa make it the best venue. Well, maybe that's an overstatement being that it's not yet built and hasn't housed a single match, but it has the potential. I share your enthusiasm regarding Saputo Stadium and your dismal outlook on Swangard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 People keep mentioning Commonwealth's natural pitch, but I remember it being in horrible condition last time we played there. A grass pitch in poor condition isn't much better for anyone than a good artificial pitch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fort York Redcoat1555362293 Posted March 9, 2008 Author Share Posted March 9, 2008 youllnever, when the new stadium is built in Vancouver could the National team play in the winter for international friendlies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cashcleaner Posted March 9, 2008 Share Posted March 9, 2008 Forgive my ignorance on the subject, but other than the pitch occasionally getting torn up during the CFL season, what are the main arguments people are making for ruling Edmonton out of future National Team matches? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snake Posted March 9, 2008 Share Posted March 9, 2008 quote:Originally posted by youllneverwalkalone Not enitrely sure what this thread is about or even whether I've posted these exact sentiments already (forgive me, if I have) but I'm pretty excited about this Montreal stadium. The natural grass, the capacity, and the proximity to Europe, TO, and Ottawa make it the best venue. Well, maybe that's an overstatement being that it's not yet built and hasn't housed a single match, but it has the potential. With BMO, you have a bunch of Man United supporters in disguise who haven't proven they can be bothered to show up and fill those extra 8,000 seats for a MNT fixture. Realistically, many of the U-Sector/Canada supporters from Toronto will likely travel to Montreal anyway, picking up the slack for those Ultra Belgium supporters who aren't interested in their country of residence. Being from Vancouver, and having witnessed two poorly attended qualifying matches in 2004 at Swangard that were overrun with opposition supporters and cocksucker RCMP protecting their behaviour, I really would recommend staying away from Vancouver until the new stadium is built. poorly attended? there were 6800 fans packed into a stadium built for 3200 the atmosphere in the stadium prior to kickoff was electric never have the combined efforts of the v's and southsiders singing their hearts out for canada been so intense. if canada would have scored in the 2-0 loss to the guats ,swangard would have erupted oh yeah almost forgot current champ giving it all at the game was priceless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.