Jump to content

Toronto Sun Articles today


Recommended Posts

quote:Originally posted by MediaGuy

G-L is the most positive Canadian soccer fan in the world. If and when we qualify for the World Cup the players should seek him out and carry him on their shoulders during a lap of honour.

G-L deserves to "qualify" for the World Cup more than some of the players.

Seriously.

agreed....he's certainly suffered more than some of the greenhorns on the team.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Suffering is what we have and suffering is what we will do. I am making a big jug of sufferade for tonight, it has a little "special something" in it.

OK there might be some more added to it as the game progresses but I hope not, this suffering is getting expensive.

"Listen men, I dont give a damn why or how we got here. The point is were here and were Canadian so lets kick some yankee a###$"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Brennan is frustrated over the national team's preparations for World Cup qualifying, particularly the calibre of opponents prior to the first game against St. Vincent and the Grenadines. Canada, ranked 62nd in the world by FIFA, has friendlies scheduled against Estonia (124th in the world) on March 26, Panama (69th) on June 6, and likely another game against another non-soccer powerhouse. For Brennan, that's not good enough.

"You look at every other country, they're playing top teams. We seem to be playing Third World countries," he said.

Quit whining, says Ed! You'll take your Estonia, and you'll like it too.

If we cant physically book games againt teams that are better than Haiti or Estonia, then fine; money and reputation are two things that we cant argue the CSA had in any great supply.

If we are CHOOSING to play agianst the likes of Haiti and Estonia, while turning down mid to upper level competition, and if we are doing it based on the results of the often close-scoring games againt these kinds of times, then I think it is pretty faulty reasoning. Canada is very capable of playing to the level of our competition. If we play St Lucia we dont win 8-0 like it looks like we should on paper. We might win 2-0 and in unconvincing style. Heck, we might lose 2-0 to South Africa's B Team. (Hey, it could happen). Does that mean we arent ready to try our hand at mid-level countries? And if you have a poor showing against minnows, then how low do you go, pray tell? Danish second division sides, perhaps?

Leaving out the likes of Argentina or Germany (or any of the potential World Cup winners - who, for the record, are worth playing once a year or so), I think it could be fairly said that (if available to us) Canada should play teams no weaker than the likes of Costa Rica or the US, since we have been winning or at least holding our own in many recent matches with them. At the very least, lets play no worse than the teams like Honduras that we had trouble with in the last WCQ cycle. In fact, I think that based on Brennan's comments, this is exactly the opinion of many of the players as well. If we are good enough to almost win the Gold Cup every few tries, cant we put a lot of that lower tier CONCACAF competition (and the dregs of Europe) behind us, and start reaching for higher goals?

Even if you buy into arguments pitched by Loyola et al, with only a game every couple of months, we arent able to afford the time and energy in seeing if we can string together three 3-0 wins againt minnows (or whatever their formula might be) before we can say that our fragile confidence is ready to take on a higher challenge that of St Lucia or Haiti or Estonia. We need to amp up the competition and fast. If we are going to risk a 2-0 loss, I sure would rather it be versus Mexico away, or the US, or Trinidad, or Chile, or Ecuador than against Estonia or Haiti. Now, at least, I know I have at least a little company in that line of thinking.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Nolando, you said in another thread that we should not based our judgement on GC performances by CONCACAF teams, why are you doing it right now?

The problem with your argument of naming a few teams (which I wouldn't have a problem playing in a friendly except Mexico, that would be stupid from us) that we should play against is that we don't know what was tried and who does want to play against us. If Estonia invites us for a friendly in Europe and we say no, we're better having other options because a game is better than no game and I,m not exactly sure that many European teams want to play us.

BTW, Brennan and DeRo have referred to opponents like Spain, Poland and Argentina in their articles, I'm not sure they're talking about teams like the one you named.

Panama was in the Hex last time around, so I see this game as good competition for us and not that much lesser quality than Costa Rica, specialy away. Haiti has improved a lot in recent years so it's not like we're playing minnows, we're playing decent CONCACAF oppositions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:Originally posted by VPjr

agreed....he's certainly suffered more than some of the greenhorns on the team.

Ok, GL is old, I get it.

based on what i have seen of our team, our FULL team, i believe we could hang with any side out there and learn alot, if not get a result. thinking that we deserve no better than estonia or south africa B is, to me, low expectations derived from seeing us lose year after year. times have changed. we are much, much better than even the team yallop had against portugal and spain.

Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:Originally posted by BrennanFan

Ok, GL is old, I get it.

based on what i have seen of our team, our FULL team, i believe we could hang with any side out there and learn alot, if not get a result. thinking that we deserve no better than estonia or south africa B is, to me, low expectations derived from seeing us lose year after year. times have changed. we are much, much better than even the team yallop had against portugal and spain.

Yes, our FULL team is pretty good on paper, we have excellent players but as shown in the South Africa and Iceland games, they need some time together before they can be really effective. I doubt playing big teams will really help developing our midfield and attacking play when we'll likely have low possession. It's a great work out on the defensive end though but even lowly Haiti gave us trouble in that regard in last year GC...

Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:Originally posted by MediaGuy

G-L is the most positive Canadian soccer fan in the world. If and when we qualify for the World Cup the players should seek him out and carry him on their shoulders during a lap of honour.

G-L deserves to "qualify" for the World Cup more than some of the players.

Seriously.

Yup he is a beacon of common sense among some of the village idiots and CSA conspiracy obsessed "Legion of Doom" who inhabit this place. The same failed CSA wannabes who only post the same CSA diatribe time after time after time. Ad infinitem, ad nauseum.

G-L is another who should be on the "Mount Rushmore" of Canadian soccer posters.

Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:Originally posted by Joe MacCarthy

Yup he is a beacon of common sense among some of the village idiots and CSA conspiracy obsessed "Legion of Doom" who inhabit this place. The same failed CSA wannabes who only post the same CSA diatribe time after time after time. Ad infinitem, ad nauseum.

G-L is another who should be on the "Mount Rushmore" of Canadian soccer posters.

Both sides have posted their opinion - numersous times. That is what a forum is for. You just seem to post vitriolic comments aimed at anyone who doesn't agree with you. Your choice, but personal insults are not going to get your point across.

Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:Originally posted by Paddy

[personal insults are not going to get your point across.

What personal insult? Are you personally offended because you consider yourself a village idiot or a CSA wannabe? I don't recall mentioning any names but judging by your recent posts and the responses, I think we can make the decision for you.

My point was to commend G-L for his years of unwavering loyalty, common sense and most important of all sanity at this madhouse.

If you want to take personal umbrage at that, too bad, so sad.

Now back to our regularly scheduled thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:Originally posted by Joe MacCarthy

What personal insult? Are you personally offended because you consider yourself a village idiot or a CSA wannabe? I don't recall mentioning any names but judging by your recent posts and the responses, I think we can make the decision for you.

My point was to commend G-L for his years of unwavering loyalty, common sense and most important of all sanity at this madhouse.

If you want to take personal umbrage at that, too bad, so sad.

Now back to our regularly scheduled thread.

Thanks for proving my point. No substance, just insults.

Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:Originally posted by Joe MacCarthy

No prob Bob. I think the posters can decide who has provided substance here over the years. Moaca, OSS vs Legion of Doom. Which adds substance? Hmmmmmm :)

Imagine a forum where everybody agreed. Wouldn't that be fun. Each thread would consist of 1 post.

I hope someday you find this forum.

Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by loyola

Hey Nolando, you said in another thread that we should not based our judgement on GC performances by CONCACAF teams, why are you doing it right now?

The problem with your argument of naming a few teams (which I wouldn't have a problem playing in a friendly except Mexico, that would be stupid from us) that we should play against is that we don't know what was tried and who does want to play against us. If Estonia invites us for a friendly in Europe and we say no, we're better having other options because a game is better than no game and I,m not exactly sure that many European teams want to play us.

BTW, Brennan and DeRo have referred to opponents like Spain, Poland and Argentina in their articles, I'm not sure they're talking about teams like the one you named.

Panama was in the Hex last time around, so I see this game as good competition for us and not that much lesser quality than Costa Rica, specialy away. Haiti has improved a lot in recent years so it's not like we're playing minnows, we're playing decent CONCACAF oppositions.

I mentioned Gold Cup because it probably matters to some of the players who have played in it - not that it matters to me, or to our WCQ record. It doesnt, as I have publicly stated.

Didnt mention Panama here at all, now did I?

The problem with this paragraph... "

"The problem with your argument of naming a few teams (which I wouldn't have a problem playing in a friendly except Mexico, that would be stupid from us) that we should play against is that we don't know what was tried and who does want to play against us. If Estonia invites us for a friendly in Europe and we say no, we're better having other options because a game is better than no game and I,m not exactly sure that many European teams want to play us."

...is that is makes virtually no sense whatsoever. In addition, I prefaced my post by saying that if Canada has tried to get friendlies against mid-top level competition and failed due to our finances or reputation, then it is a non-issue - end of story. Geez, would it it hurt some of you to take a basic critical thinking course, or as one of the Toronto loudmouths said to me recently, practice a little basic reading comprehension?

So Loyola, pray tell, how many games do we have to play against St Lucia, Haiti and Estonia, how many do we have to win (and by what margin) before we are ready to play teams at least as strong as Mexico and the US regularly? Whats your secret formula?

Link to post
Share on other sites

As reported by the London Free Press:

"I think the last year or so we've done a lot of good things," Maestracci said. "But people only are talking about the bad things."

What are the good things Maestracci is talking about, is his appointment one of them? When there are only bad things that is what people will talk about.

Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:Originally posted by nolando

I mentioned Gold Cup because it probably matters to some of the players who have played in it - not that it matters to me, or to our WCQ record. It doesnt, as I have publicly stated.

Didnt mention Panama here at all, now did I?

The problem with this paragraph... "

"The problem with your argument of naming a few teams (which I wouldn't have a problem playing in a friendly except Mexico, that would be stupid from us) that we should play against is that we don't know what was tried and who does want to play against us. If Estonia invites us for a friendly in Europe and we say no, we're better having other options because a game is better than no game and I,m not exactly sure that many European teams want to play us."

...is that is makes virtually no sense whatsoever. In addition, I prefaced my post by saying that if Canada has tried to get friendlies against mid-top level competition and failed due to our finances or reputation, then it is a non-issue - end of story. Geez, would it it hurt some of you to take a basic critical thinking course, or as one of the Toronto loudmouths said to me recently, practice a little basic reading comprehension?

So Loyola, pray tell, how many games do we have to play against St Lucia, Haiti and Estonia, how many do we have to win (and by what margin) before we are ready to play teams at least as strong as Mexico and the US regularly? Whats your secret formula?

First, like I've said until we start beating those "garbage" teams regularly we can start thinking about always playing top 50 teams (BTW, I have nothing against such games just don't think it's a crime to play South Africa or Estonia). Look at our results in the last 18 months and you'll find some really poor against those low ranked teams like Iceland, Guadeloupe and South Africa B team. So, until the bad result against low teams becomes a rare exception I won't complain against playing such teams in friendlies.

Second, do you care to explain how my argument doesn't make sense? I just don't believe that naming teams that we could play is a valid argument if those teams can't or doesn't want to play us. You have to take that into the equation when your criticizing the choice of opponents. My point is that we don't have that information, we don't know who we approached and who did contacted us for games and maybe refused.

Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:Originally posted by BrennanFan

Ok, GL is old, I get it.

If by "old" you mean 35, then yes. Young at heart though. I have been following soccer in this country since I was very young though, and with my freakishly good memory it means that I've been a fan for seemingly forever......

Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually find the friendly debate to border on the absurd. I'm convinced we play the teams we play because that's all we can get.

Sure, its nice to dream about playing Argentina or England or whoever, but it does take two to tango.

Until Canada improves its standing in international soccer we are going to be stuck playing the likes of Haiti and Estonia.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 12 years later...
16 minutes ago, _Roberto_ said:

Perhaps re-visiting this thread might be appropriate in light of the direction current "International Friendlies - CONCACAF" thread has taken. How much has the way the CSA operates changed since this thread was started 12 and a half years ago? How many of those who participated in this thread have ridden off into the sunset, after giving up on the CSA? (The zero little "blue hearts" number following their name should answer that question.) I've seen three previous generations ride off into the sunset as well in the years that I have been following soccer in this country, and it will happen again to the current generation of Canadian soccer supporters unless we unite and create enough public pressure to force the necessary changes. The people that frustrate me the most are the ones who accuse me and others who share my point of view as being repetitive and not being very nice. The only thing that is really repetitive in Canadian soccer is the way that the CSA operates, or fails to operate, to be more precise. What do those who criticize me, expect me to do? Do they expect me to change my point of view and suddenly proclaim, "Wow, isn't the CSA doing a GREAT job considering the limited resources they have? NOT ON YOUR EFFING LIFE! Do they expect me to go away and be quite? NOT ON YOUR EFFING LIFE!

You are repetitive because your posts do absolutely nothing to contribute to what you want to achieve.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My Dad used to tell me that things won’t change in Canada and I used to get super offended. I’ve been through cycles of this and I don’t think things will change at the CSA level. I’ve given up frankly, and just have my fingers crossed every WCQ cycle. We’re a minnow in concacaf, have poor leadership, but hey maybe things will work out one day!  But now I’m my Dad and have lost hope.

There’s always 2026, the World Cup we bought into with Canadians money.  Too bad BC was smart and didn’t sell our soul to FIFA so I’ll have to travel to see Canada play  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...