jahman Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 Guys...no one will argue with your effort tonight...thats what football is all about, shows some heart on the field and noone will knock you. Why on earth arent all your home games in Edmonton? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bettermirror Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 They aren't in Edmonton because no one goes! Plus it's much too far for the players to travel from Europe. Plus the pitch is usually very poor. Plus, our CSA is far too "politically correct" to centralize the matches as per the players wishes (in either Toronto or Montreal). It was a great effort by all accounts. More of that from our lads will bode well. Some on here have suggested we relied too heavily on our star players in the previous matches and as a result, others did not play to their potential. To me, that's coaching. Acknowledge the impact the star players can have on matches, but demand through motivation or ultimatum the other players are peaking at kickoff for the full 90 minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bettermirror Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 Addition - don't demand just the supporting players are peaking, the star players need that motivation as well. They all have to know they are susceptible to benching should they not be performing to their best. I somehow doubt that message was sent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuphone Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 quote:Originally posted by bettermirror They aren't in Edmonton because no one goes! Plus it's much too far for the players to travel from Europe. Plus the pitch is usually very poor. Plus, our CSA is far too "politically correct" to centralize the matches as per the players wishes (in either Toronto or Montreal). The pitch is poor? I've never heard that said about Edmonton before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jahman Posted October 16, 2008 Author Share Posted October 16, 2008 quote:Originally posted by bettermirror They aren't in Edmonton because no one goes! Thought I read somewhere that the attendance was 14k, considering the circumstances I think thats pretty good. Maybe it was just me, watching the game last night it had more of a 'football feel' than the other two venues used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmcmurph Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 quote:Originally posted by chuphone The pitch is poor? I've never heard that said about Edmonton before. During the Whitecaps vs LA game it was less than good. Last night it looked very good from the stands. Much better than you would expect for October in Edmonton 9 days after the Eskimos had been on it for a game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuphone Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 quote:Originally posted by tmcmurph During the Whitecaps vs LA game it was less than good. Last night it looked very good from the stands. Much better than you would expect for October in Edmonton 9 days after the Eskimos had been on it for a game. Fair enough, I do remember that it was poor for that game, but I've never heard it being called poor for a Canada game. The last I heard was that it was still the best natural grass surface in the country. It may be a second to Saputo now, but after watching the game in Montreal back in September I wouldn't bank on that pitch. Atmosphere-wise, I would say that last night's game was the best of the three from a TV viewing standpoint. The crowd noises seemed clearer and more active than even BMO (which is hard to believe). And 14k on a weeknight in October with next to no hype in the city is an excellent turnout. I live here and I've heard nothing about the game from anyone. The local papers mentioned it back in the summer, very briefly last week, and then a bit the day of and the day before. I would wager that 99% of Edmontonians didn't even know there was a game here last night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ed Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 The pitch was very good. Nothing to complain about at all. And 14,000 beats the attendance in Montreal. Now probably 6-7,000 of those there last night were Cdn. But 14,000 showing up for basically an exhibition game on a weeknight in Edmonton, with the hot Oilers on TV as competition is terrific. Those deriding Edmonton, especially the sad twat who posted early in the game thread on the 'empty stadium', can go fck themselves. You know who you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyola Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 quote:Originally posted by Ed The pitch was very good. Nothing to complain about at all. And 14,000 beats the attendance in Montreal. Now probably 6-7,000 of those there last night were Cdn. But 14,000 showing up for basically an exhibition game on a weeknight in Edmonton, with the hot Oilers on TV as competition is terrific. Those deriding Edmonton, especially the sad twat who posted early in the game thread on the 'empty stadium', can go fck themselves. You know who you are. Well, I think you should look at the broadcast to know what the poster was talking about. I remember that early shot and I have to agree with him that it didn't looked good. It's not a shot at Edmonton or the fans, but that early image was a bit depressing...but when the game started, the crowd seemed very lively and it was an enjoyable night of football with a good atmosphere. We have 4 more years to wait but I hope that MTL, Toronto, Edmonton, Vancouver and maybe even Ottawa will have the chance to host a few friendlies until then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFC07 Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 If Toronto can get a grass pitch, then I except Canada to play all their games there in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveBeau Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 quote:Originally posted by TFC07 If Toronto can get a grass pitch, then I except Canada to play all their games there in the future. *yawn* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strobe_z Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 *yawn* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RS Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 quote:The crowd noises seemed clearer and more active than even BMO (which is hard to believe). *yawn?* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmcmurph Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 quote:Originally posted by SteveBeau *yawn* Don't knock it. They have demonstrated that they can get out the support and do it in spite of the Jamaican turnout. There are many who say they've earned it. I don't think they will get all the games. Once Saputo Stadium fixes its grass it will get another chance and hopefully it'll be better supported for our team. I can honestly see the future WCQ games split between Saputo and BMO (with grass). I would love to see them at Commonwealth again but I think we might get a friendly here or there but the WCQ will be all down east to ease the players travel and in Toronto's case because of the massive showing of support they got this time around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Bob Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 In the WCQ, travel shouldn't factor into sending a game to Edmonton. For example, there's a one-hour time difference between any Central American nation and Edmonton. It's a long flight, but it's not much less to Toronto or Montreal. So if the boys fly into Guatemala, play, and then fly into Edmonton, jet lag wouldn't be an issue and travel time wouldn't be appreciably worse. You'd have to schedule this right, obviously: going into Edmonton then into Jamaica, say, would be a pain in the butt, but it could easily be done. This is different for A-team friendlies, where guys would be coming straight in from Europe and every time zone matters. But the World Cup Qualifying cycle shouldn't pose a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RS Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 quote:Originally posted by jahman Thought I read somewhere that the attendance was 14k, considering the circumstances I think thats pretty good. Maybe it was just me, watching the game last night it had more of a 'football feel' than the other two venues used. While Commonwealth did seem to have a "football feel" to it, I think most of that was the Mexicans in attendance (unless it was our own fans yelling "Puto!" every time Lars took a goal kick). I do think that Commonwealth crowds in general are fairly active, and on that basis alone they should always be considered for games (although only if those organizing for that venue stop with the bull**** practice of making the opposition team/fans feel at home). As for the other two venues, I'm not sure what more we have to do here in Toronto to prove that we deserve games here. Our atmosphere for that Jamaica game was unmatched in this country, and it most definitely has a "football feel" given the highly organized built-in support from the TFC fanbase. Montreal also had a "football feel", as I'm sure that's what every Honduras game in Tegucigalpa or San Pedro Sula feels like, except a little warmer temperature-wise. [xx(] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superbrad Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 I've said this before and I'll say it again. If the Jamaica game was in Edmonton on the same date, you would have had (min) 27,000+ pro Canada fans with a lot less Jamaicans. The organized support wouldn't have been as intense. TO was a big success because of hard work on the behalf of all the V's and TFC support groups, and because of timing and momentum. Edmonton drew 14,000+ to a meaningless game when the Oilers were playing and it was hovering around 0 C. I was personally impressed with the turnout. I've heard the pros/cons of having a national stadium and I think TO is that. However, we are a large country and I believe all parts of Canada should have game opportunities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Bob Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 I should add that I'm all for Toronto getting the best games. If we ever have to play a single vital game on home soil, I'd put it at BMO one hundred percent. But there's no reason the West needs to be denied entirely. The general formula for this WCQ was solid to me: one each in Edmonton, Montreal, and Toronto. Maybe rotate Montreal's spot between them, Burnaby, etc. as practical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RS Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 quote:Originally posted by Lord Bob In the WCQ, travel shouldn't factor into sending a game to Edmonton. For example, there's a one-hour time difference between any Central American nation and Edmonton. It's a long flight, but it's not much less to Toronto or Montreal. So if the boys fly into Guatemala, play, and then fly into Edmonton, jet lag wouldn't be an issue and travel time wouldn't be appreciably worse. You'd have to schedule this right, obviously: going into Edmonton then into Jamaica, say, would be a pain in the butt, but it could easily be done. This is different for A-team friendlies, where guys would be coming straight in from Europe and every time zone matters. But the World Cup Qualifying cycle shouldn't pose a problem. Quite the opposite, actually. It poses a very big problem, which you alluded to in your post. On the back end of a two-games-in-five-days series, yes, Edmonton is a good choice. But for every other fixture, Canada should not be playing any further west than Toronto. Adding 5.5 hours of flight time is most definitely a big deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Bob Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 Not sure I made myself clear, Rudi: I think sending a game to Edmonton is no problem (the back end of a two-games-in-five-days series, as you mentioned). Sending any game to Edmonton would be a problem, and I agree one hundred percent that we should avoid adding huge travel times for our players, but logistically it should be easy to get a match in Commonwealth. I'm pretty sure we're actually in complete agreement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nafnikufesin Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 quote:Originally posted by bettermirror They aren't in Edmonton because no one goes! What are you talking about? Edmonton usually draws more people than any other site, and usually draws the most pro-Canadian crowd. When meaningful games are played in Edmonton, they tend to draw well over 20,000, often much more. Sure, on TV 14000 people in a 60000 seat stadium looks "empty", but there have been many previous meaningful games that have drawn double to triple BMO's capacity. quote:Plus it's much too far for the players to travel from Europe. No argument there, but that also works against any of the opponents players coming from Europe, too. quote:Plus the pitch is usually very poor. Usually? Once in a while, yes, depending on other events and weather conditions, but it's "usually" considered the best grass surface in the country. I was surprised and pleased at the turnout for the Jamaica game, but all that one game should do for now is "earn" Toronto a spot back in the rotation. It still has a long way to go to "earn" all the games or even the best games given it's much longer history of poor turnouts and away-game atmospheres. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RS Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 quote:Originally posted by nafnikufesin Sure, on TV 14000 people in a 60000 seat stadium looks "empty", but there have been many previous meaningful games that have drawn double to triple BMO's capacity. Hyperbole? Please list the "many" games that have drawn triple BMO's capacity. "Most" don't even draw double, which isn't a knock on Edmonton at all, but let's deal with facts here and not imaginary numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nafnikufesin Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 I said many drew double to triple, not many drew triple. I don't have dates or numbers to back me up here, (hell, many of the games happened while I was still living in Toronto, so I'm not even sure if there were others in Edmonton) but off the top of my head: -Men's U-20 WC: the two games that Canada played drew big numbers. The mid-week single game was less, but the weekend double header had 35-40000. -Women's U-20 WC: all the games featuring Canada were huge draws 30-40000, with 55000 by the final. -Men's WCQ, final home game of the hex leading up to the '98 WC against Mexico: no clue of exact numbers (I've had many a beer since that time to kill off the unneeded brain cells), but I recall the lower bowl being pretty much full and the upper bowl having to be opened up, suggesting 35K+ -Men's Olympic qualifying tourney (for '96 I think?): I think the mid-week games may have only been in the 20K range, but the final match against Mexico drew significantly more -of course there have been meaningless games that have drawn well, too: the Canada-Brazil friendly before the '94 WC sold out Commonwealth. I did have the pleasure of being at that one, what an amazing experience! When Canada has played meaningful games in Edmonton, be it mens or womens, old or young, Edmonton has put lots more fans in the seats than BMO has the capacity for. Correct me if I'm wrong, but last night might have been the first time ever that the MNT drew less than 20K for a WCQ in Edmonton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ed Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 You are wrong. Stop pickin' at it. You only have to go back to the last game. Canada vs Honduras drew 8,000 in September 2004. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piltdownman Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 So all the games should be in Toronto because their fans are too lazy to travel? I believe only a single person from Toronto came out last night. I think saying Toronto should get all the games based on the fan turnout of a single game under perfect conditions is just stupid. That said since the CSA didn't do any advertising at all for the Edmonton match, it makes me wonder if they wanted to fail. Who ever was in charge of promotions should be fired ... oh wait its the CSA I bet they get promoted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.