Jump to content

U20 - GM3 CAN vs GER


Vic

Recommended Posts

We call him Cruyff and pronounce it Croy-if, but to the Dutch he is always Cruijff. He was our idol growing up.

I'm not a huge fan of IB behind a bench (I think he's much better suited to a position higher up), but he is an extremely bright individual. And he spent enough time with them all to be able to evaluate them properly, so I'm sure his decisions were based on current information. Marton looked ok against Germany, but remember they had a lot of chances and we were extremely lucky they didn't paste us. I'm sure there was a good reason to keep her out against Japan. Who knoes, perhaps they were worried the fleet and nimble Japanese would have their way with her size and quickness. And I love Filigno (I'd take her before 5 Sinclairs), but both her and Lam-Feist looked over their heads and nowhere near the level we needed up front to progress. It didn't really matter if they were on the field or not.

We can point fingers like something is wrong or we can look at the bigger picture. The Germans and the Japanese are two of the top youth programs in the world right now (along with USA, Brazil and North Korea). They are simply better teams, programs, players, etc.

It would have been nice to overachieve, but really, no shame there. Of the other three top youth programs in the world, none of them may have come out of this group either. Tough luck for the ladies that fate finally burst the uncanny bubble of lucky draws we'd been having for years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 81
  • Created
  • Last Reply
quote:Originally posted by Vic

We call him Cruyff and pronounce it Croy-if, but to the Dutch he is always Cruijff. He was our idol growing up.

I'm not a huge fan of IB behind a bench (I think he's much better suited to a position higher up), but he is an extremely bright individual. And he spent enough time with them all to be able to evaluate them properly, so I'm sure his decisions were based on current information. Marton looked ok against Germany, but remember they had a lot of chances and we were extremely lucky they didn't paste us. I'm sure there was a good reason to keep her out against Japan. Who knoes, perhaps they were worried the fleet and nimble Japanese would have their way with her size and quickness. And I love Filigno (I'd take her before 5 Sinclairs), but both her and Lam-Feist looked over their heads and nowhere near the level we needed up front to progress. It didn't really matter if they were on the field or not.

We can point fingers like something is wrong or we can look at the bigger picture. The Germans and the Japanese are two of the top youth programs in the world right now (along with USA, Brazil and North Korea). They are simply better teams, programs, players, etc.

It would have been nice to overachieve, but really, no shame there. Of the other three top youth programs in the world, none of them may have come out of this group either. Tough luck for the ladies that fate finally burst the uncanny bubble of lucky draws we'd been having for years.

My on the field SOCCER idol growing up was Diego Armando Maradona...For my money the best football player of all time.

As for the rest....you can rationalize it any way you want. But in the end our senior team, U17 team and now the U20 team never made it out of their group.

Forget OVERachieving we are NOTachieving and SOMETHING IS WRONG and we should be comparing ourselves with the top countries in the world and not be satisfied by beating countries whose GDP is less than your suburban mall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do we compare our system to the Euro's who are scouted into Pro Club's Women's Programs before they are 15. How do we compare our NT level w/ others when those same U15's are streamed into a NT program that starts at U15. We can't.

A lot of our problem begins before the players hit the PSO & NSO pathway. Until the Youth Clubs/Districts improve their development structure/model our die is cast before our players hit the PSO & NSO pathway.

As Vic pointed out Katharina Baunach (3#) of Germany's U20's is already in Bayern women's system. A system that starts before the players hit 15. This is where we are letting our players down as we don't have clubs of the size & revenues to really develop the players.

We are still at the mom & pop house level even though we have 850K youth. Far too many mom & pop clubs vs large professionally run clubs. Oakville SC (I use them as their info is in public) is a great model of the future but the Youth Clubs/Districts have got to wake up & put their self interests aside & service the youth as is obvious w/ our WP mom & pop clubs don't support a NT system on the international level anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For most of the parents of the kids playing soccer the sport is not that big of a deal. It's just something for kids to do between the ages of 5 and 14 like swimming, skating, dancing and piano lessons. How many kids taking those activities become really proficient in those things? Maybe one in 500 or so. As much as we might want to we cannot use a European model for our player development. When I visited Germany two summers ago the 6 year old boy in the household could name ALL the players on the local budesleague team and knew about Beckhams trade to LA. I would be willing to bet that all of his friends knew more football players than the average Canadian kid knows hockey players. Except for some participation in individual sports like golf, tennis and swimming he wasn't interested in anything but football. His parents took him and his little sister (5 years old)to three or four professional matches each year. He had professional (read PAID) coaches for his youth team and beautiful facilities in his neighbourhood. The parents stayed for the practices (moms and dads) and were all knowledgable about the sport. O yes they can play outdoors all months except January.

We need a made in Canada model for our development program so stop dreaming of the European mode.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^

Terpfan68, please read my post again as I've not stated we had to do a Euro model. I actually refer to Oakville SC which has a very successful model. It's a club model all of you here should read about to get a good frame of reference of what is possible in Canada. They have lots of reading at their site & clearly demonstrate IMO what Clubs/Districts should be moving towards.

As w/ any sports club to be in the black you have to run both Rec & HP which is what I've always stated.

Creating a culture for sport whether at the Rec & HP level comes easier if you have a good club.

The issue for us is the lack of well organized, managed & governed Clubs/Districts that are a decent size to afford professionally managed development & structure for the sport.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was really thinking of Vic's postings which wants to scrap the NCAA opportunity for our females. Without that training how would we have done in all of the last few world competitions? The European model is not an option in Canada. Strong clubs yes but even they sometimes have problems "giving up" their players to more advanced programs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NCAA exists as a vacuum because we have no elite women's league as a viable alternative. As an example, the number of professional hockey players who go through the university route is very low. Post-secondary education takes a lot of mental energy and time. Mixing that with building a soccer career is an option for some who both have an academic orientation and can handle that and somehow still be competitive with other elite athletes who are committed to their sport and at it 24/7. But for the pure athletes and driven competitors it's simply a default because it's the only game in town in the Winter.

And again, if they are attending school, I'd rather see them playing up here in the CIS in an integrated framework supported by both a national elite league and the national women's programs. That means increasing the money past the current $3500, integrating the local clubs (Whitecaps, Lynx, Cometes, Fury, etc) to the local schools, and giving them visibility into the national programs. We have schools across the country with the facilities and resources, they are getting full-time staff, and they are under-utilized as development centers for 9 months of the year.

I'm not saying we can compete in someone's mind with a full ride at Princeton, but just like with a league, Rome wasn't built in a day and we have to start somewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vic, I agree with the above post, I think our Canadian university teams operating within a league would be a great idea and terpfan, you need to look no farther than a place like Norway that seems to be able to function a strong women's league despite similarly nasty winter weather.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I made several points that seem to have been missed or at least not addressed by other posters. Canada does not have a football culture. Norway does. Their climate at least near their population centres is milder than Canada's because of the gulf stream. They are located in Europe where the compete at a high level against traditional rivals. They seem to have forsaken hockey unlike their neighbours the Swedes and the Finns or at least they don't seem to be very successful at hockey. Unlike the American university system Canada has not thrown much money at intercollegiate sports and is unlikely to do so. American universities for good or ill use sports as a marketing system for their universities. Tuition rates are high and so the value of a "scholarship" is inflated and actually drives sport participation at the lower ages. I am sure that a high percentage of American females age 12 or 13 are hoping to get a sport's scholarship. Equal opportunity for female athletes (a federal requirement or else schools get no federal funds) have dramatically increased female participation. Where would Canada's women be ranked if none of our players had used the American colleges to complete their development? I think we would not even be ranked in the top 20. Or, do you think the CSA or corporate sponsors would have picked up the slack and provided massive funding for our women?

I have read many proposals to "improve" Canadian soccer. Most sound good but have little chance of being implimented. Most require massive amounts of money or the presence of superior coaching when many youth teams have difficulty getting ANY coach, let alone one who is somewhat qualified. As a youth convenor I called a meeting of all the parents of a team of 12 year old females who finished 2nd in Winnipeg the previous year and told them that if I didn't have a coach by the end of the meeting there would be no team and that I would "try" to place their daughters on other teams nearby. I did get a "coach" who promised to take the necessary required training at the beginning of the season. This coach had one practice that year and won one game out of 15 and the following year only 4 of the players continued to play soccer with different teams in the area. By the way, out of the 16 parents who should have attended the meeting only 9 attended. The rest were "too busy". The time committment for coaching is substancial and many people would rather let someone else do it. (By the way I got numerous complaints about what a poor job the coach was doing and that the girls weren't having fun anymore.)

Solutions must at least by possible. Massive amounts of funding, becomming a football culture and large numbers of excellent coaches are all great ideas but I doubt if these factors can occur in under 15 years if then.

We should concentrate on what is possible instead of writing a wish list to Santa.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by terpfan68

I made several points that seem to have been missed or at least not addressed by other posters. Canada does not have a football culture. Norway does. Their climate at least near their population centres is milder than Canada's because of the gulf stream. They are located in Europe where the compete at a high level against traditional rivals. They seem to have forsaken hockey unlike their neighbours the Swedes and the Finns or at least they don't seem to be very successful at hockey. Unlike the American university system Canada has not thrown much money at intercollegiate sports and is unlikely to do so. American universities for good or ill use sports as a marketing system for their universities. Tuition rates are high and so the value of a "scholarship" is inflated and actually drives sport participation at the lower ages. I am sure that a high percentage of American females age 12 or 13 are hoping to get a sport's scholarship. Equal opportunity for female athletes (a federal requirement or else schools get no federal funds) have dramatically increased female participation. Where would Canada's women be ranked if none of our players had used the American colleges to complete their development? I think we would not even be ranked in the top 20. Or, do you think the CSA or corporate sponsors would have picked up the slack and provided massive funding for our women?

I have read many proposals to "improve" Canadian soccer. Most sound good but have little chance of being implimented. Most require massive amounts of money or the presence of superior coaching when many youth teams have difficulty getting ANY coach, let alone one who is somewhat qualified. As a youth convenor I called a meeting of all the parents of a team of 12 year old females who finished 2nd in Winnipeg the previous year and told them that if I didn't have a coach by the end of the meeting there would be no team and that I would "try" to place their daughters on other teams nearby. I did get a "coach" who promised to take the necessary required training at the beginning of the season. This coach had one practice that year and won one game out of 15 and the following year only 4 of the players continued to play soccer with different teams in the area. By the way, out of the 16 parents who should have attended the meeting only 9 attended. The rest were "too busy". The time committment for coaching is substancial and many people would rather let someone else do it. (By the way I got numerous complaints about what a poor job the coach was doing and that the girls weren't having fun anymore.)

Solutions must at least by possible. Massive amounts of funding, becomming a football culture and large numbers of excellent coaches are all great ideas but I doubt if these factors can occur in under 15 years if then.

We should concentrate on what is possible instead of writing a wish list to Santa.

So .. you delivered the wrong ultimatium, you should have charged $200 more per player giving you $3,200 dollars and hiring a coach.

As long as people like you expect others to volunteer out of shame or to let there daughter play your going to ruin players, have them quit and not advance the game.

In ever decision taken at the local level which does not respect the game ( in this case having a parent coach who was forced to do it ) you disrespect the game and its intrinsic values.

You should have charged more to pay a coach .. or folded the team and let the few ( three or four ) who really wanted to play find another club and team.

I have heard it so so many times the same situations, the answer is charge more .. professionalize.

Follow the figureskating model every certified coach is paid, entry level coaches at 23.50 or more per hour to teach canskate the basic learn to skate program. Imagine your four year old or five year old taught by someone who competes or has competed at the national, and international level, and who is paid 23.50 per hour... thats a far far better model then shaming some smhoo with daughter to coach.

Translate that to soccer and you will have talented and motivated coaches. Three practices per week for 6 hours plus 2 hours for one game a week, so 8 hours x 25 = 200.00 X 16 players/weeks. Or expressed another way .... 104 hours of baby sitting for less then two dollars per hour.

Parents will think your a genius.

Pay your coaches Terpie.. Pay your coaches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I agree. But I do not set the fees. I tried to waive the fees if a parent volunteered to be a coach or manager. It was voted down because the club executive said if they did it for soccer they would have to do it for hockey. I agree that a soccer club model is better but if the fees are too high parents will complain to the city and guess who owns the soccer fields? That's right the city. By by field permits. Or do you want the parents to pay to develop the fields too. Also if I charged double at least 3 of the girls could not have afforded it. And if the community club leadership instituted the higher fees they would all be removed at the next election. Soccer for the rich anyone? I know elite coaches of club teams in the US (Maryland for example) get $5000 per season (indoor and outdoor wow-$10000 per year). And as for the figure skating model (or gymnastics for that matter, or swimming) they do not have the NUMBERS that soccer does. Canada has always done things on the cheap. It's sort of a tradition. I had a friend who coached JV soccer at a high school in the states in the 70's and he got $1000 for a 12 game season almost 40 years ago! Double the fee for soccer and just watch the numbers drop. (The sad reality is that the German parents would probably pay the fee but don't have to because of the money the pros put into the sport.) I am sure if this were North Korea we would not have to take the parents' interest into consideration but change happens slowly in a democracy.

Again you "solution" sounded great but it won't work because there aren't enough quality qualified coaches out there even if most parents would be willing to pay double.

Try again.

(and it's Terpfan -- but if you can't attack the arguement attack the person -- right?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by terpfan68

Yes, I agree. But I do not set the fees. I tried to waive the fees if a parent volunteered to be a coach or manager. It was voted down because the club executive said if they did it for soccer they would have to do it for hockey. I agree that a soccer club model is better but if the fees are too high parents will complain to the city and guess who owns the soccer fields? That's right the city. By by field permits. Or do you want the parents to pay to develop the fields too. Also if I charged double at least 3 of the girls could not have afforded it. And if the community club leadership instituted the higher fees they would all be removed at the next election. Soccer for the rich anyone? I know elite coaches of club teams in the US (Maryland for example) get $5000 per season (indoor and outdoor wow-$10000 per year). And as for the figure skating model (or gymnastics for that matter, or swimming) they do not have the NUMBERS that soccer does. Canada has always done things on the cheap. It's sort of a tradition. I had a friend who coached JV soccer at a high school in the states in the 70's and he got $1000 for a 12 game season almost 40 years ago! Double the fee for soccer and just watch the numbers drop. (The sad reality is that the German parents would probably pay the fee but don't have to because of the money the pros put into the sport.) I am sure if this were North Korea we would not have to take the parents' interest into consideration but change happens slowly in a democracy.

Again you "solution" sounded great but it won't work because there aren't enough quality qualified coaches out there even if most parents would be willing to pay double.

Try again.

(and it Terpfan -- but if you can't attack the arguement attack the person -- right?)

Terpfan.. so your talking about some community association program .. with multiple sports ? Hockey and soccer etc. so its not even a Soccer club .. does it even join the Manitoba soccer association ?

As to fields etc.. what you are describing is recreational program not a soccer development model.

So I come back to my argument you need to as an individual respec the game, find a real soccer club in your city and put your energy there .. support paid coaches .. make the argument over and over and then it will begin to happen, Ottawa used be like your descripition buyt it has changed over time, much of that change driven by constantly repeating the argument based on respecting the game.

Pay coaches, develop good referees, demand clubs own fields or control them through long term leases from the city involved.

As to attacking you .. if pointing out the respect of the game options you had and did not avail yourself of you think I was attacking you .. well I call it challenging you to step up to higher level of understanding.

Ps.. Terpfan, A diminutive is a formation of a word used to convey a slight degree of the root meaning, smallness of the object or quality named, encapsulation, intimacy, or endearment. It is the opposite of an augmentative. While many languages apply the grammatical diminutive to nouns, a few also use it for adjectives and even other parts of speech.

So .. Terpie is and endering usage... of your Terpfan nick.. certainly you are subset of all Terapin fans are you not ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you are not from Winnipeg you probably don't know how things are done here. Community clubs control most team sports in each neighbourhood up to age 13 when elite programs run by district soccer associations take over. Capital costs such as buildings and fields etc were paid for by the city when the clubs were established but the majority of operating costs are to be paid for by the club. Since the clubs organize soccer teams up to age 17 (not elite) they each have two voting members in the Manitoba Soccer Association.

Now I don't know about the rest of Canada but fields are probably paid for by the municipalities either outright or through grants, and I doubt that players families pay the complete cost of the upkeep for these fields. I also know that city counselors are elected officials and that they would not be receptive to the doubling of fees to pay coaches. Recently when the soccer association tried to charge a $2 adult admission to our new 4 field indoor facility ($10 million of which $9 million came from the three levels of government)the hue and cry reached the primier's office and he declaired that NO FEE would ever be charged. Personally I wasn't against the fee but the quotes in the Free Press complained that parent were already paying $200 for indoor soccer and that this was just a "cash grab". (Indoor fees are higher than outdoor fees because of facility rentals of course.)

So maybe you can enlighten me about how things are done in the rest of the nation. I notice that like most of the posters you don't provide much of a biography. Nice to be able to criticize with a hood on isn't it? It's also nice to be able to use a dictionary. Was it online or in print? I really do not need any terms of endearment from you and suggest that perhaps you need some lessons in politeness. Was that too harsh? Please accept my apology in advance. Would you prefer Trillium or perhaps Shrillium?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

didnt this team under BB won the concacaf championship beating one of the three best youth program in the world.

u dnt fire a coach that won u a regional chanpionship n replace his with someone that has lost last four games the last time he was head coach.

it came dwn to poor coaching.

those players has nothing to learn from Ian bridge

he spent 2 months in residency with those players

what did they show in the first game.

those players get better coaching at tha college level than out of our national level

what a joke.

first Mitchell then bridge

who's next on the 1986 world cup squad the csa is thinking abt hiring as coach

we had bobby

mitchel

bridge

Yallop

miller

James

who's nxt

wilson?

david norman

Gery gray

carl valentin

paul dolan

i guest we will have another 32 yrs with the 1986 players bieng given

caoching jobs at the national level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clubs - You are talking about clubs so I would ask you to have a look at Oakville SC www.oakvillesoccer.ca to see what a large club can achieve. Have a look at how they are organized w/ volunteers & staff in About OSC/Organizational Structure. If you compare Oakville to what happens in Vancouver it's a joke.

Example - Vancouver has 11-12 clubs (2000 girls) where they are fighting to stay alive w/in their own little communities & the District. Does it makes sense when as a small club you can't raise enough $ or experienced volunteers to offer the best in Rec & HP development & etc? No. It's the structure/model & the self interest that puts communities 1st that doesn't service the members & the sport at large. For Vancouver to be successful for the members & the sport they only need 1 or maybe 2 large clubs. IMO a club in a city should have 5000+ members & be able to raise almost $1M to service members & the sport.

University - Good concept to use the existing structure but like community clubs they have to get on the same page. SFU & UBC are on their way to the NCAA. They say they want more competition, less traveling & to be able to increase scholarship dollars. W/ the $ available to females & how university sports are marketed & supported by the public in the US, it's going to be hard to compete w/ them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that too many organizations have their fingers in the pie. The community club model is not the best model for the sport of soccer. It's a good model if you want to maximize participation while keeping down costs. I agree that the soccer club is the way to go but you need cooperation from municipalities and to some extent the province because community clubs do not want to give up the cash cow that is soccer. Parents for the most part are interested in only keeping the costs down and having their child play within a small distance from home. I received lots of complaints when teams had to play out of our area of Winnipeg and maybe had a half-hour drive to the other side of the city. Winnipeg is fairly small. The greatest distance you might have to drive might take 45 minutes depending upon time of day and most of the travel times would be under 15 minutes. It takes you longer to stop and get a slurpee after the game. It does sound like Oakville is the exception rather than the rule though, so it doesn't look like this very good idea has caught on elsewhere in Canada. (What are the statistics? How many national team players have they developed and is that number more than other less progressive clubs (locations)?)

Although I spent a lot of time working for the community club with soccer and also attending district meetings I was turned off by the politics and the backbitting that went on (almost like this forum). Most suggestion for improvement where "pie in the sky" ideas which never had a realistic chance of getting political approval. One suggestion was to take a small 8 hole golf course which was somewhat centrally located in the city and turn it into soccer pitches. A lot of time and effort went into trying to get that lead ballon to go up. That suggestion drew opposition from golfer and the neighbourhood. They didn't want 600 cars using their streets each weekday evening and all day on Saturday and Sunday. Even the new indoor facility took much too long to get approval because of infighting by the different areas of the city and the community clubs that had already developed smaller indoor soccer facilities.

I don't usually advise people to think small but it serves no usfull purpose to devote effort to ideas that just won't be taken seriously

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by terpfan68

The problem is that too many organizations have their fingers in the pie. The community club model is not the best model for the sport of soccer. It's a good model if you want to maximize participation while keeping down costs. I agree that the soccer club is the way to go but you need cooperation from municipalities and to some extent the province because community clubs do not want to give up the cash cow that is soccer. Parents for the most part are interested in only keeping the costs down and having their child play within a small distance from home. I received lots of complaints when teams had to play out of our area of Winnipeg and maybe had a half-hour drive to the other side of the city. Winnipeg is fairly small. The greatest distance you might have to drive might take 45 minutes depending upon time of day and most of the travel times would be under 15 minutes. It takes you longer to stop and get a slurpee after the game. It does sound like Oakville is the exception rather than the rule though, so it doesn't look like this very good idea has caught on elsewhere in Canada. (What are the statistics? How many national team players have they developed and is that number more than other less progressive clubs (locations)?)

Although I spent a lot of time working for the community club with soccer and also attending district meetings I was turned off by the politics and the backbitting that went on (almost like this forum). Most suggestion for improvement where "pie in the sky" ideas which never had a realistic chance of getting political approval. One suggestion was to take a small 8 hole golf course which was somewhat centrally located in the city and turn it into soccer pitches. A lot of time and effort went into trying to get that lead ballon to go up. That suggestion drew opposition from golfer and the neighbourhood. They didn't want 600 cars using their streets each weekday evening and all day on Saturday and Sunday. Even the new indoor facility took much too long to get approval because of infighting by the different areas of the city and the community clubs that had already developed smaller indoor soccer facilities.

I don't usually advise people to think small but it serves no usfull purpose to devote effort to ideas that just won't be taken seriously

Perhaps you need to realize the model you describe in Winnipeg is not the dominant model, that said its not a bad model.

In Ottawa the pyramid operates within Clubs, most Ottawa clubs with youth programs operate a recreational house league from age five up to age nineteen then adult recreational, within the same clubs a competitive stream exists, clubs range from a few hundred players, up to clubs with five thousand players.

One you play competitive that is registered as competitive player who plays in Regional competitive team you can travel as much as three hours to Belleville from Ottawa to play games,you might want to look at the ERSL website to get an insight to the various levels of the game.

Its important to note inside the structure as it is, some clubs are smaller and focus on development for example a Capital United, working in the same geographic zone as a large community club Gloucester ... in fact what occurs is a form of limited competition, club creation is based on having fields, and access to a player pool.

The interesting thing is how some large community clubs are transistioning to having more professionalized coaching the above mentioned Capital United, and a very large almagamated club in the south of Ottawa called Nepean United, that is looking to develop even more with foriegn agreements etc.

This all capped by a USL program run by the Fury Soccer club a for profit club with professional training from first starters at u8 up to pro women and PDL men.

PS your welcome to take as many shots as you wish.. my comments on your reactions to issues in your soccer club and your involvement must have hit a sore spot with you.. and yes all things have politics as part of making improvements. As to detailed profiles on here .. why bother your judged by what you say day to day .. week to week, hell I am a even liking Richards recent comments, so go with the flow...enjoy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that we are hearing more criticism of the CSA from Richard lately. I started posting almost three years ago and Richard would defend the CSA every time. I wonder what happened to cause his turn around.

As to taking shots: If you recall I only hit back after you made that crack about my login name. Whatever names people choose should be respected. I do think that people should have the courage to identify themselves. Newspapers require identification for their letters to the editor section because then the readers can understand any conflict of interest or biases the writers might have.

I truly believe the Club Model as explained by several posters is the way to go along with paid coaches. Our problem here in Winnipeg is that players are not free to choose which club they wish to belong to at the premier level. They players 17 and under MUST play in their district unless they are cut from the program and are permitted to transfer. After 17 they may play anywhere and often there are wholesale changes from year to year (especially with the women) when players feel that they don't care for the coach anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't defend the CSA blindly every time, what I objected to were unsubstantiated accusations especially against individual people. Some of the ridiculous stuff posted here was positively libellous. I have no objection to criticism based on facts, or differing opinions.

I also agree the club model is the way to go - if it works in every other country in the world, why not here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...