Jump to content

Paul James compares Canada to France


Recommended Posts

"There is one big difference however between Canada and France. The public repulsion against the French players, including the input of President Sarkozy himself, sets standards of what is acceptable behaviour and protocol of professional athletes, irrespective of the decisions and idiosyncrasies of a coach.

In Canada in 2004 nobody cared about what happened outside a small minority of sycophantic supporters."

Uhmmmm...yeah...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'Sycophantic'? I seem to recall there were mixed feelings on this board over Holger's firing/resignation/coup d'etat. So who exactly were these supporters fawning over??

PJ's disdain for the players and supporters is certainly consistent.

I haven't been paying attention but a certain ex Ntl team captain providing analysis on CBC should be careful he doesn't step into any doodoo with comments on this French player uprising.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just don't understand where he gets this idea that Canadian MNT players have no passion. Whenever a team is an off the field disaster he always seems to compare them to Canada. It just doesn't fit, Canada has had plenty of on field disasters but off the field the players have been top class. I mean they sacrifice a lot with their clubs to fly across the Atlantic and play for Canada.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The funny thing is he seems to be placing the prima donna label on today's players in his various shots at their attitude and commitment. But in fact it was the actions of the old school brigade that led to the impossible situation for Holger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depressing reading the responses to that article - in particular the utter cluelessness amongst the average soccer fan in Canada (if those responses are anything to go by).

As for the article itself, it strikes me as revisionist history. First of all, I don't recall that we lost to Belize, I recall us winning 8-0 on aggregate. And it's not like Holger's WC qualifying run was any more successful than Yallop's - and we probably got screwed by the Refs worse in 2004. But this is conveniently not mentioned so that the facts fit the thesis, instead of the thesis fitting the facts. As such the suggestion that the player revolt and dismissal of Holger is what caused us to miss the 2006 World Cup strikes me as speculation at best. I also don't know who the Canadian soccer supporters were supposed to be sycophants for at the time.

As the anemic John Collins might say, this article is "pooooor!!!!!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just don't understand where he gets this idea that Canadian MNT players have no passion. Whenever a team is an off the field disaster he always seems to compare them to Canada. It just doesn't fit, Canada has had plenty of on field disasters but off the field the players have been top class. I mean they sacrifice a lot with their clubs to fly across the Atlantic and play for Canada.

No kidding, Paul James seems to conveniently forget facts like players taking boat rides to friendlies, being asked to play for their own travel and insurance, fighting their clubs for release. Not saying that everything has been perfect, but James is consistently out to lunch.

Basically all his articles are the equivalent of this:

Old-Man-Yells-At-Cloud-the-simpsons-7414384-265-199.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depressing reading the responses to that article - in particular the utter cluelessness amongst the average soccer fan in Canada (if those responses are anything to go by).

It's funny during World Cup time not only does the average Canadian go around saying "Canada sucks at soccer" they also seem to all have a keen insight into why... but probably will not attend or follow WC qualifies for Canada come 2012.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh look, Paul James is an ignoramous who thinks that everything was better back in his day when three quarters of CONCACAF played in parking lots and our national pool played indoor and earned ten bucks plus whatever they could get for match fixing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sycophantic????

I would like to see some evidence of that.

Towards who exactly?

His caustic tone isn't needed. We didn't qualify for the World Cup but we are heading into an amazing time for soccer, and the last people he should be pissing on are the fans that actually even KNEW that something was even happening at the time.

Perhaps the Voyageurs should pitch and buy him some anti depressants.

Here is an idea, every opportunity you get PJ, tell people to get out and support the game rather than scaring them away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh look, Paul James is an ignoramous who thinks that everything was better back in his day when three quarters of CONCACAF played in parking lots and our national pool played indoor and earned ten bucks plus whatever they could get for match fixing.

Yeah, if he gets pissy on the fans again this forum will permanently change his name to Paul Bribery James every time someone types it in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sycophantic????

I would like to see some evidence of that.

Towards who exactly?

His caustic tone isn't needed. We didn't qualify for the World Cup but we are heading into an amazing time for soccer, and the last people he should be pissing on are the fans that actually even KNEW that something was even happening at the time.

Perhaps the Voyageurs should pitch and buy him some anti depressants.

Here is an idea, every opportunity you get PJ, tell people to get out and support the game rather than scaring them away.

I had a lot of respect for Paul James, but the more he insults our national team under what seems like no basis and now attacking us (for what) its really difficult for me to maintain any respect. He just seems to want attention. He was the only one bashing Hart after the supporters and players had been begging for his appointment as the fulltime coach and now his new vendetta seems to be this lack of passion thing. Maybe next it will be attacking the few supporters we do have :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It always seemed to me that someone was badly trying to restore his place at the trough.

Despite the obvious failings of a certain former employer, there was quite a bit of dancing around the issues in the public eye and an unwillingness to get to the point.

It`s beyond me why anyone still wants to pay him to offer his opinion. Some museum is missing it`s dinosaur.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was telling a guy in Spain about a recent Paul James rant and I was mildly aggravated about it and he said I should cheer up: "when you start getting that kind of yellow journalism, that's when you know you've arrived as a real footballing nation."

I felt better.

cheers,

matthew

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was telling a guy in Spain about a recent Paul James rant and I was mildly aggravated about it and he said I should cheer up: "when you start getting that kind of yellow journalism, that's when you know you've arrived as a real footballing nation."

I felt better.

cheers,

matthew

I think there's a certain amount of truth to that! In footballing nations like England there are no end of ex players or managers wanting to get their story in the press, controversy sells papers and usually gets more notice! I don't necessarily agree with PJ very often but I think it's good he expresses his opinion, as misguided as it may seem to many! Look at all the response it's got in this thread, that's a good thing IMO!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I'd rather hear someone say exactly what they think that might piss people off then someone who is always trying to say the right thing and make everyone happy. For every over the top comment PJ makes he'll have one that has no problem singling out a player who deserves it (well in his opinion!!) or coach or organization.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I'd rather hear someone say exactly what they think that might piss people off then someone who is always trying to say the right thing and make everyone happy. For every over the top comment PJ makes he'll have one that has no problem singling out a player who deserves it (well in his opinion!!) or coach or organization.

Really? I don't see him that was at all.

He barely gave Dale Mitchell any criticism at all, despite the man being a coward who threw a bunch of 18 and 19 year olds under the bus after a disaster U-20 tournament. Top that off he was loathe to say anything wrong about Mitchell durring qualifying despite his almost infiniate shortcomings.

And frankly his take on the CSA is similarly watered down. I think his favorite line on the score and goltv was "I know it's popular to blame the CSA BUT"

Sure he is hard on the players... but deservedly? is he giving them a fair shake with everyone else involved? I think the consensus would be no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for the article itself, it strikes me as revisionist history. First of all, I don't recall that we lost to Belize, I recall us winning 8-0 on aggregate. And it's not like Holger's WC qualifying run was any more successful than Yallop's - and we probably got screwed by the Refs worse in 2004. But this is conveniently not mentioned so that the facts fit the thesis, instead of the thesis fitting the facts. As such the suggestion that the player revolt and dismissal of Holger is what caused us to miss the 2006 World Cup strikes me as speculation at best. I also don't know who the Canadian soccer supporters were supposed to be sycophants for at the time.

I think there are some similarities and James does point those out, however, Gian-Luca is correct in saying that James is very selective in choosing his facts.

I will also add that James seems to be incredibly hypocritical. He says the French Federation is to blame for not getting rid of Domenech after 2008, but then praises them for standing behind him now. So he is saying that they should support a man they should have fired?

Finally, he points out that the main difference between France and Canada is that not enough people care here, then he goes on to belittle the people that do! You just can't win with this guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...