Morace to quit after WWC?

[empty_search]

Vic,

Thank you very much for your response. I appreciate it and your knowledge of and passion for soccer in Canada. As stated in my earlier post, I am an outsider – which clearly limits what I can add to any discussion. As such, I post here with some trepidation, more with the hope of providing food for thought rather than making assertions which are not grounded in at least some fact and logic.

“Do I know that for a fact?” I believe that the following are facts and reasonable conclusions. Morace has tendered her resignation to the CSA – conclusion –she is not satisfied. The women’s team has threatened to boycott competitions and is taking legal advice in dealing with issues related to its relationship with the CSA – conclusion - they are not satisfied.

I suppose there is the possibility that these were unilateral decisions – and the CSA was unaware of the concerns and only had a chance to act after the fact, but I suspect that the chances of that being the actual case are quite slim. For the sake of argument at least, let us assume that the CSA made decisions after becoming aware of the other parties' concerns. Please point out the flaws in the logic which follows - which should at least explain why I felt I could write as I did: If the CSA had the same ultimate goal as the one which you espouse (securing the 2015 World Cup), and they felt as you do (allowing turmoil to come to the forefront now would seriously jeopardize that from becoming reality), they could have “given in” to the demands of both Morace and the women’s team. This has nothing to do, by the way, with whether those demands were reasonable or not – but rather only on whether they could have acted to avoid controversy. There are two possibilities that I can see where “they chose not to” is an incorrect inference. First, the CSA has no authority to “satisfy” the complaining parties – they were being asked to do something that falls outside of their mandate. Second, even if they conceded everything that was asked, the complaining parties would still be unsatisfied. This may be the case with Morace, although the article which PaulAB cites would suggest that she was being “unreasonable” rather than, “we gave her everything she asked for and she is still walking”. If the article which I linked to has any accuracy, the request by the women to get details on how the men are compensated for games played was denied. Assuming that this is true, I think it is safe to conclude that the CSA was willing to risk public conflict at an inopportune time. It is on this logic that I conclude that their actions have been guided by a different goal or principle than the one which you see as the most important at this time. Whether that is a more laudable goal or principle is not germane to this argument – only that it is not the same.

I am not trying to suggest that you change the direction of the dart that you are throwing - or not throw it for that matter. It simply appeared to me that there was nothing in what you said to suggest that that dart should not be thrown in a different direction as well. Hopefully this long winded explanation can help you to understand, if not agree with, that perception.

It is not a dart that I would be willing to throw myself. But, like you I think, I hope that everyone directly related is getting good advice. For me this means: “Here are the things which you should consider before you make a decision on what to say or do. Here are the possible negative consequences of that statement or action. Are you prepared to live with them and are they worth the benefits that may be accrued – either by you, the people or the organization you represent, and/or your country?” If they have conscientiously gone through this process, I feel that as a fellow citizen in a relatively free country, they should be allowed to act as the responsible adults they are. (I realize that Morace is not Canadian, but, in the end, I think that she must be allowed to act on her conscience as well.) I am far from convinced that this has occurred throughout this episode, but am clearly not in any position to make any real judgements on that account.

Ed Dick

[ThruBall]

Doug, take the guy's info or don't but do it intelligently. Psychoanalyzing every line is a little childish.

Ed Dick, that was well thought-out and I give you a lot of respect.

Rich, those demands for appearance fees were from back before residency. I'll comment on that in a minute.

Do you know that for a fact? Someone who knows a number of players asked me for advice a month ago on how they should handle themselves because a number do not have money because of the continual time commitment required by the coaching staff. My advice was approach the CSA and and tell them you are unhappy with the position you are being put in by the coaching staff and association and want to go public but don't want to threaten the hosting bid and would it be possible to receive some emergency funding until after March 4th when they would address it properly.

If they did that great, please let me know. If they didn't there is no excuse.

People think I'm pro-CSA and anti-players. I'm neither. I'm pro-women's soccer. I think our women deserve a lot more respect and I've been one of the only one's carrying that flag here for a long time. What I'm not is uninformed about women' soccer or about to praise anyone who holds the future of the game here and the enjoyment of all Canadians hostage. No one is bigger than the game or above the law.

We've come a long way in the past 25 years and the women today have things a hundred times better thanks to the hard work and sacrifice of hundreds of people. Players, coaches, administrators, supporters like yourself Rich and decent people like you Ed getting informed and asking the right questions. And yes, a very long list of CSA employees and committee members too.

A couple of pages back a player's Dad complained his daughter didn't have a professional teacher's salary and rued the CSA for it. If there was a single country in the entire world that our women could earn that salary in they would all be overseas like our men banking for their retirement from the game. They're not. There is no market valuation like that for Canadian women soccer players. And according to the team there is also no better full-time development option than what they get here either. That's pretty relevant.

Our men are together for brief random periods. With full-time programs in World Cup and Olympic years our women are spending about 60% of the year together. We spend nothing developing our men. They're forced to leave the country and are on their own to professionalize themselves.

If our women wanted true gender equity and to be treated like our men with a couple of camps a year for a couple of days each, but receiving better compensation for those few days all they had to do was ask. The CSA could have saved a lot of money that could have been moved into women's soccer infrastructure development across the country.

You can't benefit from the low-cost economics of women's soccer long-term encampment and at the same time from the high-cost economics of men's professional soccer appearance fees. Pick your poison.

The right answer is all three parties (coaching staff, CSA, players) appreciating the position each are in and coming up a solution that works. You can blame the CSA but it's a three-way street in terms of appreciating position. Like I said earlier, most people around the world do that civily. It's a real shame it's got to this point and the only party you don't see throwing anyone under the bus (yet) is the CSA. That's pretty relevant.

The last three people who took a stand for their rights and tried to get a CBA via counsel, boycott and the SDRCC were burned at the stake as witches and banished from Canadian soccer - by the association AND the players. That's another pretty relevant piece of the puzzle too.

The guy I really feel sorry for is Peter Montopoli, who's sitting in FIFA offices trying to demonstrate why we're worthy while a bunch of people who relish in being lauded as great Canadians can't accomplish the basics of putting the country first.

Actually Vic....I think you should know that some asshxxx has been publishing stupid comments under your handle.......

Hopefully you can get a handle on who that is.....

[ThruBall]

DougAB.......good input.....keep it coming.

[CoachRich]

Vic, awesome write as usual from you and your balanced approach in turmoil and support for women is always appreciated.

2002 U-19 WWC No Appearance Fees

With Charmaine, I'm pointing to 2002 while in Victoria which was before residency. I said, "Charmain Hooper revolts for appearance fees back to the U19 WWC".

2008 Lack of Olympic funding / Colin Linford Statement "your mens' team is the number one priority" / Chris Collie what WNT sponsors?

[CoachRich]

Thanks to navycyr for this link of Amy Walsh speaking to CBC Radio.

http://www.radio-canada.ca/sports/soccer/2011/02/08/002-walsh-canada-morace.shtml

Below is a GT of French to English translation. Although not perfect there are some interesting bits about Olympic appearance fees and how the CSA handles thing.

Few people are as familiar with women's soccer in Canada Amy Walsh.

In 11 years, Quebec has been called into national team 102 times. The system, she walked from base to summit.

In an interview on CBC Sports on Tuesday, Walsh has shown solidarity with his former teammates who are threatening to boycott the next World Cup in Germany. The national team players fully support their coach, Carolina Morace.

Although she spent some time under the leadership of Morace, Walsh believes that the Italian has brought squarely Canadian soccer to another level.

"At the camp I lived, it changed everything in terms of tactics," said Walsh. She even changed the players' nutrition. It was professional in every respect. One can see, by the way they play, the players are confident and effective. "

At the heart of the grievance of the players is how has the Canadian Soccer Association (CSA) to treat her senior women's team.

So Amy, CHA she demonstrates enough respect?

"No, not really, Walsh replied tit for tat.

"I spent many years trying to solve problems with ACS. We never tried to have the same pay as men. We did not want equality, but equity. We never had. "

Find a just form of compensation

Historically, the Canadian Soccer players complain about their compensation in the pharmacies of the ACS.

"For years, we sought to create a contract that would pay us in a cycle," said Walsh. We wanted to establish a reasonable budget with them. We know that there is not much money, but if you qualify for the Olympics or World Cup, is money that FIFA gave the Association. "

Without seeking the same amount to play for the national team than men, Canadian players have requested that the same spirit is respected for both groups.

"We wanted to be paid for every game like men, ensures Walsh. We said we would discuss it at meetings, but rejected the question all the time. It's downright disrespectful of the ACS. It's frustrating, even disgusting. "

And this reality has grown up resentment, the feeling of being "second class players."

"Behind closed doors, it seems that the team does not care because it is not that of men. "

But Canada Is not the only country in the world where the annual budget dedicated to women is more important than their male counterparts?

"If you look at the budget, yes. But the coaches will look for money in the program "Own the Podium" and Sport Canada. The Association reports that money in the budget, says Walsh. Basically, the ACS is very little money in the women's team. "

A new way to run?

February 5, the ACS has announced major changes to its governance framework. The news was greeted with enthusiasm by different observers.

For Walsh, it will take more than a structural change to shake the culture of members.

"In light of recent years, nothing tells me, as a former player, they (the directors of the ACS) will do better this time," she says.

In this context, it returns to the dispute surrounding the Beijing Games, where players of the maple leaf have not been paid.

"You will never receive money for that, Walsh resigned. We negotiate our fee for each event, whether the qualifications for the World Cup or the Olympics, and it's very tiring. Being one of the oldest players, I negotiated for the team.

"To Qualify (2008 Games), the ACS has given us $ 5000. In July, we wanted to negotiate an agreement for the Olympics (in August) that would have allowed each player to get an amount based on the result. A typical structure for a tournament like this.

"The negotiations were never made very far, because the ACS argued that the bonus of $ 5000 also covered the Beijing Olympics. "

Letters of attorney and numerous personal calls to the Association have not changed.

"They had the upper hand, we would not boycott the Olympics," she explains. We continued to fight. But at that moment was the day before our first game. Moreover, we have always fought for every penny from the Association. "

Children spoiled?

For its part, the ACS has often argued that budgets are sufficient in the current context, they compare favorably with those of other nations.

For example, it states that the team can prepare the next World Cup to the four corners of the planet.

"It's sad when you think about it, Walsh replied. It would be nice if Canada was able to play the girls in the country before the World Cup in Germany? But they do not have the budget to do so. They must spend almost six months away for their preparation. "

Canadian players are not pampered, they perfect their technique in football markets completely?

"The reason we played so many games away in recent years is that countries that receive us defray hosting costs. They pay to have us as adversaries.

"This is not a luxury, that's not it at all! "

[CoachRich]

just up -

http://tsn.ca/soccer/story/?id=353124

TORONTO -- There has been some progress in the impasse between the Canadian Soccer Association and the national women's team.

A compensation offer has been tendered to the team and the association says it hopes to meet coach Carolina Morace to hear her concerns. Morace announced Friday that she was stepping down after this summer's World Cup.

But some sticking points remain.

The women insist they want a long-term deal that "provides predictability" and to see the deal the association has with the men's team.

The CSA says sharing details of the men's compensation would violate "confidentiality agreements."

"Certainly we feel that we are entitled to see that information," said Jim Bunting, the lawyer representing the women in their compensation negotiations.

"And that it's important to us to understand what the arrangements are with the men's team when weighing and considering any proposal that's been put to the women's team."

The men's side lost a friendly 1-0 in Greece on Wednesday. Players asked by The Canadian Press about the women's impasse said they were unaware of the situation.

Bunting did say the fact an offer was on the table was "a step forward."

TSN story has been update, click here to cont'd

[wnt fan]

There is alot of talk about $1500/month or $18,000/year for players and how they want additional dollars for games played atc.

Alot of these players are on university scholarships and must retain amature status.

Does anyone know how the money applies to amatures?

[VPjr]

great posts Coach Rich, Vic et al.

I will always defer to the experience of the more senior V's when it comes to the women's game (BTW, by senior, I'm not implying you are old). I simply don't follow the women's game closely enough.

I know that CoachRich is correct....the women have been lobbying for stable/predictable compensation for a while. I don't think it is an unjustified request. I have a gut feeling that the CSA would have no issue with developing a funding formula to grant them this reasonable request.

I may be wrong, but as Vic pointed out, it feels like the issue is whether the ladies (and more importantly the coaching staff) are willing to sacrifice playing as many games and conducting as many training camps as they get now in return for the stable and predictable compensation agreement that the women want (and deserve). It would be nice to be able to say "we want both" and if I won Lotto Max, I'd gladly write a cheque to see that happen for this year. Since the odds of me being a big benefactor are slim, the question becomes "where does the CSA find the money" without cutting elsewhere. We do have to be realistic...there is only so much money to go around and the women's game doesn't generate much in the way of ancillary revenues (i.e. getting paid by a host country to play friendlies, like the MNT gets paid when they play away from Canada). I do not believe the WNT has a TV deal that could help bring in some extra money. It doesn't appear that there are alot of sponsors lining up to back the WNT and it seems unlikely that the provinces are willing to impose any further registration taxes. I'm at a loss to figure out where to get more money.

I'm sincerely curious to hear what ideas people have because I suspect that CSA people read these boards. Who knows....maybe someone has an idea that has been thought of yet??

[DougAB]

Duane,

Why have people made this a gender argument?

Worse, why is your CSA official making it a gender argument and what does this actually say about somebody who is supposed to be leading the game in this country?

Some observations from page 3 of the CSA 2010 Budget that you and your CSA official provided to us a few days ago:

Let’s look at the CSA’s 15 million dollar picture in 2010:

· Women’s and Men’s Senior National Team Programs costs = 2,752,000

· CSA Administrative costs = 5,048,000

· Technical costs (non-senior men’s and women’s national team costs)= 4,059,000

· Amateur Competitions = 2,494,000

· Canadian Professional Club Championship = 540,000

· Total CSA Budget 2010 = 14,893,000

Rather than you and your CSA official arguing over thousands of dollars this way or that for the Men’s and the Women’s Senior Programs, shouldn’t we instead look at CSA’s overall spending decisions?

Rather than pitting the Men’s Senior Team against the Women’s Senior Team, remember the Canadian Soccer Association’s goals for these two Programs are:

· The Men’s Senior National Team qualifies for the 2014 Men’s World Cup

· The Women’s Senior National Team is to medal at the 2011 World Cup and/or Olympics in 2012

These are pretty heavy goals considering that 2,752,000 was collectively spent on the Men’s and Women’s programs in 2010.

Is this expenditure amount in line with the CSA’s goals? There is no down year in football. What you do in 2010 impacts what you are trying accomplish in 2011, 2012 and 2013.

Is this really a men versus women’s senior national team argument or is more about the fact that the CSA choses to allocate most of its resources towards a disconnected and low functioning youth national team and NTC system, administration and amateur soccer?

Maybe the CSA should re-evaluate what the goals are for the men’s and women’s senior national team programs?

Duane, we request that you and your CSA official provide the 2011 CSA Board Approved numbers so that we can do our own critical thinking versus what you keep feeding us. The 2010 CSA Budget came out on December 5, 2009 so I would think that the 2011 numbers became available in December 2010 and therefore are readily available.

Thanks, Duane.

[Norma Rae]

Duane,

Why have people made this a gender argument?

Worse, why is your CSA official making it a gender argument and what does this actually say about somebody who is supposed to be leading the game in this country?

Some observations from page 3 of the CSA 2010 Budget that you and your CSA official provided to us a few days ago:

Let’s look at the CSA’s 15 million dollar picture in 2010:

· Women’s and Men’s Senior National Team Programs costs = 2,752,000

· CSA Administrative costs = 5,048,000

· Technical costs (non-senior men’s and women’s national team costs)= 4,059,000

· Amateur Competitions = 2,494,000

· Canadian Professional Club Championship = 540,000

· Total CSA Budget 2010 = 14,893,000

Rather than you and your CSA official arguing over thousands of dollars this way or that for the Men’s and the Women’s Senior Programs, shouldn’t we instead look at CSA’s overall spending decisions?

Rather than pitting the Men’s Senior Team against the Women’s Senior Team, remember the Canadian Soccer Association’s goals for these two Programs are:

· The Men’s Senior National Team qualifies for the 2014 Men’s World Cup

· The Women’s Senior National Team is to medal at the 2011 World Cup and/or Olympics in 2012

These are pretty heavy goals considering that 2,752,000 was collectively spent on the Men’s and Women’s programs in 2010.

Is this expenditure amount in line with the CSA’s goals? There is no down year in football. What you do in 2010 impacts what you are trying accomplish in 2011, 2012 and 2013.

Is this really a men versus women’s senior national team argument or is more about the fact that the CSA choses to allocate most of its resources towards a disconnected and low functioning youth national team and NTC system, administration and amateur soccer?

Maybe the CSA should re-evaluate what the goals are for the men’s and women’s senior national team programs?

Duane, we request that you and your CSA official provide the 2011 CSA Board Approved numbers so that we can do our own critical thinking versus what you keep feeding us. The 2010 CSA Budget came out on December 5, 2009 so I would think that the 2011 numbers became available in December 2010 and therefore are readily available.

Thanks, Doug.

I think you have hit the nail on the head Doug! Great comments.

[CoachRich]

DougAB,

I'm curious if you get the same take as me on comparing the CSA financials to the USSF financials when it comes to admin and program expenses ratio?

USSF Financials 2009

Cheers,

Neil

[DougAB]

Doug, take the guy's info or don't but do it intelligently. Psychoanalyzing every line is a little childish.

Vic,

You feel as though my analysis of Duane’s Feb 6th article (his words and the CSA Official’s words) was childish and unintelligently conveyed.

To you, you call it psychoanalysis; to me I was just being a critical thinker.

It is only when you open yourself up to critical thinking that you can then determine for yourself if there is adequate justification for you to accept the original claims/arguments or not.

I took some time to reflect upon what had been written and applied some of my own reasoning (and facts that I was aware of) to the claims, beliefs and issues that were being brought up by Duane and his CSA official source regarding Carolina Morace.

There was so much to analyze in just one short article; so many claims, hence the reason it virtually got picked apart line-by-line.

It is obvious to me that these word-of-mouth claims made by Duane and his CSA Official source regarding the “facts” in this article have been skewed.

My own critical thinking conclusion is that Duane and his CSA source have spewed several untruths and misleading bits of information about Morace.

So, Vic, how would you like me to “intelligently” post in the future? Am I supposed to “just take it or not” when it comes to other peoples claims/arguments/comments or do I actually get to form my own critical conclusion and join in on the debate?

[Marc]

Vic,

You feel as though my analysis of Duane’s Feb 6th article (his words and the CSA Official’s words) was childish and unintelligently conveyed.

To you, you call it psychoanalysis; to me I was just being a critical thinker.

It is only when you open yourself up to critical thinking that you can then determine for yourself if there is adequate justification for you to accept the original claims/arguments or not.

I took some time to reflect upon what had been written and applied some of my own reasoning (and facts that I was aware of) to the claims, beliefs and issues that were being brought up by Duane and his CSA official source regarding Carolina Morace.

There was so much to analyze in just one short article; so many claims, hence the reason it virtually got picked apart line-by-line.

It is obvious to me that these word-of-mouth claims made by Duane and his CSA Official source regarding the “facts” in this article have been skewed.

My own critical thinking conclusion is that Duane and his CSA source have spewed several untruths and misleading bits of information about Morace.

So, Vic, how would you like me to “intelligently” post in the future? Am I supposed to “just take it or not” when it comes to other peoples claims/arguments/comments or do I actually get to form my own critical conclusion and join in on the debate?

Your post wasn't at all analysis - it was a one-sided emotional response. Duane isn't a CSA apologist - he's a reporter reporting one side of the story - you don't have to like it or accept it (I certainly don't) but going after him is nothing but lashing out at the messenger and twisting yourself into a pretzel to invalidate his report in the process. Both sides probably have a point here and not recognizing that really only hurts our case.

[Bill Spiers]

For those interested in analyzing the CSA Financials in more detail, the CSA Pathway to Excellence document provides more of a breakdown. (See pages 15-21).

The 2010 budget figures - Revenue of $15,393,000 and Expenses of $14,893,000 - are the same as in the document posted earlier by Duane (in Canadian Soccer News).

While the Pathway to Excellence document projects budgets for 2011, 2012 and 2013, keep in mind that the requested player fee increases to support those future budgets were never approved by the membership. However, they do indicate how the CSA planned to allocate the increased revenue over their various programmes.

[CoachRich]

Thanks Bill and some of the numbers jive.

What scares me is when one looks at the following comparisons -

2010-2013 of CSA Forecasts -

- MNT compensation $2,832K vs WNT $400K.

- MNT expenses $9,204K vs WNT $6,308K

More concerning is -

If the CSA was going to include the OTP on top of the WNT expenses it should be included in the expenses and those expenses would be $1,075K higher each year or over the 4 years $4.300K higher but it doesn't look like it

Now if one takes out the OTP from the WNT expenses it shows what people have been concerned about in how the WNT is funded on a majority basis by it's external funding. Also, it shows the CSA insider is feeding us BS -

WNT expenses $6,308 - OTP $4,300 = $ 2,008 by 4 years = $502K CSA internal funds per year.

What we don't know about either the MNT or WNT is what their portions are of

- Sports Canada

- Sponsorship & TV

- Major Events

- Gate Receipts & Appearance Fees

- Other FIFA

I'm not an accountant so maybe someone else can have a wack at this but to me it ain't right :-(

[Mazha]

What's sad to me is that the girls have not been given their well deserved moneys for a job well done!!!

What's also sad is that THE COACH does not deem our country good enough to claim any kind of REAL residency.

A guest appearance, here and there, for a National coach, to me, is unacceptable.

I would also like to know why our national coach didn't do her "due diligence" in inspecting our CSA when she

accepted her position for our women's team.

All of a sudden she's bailing! To me "It's SKETCHY"

I sure hope the only fault she has with CSA is U-8 soccer. What else could it be? The girls certainly didn't sit

home all year.

[Vic]

You definitely are thorough Ed.

I think it is safe to conclude that the CSA was willing to risk public conflict at an inopportune time

If you're implying either Morace or the players offered an out this week or a way to work together to delay the embarrassment to our bid it would certainly put them in a better light. But I haven't seen anything to that effect. And if you're implying the CSA risked conflict because the players were unhappy, that's a bit of a blank cheque. Anyone with a grievance, real or imaginary, could employ any destructive act they choose anytime they like and claim the other side caused it.

they could have “given in” to the demands of both Morace and the women’s team.

Would that precedent not lead to a culture where terrorism and ransom is accepted? Do we want a national organization where groups operate and act under that principle?

If they have conscientiously gone through this process, I feel that as a fellow citizen in a relatively free country, they should be allowed to act as the responsible adults they are.

Most definitely. But if I used that in a homicide defense I don't think it would it free my client.

This all goes where it goes. I'll quote this a year from now and we'll measure cause and effect.

Neil, on the $$$ front. In one of the most bizarre announcements of the year BMO this week gave $1 million to UNB soccer. Their women's program won four games in 2010 with a roster of entirely NB players who represent 1.8% of the female players in Canada. If our women's program wants money that would be a very good place to look.

[paul-collins]

Money key to Canadian women's World Cup soccer impasse

MICHAEL GRANGE (Globe and Mail)

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/soccer/money-key-to-canadian-womens-world-cup-soccer-impasse/article1901232/

A few choice quotes:

According to the CSA and the players’ lawyer, Jim Bunting, an offer has been made and negotiations are on-going, but so far the players haven’t received what they want – a predictable stipend that will allow them to anticipate their financial needs year in and year out through the four-year Olympic cycle.

The Canadian women’s hockey team gets a stipend while training and competing for Canada, though Hockey Canada wouldn’t comment on the amount.

The soccer team is seeking compensation in line with what the men’s national team receives. While the CSA hasn’t revealed what the men get, executive secretary Peter Montopoli said Wednesday that the amount was based on revenues generated from ticket sales. It’s believed the men receive a predetermined fee per game played, believed to be in the low-four figures per appearance.

Comparing the two teams is problematic because the women’s team trains together three times longer than the men do, but Moscato says it seems reasonable that the women receive a comparable amount overall, even if it’s for more time spent training. “We’re not seeking the same arrangement,” she said. “But the bottom line should be the same.”

[Bill Spiers]

Why have people made this a gender argument?

You seem to be making this an issue of spending money on senior teams v. youth teams

Rather than you and your CSA official arguing over thousands of dollars this way or that for the Men’s and the Women’s Senior Programs, shouldn’t we instead look at CSA’s overall spending decisions?

Rather than pitting the Men’s Senior Team against the Women’s Senior Team, remember the Canadian Soccer Association’s goals for these two Programs are:

· The Men’s Senior National Team qualifies for the 2014 Men’s World Cup

· The Women’s Senior National Team is to medal at the 2011 World Cup and/or Olympics in 2012

These are pretty heavy goals considering that 2,752,000 was collectively spent on the Men’s and Women’s programs in 2010.

Is this expenditure amount in line with the CSA’s goals? There is no down year in football. What you do in 2010 impacts what you are trying accomplish in 2011, 2012 and 2013.

Is this really a men versus women’s senior national team argument or is more about the fact that the CSA choses to allocate most of its resources towards a disconnected and low functioning youth national team and NTC system, administration and amateur soccer?

Maybe the CSA should re-evaluate what the goals are for the men’s and women’s senior national team programs?

A lot of the discussion on this and other forums in the past has been on how ill-prepared our youth players have been when stepping up to compete on the international stage. This was most obvious at the FIFA U-20 Mens World Cup hosted by Canada in 2007. We can't write off our youth national teams - they will be our World Cup teams of the future! However, our youth national team programmes currently have been decimated by lack of funds. We need to find a way (i.e. additional revenue) to fund our youth development programmes as well. And this probably ties in with the other hot topic - governance reform. We need to get people on the CSA Board who have the credibility and the contacts with Corporate Canada to bring in additional sponsorship revenue so that the CSA doesn't have to rely on player fee increases as the only way to generate that additional revenue.

[hc1]

Random thoughts:

1) If the ladies had wanted to time this at the point where they had the most leverage, they succeeded. It appears that the CSA's plan is to say "heres a few thousand dollars extra - you should take it now and we will nail down a final agreement after the WC". I think the ladies realize that after the WC, they will have far less leverage. From a business standpoint - they appear to have timed it right.

2) It may be that the CSA was never given a final "settle this now, or we will escalate" notice - but if they didn't see it as a possibility, and have a plan in place to deal with it - then shame on them - thats poor management.

3) Although times are tight - there is still corporate money available. I think we all regularly see various corporate sponsorships still occurring regularly in other areas. This group of women is amazingly talented and play wonderful soccer and truly have a chance to be world champions. The fact that the CSA cannot put together multiple big dollar sponsorships is shameful. If the CSA cannot market THIS team at THIS time - then they simply do not have the skills & connections to do the job. Period. Whose ever job it is - should be fired. And frankly: if the person responsible cares for the game at all: they would have already stepped down for the good of the game, because its obvious that if they can't make the corporate world interested in this team - they don't have the skills to make it happen at all.

4) I'm a little confused about the "we can't tell you what deal we have with the men because its confidential". Surely if the CSA really was treating everyone fairly, they could contact the men's representative and request that they allow a representative from the women's side to view the agreement (as long as they too agreed to keep the details confidential). If someone the women trusted, looked at the agreement and said "I saw the numbers and the CSA has been telling us the truth - everything is fair" - then that issue would be solved. The fact that they are not looking for creative ways to overcome that issue, screams cover-up.

[Vic]

Regarding Bill's comment. Since September of last year our women have been together full-time and in a new continent every month. In the same half-year our men were together 2 days while our U20 and U17 women's programs have been reduced to one camp a year. Somewhat ironically a horrific scenario our women fought for decades to get out of.

[kj52]

You seem to be making this an issue of spending money on senior teams v. youth teams

A lot of the discussion on this and other forums in the past has been on how ill-prepared our youth players have been when stepping up to compete on the international stage. This was most obvious at the FIFA U-20 Mens World Cup hosted by Canada in 2007. We can't write off our youth national teams - they will be our World Cup teams of the future! However, our youth national team programmes currently have been decimated by lack of funds. We need to find a way (i.e. additional revenue) to fund our youth development programmes as well. And this probably ties in with the other hot topic - governance reform. We need to get people on the CSA Board who have the credibility and the contacts with Corporate Canada to bring in additional sponsorship revenue so that the CSA doesn't have to rely on player fee increases as the only way to generate that additional revenue.

Spot on Bill. That is the problem in a nutshell, we don't have the people running the CSA Board who can get the job done. As long as the CSA is Maestracci's personal toy all this discussion is to no avail.

[paul-collins]

All those games / training for women as compared to 6 (FIFA calendar) or 5 (CSA 2010 expense slideshow) games for the men. And yet the CSA will have spent the same amount in 2010 on each program (less the OTP funding). I guess one could argue you're getting value for money with all that activity.

You know, I find it surprising that as I try to find historical info, the only place I can get it is here on the V's site. Why would CSA bury / remove previous years' financials?

I found this http://soccer.loop48.com/down/csaAnnualReport2003.pdf which said they budgeted $2.9m on the national teams in 2003. Here we are 7 years on and we've not made any increases in our expenditures on the national teams? CSA revenues are up 50% from 2003 (almost $15m from almost $10m).

[Vic]

The link below is to a half-hour podcast of Americans Richard Farley and Jeff Kassouf who bring in John Molinaro of the CBC. It touches on a lot of different areas of the dispute from a general perspective. If you're mp3'd up on a long commute home, it beats the same old tunes.

http://worldsoccerreader.com/2011/02/csa-and-womens-national-team-at-loggerheads-equalizer-womens-soccer-podcast/

[Pete K]

Obviously there are so many different points to the story to comment on, as per this thread, but I'll focus on the financial side of things since we are now starting to discuss corporate sponsorships, money for youth teams vs senior teams etc.

For me, the question lies with, where exactly is all the money going? We have 400,000 girls playing soccer in Canada, paying registration fees etc. If even $20 of every registration fee was put towards the elite level of the game in this country (and as the buzzword at the youth level is "development", another relevant question at this point is development towards what?), that would be 8 million dollars for elite women's soccer. I think we could run a pretty fantastic pro-league, national team and have youth national teams with some quality funding. Instead, this money seems to pouf into thin air.

Recently on BC Soccerweb, there were published figures from BC Soccer's 2009 budget, 24% was spent on meals, accommodation and travel for their staff! (http://www.bcsoccerweb.com/articles-january/2011Jan22BCSoccer%20Finance%20CommitteeAppendix-DetailedReports.pdf) In Alberta I think I read something detailing $700,000 going towards the legal issues that the ASA were having.

My point is, is that there is so much mismanagement of money currently within the Canadian soccer system, and there seems to be no accountability to those that pay their registration fees as to how this money is being spent. If I was a corporate sponsor, no doubt having made money from making astute business decisions, investing in the black hole of the CSA and Provincial bodies, would be the last place I would put my money.

That all being said, again, in the name of transparency, I don't understand why it all can't be laid out on the table. Where exactly is the CSA spending the money? Just put it out there! Detailed line by line spending. Maybe then, the women will realize that they are off base with their demands and this gender equity talk is unwarranted. Or maybe we will see that they are well within their rights to the demands that they are making.

At the end of the day, the CSA had plenty of opportunity to sit down over the last 2 years to have a reasonable discussion with the women about the situation, but they chose not to. I agree with the assertion that this timing is not ideal, but at the same time, they received an offer for the first time from the CSA for compensation of some sort, within the week that this "mutiny" began.

Btw, just found a good interview with Moscato posted on a site I hadn't seen before- Our Game Magazine (www.ourgamemagazine.com)