Should we have sanctioned D-3 football in Ontario in 2013?

[Juby]

It wasn't a "certain" comments section. It was in the comments section of the most recent CSN story on the CSL, where Juby has posted dozens of times.

that was a joke, everyone is aware...

Whatever snarkiness you're sensing from me is most certainly related.

For someone who only has a month to save the CSL season, you spend a ridiculous amount of time engaged in Internet flame wars with anyone who posts a viewpoint that even slightly disagrees with your own. And now you seem to be embarking down that same path with me.

That to me is the very definition of counter-productive.

I'm not for or against the CSL, although to me it's fairly obvious that a hiatus or regrouping is probably the minimum needed for that league to get its house in order. Match-fixing was only one of the many problems that plagued the CSL (although it was obviously the biggest and most worrisome), but you're too busy "trying to save the season" to have noticed that.

I won't bother engaging you on this forum past this post, at least not where the CSL is concerned. So take that as a "victory" or whatever, I don't really care. But if I were you, I'd take a break from posting.

How is not trying to change public opinion to a more reasonable stance going to achieve my goals? I don't have a whole lot of options but to call people and try and convince people one at a time to get involved in taking a more reasonable stance. Please enlighten me on how I can actually save the season?

The very definition of counter productive? HAHAHAHAHA, Counter Productive depends on your goals (which might be different person to person), doing nothing means letting everyone's apathy take charge and losing.

Why don't I just join all the other people lazy people who've tried nothin and are all out of ideas.

edit: I just wanted to add that: How exactly does a hiatus help catch the guilty parties (you can't entrap them, it's just spreading the blame around longer and ignoring...fitness), it's apparently fairly obvious why not playing is so useful, so please, enlighten all of us as to how not playing will magically repair match fixing issues (playing will create opportunities for entrapment which will hasten their downfall) and allow the CSL to fix itself when it for sure won't exist in 2014 (that's how convuluted your point is, 'they should give up so they have a chance even though if they give up, they'll never have a chance'. Maybe, and just hear me out, we should try regulating them properly for once...)

If you actual want to debate the issues, I will one by one either show you all the flaws in the faulty reasoning that's going around, from what's been exagerated (standards), to what sounds good but makes no sense (were talking the most extreme stance on match fixing of all the leagues affected? We, of Ontario D-3 semi pro) to whatever horse**** reason people tell themselves to avoid seeing playing as being important (after you give up the extreme position of nobody playing, I no longer have a point when there's another option but until then I have a valid point, sorry)..

[Juby]

I'm here to rattle a few cages

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YhmPhd-ojE

[Levi Oakey]

I guess I should stop beating my head against a brick wall. Maybe one last try.

How a league develops players is directly related to whether it is professional or not. Why is this concept so difficult to understand??!?!?!

You cannot develop professional players of college age or older in an amateur system. They need to be trained by professionals and paid (or at least financially supported) in a professional training schedule to prepare for a bare minimum of 20 games in a season against other professional clubs.

This does not and cannot happen in the CIS or NCAA or CSL or any other amateur league. Creating a false D3 league - "false" because any definition of D3 includes the word "professional" - will get us nowhere.

Honestly, I think we are on the same page, your just thinking I am coming from some wierd prism of soccer **edit, was distracted, I mean timewarp** .

Let me put it this way, using your nomenclature. Losing the CSL (former D3) is losing an amateur soccer league, CIS (defacto D3) can just pick up the slack . Is that better?

I would like to see a professional Canadian D3 soccer league with paid players and great opportunities (L1O??? maybe....). But that isn't here now, nor was it last year. So I don't see us as losing D-3 (again using your nomenclature) cause we never had it. Creating a 3rd Division of PROFESSIONAL soccer should be a priority.

[Juby]

Honestly, I think we are on the same page, your just thinking I am coming from some wierd prism of soccer **edit, was distracted, I mean timewarp** .

Let me put it this way, using your nomenclature. Losing the CSL (former D3) is losing an amateur soccer league, CIS (defacto D3) can just pick up the slack . Is that better?

I would like to see a professional Canadian D3 soccer league with paid players and great opportunities (L1O??? maybe....). But that isn't here now, nor was it last year. So I don't see us as losing D-3 (again using your nomenclature) cause we never had it. Creating a 3rd Division of PROFESSIONAL soccer should be a priority.

While I am aware your saying you think D-3 has to be fully pro (don't really want to get into a big debate here, I would like to point out that from a literal standpoint, the CSL is definately semi pro. The last few years has had around 15 teams and only one of the teams was completely amateur (St Catherines), North York of course would have been a few grand shy of even L1O standards. After that though, even failing CSA standards it would be a 'semi pro league' with the majority of teams paying out at least L1O amounts. I'm not saying it's the greatest semi pro league or anything but l when you have around 50 - 100 legitimate part time contracts, you are a semi pro league even if a few teams dink around (not that being a semi pro league impresses you but I'm argueing it's better then nothing).

[Trillium]

I responded that I have a month to save any sort of season and asked how giving up on a 2013 is productive for getting a 2013 season. I'm just saying this because I don't think the snarkiness is unrelated. (I'm kind expecting a bunch of prominent Vee's to try and tease me out of trying, it's happened before).

In what alternate reality do you have any ability to save the season ?

Are you a CSL executive ?

Are you an OSA Director ?

Are you on any official board or ctte in this dimension that has responsibility for soccer ?

If you are allowed to drink, get a bottle of good scotch drink it and see things in a different light.

If you think I am being cruel ... I am not .... next time I am down to TO... June 2 for sure ...we can meet up and I will stand you all the Glens needed to help you out.... that is a serious offer for a soccer intervention, cause right now I have the sense your in need of such a thing and your buddies at the CSL wont help you out.

[Juby]

No, I think your being a smartass who didn't bother to research much and makes snotty points to avoid getting tangled in the issues (how will getting drunk allow me to see the wisdom in letting match fixers get away by not playing this year (and not entrapping anyone before L1O starts).

No am not a CSL executive of an OSA Director. I am a Poli Sci major who actually understands the process of lobbying (meaning I met people, I don't just call whatever I am doing 'lobbying'.

Before I got involved, everyone on this board thought the desanctioning was a done process and that even though L1O failed to materialize another year, the CSA's and OSA's hands were tied by there own red tape.

People on this board were literally going around making comments based on the assumption the CSL was already a rogue league. So after it was finally revealled that this was an on going process, I started to personally lobby the people of these organization. I believe I have been having results because everytime I expose some information it get's released a few days later with a different spin through a media leak (Everyone thought there was no appeal process, a little while late we find out the associations knew about the appeals. Everyone thought the CSA hands were tied and that sanctioning the CSL in 2013 would affect L1O in 2014, I confirmed from Victor Montagliani that this was not true, and a couple days later that had to come up with new flimsier reasons built around the fact I had doggedly confirmed).

It's actually been extremly frustrating, despite how much evidence has exhonerated my point, I am still portrayed as talking **** by people who apparently want to help but never bother to read what's going on before they come at me. I am also tired of the Vee's trying to degenerate this into a conversation about me. I have been getting phony PM's for years dicking me around so the Vee's could put on a silly public show for the lurkers and all for the grand reward of bungling the match fixing scandal and wasting a season. I know you all don't see losing the season since you weren't going anyway but you don't seem to have the empathy to realize there are thousands of people who see you all giving away their season for a debate (the extreme side of your position doesn't even make sense, how are we gonna catch them before L1O without trying legitimate regulation first?).

The fact is, I have already proven both the CSA and OSA could act at any time without comprimising their 2014 stance (just try to actually regulate the CSL for once) when everyone thought this was over. I did this so that if we don't have a season, everyone will know the CSA and OSA were conciously making the extreme choice to not play at all this year(there hands aren't tied). I took away from them the option of looking good by doing nothing because I want to pressure them into action. Now if you read what I'm writing you'll notice I'm asking for help, we need more then one people making their voice heard.

and 'buddies from the CSL'? Just because your being snotty doesn't mean me argueing for any season suddenly is less relevant, thanks bud (btw, Grizzly often pretends were friends (we hate each other) so that he can pretend he's just reasonably talking to me about me while skipping the issues, I'm sick of Voyageurs Theatre, get new actors).

Btw, before I get back from work I hope you actually read it before you respond because I don't want to get into a five rebut debate here where I get you up to speed by repeating what's already written over and over again.

And thanks, I've admitted on numerous occasions I don't have the clout I'd like and that I need help in this but you act like I'm pretending to be a big shot and I'm supposed to just no care about a season because it means nothing to you? When the board doesn't realize I have valid and legitimate concerns just like them is just creepy.

[Redcoatsforever]

It's a strawman's poll with the questions intentionally skewing the results.

That's likely a big reason why people aren't responding to it.

Ding ding ding!

I mean seriously: "I would prefer no one be able to participate/enjoy any D-3 sanctioned football in Ontario in 2013"

This is basically like having a poll about ice cream, with the options being "chocolate", "chocolate, but I'm not happy about it", or "I don't think anyone should have any ice cream, ever, because I am a prick".

Just awful.

Oh, and also people aren't responding because they know that if they do they're just going to have the same shpeel thrown at them as they did in the other thread, and we're all more than a little sick of it.

[Trillium]

Juby in the Great tradition of Canada's best political minds...get drunk and think get some clarity.... your welcome to call me a smartass, but I suspect I have done more for the game in Ontario then you have, and I am certain I know the various regulations and rules of how to do things better then you do, again my offer is open when in Toronto let me take you out get you some of the Glens and educate you on how things really are.

PS Grizzly is probably one of the best friends you could manage to have going foward in your life, you might not want to blow him off so quickly.

Me.. you do not have to be friends with, just remember the respect you give is the respect you get.

[Juby]

??? Are you confused, you came at me with a big 'who the hell are you' post, you ended it nice but it was still just you trying to talk about me and skip the issues. You seem to ignore the way you just jumped at me without getting caught up to speed here, when you talk about respect.

Grizzly, only talks to me to be as rude as possible, except when he wants to put on show, then he acts like he's a good old friend who's just trying to talk about me instead of whatever topic it is. I just stop him ahead of time now by reminding him he's done it before. (That's why I roll my eyes when some Vee who I don't really know try to reason with me as a friend (I don't know them, it's a big silly show for the board (edit: That was mean, if your just a nice guy sorry, but PM if you wanna talk about me because I am also clearly a tad ?jaded?).

Also, you have once again skipped weeks of information before asking me questions with a bit of context. I even did explain it too you, like the 100th person but you just skipped all that because I got upset with you trying to talk about me instead of the topic.

If people want to talk about me, start a thread (call me a troll for all I care like I did bbtb). It might actually work better then the usual plan, you know: send Juby a PM from a respected Vee pretending to have pertinant information, and then in like a year it turns out the respected Vee was exaggerating the evidence (to making it up) and Juby starts talking about it again usually after the damage is done just to find out he's been duped. You guys literally keep doing this to me, and then you all make me look (and feel thank you very much) like **** because I am sick of being lied too. There are people here who hate me because I didn't start argueing their points after I found out they were lieing to me...(for real, like a thief getting angry when he's caught). You guys have only yourselves and your sneaky behaviour to blame for me not finding a whole lot to respect in many of you (in other words, stop all the clever high school gossiping game, it's seriously embaressing, and in some funny news, some of you are safe again but I still have all the PM's for a bit under two years ahaha, I think I'm just gonna download them so I can clear out my inbox (probably should have done that last time too)).

In a mild example, I have been hearing 'tip of the iceberg' for years, it's been used to blame everyone, I backed off at key moments on faith and now it's like everyone CSL is tainted when complicity was too high (and I mean that) but for sure well under 10% (no joke, probably less then 5%, only certain teams, only certain players on teams and only a few people of being so foolishly ignorant they can be blamed (I'll give most people credit though for not clueing in on the occasional oddity of what was obviously discussed secretly)

tbh your using the 'You don't know what your talking about but I do' arguement, maybe you should get specific. I actullay quickly shot off a few regulations that could actually be tried for once with the CSL:

But I guess it's just easier to say you know more then the person your argueing with and not get dragged into...a debate. By the way, didn't this start when you were trying to accuse me of pretending to be a big shot (I clearly wasn't) but now who is it that's bragging? Sorry, I'm a jerk, I edited the hell out of this so I hope you read it now.

[Juby]

Ding ding ding!

I mean seriously: "I would prefer no one be able to participate/enjoy any D-3 sanctioned football in Ontario in 2013"

This is basically like having a poll about ice cream, with the options being "chocolate", "chocolate, but I'm not happy about it", or "I don't think anyone should have any ice cream, ever, because I am a prick".

Just awful.

Oh, and also people aren't responding because they know that if they do they're just going to have the same shpeel thrown at them as they did in the other thread, and we're all more than a little sick of it.

Do you guys understand polls? lol, what are all the options I'm skipping eh? (like rocky road, pralines and cream, vanilla, dutch chocolate, your saying their's all these options, so what are they???? Before people believed there were only two options, L10 in 2014 and CSL in 2013, turns out there is a third option for both that you've all been ignoring. Sure I said participate/enjoy, but that was so all the forum sociopaths might gain the empathy to realize there taking something away from someone else instead of just doing something with no consequences.

This poll, despite what you all say, is still way more accurate then the entire discussion before I came along because it's not missing an obvious possiblity. Why don't one of you guys make the poll, the only thing you'll have to do is not lie (pretend like you can't have both CSL 2013 and L1O 2014). The three possibilities are still the same, (like what is the possibilty you want? No CSL and No objections? (sorry but that's not fair, you have to acknowledge the consequences of your action, which would be no one can enjoy/participate in sanctioned D-3).

I expect though you'll all just keep not really reading what I type and be as insulting as possible until, out of NOWHERE, I'll get angry back while talking to 8 people and you'll all act like I must have never had a point because I was no more above insulting people then most of you guys. You'll all freak out at this but your just angry that option you want is no longer shrouded in general statements, on it's own it's one of the two extremes and seems a little bitter (before when it was 'No CSL so we canadians can set an example to the whole world on how to handle match fixing', it wasn't accurate/realistic, it sounded nice but it was hiding the no one can play bitterness)

[Redcoatsforever]

You're missing my point. It's not an issue of the actual options, it's an issue of the phrasing clearly indicating your bias against the third option. Any reasonable, well constructed question isn't leading in this way. A good poll with your chosen options would be:

D3 in 2013?

1) The CSL should be sanctioned for 2013.

2) There should be a sanctioned D3 in 2013, regardless of which league.

3) There should be no sanctioned D3 in 2013.

Your framing of the question clearly biases the whole thing against the view you disagree with, and are subsequently misrepresenting as some monstrous ogre stomping on people's beloved CSL, which is why it's a strawman poll.

[Juby]

You're missing my point. It's not an issue of the actual options, it's an issue of the phrasing clearly indicating your bias against the third option. Any reasonable, well constructed question isn't leading in this way. A good poll with your chosen options would be:

D3 in 2013?

1) The CSL should be sanctioned for 2013.

2) There should be a sanctioned D3 in 2013, regardless of which league.

3) There should be no sanctioned D3 in 2013.

Your framing of the question clearly biases the whole thing against the view you disagree with, and are subsequently misrepresenting as some monstrous ogre stomping on people's beloved CSL, which is why it's a strawman poll.

While I agree (and already have) that I put the bias in there, it was so everyone fully realized the implications (probably at least a few thousand people, players, family, staff and fans would be disappointed) and I only object to your exaggerating it to be a huge bias and that it is a strawman poll. It doesn't force people to not make the choice, it just admits to the consequences but isn`t that fair(your joke example would have been 'hugely objectionable' but I don't think it's unfair to force people to admit if their beyond comprimising and it's implications)? I want to seperate this arguement from two sides so that people couldn't all hide amoung their two choices of far right(NO CSL) and far left(CSL CSL CSL) (sorry for that bias, I can't call myself far right even in an analogy).

I do want to embaress the people because too many people were hiding behind good philosophies that didn't hold up to scrutiny (like there is a risk of L1O losing, or we should take the most extreme stance of all the leagues involved for D-3 in Ontario, or that the CSL failing standardsbut ignoring they are still L1O quality so it's not like it's worse then nothing). I also generally worry about the first one, some people are scared the CSL will squirm away if they give it a chance but greater good stances(no season for L1O) like this reek of machiavellianism (which if anyone's taken an 'intro to poli sci' class (you should have read The Prince) is an effective but morally ugly rationale).

And I would like to point out that the people approving of the first option could be said to be embaressing themselves to some of you. I have seen it as the multi leagues option but it generally shows a let's actually fix the CSL and let it live past 2013 opinion. The CSL supporters have been characterized already, I'm sorry but your guys stance at least mildly also represents either bitterness, laziness or machiavellianism (I said mildly but like I said people in option one are written off as naive, ignorant and many other adjectives I'll let the opposition do for me)

edit: I didn't think I was going to be dewound from my angry self but sure enough. I am actually terribly reactionary (I respond in kind almost instictivly, it does go to all hell when I'm talking to a few people at once though) and believe it or not but I can actually be wound down almost as easily as I can be wound up (I just hate when someone snot-tags me first then pull's a Tim Duncan (What'd I do?)).

[Trillium]

??? Are you confused, you came at me with a big 'who the hell are you' post, you ended it nice but it was still just you trying to talk about me and skip the issues. You seem to ignore the way you just jumped at me without getting caught up to speed here, when you talk about respect.

So the issues, since you seem to have lost sight of them.

1. The CSA dumped the CSL, which had been dumped years before by the OSA.

2. The CSL being dumped by CSA ( for whatever rationale or reasons ) at the time of year it was done leaves the OSA unable to sanction the CSL because the existing regulations, and rules for league "Terms of League Operations" to be submitted and approved according to the published rules.

So the CSL arguments and the persons responsible for the D3 state of affairs is the CSA, if they have acted improperly the CSL should appeal the decsion by the CSA to its governing body FIFA, to date that has not been done.

Such things will not happen fast, and if the CSL does go to FIFA, it will cost money and time for organisations ( clubs in the league ) who do not have ownership status .

So if you are going to save the CSL and Division 3 level soccer in Canada for summer 2013 you should be talking directly to the people who run the CSA the provincial presidents in PEI, Alberta, B.C etc... and the executive board of the CSA, if you do have the influence you claim to lobby, then get yourself on up to Parliament Hill and talk to the Minister of Sport, hint he is from Brampton.

Maybe you should have been asking the CSL folks why they were not having the clubs in the league live up to the league Terms of League Operation, cause bottomline they did not meet the standard and finally the CSA pulled the sanction.

End of story ... except for the legal costs.

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

...So the CSL arguments and the persons responsible for the D3 state of affairs is the CSA, if they have acted improperly the CSL should appeal the decsion by the CSA to its governing body FIFA, to date that has not been done.

Such things will not happen fast, and if the CSL does go to FIFA, it will cost money and time for organisations ( clubs in the league ) who do not have ownership status...

CSN has reported that the appeal is going to the Sport Dispute Resolution Centre of Canada

http://www.canadiansoccernews.com/content.php?4358-CSL

CSN has learned that as a result of the CSA's unwillingness to move on the issue, the CSL is now applying to the Sport Dispute Resolution of Canada for mediation and then arbitration if necessary. A hearing is expected in early April. The CSL has start their launch date for the 2013 campaign as late April.

Two CSA sources re-affirmed that the CSA are committed to moving forward with their plans to build a national D3 league.

I posted in the other thread the part of the CSA's constitution that refers to that as the dispute resolution process between the CSA and its members:

http://www.cansoc.org/showthread.php?45949-CSA-cuts-sanction-of-CSL&p=480924&viewfull=1#post480924

The solution to how the CSL would have got sanctioned at the OSA level under the existing published rules appears to have been to merge it into L1O and rename the merged entity the CSL:

http://www.cansoc.org/showthread.php?45949-CSA-cuts-sanction-of-CSL&p=481020&viewfull=1#post481020

If the letters on the CSL's website are to be believed, for whatever reason the CSL refused to go along with that when the scenario was outlined to them by Victor Montagliani and Ron Smale at a meeting in late January.

[Juby]

So the issues, since you seem to have lost sight of them.

1. The CSA dumped the CSL, which had been dumped years before by the OSA.

2. The CSL being dumped by CSA ( for whatever rationale or reasons ) at the time of year it was done leaves the OSA unable to sanction the CSL because the existing regulations, and rules for league "Terms of League Operations" to be submitted and approved according to the published rules.

So the CSL arguments and the persons responsible for the D3 state of affairs is the CSA, if they have acted improperly the CSL should appeal the decsion by the CSA to its governing body FIFA, to date that has not been done.

Such things will not happen fast, and if the CSL does go to FIFA, it will cost money and time for organisations ( clubs in the league ) who do not have ownership status .

So if you are going to save the CSL and Division 3 level soccer in Canada for summer 2013 you should be talking directly to the people who run the CSA the provincial presidents in PEI, Alberta, B.C etc... and the executive board of the CSA, if you do have the influence you claim to lobby, then get yourself on up to Parliament Hill and talk to the Minister of Sport, hint he is from Brampton.

Maybe you should have been asking the CSL folks why they were not having the clubs in the league live up to the league Terms of League Operation, cause bottomline they did not meet the standard and finally the CSA pulled the sanction.

End of story ... except for the legal costs.

I don't want to be a dick but you have to get caught up before you come at me so that you understand what I'm saying instead of skipping most of it.

The crux of this issue is that the CSL has a good case for this year because they were led around to believe things were being worked out and then desanctiontioning came in mid febuary (which is pretty late). The CSL is probably screwed for 2014 though, so they cannot quit the 2013 season to fight the 2013 season because then they'll lose (they won't get their 2013 back in 2014 so they have to play, I just hope it get's sorted out before the season.

If your stance is standards we've done that dozens of times: Considering there would be no D-3 football at all and that the vast MAJORITY of CSL clubs are easily making proposed L1O standards (their defacto replacement in 2014) that it's not as though the CSL is a worse then nothing option. Literally, all but two CSL clubs easily make the standards that their replacements will have to achieve. But apparently their`s no wiggle room even when they realize they pulled the trigger a season to early (that`s it, mix a little bit of pragmatism into your stance for 2013, have leniency considering no D-3 football season is a big impediment to developement). Also, the CSA hasn't done much at all as far as middling punishments go, it's like the only weapon in the arsenal is a mace.

As far as I know, the CSL was 'dumped' by the OSA not to long after it was given CSA sanctioning out of silly drama way before any of this stuff was happening (for real, from what I hear that one is actually uber pathetic (CSLOSA phonedrama hurtfeelings) especially compared to like...today (I think it boiled down to someone not being called and feeling betrayed...).

The big point I have made (and other people have accidentaly proven for me) is that both the CSA and OSA has the necessary exective power, they can do almost whatever they want if they have agreement from all parties (the process would go forward until a review because everyone's on board). I have confirmed from Victor Montagliani that they could temporarily sanction the CSL for the 2013 season without comprimising their overall position (the only risk is the CSL doing a good job and changing peoples minds). However, without agreement, and with the death blow of putting their business on hold for the appeals process, generally the status quo would take over till the review process. So I am saying let's just go ahead and try to seriously regulate the CSL for practise alone this year instead of gearing up to not regulate them at all because your going to be kicking them out.

I am aware of the list of people I need to be talking to, sadly I only have the pull to connect with a solid handful (most of whom weren`t very helpful but are least aware that people are aware that they can act (their hands aren`t tied)) so I am here 90% of the time hoping to win over enough public support to get another handful (I never pretended to be a big shot, I've been begging for help for weeks). Please help, take the most anti CSL rhetoric you want but I want people to be aware they don`t have to throw away the season to get the results (with a season and some legitimate hard work it will hasten the results)

[Fort York Redcoat1555362293]

Ding ding ding!

I mean seriously: "I would prefer no one be able to participate/enjoy any D-3 sanctioned football in Ontario in 2013"

This is basically like having a poll about ice cream, with the options being "chocolate", "chocolate, but I'm not happy about it", or "I don't think anyone should have any ice cream, ever, because I am a prick".

Just awful.

Oh, and also people aren't responding because they know that if they do they're just going to have the same shpeel thrown at them as they did in the other thread, and we're all more than a little sick of it.

Well said.

The amount of frustration is palpable in here but successfully berating people into supporting ones POV is a rarity. A strawman poll definitely didn't help my confidence in the validity of this "debate" or discussion. More than one POV should be welcome at a debate or discussion. This insulting your audience is one of the worst examples of support rallying I've ever read.

[Juby]

Well said.

The amount of frustration is palpable in here but successfully berating people into supporting ones POV is a rarity. A strawman poll definitely didn't help my confidence in the validity of this "debate" or discussion. More than one POV should be welcome at a debate or discussion. This insulting your audience is one of the worst examples of support rallying I've ever read.

Like I said before, just because the third stance has more needless consequences then the other two, doesn't mean the poll is invalid, but may mean you might not like the extremity of the position most people have taken (anti-CSL and beyond comprimising).

I intended to prove that that was publically an indefensible position, and you all are upset that my point has been proven. Me burdening a poll with...real world implications is not 'straw man', it's a just a mild amount of bias (boo hoo, your not the one missing out on anything this year). Researching 'straw man poll' which seems to be a combination of sayings, I am not pretending to be stupid to advance my arguement. I am successfully making the extreme side of the arguement look unpopular (not even the whole side, just the tip needlessly creating collatoral damage). If more people voted then this would be evidence that the even the public wasn't even for being as extreme as the association (which is an important implication, at 20 ish votes it's not enough though, a tad popular for this subthread but we'd have to hit 50 for it be at all relative of general public opinion (but that would assume this place is popular in regards to canadian soccer, probably)).

edit: according to a wikipedia entry a 'strawman sockpuppet' would be decietfully argueing the oppositions point unwholesomely. I am only making the most extreme stance of the whole opposition look bad without completely degenerating their side, as well I'm not forcing anyone to be pro CSL at all. I'm also not being false about which side I am on. I am literally trying to point out the obviousness of just cutting off the too extreme 5% of a generally winning arguement (long term) for the good of achieving the realities of our goals, not at all making your whole side look wrong. But since someone already said 'straw man' I guess it doesn't matter whether it's accurate or not (the damage has been done).

[Fort York Redcoat1555362293]

Like I said before, just because the third stance has more needless consequences then the other two, doesn't mean the poll is invalid, but may mean you might not like the extremity of the position most people have taken (anti-CSL and beyond comprimising).

I intended to prove that that was publically an indefensible position, and you all are upset that my point has been proven. Me burdening a poll with...real world implications is not 'straw man', it's a just a mild amount of bias (boo hoo, your not the one missing out on anything this year). Researching 'straw man poll' which seems to be a combination of sayings, I am not pretending to be stupid to advance my arguement. I am successfully making the extreme side of the arguement look unpopular (not even the whole side, just the tip needlessly creating collatoral damage). If more people voted then this would be evidence that the even the public wasn't even for being as extreme as the association (which is an important implication, at 20 ish votes it's not enough though, a tad popular for this subthread but we'd have to hit 50 for it be at all relative of general public opinion (but that would assume this place is popular in regards to canadian soccer, probably)).

edit: according to a wikipedia entry a 'strawman sockpuppet' would be decietfully argueing the oppositions point unwholesomely. I am only making the most extreme stance of the whole opposition look bad without completely degenerating their side, as well I'm not forcing anyone to be pro CSL at all. I'm also not being false about which side I am on. I am literally trying to point out the obviousness of just cutting off the too extreme 5% of a generally winning arguement (long term) for the good of achieving the realities of our goals, not at all making your whole side look wrong. But since someone already said 'straw man' I guess it doesn't matter whether it's accurate or not (the damage has been done).

If you honestly feel you've proven your point then wouldn't your job be done?

Between your ridiculously skewed poll and your insulting and raving rants you're only making this discussion unattractive at best and unreadable at its worst.

Good Luck on using a skewed poll of 20 on a forum to sway anything.

So far what's happened has driven away 3 more teams from the unsanctioned CSL.

[JamboAl]

I'm a lot confused and maybe rightly so. The CSL is a business which requires sanctioning from a governing body. If the governing body/bodies won't sanction it, the business can't successfully exist without it. So why try to run a league for a single season with very little growth or prospects for the future? Wouldn't it be better to shut it down and try to come back with a better, more sound business model that can be eventually get CSA/OSA approval? Frankly, I don't see the problem and don't know why you (Juby) insist on going down this road?

And to answer the question, yes, I do want D-3 soccer in Ontario as a fan but not if the league is going to be dead in less than a year. As a business person, I wouldn't touch the thing with a 50 ft pole and I think a lot of the franchises that have pulled out in the past have seen the same thing.

And speaking of poll, why can we see who voted and which way they voted? Is that the default for the this forum?

[canadianfoot]

And speaking of poll, why can we see who voted and which way they voted? Is that the default for the this forum?

For safety reasons LOL

[ted]

Creating a 3rd Division of PROFESSIONAL soccer should be a priority.

Yes.

I see where the confusion has come from. Sorry I did not realize you were simply talking about keeping what already existed in some form.

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

I'm a lot confused and maybe rightly so. The CSL is a business which requires sanctioning from a governing body. If the governing body/bodies won't sanction it, the business can't successfully exist without it. So why try to run a league for a single season with very little growth or prospects for the future?...

The obvious conspiracy theory would be that $185 million generated in legal betting per season might motivate some people, but it seems far-fetched that the betting companies would meekly play along at this point and the RCMP and Interpol appear to be paying close attention now to what people get up to within the league, so I'd rule that angle out. Think it probably boils down to the way that people holding equity in the CSL as a business are losing something that they probably perceive as having a value running into low six figures along with effective control over who gets to operate at the D3 level of the sport in southern Ontario. Looks like they are not willing to walk away from that without exhausting the possible avenues of appeal. If the SRDCC sides with the CSA (not a lawyer but the way the CSA constitution reads to me I suspect they will) we'll soon find out how far the CSL equity owners are actually willing to go on this.