Jump to content

Canadian Premier League


ted

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Gopherbashi said:

Oh great, now BBTB is going to come back here and remind us about the time we were all convinced that it would be approved back in December, while he kept saying "We haven't heard anything yet so it must not have been approved" and we all shit on him for that line of thinking.

Thanks for nothing, Totera! :angry:

Nah let's just focus on the important things like the Simpsons timeline

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 10k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
8 hours ago, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

There are typically 12 venues max and FIFA weren't planning on increasing that with 48 teams, so think that means 2 Canadian venues is the maximum likely? BMO Field gets another extension up to 40k and the Big O gets the Pontiac Silverdome in 94 treatment? Suspect Vancouver loses out to Seattle in Cascadia venue terms. Nothing much happening in Hamilton, Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg, Ottawa and Halifax under that scenario unlike what could have happened with a solo bid.

Did you watch the press conference? According to reporters, Vancouver was mentioned numerous times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3:57 ''We need to close those voices down, we need to tell them to sit in the corner, be quiet, you have no say''

6:20 ''...so to the few naysayers out there, put the spotlight on them, embarrass them in a way that they understand how important this is to keep their mouth shut and understand this is the right thing to do''

Hilarious

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not new news... Paul Beirne said that at the Halifax information session. He said that there is an annual CSA meetint in May and that's the only time you can approve a new league. So this isn't a "Boom, Sources" type leak. Came from Paul Beirne himself at the meeting infront of a ton of random people. It all depends on if they are ready to go in time for May. If not then it will wait another year I assume. But I think the April 26th (I believe) date for Halifax council to decide on the Stadium will be telling. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Greatest Cockney Rip Off said:

I think they manage it but the city still owns it, can anyone confirm? Does anyone know if it still runs at a loss? 

Correct. It's city owned. Unlikely the city gives "exclusivity" clauses over that stadium

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, matty said:

Wolfpack play in blocks and they need to have the stadium free for almost the whole week in case they need to reschedule their games due to weather, broadcast changes or any "Act of God" otherwise they face sanctions. Basically a Toronto team based a Lamport would need to stay away from home for weeks at a time.

Did you just make that up or can your source this? As in, that other events can be scheduled when the Wolfpack are home. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, BradMack said:

This is not new news... Paul Beirne said that at the Halifax information session. He said that there is an annual CSA meetint in May and that's the only time you can approve a new league. So this isn't a "Boom, Sources" type leak.... 

Paul Beirne is the person to listen to and will give you the straight goods to the extent he can. Anthony Totera shouldn't be taken seriously as he is using this issue to publicize his podcast as much as anything else and probably isn't in the loop to any huge extent judging by how often he has been flat out wrong. If they need Edmonton and Ottawa for the so called soft launch I doubt it's happening until 2019 at the earliest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Big_M said:

3:57 ''We need to close those voices down, we need to tell them to sit in the corner, be quiet, you have no say''

6:20 ''...so to the few naysayers out there, put the spotlight on them, embarrass them in a way that they understand how important this is to keep their mouth shut and understand this is the right thing to do''

Life is so much easier when you can get rid of those dissenting voices and everybody has to slavishly follow the party line or else:

Alternatively, we can try to be truly Canadian about it and tolerate diverging opinions. If a new initiative is sound in its format it will win on the strength of the arguments.

Given the way the CSA has cosied up to the USSF-MLS-SUM axis over WC 2026 over the last year or so and has agreed to initiatives like Generation Adidas Canada and revised domestic player rules, it remains to be seen whether a CPL that is in direct opposition to MLS still fits their agenda. How exactly do you go about using a joint WC hosting that will be used to boost MLS in the USA to try to decouple from MLS in Canada and launch a rival?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Greatest Cockney Rip Off said:

Did you just make that up or can your source this? As in, that other events can be scheduled when the Wolfpack are home. 

My language is bad in that quote because it implies certainty, which I'm not, so forgive me for that but there is a rule in place called "primacy of tenure" for Rugby Football League. Failure to meet this could mean no promotion. Part of primacy of tenure in RFL includes to ability to meet the requirements of broadcast contacts. The broadcast element of the rule is an issue (also public info runs dry here because it's non-public contracts so I hope hearsay is ok for now as I'm just saying this could be an issue), apparently teams at the higher levels are needed to have their grounds open for the entire weekend (Friday to Monday) they're scheduled in case the broadcaster wants to move their game to a different time (with 24-36 hours notice of course) or weather is too shit or there is an emergency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, matty said:

My language is bad in that quote because it implies certainty, which I'm not, so forgive me for that but there is a rule in place called "primacy of tenure" for Rugby Football League. Failure to meet this could mean no promotion. Part of primacy of tenure in RFL includes to ability to meet the requirements of broadcast contacts. The broadcast element of the rule is an issue (also public info runs dry here because it's non-public contracts so I hope hearsay is ok for now as I'm just saying this could be an issue), apparently teams at the higher levels are needed to have their grounds open for the entire weekend (Friday to Monday) they're scheduled in case the broadcaster wants to move their game to a different time (with 24-36 hours notice of course) or weather is too shit or there is an emergency.

That would be the same for any Rugby League side yet Hull FC and Hull City have no problem ground sharing or playing with 24 hours of each other on the same ground. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Greatest Cockney Rip Off said:

That would be the same for any Rugby League side yet Hull FC and Hull City have no problem ground sharing or playing with 24 hours of each other on the same ground. 

I believe it's more concerning games broadcast on TV, not every game. Sorry if I'm a little unclear kind of out of it this morning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, matty said:

I believe it's more concerning games broadcast on TV, not every game. Sorry if I'm a little unclear kind of out of it this morning.

If TFC and the Argos can do it at one facility where both have television fixtures to fulfill, then there is no reason when the Wolfpack and a CPL club couldn't do the same. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...