CPL General

[Cheeta]

19 hours ago, Kent said:

If I am thinking of the same play you are, I don't think that game would have been improved with a handball call. I kind of hate how the interpretation of an "unnatural position" has come to mean "arms aren't glued to the players sides or behind their back". In what world is it natural to run around with your arms tucked in to your sides?

I am still firmly against VAR. Goal line technology is great, because it's a black and white call, but VAR I don't like.

I'm 100% OK with that.  100%.  And I'm a defender.  From the 1st day I learned to tie my boots up until the day I hung them up for good. 

I'll tell you what world it's natural to run around with your arms glued to your sides.  The one where you surrender a penalty if you've wings are no glued to your sides when the attacker makes to shoot inside the penalty area.  Just like any other law of the game.

It's not that complicated.  Defenders figure it out, or they don't.  

 

[Cicero]

1 hour ago, Cheeta said:

I'm 100% OK with that.  100%.  And I'm a defender.  From the 1st day I learned to tie my boots up until the day I hung them up for good. 

I'll tell you what world it's natural to run around with your arms glued to your sides.  The one where you surrender a penalty if you've wings are no glued to your sides when the attacker makes to shoot inside the penalty area.  Just like any other law of the game.

It's not that complicated.  Defenders figure it out, or they don't.  

 

That's fine when you're just jockeying, but is basically impossible when it comes to running at any pace, or jumping. We need our arms for balance and momentum.

[SthMelbRed]

People keep using "unnatural position", then argue what's natural or unnatural in different scenarios. The problem with that is that the LotG don't actually state "unnatural position" as a determinant for a handball offence. 

 

Law 12 says that it's an offence if you handle the ball when the position of your arms have made your body unnaturally bigger. That leaves scope for the referee to use discretion in each situation. In the Ottawa game, the referee made the correct decision not to award a penalty, as the player's arms were at his side, not increasing the silhouette of his body by being away from his body.

[Kent]

23 minutes ago, SthMelbRed said:

People keep using "unnatural position", then argue what's natural or unnatural in different scenarios. The problem with that is that the LotG don't actually state "unnatural position" as a determinant for a handball offence. 

 

Law 12 says that it's an offence if you handle the ball when the position of your arms have made your body unnaturally bigger. That leaves scope for the referee to use discretion in each situation. In the Ottawa game, the referee made the correct decision not to award a penalty, as the player's arms were at his side, not increasing the silhouette of his body by being away from his body.

I'm not sure what the difference is. Seems to me your body would only be made unnaturally bigger if your arms are in an unnatural position, and if your arms are in a natural position they would make your body either not bigger at all, or naturally bigger. It is good to get reminded of the official wording though.

[SthMelbRed]

7 minutes ago, Kent said:

I'm not sure what the difference is. Seems to me your body would only be made unnaturally bigger if your arms are in an unnatural position, and if your arms are in a natural position they would make your body either not bigger at all, or naturally bigger. It is good to get reminded of the official wording though.

The main difference is that it should preclude idiots like Danny Murphy talking absolute rubbish on Match of the Day after every handball decision that they don't like. In all seriousness, though, the difference between your hands being in an 'unnatural position' as opposed to making your 'body unnaturally bigger' makes a lot of difference to a referee when determining if they should blow for a handball. There are also guidelines related to proximity to the ball, and such, that referees are given which assist them in this regard.

[Cheeta]

Don't care.  It is what it is.  Deal with it.

I'm old enough to remember when there was only one match ball.  I'll old enough to remember when players wouldn't be stretchered off if they couldn't get up after 10 seconds and I'm old enough to remember when all sorts of justifications would be made for hand balls or "balls-to-hand" or whatever.  Not going back to those days.  Thank gawd.  

The laws are know.  The laws are simple.  Deal with it.   

Or don't and live with the consequences. 

Grrrrrr.... 

 

 

 

 

 

[Kent]

35 minutes ago, SthMelbRed said:

The main difference is that it should preclude idiots like Danny Murphy talking absolute rubbish on Match of the Day after every handball decision that they don't like.

Not sure if you are talking about the rule or VAR, but for me the existence of VAR being used in a game makes me more upset when I don't agree with a call than if there is no VAR. If there is no VAR I can give the ref the benefit of the doubt, because the game happens fast, maybe he didn't have a great angle on it, etc. When there is VAR and I know what they are looking at but their interpretation is different from mine, that's frustrating.

[Unnamed Trialist]

7 hours ago, Cheeta said:

I'm 100% OK with that.  100%.  And I'm a defender.  From the 1st day I learned to tie my boots up until the day I hung them up for good. 

I'll tell you what world it's natural to run around with your arms glued to your sides.  The one where you surrender a penalty if you've wings are no glued to your sides when the attacker makes to shoot inside the penalty area.  Just like any other law of the game.

It's not that complicated.  Defenders figure it out, or they don't.  

 

Larin this weekend was defending a corner, the ball went back to the edge of the box, and he charged out to challenge the attacker with both arms glued to his back. After giving up an unlucky penalty not doing that last week. Took him a week to learn, or at least get straight, as a striker normally defending selectively in the box.

[MtlMario]

On 4/16/2023 at 11:10 AM, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

...while mentioning Windsor, K/W and Kelowna instead. Maybe an oversight but given it's the one that on the surface should be most imminent it probably points to that not being viewed as likely to happen for whatever reason. Depressing to hear him mention the GTA because there is a lesson that should have been drawn from the York United experience in contrast with what unfolded in Halifax.

Well at least I was happy to hear him mention LAVAL for a Mtl area team.😁

[MtlMario]

.....and also happy to here that the league is (still) planning for 12 teams by 2026 (under the right conditions).

[Ansem]

State of the league

 

[Sonny Heung-min]

8 hours ago, Ansem said:

State of the league

 

When asked what are the likely expansion cities he mentioned in order:

Windsor

Kitchener- Waterloo

Kelowna

Province of Quebec (Laval in Montreal and Quebec City)

Greater Toronto Area

The order is telling to me as Windsor is officially announced, Kelowna is not official but in the press, but we haven't heard anything on Kitchener- Waterloo in the press but he mentioned it first, maybe that is further along that we know and something could be announced soon? He goes on to mention Saskatchewan with more details about positive progress at Prairie Land but noted the issues between "Regional partnership group" not getting along with each other. Seems like he was hoping the two parties would combine or come to an agreement.

He is predicting 4 new teams by 2026. From over analysing this interview and hopelessly reading into every word my best guess is:

Windsor

Kelowna

Currently unannounced expansion in Kitchener- Waterloo, Maybe Quebec City or Montreal

Saskatoon if they sort their shit out.

Thought it was an interesting interview would recommend.

[jonovision]

35 minutes ago, Sonny Heung-min said:

When asked what are the likely expansion cities he mentioned in order:

Windsor

Kitchener- Waterloo

Kelowna

Province of Quebec (Laval in Montreal and Quebec City)

Greater Toronto Area

The order is telling to me as Windsor is officially announced, Kelowna is not official but in the press, but we haven't heard anything on Kitchener- Waterloo in the press but he mentioned it first, maybe that is further along that we know and something could be announced soon? He goes on to mention Saskatchewan with more details about positive progress at Prairie Land but noted the issues between "Regional partnership group" not getting along with each other. Seems like he was hoping the two parties would combine or come to an agreement.

He is predicting 4 new teams by 2026. From over analysing this interview and hopelessly reading into every word my best guess is:

Windsor

Kelowna

Currently unannounced expansion in Kitchener- Waterloo, Maybe Quebec City or Montreal

Saskatoon if they sort their shit out.

Thought it was an interesting interview would recommend.

Very interesting. It's too bad Saskatchewan and Quebec aren't higher up the list, as they would make a big difference to some existing in terms of reduced travel and potential rivalries.

[EnigMattic1]

22 minutes ago, jonovision said:

Very interesting. It's too bad Saskatchewan and Quebec aren't higher up the list, as they would make a big difference to some existing in terms of reduced travel and potential rivalries.

I don't think it was a specific list. He mentioned Mississauga, Vaughan and Brampton when talking about the GTA, Laval and Quebec City when referring to Quebec and Windsor, Kitchener-Waterloo and Kelowna when talking about expansion sides that are "in play".  Much like an Edmonton return, Saskatoon were a topic on their own.

[EnigMattic1]

1 hour ago, Sonny Heung-min said:

When asked what are the likely expansion cities he mentioned in order:

Windsor

Kitchener- Waterloo

Kelowna

Province of Quebec (Laval in Montreal and Quebec City)

Greater Toronto Area

The order is telling to me as Windsor is officially announced, Kelowna is not official but in the press, but we haven't heard anything on Kitchener- Waterloo in the press but he mentioned it first, maybe that is further along that we know and something could be announced soon? He goes on to mention Saskatchewan with more details about positive progress at Prairie Land but noted the issues between "Regional partnership group" not getting along with each other. Seems like he was hoping the two parties would combine or come to an agreement.

He is predicting 4 new teams by 2026. From over analysing this interview and hopelessly reading into every word my best guess is:

Windsor

Kelowna

Currently unannounced expansion in Kitchener- Waterloo, Maybe Quebec City or Montreal

Saskatoon if they sort their shit out.

Thought it was an interesting interview would recommend.

Windsor is pretty much a done deal and so would Saskatoon be if they could sort their shit out. Kelowna seem to think they would be good to go by 2024/25. Personally, I would like a team in Quebec ahead of one in Kitchener-Waterloo, simply because Ontario already has a number of teams and Quebec is, as of yet, unrepresented.

[Kingston]

1 hour ago, Sonny Heung-min said:

Windsor

Kitchener- Waterloo

Kelowna

Province of Quebec (Laval in Montreal and Quebec City)

Greater Toronto Area

Windsor:  Somehow, I just don't feel this one.  I'd hope to be wrong if it happens but I have difficulty seeing them drawing well.  I lived briefly in the area and it seemed very Detroit-focused for sports  (although the Spitfires do draw well).

Kitchener-Waterloo:  An affluent, mid-size, rapidly growing region.  Build a stadium on the LRT or possibly even make a suitable arrangement with Laurier to use the 6000 seat University Stadium which is very near the LRT.  This one could knock it out of the park.

Kelowna:  I've visited but I don't know it well at all.  Is the city big enough?

Quebec City:  Please, yes!  By far the best option for putting a team in the province.

Laval and the GTA:  Please, no!  York 2.0.

[Ansem]

29 minutes ago, Kingston said:

Windsor:  Somehow, I just don't feel this one.  I'd hope to be wrong if it happens but I have difficulty seeing them drawing well.  I lived briefly in the area and it seemed very Detroit-focused for sports  (although the Spitfires do draw well).

They certainly capture enough population to make a club there viable. Outside of MLB in Detroit, there's nothing else in the area going on there in the summer and I doubt Detroit City FC would impact CPL (it would be another story if MLS was there). It's actually smart from the league to beat MLS to that area to allow a Windsor club to build and consolidate their fanbase.

 

34 minutes ago, Kingston said:

Kitchener-Waterloo:  An affluent, mid-size, rapidly growing region.  Build a stadium on the LRT or possibly even make a suitable arrangement with Laurier to use the 6000 seat University Stadium which is very near the LRT.  This one could knock it out of the park.

A new stadium would be needed, the league seems to have moved away from university stadium as they even hired someone who will be dedicated to infrastructure

 

35 minutes ago, Kingston said:

Laval and the GTA:  Please, no!  York 2.0.

I agree with Laval, don't cannibalize the market for AS Laval and FC Laval - let them have the Island and their own fanbase. Montreal Island makes far more sense as the island is much bigger than people realize and there's enough space for another club in the city.

The GTA being big and densely populated, from Mississauga to Brampton or even Pickering/Scarborough could work.

[Kent]

If York United ends up moving to Woodbine it would be just across the 427 highway from Mississauga. Just something to think about regarding a separate team being in Mississauga in the future. It might be hard for both to grow fanbases.

[Cicero]

1 hour ago, Kingston said:

Kelowna:  I've visited but I don't know it well at all.  Is the city big enough?

Haven't spent a lot of time there recently, but the immediate area is around 200,000 and the whole valley must be pushing 300k. It's more than just a vacation town these days, but the Okanagan's demographics skew toward retirement. The weather would be great for spectating. You might get a couple scorchers in the summer, but the temp dips pretty quickly in the evening as it's not usually humid. We may underestimate this factor from a viewing perspective. Being a fan of an outdoor sport in Hamilton, for example, is an exercise in enduring the elements. Kelowna would be dry and mild for most of the season.

I doubt it would rival Halifax fan-wise as there just isn't the same sort of hometown spirit. Also, traffic can be surprisingly bad for the size of city, so weekday games may suffer as a result. Not to support a certain poster's viewpoint, but the proximity to two other franchises would help reduce travel costs and I'm sure this must factor into the league's focus on where to place teams. There also isn't much competition for entertainment dollars. I would be cautiously optimistic that Kelowna could succeed.

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

4 hours ago, EnigMattic1 said:

Windsor is pretty much a done deal...

Do they have a stadium sorted out yet and a rich enough investor lined up? Think that's overstating things. K/W was all set to go in terms of having a would be investor for the launch but they couldn't get a suitable stadium deal sorted. The league didn't want to use the Wilfred Laurier U-Sports stadium and a local schoolboard (think anyway, memory getting hazy on this?) didn't agree to cooperate on a location that was reasonably near the LRT.  

[Unnamed Trialist]

On 4/17/2023 at 3:38 AM, Kent said:

I'm not sure what the difference is. Seems to me your body would only be made unnaturally bigger if your arms are in an unnatural position, and if your arms are in a natural position they would make your body either not bigger at all, or naturally bigger. It is good to get reminded of the official wording though.

That's a well expressed critique of the language used in the rule.

[EnigMattic1]

2 hours ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

Do they have a stadium sorted out yet and a rich enough investor lined up? Think that's overstating things. K/W was all set to go in terms of having a would be investor for the launch but they couldn't get a suitable stadium deal sorted. The league didn't want to use the Wilfred Laurier U-Sports stadium and a local schoolboard (think anyway, memory getting hazy on this?) didn't agree to cooperate on a location that was reasonably near the LRT.  

I meant done deal in terms of having the expansion license or whatever you want to call it. I hadn't actually heard anything about K/W until that interview.

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

https://northerntribune.ca/state-of-the-league-eight-big-things-the-cpl-commissioner-revealed/

[Shway]

3 hours ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

https://northerntribune.ca/state-of-the-league-eight-big-things-the-cpl-commissioner-revealed/

Quote

“It’s a place where we need to have a team,” echoes Noonan, explicitly earmarking Quebec City and Laval as potential areas. Also still on that list for expansion is the Greater Toronto Area, another item that has been discussed before. Here, Noonan believes that areas like Mississauga, Brampton, and Vaughan could sustain teams if the right partnerships and stadium conditions are met.

Honestly this is wishful thinking, go somewhere else. 

Can't be talking about "another" GTA team when the primary one needs to be sustained. 

It's a big maybe to Mississauga if they build a stadium....but Brampton would be a hard no because they are focused on building a cricket stadium. Vaughan sounds cute, but again would require a stadium and the league to allow teams to buy overpriced Italians. 

Give me KW, London, or Durham.

[fil]

On 4/18/2023 at 10:12 AM, Kingston said:

 

Kitchener-Waterloo:  An affluent, mid-size, rapidly growing region.  Build a stadium on the LRT or possibly even make a suitable arrangement with Laurier to use the 6000 seat University Stadium which is very near the LRT.  This one could knock it out of the park.

 

I highly doubt it. From looking from the outside it makes sense... but I would consider London being a better option.

KW has the issue of being just close enough to Toronto and Hamilton that the area can be seen as a cultural dead zone. Most people with a car will travel out of town for entertainment and sports. While their are alot of University students they are from out of town and don't feel connected to the area.

A personal note, I went to the soccer merchandise store by the old bus terminal. I asked if they had Canadian Premier League shirts. The young retailer wasn't sure what I was talking about. I was surprised his lack of knowledge on Canadian soccer. I thought for sure someone had asked this question before. Of course they only carry boring Adidas stuff, plenty of shirts for Euro Snobs to wear.