2017 Gold Cup Opponents

[Guest]

1 hour ago, mrstepp817 said:

I agree BUT they are at least members of FIFA who will at least follow the rules and if they don't there is recourse...FG isn't in FIFA so what is the recourse if they thumb their noses to everyone??? They make a mockery of the tournament.....

I understand that but what I am saying is they won't qualify anytime soon

[mrstepp817]

If CONCACAF bans the non-FIFA countries someone has to take their spots haha...I don't care who it is as long as they member nations in FIFA

[shorty]

Ok, for the other rules geeks out there... just scoured the regulations.  Although I may have missed something here are the relevant regulations that are likely under discussion today:

III.2.e  says it is the Gold Cup committee who is responsible for "judging infringements concerning the eligibility of players."   (I would assume this is why the refs have no authority to bar or pull Malouda from the field -- it is not their responsibility to do so.)

V.2.j says that "member associations agree to fully respect and comply with...FIFA regulations in relation to the eligibility of players."  (Here's the thing -- Article 10 of the FIFA statutes says that only one Association will be recognized per country.  FG (and Martinique and Guadeloupe for that matter) are French departments and so the one Association FIFA recognizes and to whom the rules apply is... France.  If you look at it from the point of view that all of FG's players would be eligible for France, including Malouda, they may have a point to make here.  Awkward, though, that the implication of this interpretation would be that France has two entries in the competition...)

V.2.1 says that member associations are responsible to "take all necessary actions for their players and officials to be bound by and comply with all the aforementioned statutes,...etc"  (If FG is arguing that they are not bound by FIFA rules as a non-FIFA nation they will argue that they did nothing wrong here)

V.2.2 says that member associations are responsible to "refrain from any illegal, immoral or unethical behaviour that damages or could damage the integrity and reputation of football...."  (notice, though it's the integrity and reputation of football generally and not the integrity and reputation of the tournament -- it's a higher bar to prove that FG has damaged the reputation of football generally when the issue at hand is a lack of clarity about what rules apply to them originating from the governing bodies of football itself)

IX spells out the powers of the discipline committee.  They can make a ruling with or without a hearing.  No appeal is allowed unless the sanction is a suspension of greater than 2 games/2 months or a fine greater than $10K for an association/$3.5K for a player.

XII.2 as already mentioned says that protest against eligibility of a players must have been made 48 hours before the start of the tournament (and which someone above suggested didn't happen.  If that's true, FG might escape on a technicality)

XV.a is the heart of the matter which is eligibility.  "Each participating Member Association shall select its national representative team from the best players who are nationals of its country and under its jurisdiction, and are eligible for selection in accordance with the provisions of the applicable FIFA regulations"  (Again, if FG argues that all its players are French-eligible this gets sticky)

Interestingly, I didn't see anything that referred to a forfeit or what the sanction must be or could be in the case of a member being found in violation of eligibility.  The 3-0 rule that everyone is quoting must be either a FIFA statute (which I didn't find searching their document) or maybe part of the World Cup regs... (?)  I think they might have a lot of freedom to craft whatever sanction they want. 

It would be SOOOO interesting (infuriating?) to be a fly on the wall today.

http://www.goldcup.org/en/regulations

 https://resources.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/generic/01/09/75/14/fifa_statutes_072008_en.pdf

[michaeltfc91]

there are 12 countries that make the semi final round in WCQ, they seem to be competitive, that could be a Gold Cup right there. Not to mention the power houses like Curacao, Nicaragua, Grenada, Guyana and Cuba that didn't even make that final 12 for 2018.

There are more than enough CONCACAF countries within FIFA for a solid 12 team Gold Cup, and I would rather have Aruba and Dominica in the tournament than Martinique or Brazil even

[Gian-Luca]

https://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2017/07/12/french-guiana-coach-jair-karam-decide-playing-malouda-worth-risk

 

 

[Ruffian]

15 minutes ago, Gian-Luca said:

https://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2017/07/12/french-guiana-coach-jair-karam-decide-playing-malouda-worth-risk

From this quote:

“But after analyzing and reading and knowing all these rules, we decided to take our chances for the second match.”

It seems they think they have some kind of argument that they may win.

[dyslexic nam]

1 minute ago, Ruffian said:

From this quote:

“But after analyzing and reading and knowing all these rules, we decided to take our chances for the second match.”

It seems they think they have some kind of argument that they may win.

As much as I despise the way this had developed, I despise Honduras even more.  Go FGLT! (French Guiana Legal Team)

[Gian-Luca]

Someone cross-posted this in the comments section on the MLS website - it was originally posted on the ESPN comment section. Not sure if it is 100% accurate or not but worth a read:

'I love that they played him. This is a guy who was born in French Guiana and had no FIFA recognition to play for his country in international competitions. They became quasi recognized by FIFA in 2013 in that they could win entrance to a FIFA competition. Malouda last played for France in 2012, 1 year before French Guiana became recognized. He then waited the 5 year period before the standard often employed in unofficially recognized international tournaments wherein a player who has previously played for a recognized country because their birth country was not recognized is then allowed to play. So for CONCACAF to turn around after Malouda helps French Guiana qualify for the Gold Cup with their permission and say he is ineligible, despite knowing the exigent circumstances as to why he is now playing for his birth country, is ridiculous. Either prevent him from playing in the Caribbean Cup in this first place, or recognize the circumstances and work with FIFA to allow the switch legally. 

Additionally, people saying that this either detracts from the Gold Cup's level of play, takes away opportunities from younger players, or that it would never happen in Europe are dead wrong. 

First of all, Malouda helped the team qualify over other teams and French Guiana has been competitive even against much better Honduras, so the standard of play has been increased by their presence in the tournament and with Malouda playing. Plus, he's a popular and talented player. 

Second of all, having Malouda participate has brought more opportunities for younger players of French Guiana. These players now get to play in the Gold Cup against the best CONCACAF teams and they get to have first hand experience of how to be a professional at that level with the direction of a Champions League winning player and World Cup Final participant.

Finally, to say this would never happen in Europe is an uninformed statement. First of all, multiple players have played for Spain officially and Catalonia unofficially. If Catalonia were made an officially recognized team in the future, do you think these players wouldn't want to play for their birth state? Additionally, Kosovar peoples are countryless in international play, so they are tied to Germany, Switzerland, Albania, and others. If Kosovo becomes fully recognized as a country and an official nation subsequently by FIFA, these players would jump to play for them as Xherdan Shaqiri has already stated. 

For me, this situation is not an uncommon one and should be dealt with in a reasonable manner. If your birth country was not recognized when you were called up to play for another country for which you are eligible, and your birth country later becomes recognized, you should be given the choice to make a 1 time switch, regardless of the number of caps for the previous country. 

I really don't understand handling the situation any other way, or the outrage over this particular instance.'

 

[apbsmith]

16 minutes ago, dyslexic nam said:

As much as I despise the way this had developed, I despise Honduras even more.  Go FGLT! (French Guiana Legal Team)

Honestly,  I think it could come back to my original 5%'er.

Looking like a true coin flip at this point.

If Honduras has access to the 23 man roster before the tournament and did not file a protest about his eligibility 48 hours before the tournament..... it could be interpreted that it did not even matter if Concacaf ruled him ineligible.  The onus is on Honduras to formally file the protest 48 hours before the tournament began. Re: a player's eligibility.

Ie: Canada names X player to it's roster. Concacaf formally and officially rules he is ineligible, based on a team formally protesting his eligibility based on the rules and guidelines. 

Looks like Honduras may have missed the legal guidelines formally protesting his eligibility!!!!

[Big_M]

If he was eligible for the Caribbean Cup he should be eligible for the gold cup as it is directly related. After that if there is a difference in the rules between the competitions that needs to be corrected they should do it later but for this case he should be allowed to play without any consequence

[apbsmith]

Trolling hard on that MSL website link, tried keeping my post as simple as possible LOL.  Be sweet if my post made it to the higher ups.  I'm all-in on trying to bury Honduras haha.

[to70]

I'm with French Guyana on this one. I'm not going to scour the rule books, but they have a precedent in some new nations recently. Take the example  of Kosovo who were allowed to field players that played full caps for other nations. For CONCACAF not to allow Malmouda to play in this tournament might not stand in the Sports Court of Appeals.

[Kent]

Kosovo is a FIFA nation though, so it's not entirely a like for like comparison. Catalonia isn't a FIFA nation, but also doesn't compete in official competitions, so also not like for like.

From the post that Gian-Luca found they say "If your birth country was not recognized when you were called up to play for another country for which you are eligible, and your birth country later becomes recognized, you should be given the choice to make a 1 time switch, regardless of the number of caps for the previous country." I would agree that this makes sense, but I'm not finding any support for the claim that "They became quasi recognized by FIFA in 2013 in that they could win entrance to a FIFA competition."

It makes sense that someone that used to play for Czecheslovakia, would then be allowed to play for the Czech Republic, for example, after the country splits and it's a FIFA recognized nation. But this case doesn't seem to be what is happening with French Guiana.

[Gian-Luca]

That fact that we're this late into the day after the game and no decision has been released is making me wonder if it isn't quite such an open and shut case that a forfeit is going to be awarded. They were extremely quick to issue a statement on this issue last night (which was just that it was going to be referred to a committee).

[Ruffian]

It is taking them a long time to come to a conclusion so I have to assume it is not cut and dry situation. Obviously there is still doubt in their and their lawyers minds as what is the correct decision.

[dyslexic nam]

7 minutes ago, Kent said:

Kosovo is a FIFA nation though, so it's not entirely a like for like comparison. Catalonia isn't a FIFA nation, but also doesn't compete in official competitions, so also not like for like.

From the post that Gian-Luca found they say "If your birth country was not recognized when you were called up to play for another country for which you are eligible, and your birth country later becomes recognized, you should be given the choice to make a 1 time switch, regardless of the number of caps for the previous country." I would agree that this makes sense, but I'm not finding any support for the claim that "They became quasi recognized by FIFA in 2013 in that they could win entrance to a FIFA competition."

It makes sense that someone that used to play for Czecheslovakia, would then be allowed to play for the Czech Republic, for example, after the country splits and it's a FIFA recognized nation. But this case doesn't seem to be what is happening with French Guiana.

I agree that the precedents are only partially analogous - but the overarching point I take away from all this is that it isn't a slam dunk that FG threw out the rule book and were knowingly handing Honduras a forfeit win (which is where my initial outrage was coming from).  In the end, Malouda's presence may or may not end up overturning the result and benefiting the pissbaggers, but it at least seems like CONCACAF has a very real decision to make - whether on the basis of procedure (the 48 protest issue) or principle (FIFA's allowance for a one-time switch for new nations).   From a V perspective, that is far better that Honduras having a 3-0 win practically in the bag before a ball was even kicked  - especially since we got to avoid facing Malouda in a game that ended up being a bit twitchier at points than many of us were comfortable with.  I even think CONCACAF has a vested interest in interpreting the rules in a way that doesn't make it look like a total shitshow.  That would mean that they have a strong incentive to rule in favour of Malouda's eligibility, since they themselves didn't prohibit FG from listing him on the roster.  Fingers crossed that the Honduras results stands.

[Kent]

4 minutes ago, dyslexic nam said:

the overarching point I take away from all this is that it isn't a slam dunk that FG threw out the rule book and were knowingly handing Honduras a forfeit win

Agreed.

I hope for the next Gold Cup they at least adopt a rule that they investigate player eligibility when they receive the 40 player rosters. I mean, why on earth do those lists have to be submitted more than a month before the tournament starts if they aren't going to do anything with it?

[Keegan]

I think FG has a pretty good case based off precedent. There is of course no direct relation, however the wording of the legislation leaves it open somewhat.. as we've seen there have been players cap tied to nations who have become eligible for another.  I don't think the wording is detailed enough to cancel the result.. and I think a court would rule the same way and they would question why a supposedly ineligible player was allowed to be part of a 23 man squad to begin with.  Concacafs decision to allow the roster was inequitable to FG as essentially it gave them a 22 man squad if he was in fact ineligible.

If the result stands it could be very interesting going into match day 3.

[Rheo]

The bottom line is that they (not sure who gets the official blame, organizers? CONCACAF?) messed this up big time.  I have no idea how they let it get to this but they did.  The reason it's taking so long is that they're trying to find the best solution that gives them the least amount of hassles.  Relistically though, there's no way to get out of this without taking heat and deservedly so.

[Keegan]

The best way out here is to let the result stand through interpretation since they already dropped the ball in letting him play. Fix up the rule book for years after so it is clear or just get rid of these non FIFA nations altogether.

[Unnamed Trialist]

I suppose it has been mentioned, but in fact, as the group stands, it does not matter much. At least to us. More so to CR, in fact.

As I see it, they should NOT count the administrative result as goals scored, they should keep them as +-0 and go from there. You can't have an administrative 3-0 count towards a tie breaker, though I think you can allow a win to do so. I am saying this as a matter of principle, as it won't affect us.

As we stand, we need at least a draw either way vs. Honduras.

A loss, even if they start with 1 point, means they beat us on the head to head, tied at 4 pts.

With them having 3 points and us 4, that does not change in the least. We still need at least a draw. 

[Keegan]

Well I think it's safe to presume that if this match is ruled a forfeit they go on to forfeit against CR as well. If it's a draw then the group is wide open and we still have a shot at first.

[maplebanana]

34 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

I suppose it has been mentioned, but in fact, as the group stands, it does not matter much. At least to us. More so to CR, in fact.

As I see it, they should NOT count the administrative result as goals scored, they should keep them as +-0 and go from there. You can't have an administrative 3-0 count towards a tie breaker, though I think you can allow a win to do so. I am saying this as a matter of principle, as it won't affect us.

As we stand, we need at least a draw either way vs. Honduras.

A loss, even if they start with 1 point, means they beat us on the head to head, tied at 4 pts.

With them having 3 points and us 4, that does not change in the least. We still need at least a draw. 

I could be wrong, but if the result stands and they are at 1 pt and -1 GD, we could lose by 1 to Honduras and still claim second. H2H doesn't count as a tiebreaker (according to wikipedia anyway). So a 1 goal loss to Honduras would mean we are sitting at 4 pts and +1, them at 4 pts and 0. 

Of course, a draw in either Malouda situation means we claim at least 2nd. 

[Bertuzzi44]

It seems as though CONCACAF made their bed when they allowed Malouda to play in the Caribbean Cup, which is a qualifier for the Gold Cup. Then, they allowed his name to be put on the provisional roster. To say he is ineligible now is definitely confusing.

Also, it's great that FG got a result against Honduras! It means they will fight hard in this case in order to have another meaningful game against Costa Rica!

[to70]

Then they shouldn't have allowed French Guyana in an official competition like the Gold Cup.. The blame for this is all on CONCACAF.