Herdman new head coach

[Joe MacCarthy]

1 minute ago, Floortom said:

Managing a men’s versus women’s National team is very different. That’s not to say it can’t be learned and picked up (clearly Herdman has) but you’re gambling.

I think he addresses that in the interview

[frmr]

5 minutes ago, Floortom said:

Coaching the technical and tactical aspects for men and women is the same

Managing a men’s versus women’s National team is very different. That’s not to say it can’t be learned and picked up (clearly Herdman has) but you’re gambling.

What would said differences be in managing men's vs women's football?

[Sal333]

10 minutes ago, Floortom said:

Coaching the technical and tactical aspects for men and women is the same

Managing a men’s versus women’s National team is very different. That’s not to say it can’t be learned and picked up (clearly Herdman has) but you’re gambling.

Tell me what's the difference.

[Gian-Luca]

2 hours ago, Bison44 said:

Ughhh.  Still seems like a very big cop out for him to say most of the opposition he got was sexism/misogany from hardcore CMNT fans.  He makes it sound like no one had any problems with how and what he did with the womens program, and it was normal as pie to sack Zambrano (who they just hired) and bring him over.  He might be as good a coach as he tells you he is but I hope he didnt dislocate his arm clapping himself on the back.

I haven't heard the full podcast (only had time for the last 10 minutes as recommended by Free Kick) but I hope he didn't use either the sexism or misogyny to describe the negative reaction he got in some parts. It was a reaction that generally was based upon either how the hiring process was handled (which wasn't particularly transparent and involved suddenly removing a coach who had shown some progress for the team in the short time he was there versus the previous manager) or from a concern of his lack of experience in coaching the men's game. Given that Herdman has also admitted that he's made mistakes (especially during that 2019 Gold Cup) which have not been repeated because he's learned from the experiences that he previously didn't have (a circumstance also known in the trade as "inexperience") and given that the lack of transparency in the announcement with respect to the sudden dismissal of Zambrano (something that the likes of Kristian Jack also commented upon at the time), it was entirely reasonable and understandable for people at the time to be alarmed by & concerned with the hiring decision and the way it happened. This general reaction also had sweet F.A. to do "misogyny", although I shouldn't be surprised as one of the problems in the culture wars in modern times is that attack-laden words like the m-word get chucked about more often than grenades were during the Allied invasion of Italy.

 

 

 

[Gian-Luca]

39 minutes ago, Sal333 said:

Sorry, man, but you contradict yourself within the same sentence. You say it isn't misogyny but with the next breath you say he never coached a men's team. Let me ask you what's the difference between coaching men and women?

 

Well for one thing, the men's game has a club vs country dynamic (negotiating with clubs for the use of players, something that the Gold Cup suggests Herdman still has learning to do on with Kennedy's club effectively telling him to go take a jump in the lake when Kennedy was called but was held back by his club) which the women's game doesn't really have (especially given the high salary dynamic that comes with the men's club game). For another, the notion that the men are more egotistical and likely to get into violent/physical fights (whether with each other or with the opposition) than women is also a clear difference that we should be able to see for ourselves. It's nice that Herdman has curbed the fights within the locker room or the training pitch but the corollary is they happen once (if not twice) during game for the men's team. I don't ever recall seeing a similar stretch of games for women's team where they started a physical bench clearing brou ha ha every single game. I'm not complaining about that by the way, I love all the bench-clearing stuff, but it's a very observable difference.

Let me in turn ask the question - how does being concerned that a man lacked experience as a coach of the men's game translate into the person expressing this concern as having hatred or contempt towards women? If anything, a big part of the concern was that he'd not had the experience to handle what a bunch of egotistical pricks male soccer players can (in general) be on the belief that the level of arrogant machismo-laden dickheads in the men's game is far greater than it is on the women's side (despite the best efforts of the US Women's team in that regard over the past 10 years 😉)

Edited October 29, 2021 by Gian-Luca

[frmr]

27 minutes ago, Gian-Luca said:

I haven't heard the full podcast (only had time for the last 10 minutes as recommended by Free Kick) but I hope he didn't use either the sexism or misogyny to describe the negative reaction he got in some parts. It was a reaction that generally was based upon either how the hiring process was handled (which wasn't particularly transparent and involved suddenly removing a coach who had shown some progress for the team in the short time he was there versus the previous manager) or from a concern of his lack of experience in coaching the men's game. Given that Herdman has also admitted that he's made mistakes (especially during that 2019 Gold Cup) which have not been repeated because he's learned from the experiences that he previously didn't have (a circumstance also known in the trade as "inexperience") and given that the lack of transparency in the announcement with respect to the sudden dismissal of Zambrano (something that the likes of Kristian Jack also commented upon at the time), it was entirely reasonable and understandable for people at the time to be alarmed by & concerned with the hiring decision and the way it happened. This general reaction also had sweet F.A. to do "misogyny", although I shouldn't be surprised as one of the problems in the culture wars in modern times is that attack-laden words like the m-word get chucked about more often than grenades were during the Allied invasion of Italy.

 

 

 

Instead of listening to 10 minutes of the podcast and then writing a long post (followed by another) about what you hope was or wasn't said, you could just use that time to actually listen to the podcast and remove all uncertainty. It seems like you're more interested in giving it the old "boy I hope he didn't" than to actually listen to what has to say. Ah, this thread. Always makes me smile.

Edited October 29, 2021 by frmr

[Free kick]

14 minutes ago, frmr said:

Instead of listening to 10 minutes of the podcast and then writing a long post (followed by another) about what you hope was or wasn't said, you could just use that time to actually listen to the podcast and remove all uncertainty. 

There was nothing in the earlier parts of the podcast (ie.: before the last 10 mins give or take) that addresses the issues or concerns that people had surrounding his hiring at the time.  So GL didnt miss anything relating to this topic.

Edited October 29, 2021 by Free kick

[Bison44]

I did listen, and thats pretty much what he said, and he specifically pointed out hardcore fans as being the ones with the problems.  Which i dont like.  You want to say nani boo boo, i'm rubber your glue etc to the people who said you couldnt do it..fine.  Dont try and appoint a motive to the critisism to get media types on your side.  The usual slick talking, saying everything the interviewer wants to hear baloney you always get from him. 

He says attitude, excellence is the same (it is) but then he also admits men and women players are different (he was surprised at the fights, not used to that in womens game) then tries to shit on us, because some wondered if his methods would translate to success with men...who are different than women and he had mainly had success with women.  And if saying men and women are different is sexist, well then you and I dont even have common ground to begin a conversation.    

[frmr]

2 hours ago, Bison44 said:

Ughhh.  Still seems like a very big cop out for him to say most of the opposition he got was sexism/misogany from hardcore CMNT fans.  He makes it sound like no one had any problems with how and what he did with the womens program, and it was normal as pie to sack Zambrano (who they just hired) and bring him over.  He might be as good a coach as he tells you he is but I hope he didnt dislocate his arm clapping himself on the back.

Sorry, but this is fucking stupid. He says multiple times in the podcast that Davies and David deserve a lot of the credit, and he literally said "I wish I could take the credit" for the men's program's strides. As for the hire, he talks about how Canada Soccer saw a huge disconnect within the program after decades of failure and they realized that the entire program needed an overhaul—which is exactly what he did with the women's program in Canada and New Zealand. Was Zambrano a good coach? Yeah, he was pretty good. We were playing much better football under him than Benito, but he wasn't the person to overhaul the entire program. I don't know all the details about the hire and to be honest, I couldn't fucking care less, because at this point, it's very clear that Herdman was OBVIOUSLY the right choice for this program, and anyone who can't see that is a fucking moron. If you're a Canada Soccer supporter and you don't see that Herdman was the right man for this job, it's because you're choosing not to see it.

Even to this day, there is still stale emotional artifacts and people holding on to old irrelevant opinions about this or that that either don't fucking matter at all, or that were proven wrong. And yet they persist, like sour, rotting grapes. And I, as always, am amused by it.

[Gian-Luca]

13 minutes ago, frmr said:

Instead of listening to 10 minutes of the podcast and then writing a long post (followed by another) about what you hope was or wasn't said, you could just use that time to actually listen to the podcast and remove all uncertainty. It seems like you're more interested in giving it the old "boy I hope he didn't" than to actually listen to what has to say. Ah, this thread. Always makes me smile.

Not really since it took me about less than a quarter of the time to write those posts as it would have taken me to listen to another 40 minutes of the podcast, 40 minutes which I didn't have available to listen to as I have other things on the go at the moment. I decided to put my trust in what a couple of reliable posters posted.

PS, if you think those were long posts by my standards, then as Randy Bachman one sang, you ain't seen nothing yet baby!

[frmr]

4 minutes ago, Bison44 said:

I did listen, and thats pretty much what he said, and he specifically pointed out hardcore fans as being the ones with the problems.  Which i dont like.  You want to say nani boo boo, i'm rubber your glue etc to the people who said you couldnt do it..fine.  Dont try and appoint a motive to the critisism to get media types on your side.  The usual slick talking, saying everything the interviewer wants to hear baloney you always get from him. 

He says attitude, excellence is the same (it is) but then he also admits men and women players are different (he was surprised at the fights, not used to that in womens game) then tries to shit on us, because some wondered if his methods would translate to success with men...who are different than women and he had mainly had success with women.  And if saying men and women are different is sexist, well then you and I dont even have common ground to begin a conversation.    

This whole post can be summed up as the bolded part. The people who were against the hiring (in some cases strongly) were proven wrong—and people don't like to be proven wrong because it makes them feel intellectually inferior. If I was Herdman I'd be shitting on everyone I proved wrong as well. The fuck do you expect?

Also I like how you worded it as "because some wondered if his methods would translate to success with men". If that's what you call "wondering".. jesus, some of you "wonder" pretty hard. I love watching this narrative merry-go-round.

[Bison44]

 Herdman can go ahead, like i said nani boo boo all you like..he proved them all wrong, suck on it..do a couple victory laps etc etc.  But dont say the flack you got when you were hired was mainly sexist.  

[archer21]

5 hours ago, Bison44 said:

 Herdman can go ahead, like i said nani boo boo all you like..he proved them all wrong, suck on it..do a couple victory laps etc etc.  But dont say the flack you got when you were hired was mainly sexist.  

The criticisms about the hiring process may be valid, but the whole “never coached the men’s game” thing clearly has at least mild sexist undertones. Let’s face it, if a successful coach from the men’s game jumps to the women’s game, nobody will assume he’ll be unsuccessful because of the differences between men and women. The problem isn’t that they see the men’s and women’s game as different, it’s that the see the women’s game as inferior. 

[An Observer]

44 minutes ago, archer21 said:

The criticisms about the hiring process may be valid, but the whole “never coached the men’s game” thing clearly has at least mild sexist undertones. Let’s face it, if a successful coach from the men’s game jumps to the women’s game, nobody will assume he’ll be unsuccessful because of the differences between men and women. The problem isn’t that they see the men’s and women’s game as different, it’s that the see the women’s game as inferior. 

Actually, I would. I think the games are pretty different as is the talent levels and therefore the tactics.  Plus dealing with men and women is very different (as anyone who manages both in your career can attest). And I wouldn’t expect any successful men’s coach to necessarily make the jump.  Some would, some won’t.  Anymore than I would expect a successful men’s youth coach to always make the jump to coaching men.  
All that being said, I was one who was willing to give it chance when it was announced as I thought a program like ours with its limited resources was never going to attract a high quality international manager so why not think outside the box and take someone who has been successful from the women’s game, is known commodity to the association, has some novel management strategies and seems to be a great motivator. And it has worked so the risk was worth taking.  

I am bit bored with people always making assumptions about sexist undertones for everything.  Frankly, that’s sexist in itself.  To your point, if someone questioned whether a person could make the jump from the men’s game to the women’s, I doubt any of you would raise the sexist flag immediately unless it was patently obvious.

[El Hombre]

8 hours ago, Sal333 said:

Tell me what's the difference.

 

8 hours ago, frmr said:

What would said differences be in managing men's vs women's football?

While no post actually addressing these questions will be successful (because they're a trap), I just want to point out as someone who has managed teams for the last 15 years, there are differences between managing men and women.  Men (in general) have different motivations and motivators than women (in general).  Men (in general) respond better to different approaches than women (in general).  One is not easier than the other, they are just different.  Most managerial courses teach you that different people respond to different managerial strategies and this is one of the bigger delineators.

You find the same with coaches that only coach youth but then fail coaching adults (or vice versa) in a number of sports (paging Mr. Mitchell, Mr. Dale Mitchell....).  Or cross-culturally, when someone has only coached in one country but then needs to adapt to a new culture to coach elsewhere.

It's a valid question to be asked, at the least.  There were even odds that this experiment could've failed.  Luckily for us, he understood the intangibles and was successful.

[dyslexic nam]

8 hours ago, Sal333 said:

Sorry, man, but you contradict yourself within the same sentence. You say it isn't misogyny but with the next breath you say he never coached a men's team. Let me ask you what's the difference between coaching men and women?

I can understand the uproar if Herdman had decided to play women on the men's team but when it comes to coaching the same principles apply to men and women.

It isn’t contradictory at all.  Misogyny is literally the hatred of women.   It is massively ignorant and hyperbolic to characterize it as misogynistic when anyone expresses any degree of skepticism that success in coaching the women’s game may not be exactly the same as coaching the men’s game.  No one was implying that Herdman  didn’t have great accomplishments with the CWNT or that the success took place in a very demanding environment.  

I just think it is time to let the argument go.  Some on here have been big fans of Herdman’s appointment right from day one.  Awesome job. Take the W and know that you were right.  But to regularly recycle various iterations if “I told you so” seems unnecessary- especially when it mischaracterizes the stance of many who weren’t aligned with your thinking at the outset.  
 

[Sal333]

39 minutes ago, El Hombre said:

 

While no post actually addressing these questions will be successful (because they're a trap), I just want to point out as someone who has managed teams for the last 15 years, there are differences between managing men and women.  Men (in general) have different motivations and motivators than women (in general).  Men (in general) respond better to different approaches than women (in general).  One is not easier than the other, they are just different.  Most managerial courses teach you that different people respond to different managerial strategies and this is one of the bigger delineators.

You find the same with coaches that only coach youth but then fail coaching adults (or vice versa) in a number of sports (paging Mr. Mitchell, Mr. Dale Mitchell....).  Or cross-culturally, when someone has only coached in one country but then needs to adapt to a new culture to coach elsewhere.

It's a valid question to be asked, at the least.  There were even odds that this experiment could've failed.  Luckily for us, he understood the intangibles and was successful.

How did you go from "different people......" to different genders?

Also, claims have been made: example it is different managing men and women. Okay, you may be right. Then again you may be wrong. Here is an opportunity to educate us. But no. You claim we're setting a trap by asking how is it different. Now that sounds like dogma to me and I've attended enough Catholic mass in my youth to recognize dogma when I hear it.  

[Sal333]

42 minutes ago, dyslexic nam said:

It isn’t contradictory at all.  Misogyny is literally the hatred of women.   It is massively ignorant and hyperbolic to characterize it as misogynistic when anyone expresses any degree of skepticism that success in coaching the women’s game may not be exactly the same as coaching the men’s game.  No one was implying that Herdman  didn’t have great accomplishments with the CWNT or that the success took place in a very demanding environment.  

I just think it is time to let the argument go.  Some on here have been big fans of Herdman’s appointment right from day one.  Awesome job. Take the W and know that you were right.  But to regularly recycle various iterations if “I told you so” seems unnecessary- especially when it mischaracterizes the stance of many who weren’t aligned with your thinking at the outset.  
 

You've given a partial meaning of misogyny. Here are the complete meanings:

Oxford languages: dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women.

Merriam-Webster:  hatred of, aversion to, or prejudice against women

dictionary.com: 

1)hatred, dislike, or mistrust of women, manifested in various forms such as physical intimidation and abuse, sexual harassment and rape, social shunning and ostracism, etc.:the 

 

2)ingrained and institutionalized prejudice against women; sexism.

 

You completely gloss over the second meaning: prejudice against.

[VinceA]

The fact he was able to break up the cliques that were formed are huge.

This also lends further credence to how much better he's made playing for Canada feel. Now everyone wants to be a part of the program.

Imagine if we had youth camps how many young guys would probably immediately become smitten with the program.

[gator]

10 hours ago, frmr said:

Sorry, but this is fucking stupid. He says multiple times in the podcast that Davies and David deserve a lot of the  it's very clear that Herdman was OBVIOUSLY the right choice for this program, and anyone who can't see that is a fucking moron. If you're a Canada Soccer supporter and you don't see that Herdman was the right man for this job, it's because you're choosing not to see it.

 

Sorry but I have a problem with this statement and in fact with anyone who agrees with this, are we not entitled to our opinions on here and is there not supposed to be some respect among posters? Let's just kill debate because my opinion is right and everyone who disagrees is "a fucking moron", really? I hate to inform you people but managerial debates are the norm in every club and country in the football world and every other sport for that matter, I also do not like at all the labels put on anyone who dares question Herdman in any way! I personally was skepitical of the hire but have got on board and think he is doing well and as I have said before the book isn't written yet, when and if we qualify I am willing to give JH even more credit but in the meantime why would I bother participating in a debate or shaming session where if I have a dissenting view I am labelled many things that I am not and called a "fucking moron" which is endorsed by some respected members of this board?

Edited October 29, 2021 by gator

[youllneverwalkalone]

11 hours ago, dyslexic nam said:

it was reasonable hesitation that we were handing over the keys to our golden generation to a guy who had never coached the men’s game before.  

Davies was capped I suppose, but I don't think the Golden Generation was quite solidified in early 2018. Davies is at the Caps, David has yet to make his debut at Gent, Eustaquio hasn't commited, and nobody know who Buchanan is.

My hesitation was that he is so short. I don't trust short people. I know this is wrong. I'm working on it.

[Unnamed Trialist]

I see it like this

1-Herdman backstabbed a fellow CSA employee to get the CMNT job. That, of course, is not sexism. It is more like a macho power play. It also contradicts what he claims to be a key principle of his team philosophy: we don't fight amongst ourselves. He out-alphaed our then alpha. See how the men's game is different?

2-If you disagree with the above, that is fine, it is a question of interpretation. If you feel the ends have justified the means, that is fine as well. I personally do not, yet. I am getting there, because I see no need to harp on the past. I don't care if one player got into a fight with another in training, as long as they perform on the pitch. I also don't care ultimately if Herdman was underhanded about getting the job, as long as his teams perform on the pitch.

3-Ends justifying the means: but have they yet?

I find it odd that many are just assuming that Herdman got the W, or proved everyone wrong, or can strut about like a peacock as a former successful women's coach now doing the job for the men. First because he has had a long time to get this far, a lot longer than was afforded to his predecessor. If you get a job with a longer contract or term, we might suppose you will eventually figure things out if you don't at first. So: he didn't at first, with the Haiti result a failure. 

But most importantly so far: we are still a project and nothing is done yet. We have not qualified for Qatar, and it is still too soon to say we had a good qualifying campaign. We don't have the ends in themselves, never mind the ends to justify the means if that is what matters. 

4-The sexism card. I think I sort of covered that in 1-. He is defending himself from what he felt were unfair criticisms, all power to him. But like most of his discourse, hyperbole claims the prize. We don't even have a soccer press in the nation able to even formulate such an argument in a logical way in a public forum. There was not one major media outlet or soccer press voice to lay out the argument.

The guy had it easy: instead of arguing that he was unfairly criticised, he should be honest enough to admit that he has never really been criticised with any criteria, fair or unfair, in the Canadian sports press. Okay, maybe Haiti notwithstanding, the game reports did not leave the team in good stead. Apart from that, he's been pandered, let off easy, gets soft questions, and there is a lot of fawning. He's seen this for his entire tenure as CMNT coach. So don't overstate your defence, John, with "anyone who criticises me is a sexist pig" line, when you really haven't seen any offence worth worrying about. 

5-Is Herdman a successful coach? I am very optimistic, and I want him to prove to be a great coach for Canada. Great, a national monument. If we qualifying for Qatar I will say yes, good choice, everyone else no longer matters. If we get very close to Qatar, depending on extenuating circumstances (4th in the Ocho and then a hard home and away draw), I might still say the same, good coach (huge disappointment notwithstanding). 

So far we are doing well, but since we are in the middle of a campaign and nothing is definitive yet, I am not sure anyone is justified making the argument. We have done better than expected so far (though you could argue the two points in the US and Mexico were the ones we lost vs. Honduras, last place team), but are not there yet. But there are also objective reasons to be worried, like only scoring first in one of 6 matches. That suggests that the game plans are not working, because no coach goes into a game prepared to be in comeback mode.

But I see he has never been asked why his game plans at the start of matches are not going well and we've been forced into catch-up. None of the sexist pricks who dissed his appointment have even mentioned this by the way, even on this board most ignore it. You can't complain about unfair crititicm, sexist or however motivated, and then ignore the fact that perfectly fair soccer criticism is something you are mostly exempt from in Canada. 

[narduch]

17 minutes ago, gator said:

Sorry but I have a problem with statement and in fact with anyone who agrees with this, are we not entitled to our opinions on here and is there not supposed to be some respect among posters?

This poster does this everytime the Herdman topic comes off.

If you don't agree with him you are stupid.

[nolando]

2 minutes ago, youllneverwalkalone said:

Davies was capped I suppose, but I don't think the Golden Generation was quite solidified in early 2018. Davies is at the Caps, David has yet to make his debut at Gent, Eustaquio hasn't commited, and nobody know who Buchanan is.

My hesitation was that he is so short. I don't trust short people. I know this is wrong. I'm working on it.

[gator]

7 minutes ago, youllneverwalkalone said:

 

My hesitation was that he is so short. I don't trust short people. I know this is wrong. I'm working on it.