Jump to content

November friendlies


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 561
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The US and Canada should be playing a friendly against each in the US since we have so many US based players right now anyway. Its the only friendly which makes sense for either country right now. I h

Posted this in the Arfield thread, but Scotty mentioned that Herdman will be announcing a squad in the next two weeks. So, it sounds like a friendly is in the works: https://www.rangersnews.uk/in

I have an honours degree in Microbiology and Immunology from McGill.  So yeah, I know how viruses work as opposed to your opinions on virology. And for the record, I wants us to play a friendly i

Posted Images

A lot of this angst would have been eliminated if the CSA were a little more transparent with the fanbase. I'm ok with protecting the health and safety of our players, especially for a friendly, but why not disclose who  we were scheduled to play and where? The Vs support home games and their presence at every game at BMO/Vancouver has been significant... its clear the players appreciate it.   Communication with the fanbase is one aspect that needs to improve and it does not cost anything...in monetary terms at least.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kadenge said:

A lot of this angst would have been eliminated if the CSA were a little more transparent with the fanbase. I'm ok with protecting the health and safety of our players, especially for a friendly, but why not disclose who  we were scheduled to play and where? The Vs support home games and their presence at every game at BMO/Vancouver has been significant... its clear the players appreciate it.   Communication with the fanbase is one aspect that needs to improve and it does not cost anything...in monetary terms at least.

This thread would be dead, and a lot of people including myself would have nothing to say. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Shway said:

Okay cool, I'll tune into your Canada FC to hear your content.

Do I need to define the difference between a volunteer weekly radio talk show co-host and working journalist for you now, too? Or are you going to accept that I actually know what my job is and who I work for?

Do I get to just tell you what your job is, since we're playing this incredibly stupid game?

16 minutes ago, Shway said:

By using the same measures that Forge FC seem to be doing to ensure that none of their players have tested positive for C19. Reality is Jonathan, Alphonso, Atiba, Cyle, Scott, Manjrekar, Samuel and Miljan have all travelled to multiple European countries with their clubs and haven't got COVID.

Forge is following the guidelines set out by CONCACAF for the CL — the same tournament in which at least one game has already been postponed for positive COVID tests.

Similarly, Alphonso's own teammate Niklas Sule tested positive just two days ago despite the vast resources of Bayern Munich, the Bundesliga and the Champions League. But you're right, Davies didn't get it so it's totally cool.

24 minutes ago, Shway said:

If this is the case, then there should absolutely be no soccer allowed to play in the country at all. But there is, and they have outlined it in this link here. So why wasn't there a concern that stopped the CPL from successfully completing the Island games, or why is there no concern for kids returning to play recreational sport?

In case you missed it, my biggest point is that friendlies would require the CSA gathering players from different countries. These examples are not apples to apples, and in the CPL's case you know exactly the Herculean effort that was made to ensure a COVID-free bubble in PEI. That cannot be applied to friendlies on the other side of the world.

27 minutes ago, Shway said:

You're reaching, and i'm giving you answers.

It must be Opposite Day on this site. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MtlMario said:

Here's an idea. Why doesn't someone  (us or some reporter that covers soccer in this country) ask the CSA or JH or whomever knows about this supposedly friendly? Why all this F@#$%^g secrecy? This has been going on for as long as I remember and I'm in my 60's! Thank u thank u very much (TUTUVM).

What secrecy? The news release stated why the camp was called off, the issue is people don't believe the reasoning put forward. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, narduch said:

Come on. The Island Games only happened due to a $1 million sponsorship from PEI and a load of Covid protocols.

Its not the same as a NT friendly.

Do we know what the return on investment turned out to be for PEI? It is probably too early to tell but with all the influx of players, media etc I am assuming PEI got their $1M back and then some. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, BuzzAndSting said:

What secrecy? The news release stated why the camp was called off, the issue is people don't believe the reasoning put forward. 

People don't believe it because it does not make sense. It seems strange and raises many questions:

  • Why would they plan a European friendly, but then turn around and cancel their plans on the advice from experts?
    • Shouldn't they have just gotten that advice from the beginning? 
    • Did the advice change and if so why not mention that?
    • Assuming it was deemed to dangerous to play, what about the USA?
      • Maybe they were given different advice?
      • Maybe they were given similar advice, but the CSA give more weight to it than the USSF?
        • Would that not be more tempting if your plans were less-than-solid?
          • I would guess so, in which case fans would have appreciated them being more forthcoming. 

I don't think anyone is being purposely obtuse here. I think people are just trying to logically make sense of it. That is what I am doing anyways. 

Edited by Obinna
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, BuzzAndSting said:

What secrecy? The news release stated why the camp was called off, the issue is people don't believe the reasoning put forward. 

If I understand correctly.... The news stated: a "possible game" would be called off.  There never was an announcement of an actual game, with an actual opponent, or where this game would be held, it was all just hearsay after the fact. 

Hence people don't believe the reasoning put forward.  It's rather easy to understand the lack of trust, it stems from the lack of transparency.  It's years we're complaining about the lack of transparency, everything about CANMNT & CSA is secretive.  We're talking KGB level stuff.  

It's like your parents coming down Christmas morning and saying "we planned to buy you a game console, but we decided against it because we don't know if we'll still have our jobs a year from now".  It's losing a gift you never received, its only normal it causes trust issues.  There is no proof of this gift, or the effort, or the plan, just the notice saying "we decided against it without informing you".  Its seriously deranged and borders on mental abuse.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Boominbooty said:

Do we know what the return on investment turned out to be for PEI? It is probably too early to tell but with all the influx of players, media etc I am assuming PEI got their $1M back and then some. 

Probably too early to tell.

My family is planning to visit their onw day too!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Obinna said:

People don't believe it because it does not make sense. It seems strange and raises many questions:

  • Why would they plan a European friendly, but then turn around and cancel their plans on the advice from experts?
    • Shouldn't they have just gotten that advice from the beginning? 
    • Did the advice change and if so why not mention that?
    • Assuming it was deemed to dangerous to play, what about the USA?
      • Maybe they were given different advice?
      • Maybe they were given similar advice, but the CSA give more weight to it than the USSF?
        • Would that not be more tempting if your plans were less-than-solid?
          • I would guess so, in which case fans would have appreciated them being more forthcoming. 

I don't think anyone is being purposely obtuse here. I think people are just trying to logically make sense of it. That is what I am doing anyways. 

 

1 hour ago, costarg said:

If I understand correctly.... The news stated: a "possible game" would be called off.  There never was an announcement of an actual game, with an actual opponent, or where this game would be held, it was all just hearsay after the fact. 

Hence people don't believe the reasoning put forward.  It's rather easy to understand the lack of trust, it stems from the lack of transparency.  It's years we're complaining about the lack of transparency, everything about CANMNT & CSA is secretive.  We're talking KGB level stuff.  

It's like your parents coming down Christmas morning and saying "we planned to buy you a game console, but we decided against it because we don't know if we'll still have our jobs a year from now".  It's losing a gift you never received, its only normal it causes trust issues.  There is no proof of this gift, or the effort, or the plan, just the notice saying "we decided against it without informing you".  Its seriously deranged and borders on mental abuse.

I'm not challenging anyone who doesn't believe the reasoning put forward and I completely understand the issue and it's context. I was just pointing out that the CSA did issue a press release and stated their reasoning behind not holding a camp in November. They weren't being secretive unless you expect them to release every detail related to the cancelled camp, which they've never done, they never will and I'm not sure why they would other than to appease the 50-100 of us who post on this board.

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, BuzzAndSting said:

 

I'm not challenging anyone who doesn't believe the reasoning put forward and I completely understand the issue and it's context. I was just pointing out that the CSA did issue a press release and stated their reasoning behind not holding a camp in November. They weren't being secretive unless you expect them to release every detail related to the cancelled camp, which they've never done, they never will and I'm not sure why they would other than to appease the 50-100 of us who post on this board.

Appreciate you clarifying you are not challenging anyone per se, but how can you be sure they are not being secretive? Just because they give a reason publicly does not mean it was the reason internally.

We know they are well within their right to keep their actual reasons internal, but a lack of transparency does reflect poorly on them. Their inability to arrange a game (again) also reflects poorly on them. Either way, it reflects poorly on them.

I can understand their temptation not to acknowledge their failure publicly, but I would respect them much more if they did. I am sure I am not alone on that.  

Edited by Obinna
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Obinna said:

People don't believe it because it does not make sense. It seems strange and raises many questions:

  • Why would they plan a European friendly, but then turn around and cancel their plans on the advice from experts?
    • Shouldn't they have just gotten that advice from the beginning? 
    • Did the advice change and if so why not mention that?
    • Assuming it was deemed to dangerous to play, what about the USA?
      • Maybe they were given different advice?
      • Maybe they were given similar advice, but the CSA give more weight to it than the USSF?
        • Would that not be more tempting if your plans were less-than-solid?
          • I would guess so, in which case fans would have appreciated them being more forthcoming. 

I don't think anyone is being purposely obtuse here. I think people are just trying to logically make sense of it. That is what I am doing anyways. 

False. Such a friendly was never planned, and nothing was ever officially announced. If you're really trying to be "logical", then you would realize all the subsequent points you're trying to infer follow from a non-existent/false premise... 

Edited by LeoH037
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am disappointed there isn’t going to be a November camp. But reading through this thread is exhausting. It sounds like some people are saying the CSA should have released records of communications (emails, phone conversation recordings, etc) with other FAs and venues to show they were trying to organize a friendly. Plus they should also release not just the health recommendations the CSA were given but also the recommendations the USA were given and if applicable, the USSF’s reasons for ignoring those recommendations, and if those recommendations differed, then probably an in depth analysis of which recommendations were likely superior than the other. Ideally they would also show us the financial records of CONCACAF Nations that have scheduled friendlies in November.

Did I miss anything?

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, LeoH037 said:

False. Such a friendly was never planned, and nothing was ever officially announced. If you're really trying to be "logical", then you would realize all the subsequent points you're trying to infer follow from a non-existent/false premise... 

Semantics. They planned to play a Friendly, but they never had a concrete plan in place, obviously.

I was not inferring there was a concrete plan in place, just to clarify. 

So not a false premise. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Kent said:

I am disappointed there isn’t going to be a November camp. But reading through this thread is exhausting. It sounds like some people are saying the CSA should have released records of communications (emails, phone conversation recordings, etc) with other FAs and venues to show they were trying to organize a friendly. Plus they should also release not just the health recommendations the CSA were given but also the recommendations the USA were given and if applicable, the USSF’s reasons for ignoring those recommendations, and if those recommendations differed, then probably an in depth analysis of which recommendations were likely superior than the other. Ideally they would also show us the financial records of CONCACAF Nations that have scheduled friendlies in November.

Did I miss anything?

Not sure if you are disagreeing through sarcasm or you really believe people want the CSA to say that, but either way you are missing the point entirely.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, kacbru said:

What is to be lost if the CSA were to say: "Unfortunately, due to health concerns, our planned friendly with country X has been called off."  Is that commercially sensitive?

Also missing the point. The point is that we are not taking the CSA at their word. Why? Because It doesn't make sense. I laid out why in an earlier post. I would love if someone went through my reasoning for flaws. I am open to changing my mind. @LeoH037attempted, but he misinterpreted my first premise to be false and tore everything else down based on that.

Can anyone else have a go at it? I would rather someone point out how I am wrong convincingly than to view the CSA in the way I currently do. They have a track record with not being transparent, or at the very least a reputation in the minds of many.

Edit: Do you knw what, never mind. Nobody really knows except the CSA. The rest is speculation. I have my own opinions, and so do others. It's all good. No response to this required.

Edited by Obinna
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, RS said:

Let's put it in much simpler terms: The Portuguese FA wasn't able to stop Cristiano Ronaldo from contracting COVID in their European-only camps. What makes anyone here think that the CSA, operating from a different continent and in a totally different financial stratosphere, would be able to do better?

Keeping players from contracting and spreading the virus is the CSA's concern. That becomes incredibly tough without a significant financial outlay, and even then it's still possible for someone to catch it. You can agree or disagree with how much it would affect players in their 20s and 30s, but ultimately it doesn't matter as it's the choice that was made.

Exactly. And even if the CSA could pull it off: what Canadian MNT player, with a career in Europe on the line, is going to risk (at worst) getting COVID or (more likely) a quarantine period just to show up for a camp?  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Real Marc said:

Exactly. And even if the CSA could pull it off: what Canadian MNT player, with a career in Europe on the line, is going to risk (at worst) getting COVID or (more likely) a quarantine period just to show up for a camp?  

 

Doesn't seem to bother usmnt players. Or anyone else for that matter.

In the spirit of this thread im going to find a guy today with a going out of business sign on his front window and scream at him for going out of business 

Edited by SpursFlu
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Real Marc said:

Exactly. And even if the CSA could pull it off: what Canadian MNT player, with a career in Europe on the line, is going to risk (at worst) getting COVID or (more likely) a quarantine period just to show up for a camp?  

 

All of them who were called and accepted.

But who knows, maybe the CSA actually couldn't find enough players interested in playing during COVID?

Which would obviously be a repudiation of our program, since many other countries are playing. That would definitely be a first, but this is Canada. Nothing would surprise me lol

Edited by Obinna
Link to post
Share on other sites

This whole thing is just ultimately embarrassing, and it's a testimony of how the Canadian Soccer Association has been running for years. Some of you guys have been following the NT for 25+ years and witnessed a lot of failure with no change, and have accepted whatever we'll be, we'll be the futures not ours to see que sera sera bullshit. 

Bottomline I can't accept complacency, and this is exactly what is being continually portrayed. 

We are going to be playing some serriousss catch up more than we already had, but I guess the mindset is "we have two of the best young players in the world, we'll be alright".

Edited by Shway
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Shway said:

This whole thing is just ultimately embarrassing, and it's a testimony of the Canadian Soccer Association has been running for years. Some of you guys have been following the NT for 25+ years and witnessed a lot of failure with no change, and have accepted whatever we'll be, we'll be the futures not ours to see que sera sera bullshit. 

Bottomline I can't accept complacency, and this is exactly what is being continually portrayed. 

We are going to be playing some serriousss catch up more than we already had, but I guess the mindset is "we have two of the best young players in the world, we'll be alright".

The same voices on this board who accept the cancelling of the November window plans "due to COVID" do not seem to interpret this as complacency. Interestingly, they are also some of the strongest pro-covid voices on this board.

I cannot help but see a connection there, but perhaps that is just me...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...