CSA vs Government/Parliament of Canada

[trosenoff]

 

 

 

Looks like Canada Soccer execs are going to have to face off vs the same parliamentary committee that Hockey Canada had to deal with. Will FIFA view this as potential government interference in footballing affairs?

Edited February 14, 2023 by trosenoff

[Dominic94]

Who cares if they do, the corruption is too widespread. Interference was needed.

[Shway]

Interesting.....what will FIFA say?

[trosenoff]

3 hours ago, Dominic94 said:

Who cares if they do, the corruption is too widespread. Interference was needed.

Not in disagreement of that point, but it should be noted that other national FAs, like Zimbabwe and Kenya are banned by FIFA due to the government investigating and attempting to replace the leadership the FA. Even the Spanish government was given a harsh warning from FIFA when it’s sports ministry tried to replace the president of the RFEF

 

Edited February 14, 2023 by trosenoff

[SthMelbRed]

FIFA only gets involved if the incumbent regime asks them to. Do you think that Bontis and Cochrane are going to call Vic and ask him to arrange for some FIFA veiled threats to be made?

[Gian-Luca]

Here's how I'd like to imagine the hearing going:

Q. Why aren't you funding the Women's national teams more?

A. In part because your government isn't giving us enough money to support these teams properly. They are spending taxpayer money on parliamentary hearings asking us silly questions instead.

Q. Ok, next question - why did you spend so much more money on the Men's team than the women's team in 2021?

A. In part because your government refused to let the men's team play its home games in Canada, so we had to spend a fortune housing them in the US instead, including the cost of renting stadiums for our "home" games when we had some nice shiny ones sitting vacant back in Canada.

Q. Ok, but since you keep saying the CSA is committed to equity, shouldn't you be spending the same amount of money on the women in any given year, regardless of the circumstances?

A. Fine, give us another 6 million and we'll be happy to send the women's team to go play in places like Haiti in the midst of a civil war for no readily apparent reason. Although it's going to be tough to re-create the pandemic conditions, I'm sure the women will be all to eager to go play there. We'll also try to set up a friendly with the Iranian's women's team, but we'll make sure to do it in Iran so that you can't cancel it, and besides we hear that women are treated really well over there. Maybe you could get Jessica Chastain to do a ceremonial drop ball kick.

Q. Ok, hang on, I'm sure I can find a point of attack that actually works. Do you think its correct that funds are going to subsidize players playing in a professional men's league?

A. Just as much as we think that it's right to subsidize players playing in the NWSL, which we've been doing since before the CPL kicked off.

Q. Damn it! Okay, hearing adjourned.

[Obinna]

This makes me nervous.

First of all, I want the CSA to be transparent, but on their own accord. Maybe that was never going to happen, but like others suggest - FIFA doesn't like government intervention.

Secondly, another layer of concern here is that focus is going to be exclusively on women getting resource equity, not the general ineptitude that comes from the CSA, including the lack of transparency. If we are going to risk FIFA's wrath by the government getting involved, I want to at least see us get to the heart of the issue that is the CSA, not just nibble around the edges on the gender issue (which is beginning to feel "politically driven" with the tone of that tweet by the NDP). 

Thirdly, is the Canadian government going to legally force the CSA into equal resources here? People seem to forget that equity can result in less resources to the men and women, not more, and since you cannot squeeze blood from a turnip that may be the outcome here. 

[Obinna]

55 minutes ago, Dominic94 said:

Who cares if they do, the corruption is too widespread. Interference was needed.

I am not optimistic corruption (or potential corruption I should say) is going to be the focus, even though it should be in my opinion. The focus is going to be resource/pay equity, I imagine. Should be interesting to see how it all shakes out, either way. 

Edited February 14, 2023 by Obinna

[Sal333]

19 minutes ago, SthMelbRed said:

FIFA only gets involved if the incumbent regime asks them to. Do you think that Bontis and Cochrane are going to call Vic and ask him to arrange for some FIFA veiled threats to be made?

It all depends. If there's corruption to be seen and the rot has spread far and wide, yeah I can see Bontis calling Vic.

[Dominic94]

And now the CSB wants to volunteer money……

[Ansem]

This is sheer stupidity. There are more urgent matters and people in need in this country than this. This is where it stops being cute.

What a waste of time and misuses of resources.

This is a joke

[Gian-Luca]

1 hour ago, Obinna said:

This makes me nervous.

First of all, I want the CSA to be transparent, but on their own accord. Maybe that was never going to happen, but like others suggest - FIFA doesn't like government intervention.

Secondly, another layer of concern here is that focus is going to be exclusively on women getting resource equity, not the general ineptitude that comes from the CSA, including the lack of transparency. If we are going to risk FIFA's wrath by the government getting involved, I want to at least see us get to the heart of the issue that is the CSA, not just nibble around the edges on the gender issue (which is beginning to feel "politically driven" with the tone of that tweet by the NDP). 

Thirdly, is the Canadian government going to legally force the CSA into equal resources here? People seem to forget that equity can result in less resources to the men and women, not more, and since you cannot squeeze blood from a turnip that may be the outcome here. 

I don't know that FIFA will mind a hearing happening if that's all it amounts to being. But you have correctly hit it on the nose - this isn't about a lack of funding, the government are making noises about doing a hearing because the women are playing the gender card, and politicians who presumably know nothing about soccer or don't follow it closely are falling for it.

I mean, if they have a hearing and find out some actual evidence of the implied sexism/misogyny then fair enough, but the evidence presented thus far is completely unconvincing. The imbalance in spending in 2021 seems readily explainable when extra matches and a ton of extra traveling required by the men is taken into account (the women had fewer matches and I think only had to travel 3 times outside the country the whole year). Janine Beckie complaining that the men got to travel first class to the World Cup, so the North American based women should get to travel to the She Believes Cup first class as well...I mean doesn't anyone else spot that maybe the bigger difference is not between men and women but that the men's World Cup is slightly more important and high-profile than the She Believes Cup? And this is what's being cited (along with the women having the hardship of having to share a room with a teammate in the US while the men got a room of their own in Qatar) as evidence of inequitable treatment between the genders?

There is of course no equivalent "He Believes Cup" or even a "He Isn't Quite Sure but is at Least Keeping an Open Mind Cup", so it makes equivalent spending comparisons fraught with difficulty, but come on, the CSA is supposed to splurge on a glorified friendly tourney to the same extent as they would for a World Cup? The scary part for me is that I can see certain people with no interest in sport but every interest in political issues answering "Yes" to this question

Edited February 14, 2023 by Gian-Luca

[Vasi]

2 minutes ago, Ansem said:

This is sheer stupidity. There are more urgent matters and people in need in this country than this. This is where it stops being cute.

What a waste of time and misuses of resources.

This is a joke

Its the minister of sport. They give money to the csa. So its not a waste of ministries time. Its actually part of its responsibility. 

Now if another ministry would get involved, you would be corect. 

You are right that our govt wates resources on shit that does not benefit a single Canadian. But that's a  discussion for another day. 

However this is gotten very interesting. Also things are moving. The CSB has come out with a statement. Looks like they are willing to talk. 

Things need to change, its unfortunate that this way changes will come.

But its the CSA's way. Chaos. 

 

[youllneverwalkalone]

49 minutes ago, SthMelbRed said:

FIFA only gets involved if the incumbent regime asks them to. Do you think that Bontis and Cochrane are going to call Vic and ask him to arrange for some FIFA veiled threats to be made?

[SpursFlu]

Peter Julian is a massive tool. Whatever position he takes on any topic is likely dead wrong 

 

[DoyleG]

How will this turn out?

Hedy Fry as Chairpeople should tell you all that.

Notice that Chris Bittle is on there, he accussed a law professor as racist because the professor didn't agree with a media bill.

https://www.stcatharinesstandard.ca/news/niagara-region/2022/08/30/bittle-apologizes-for-unfounded-and-inappropriate-tweet-after-online-feud-with-law-professor.html

Also, noted that Housefather looks like a ventriloquist dummy. So accurate given his track record.

 

 

[SpursFlu]

Our government is investigating suspected corruption? 😆 

 

 

 

It says here you took 5 billion dollars to fund a separate business.. oh wait, 5 million dollars.. you guys dragged us in here for 5 million dollars? What is this amateur hour?

 

 

 

 

Edited February 14, 2023 by SpursFlu

[GasPed]

I too am somewhat worried by this development, partly because we just had an inquisition/censure of a national sports body (Hockey Canada) on a gender-based issue, and I'm concerned there will be a (natural) spillover to this one.  😐

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

It was always the CWNT angle that was going to come back and bite them if nothing was done about a women's pro league. The deal with CSB actively drains money that could have been used to fund the CWNT out of women's soccer to prop up a struggling men's pro league. The optics of that in gender equity terms are horrendous and that speaks volumes about what the culture of the CSA was like back around 2018 when the deal was signed.

[SpursFlu]

This all clearly has to do with Sinclair doing everything to move the CPL out of the way so she can launch a terrible soccer league. Next up.. Kangaroo court with the silk scarf brigade asking all the questions. Should be a joke of the highest order

[Unnamed Trialist]

1 hour ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

It was always the CWNT angle that was going to come back and bite them if nothing was done about a women's pro league. The deal with CSB actively drains money that could have been used to fund the CWNT out of women's soccer to prop up a struggling men's pro league. The optics of that in gender equity terms are horrendous and that speaks volumes about what the culture of the CSA was like back around 2018 when the deal was signed.

I agree. The perspective we (maybe not you) have of how things developed with the CPL, which was not malicious or slighting towards the women's game, won't be appreciated by parliamentary committees.

@trosenofffix the thread title please, it's embarrassing.

 

[Stryker911]

13 hours ago, SthMelbRed said:

FIFA only gets involved if the incumbent regime asks them to. Do you think that Bontis and Cochrane are going to call Vic and ask him to arrange for some FIFA veiled threats to be made?

Yes

[Ruffian]

Ozzie is drooling over these developments potentially hurting the CPL so much that they have to stop operating and making it seem like he was correct the whole time.

[Gian-Luca]

8 hours ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

I agree. The perspective we (maybe not you) have of how things developed with the CPL, which was not malicious or slighting towards the women's game, won't be appreciated by parliamentary committees.

@trosenofffix the thread title please, it's embarrassing.

 

If the question should come up (assuming a hearing even happens), a simple enough answer should present itself even for politicians to understand. FIFA historically has expected a domestic league to be in place for men's World Cup hosts, whereas they have not for Women's World Cup, as we should know given that we hosted one solo in 2015. Hence the creation of a domestic men's league was prioritized first. If I'm the CSA, that would be the explanation I'd stick to, along with pointing out that they have subsidized some women to play in the NWSL in the interim - although there are other factors involved, that should be straightforward enough. The politicians probably don't know about any of this because their knowledge is essentially coming solely from Rick Westhead articles and tweets, who is not likely to mention the NSWL stuff even if he knows about it.

[SF]

The hearing, if there is one, will focus on issues of gender equity and, perhaps, governance.  This is a good thing - the government is a funder to the CSA and should expect outcomes in line with it's priorities and that the CSA be a well governed enterprise. 

We saw similar (in theme, not content) with Hockey Canada. After an ill advised and futile battle, the Hockey Canada Board finally came around to the idea that a new governance team was required to restore the trust of their stakeholders.

I will note, however, that Hockey Canada sponsors piled on while their crisis was unfolding. It remains to be seen if that will happen to the CSA.

As an aside, if I were advising the women, I would focus my energies on the largest sponsors and convincing them that there is a gender bias at the CSA. If they can make that argument and the money acts accordingly, this thing will unravel quickly. As a further aside, it strikes me the players aren't terribly well organized themselves (i.e. with professional advice spanning legal, finance and communications).