Jump to content

shorty

CSN
  • Posts

    782
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    shorty reacted to dyslexic nam in 2017 Gold Cup Opponents   
    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.
  2. Like
    shorty got a reaction from dyslexic nam in 2017 Gold Cup Opponents   
    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
  3. Like
    shorty got a reaction from apbsmith in 2017 Gold Cup Opponents   
    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
  4. Like
    shorty reacted to Alex in 2017 Gold Cup Opponents   
    what if concacaf did this:
     
    penalize French Guiana by giving them 0 points and -3 goal differential. But leave the 0-0 result for Honduras. So you penalize French Guiana but Honduras doesn't benefit and no other teams feel cheated by concacaf allowing Malouda to step onto the field in the first place.
  5. Like
    shorty got a reaction from toontownman in Costa Rica - July 11th Pre-Game Thread   
    I think you had it right that Waston has to wait until the knockout round.  That's what the regs say, and now Pete Schaad is tweeting that Waston won't play against either us or FG.
  6. Like
    shorty got a reaction from dyslexic nam in Costa Rica - July 11th Pre-Game Thread   
    I think you had it right that Waston has to wait until the knockout round.  That's what the regs say, and now Pete Schaad is tweeting that Waston won't play against either us or FG.
  7. Like
    shorty got a reaction from Ruffian in Costa Rica - July 11th Pre-Game Thread   
    I think you had it right that Waston has to wait until the knockout round.  That's what the regs say, and now Pete Schaad is tweeting that Waston won't play against either us or FG.
  8. Like
    shorty got a reaction from Kent in Canada vs French Guiana - Match Thread   
    Also, in one game we've already bettered or equaled the total number of goals we scored in 8 out of the 12 previous tournaments. Let that sink in for a bit...
  9. Like
    shorty got a reaction from Ruffian in Canada vs French Guiana - Match Thread   
    Also, in one game we've already bettered or equaled the total number of goals we scored in 8 out of the 12 previous tournaments. Let that sink in for a bit...
  10. Like
    shorty got a reaction from nolando in French Guiana vs Canada - Post Match Thread   
    Dear god, I had never heard of Zardoz before, and now, after two hours and a bottle of wine, I feel enlightened.  I've never dropped acid before, and now I don't have to.  Also, my wife never sits through an entire movie, and this was just morbidly fascinating and weirdly and artfully 1970s enough to hold her attention from start to finish.  Thank you LSM.
    And yes, I agree.  These would be "killer" uniforms.
  11. Like
    shorty reacted to LSM in French Guiana vs Canada - Post Match Thread   
    How about Zardoz?
    "Zardoz speaks! The Attack is good. The Turnover is evil. The Turnover results in goals against, poisoning the Team with a plague of defeat, as it once was. But the Attack scores goals and purifies the Team of the filth of Losses. Go forth, and Attack! Zardoz has spoken!"
    Plus, new uniforms:

    (Moustaches mandatory.)
  12. Like
    shorty reacted to dyslexic nam in Alphonso Davies   
    I think I said something like this a bunch of pages ago, but it is hard to describe just how happy I am about the whole Davies situation.  An amazing footy talent who was  an immigrant kid, who came to Canada along with what seems like a great family, developed his footy skills here in Canada, is appreciative for the opportunities he got, has massive potential (the kind that is unprecedented in the CMNT), and he chose us and seems proud to do so.
    I don't know if Alphonso and the other players read these threads, but if so:
    Thank you.  You have made a whole bunch of us immensely happy.
  13. Like
    shorty got a reaction from Gian-Luca in What should our gold cup lineup be?   
    Yeah, watched that.  They talk about Lucas Carnavali a fair bit. Lol.  Maybe one of you Cdn pod casters could do a hoser parody where we talk about the American stars Dumpsey and Pusillanimous.
  14. Like
    shorty got a reaction from BearcatSA in 2017 Toronto FC season (aka the 2017 MLS Cup clinching thread)   
    I agree with this.  Even if Morgan steps up on that play, Rivas is still onside.  He would only have been putting Larin offside, and I think Morgan was more worried about tracking and containing Larin.  Given the choice between letting Larin go and staying tight to him, I probably would have made the same choice as Morgan in his current position, trying to impress and not screw up.  Plus, he was the only TFC defender aware of Larin's run that I could see.  On the other hand, in another version of the highlights I saw (or maybe it was during the broadcast), you can see Bradley point toward Rivas making the late diagonal run as if to delegate someone else to pick him up, but then he realizes too late that no one else is aware or available.  He tries to track him, but can't catch up.  Maybe it's on Bradley, but for me it was just a great run and finish by Rivas and a superb pass by Kaka.  If they had to give one up at least it was quality.  Don't blame Morgan in the least for that one.  (Definitely wanted him to shoot and be more aggressive at the other end, though)
  15. Like
    shorty got a reaction from Brethers8 in What should our gold cup lineup be?   
    Guys, guys...
    GK/CB  Straith, Adam
    Problem solved.  It's all about versatility.

  16. Like
    shorty got a reaction from Obinna in What should our gold cup lineup be?   
    Guys, guys...
    GK/CB  Straith, Adam
    Problem solved.  It's all about versatility.

  17. Like
    shorty got a reaction from SpecialK in What should our gold cup lineup be?   
    Guys, guys...
    GK/CB  Straith, Adam
    Problem solved.  It's all about versatility.

  18. Like
    shorty got a reaction from Ruffian in What should our gold cup lineup be?   
    Guys, guys...
    GK/CB  Straith, Adam
    Problem solved.  It's all about versatility.

  19. Like
    shorty got a reaction from BuzzAndSting in What should our gold cup lineup be?   
    Guys, guys...
    GK/CB  Straith, Adam
    Problem solved.  It's all about versatility.

  20. Like
    shorty got a reaction from GuillermoDelQuarto in Potential CPL logo concepts   
    No problem!  Thought something didn't look right.  Plus, the pillow intrigued me, so I looked it up.
  21. Like
    shorty got a reaction from GuillermoDelQuarto in Potential CPL logo concepts   
    This is the flag of Surrey, England.
    Link to flag of Surrey, BC:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flag_of_Surrey_BC.svg
  22. Like
    shorty reacted to mlsintoronto in CPL Canadian Player Quotas   
    allow me to manage expectations here.  You won't hear us talking about Canadian Quotas in CPL.  You'll hear us talking about limits on imports.  And the numbers will be way more aggressive than you're suggesting here.  The commitment to Canadians is real.
  23. Like
    shorty got a reaction from Pottsy3 in Octavio Zambrano   
    Didn't realize Tissot and Ouimette were that young, tbh, but my point was to hear from others who know more and follow more closely than me what you all thought about where the competition lies at each position for the GC and beyond.  
    Age aside, it just seems to me that a lot of the competition is coming up at the wide MF and FB position.  I agree that Tissot probably has more to offer than Ouimette, but doesn't he also face a deeper pool on the left?  And how high is his ceiling compared to the ceiling of those he is up against:  Corbin-Ong, Adekugbe (provided he doesn't end up perma-injured like Doneil), Edwards, Awuah, Levis, Pasher...  Honest question.  I just was guessing that with OZ sounding like he might go more attacking on the flanks that we might see 2 or 3 of that list get called regularly ahead of Tissot going forward.  Maybe "end of Tissot" was a bit strong, but I think like Ouimette he might end up being fringe, especially if a couple of the MLS guys get more time next year.  
    Nothing against him, and I hope I'm wrong -- high water floats all boats and such.
  24. Like
    shorty reacted to baulderdash77 in What should our gold cup lineup be?   
    @Gator I was thinking something similar.
    We suddenly seem blessed with all kinds of attacking players.
    Wingbacks and 2 strikers upfront would make other teams adapt to us.
    There's something to be said for TFC's 3-5-2 formation.  It floods the midfield and doesn't isolate a single striker.  
    Larin and Hoilett upfront with Ricketts as a supersub would look good.  Certainly both are super dangerous.
    Edwards and Wootherspoon are also dangerous out wide in space.  Aird could also be a super sub there
    A central midfield of Arfield, Johnson and Osorio is certainly pretty strong (Assuming Hutch is done).
    At the back we could then play 3 CB's.  It's Pretty weak back there right now but Attakora, Oiumette, Jakovic and Straith are all regular starters and James continues to get PT.  There's at least a core we can use.
  25. Like
    shorty got a reaction from ThiKu in Players you expect to see in the CPL   
    Agree with dspqr that even if some MNT fringe or otherwise come back, there will be a lot of unknown names. But I also remember being a youth player in the 80s when the Intrepid were formed in Ottawa and when we started to see kids we played with and against move up it was exciting and motivating. Also remember seeing players like Alex Bunbury, etc in their early days and I agree it is exciting to think we might get to see future International players 10 yards away at a pop-up stadium in places like Victoria, Waterloo or Moncton. 
     
×
×
  • Create New...