What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

World Soccer XI: To South Africa, and Beyond!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: World Soccer XI: To South Africa, and Beyond!

bigmrg74 said:
Yeah, Montreal and Toronto is as natural of a rivalry as Cats vs Dogs. Wouldn't take much of an incident for their to be bad blood between those two clubs. You throw in Vancouver and you would have enough to have a fairly decent contract with CBC I would think.
Click to expand...
I think that's definitely on the mind of the folks at MLS. Adding in more TV money is always good thing.
 
Re: World Soccer XI: To South Africa, and Beyond!

blockski said:
My guess is that Saputo is balking at expanding his stadium/adding more luxury boxes and wants to milk the Province because he's stubborn. We shall see.
Click to expand...

You'll forgive me for being extremely skeptical. I'm still angry after having watched Lucien Bouchard and Bernard Landry fiddle while the Expos burned, then watched Jean Charest shrug his shoulders as they left town.
 
Re: World Soccer XI: To South Africa, and Beyond!

Chile could be expelled from World Cup. So is this just an idle threat or could it actually happen?

If they are expelled, who takes their place? Ecuador? Costa Rica? Would there be another two leg playoff between the two?
 
Last edited:
Re: World Soccer XI: To South Africa, and Beyond!

Dirty said:
Chile could be expelled from World Cup. So is this just an idle threat or could it actually happen?
Click to expand...

Wow. That's like applying the death penalty for assault and battery.

If they are expelled, who takes their place? Ecuador? Costa Rica? Would there be another two leg playoff between the two?
Click to expand...

Seems like that would be the fair way to do it, considering that if not for Chile, Uruguay would have gotten in without having to play Costa Rica. Simply adding Ecuador wouldn't be fair to Costa Rica OR Uruguay, and simply adding Costa Rica wouldn't be fair to Ecuador. A two leg playoff seems like the right answer.
 
Re: World Soccer XI: To South Africa, and Beyond!

AMC said:
I don't understand how FIFA can insert itself into a sovereign nation's judicial system.
Click to expand...

Exactly. But regardless, the crime of a club appealing a points penalty doesn't seem to merit an entire country's expulsion from the most important tournament there is.
 
Re: World Soccer XI: To South Africa, and Beyond!

Red Cloud said:
Wow. That's like applying the death penalty for assault and battery.
Click to expand...

Am I reading this right that FIFA is asserting this because it implies gov't interference into a soccer league? But isn't this interference at the behest of a club in the sport and if so isn't that up to contract law?

is it FIFA's position that the laws of soccer transcends national laws?
 
Re: World Soccer XI: To South Africa, and Beyond!

AMC said:
I don't understand how FIFA can insert itself into a sovereign nation's judicial system.
Click to expand...

Patman said:
Am I reading this right that FIFA is asserting this because it implies gov't interference into a soccer league? But isn't this interference at the behest of a club in the sport and if so isn't that up to contract law?

is it FIFA's position that the laws of soccer transcends national laws?
Click to expand...

That would be my guess.
 
Re: World Soccer XI: To South Africa, and Beyond!

Patman said:
Am I reading this right that FIFA is asserting this because it implies gov't interference into a soccer league?
Click to expand...

FIFA picks and chooses where they decide to enforce that rule. It's such a joke, kind of like the guy who runs the show.
 
Re: World Soccer XI: To South Africa, and Beyond!

Red Cloud said:
FIFA picks and chooses where they decide to enforce that rule. It's such a joke, kind of like the guy who runs the show.
Click to expand...
Exactly, just like the other day when they decided not to get involved with MLS/MLS Players Union discussions because those talks were following US labor laws. :rolleyes:
 
Re: World Soccer XI: To South Africa, and Beyond!

Red Cloud said:
OK, so they said they wouldn't have made a ruling until the day before the draw if this hadn't happened? I wonder what the plan was then? A walkover for whichever draw Chile ended up in?
Click to expand...

It makes you think it was all a bluff to get the club team to drop the lawsuit. That club certainly wouldn't want to be the one responsible for keeping their country out.

------------

Thought this was interesting. Univision owns the spanish-language rights to the World Cup in the US, but ESPN Deportes found an interesting work-around - by broadcasting the matches in Portuguese.
 
Re: World Soccer XI: To South Africa, and Beyond!

I'm guessing if an English league team was protesting there would be no talk of England being banned from the World Cup.
 
Re: World Soccer XI: To South Africa, and Beyond!

No, probably not. But if you're going to bluff, you'd better know who you can bully into folding and who you can't.
 
Re: World Soccer XI: To South Africa, and Beyond!

Red Cloud said:
Vancouver and Portland are already confirmed. Montreal I heard rumblings about but nothing concrete, especially not if MLS is going to try milking the provincial government for cash.
Click to expand...

I thought team #20 was contractually required to be for David Beckham to own? And rumors had been that he wanted a second NY team?
 
Re: World Soccer XI: To South Africa, and Beyond!

AMC said:
I thought team #20 was contractually required to be for David Beckham to own? And rumors had been that he wanted a second NY team?
Click to expand...

I don't think there's clarity on exactly what's required of Beckham's contract.

Either way, they're not at 20 yet.

Philly is #16 in the league, set to start play this year.
Portland and Vancouver would be #17 and #18.
Montreal would be #19.

EDIT:

For details on Beckham's option (not a requirement) to become an owner, it has to be after 2011 AND after he's done playing in the league. He also wouldn't have to be a sole owner.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/08/sports/soccer/08goal.html

http://www.reuters.com/article/sportsNews/idUSTRE5AM0CZ20091123
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top