'Caps and Impact's CCL eligibility in question [Archive]

Duane Rollins

12-07-2009, 11:40 PM

I asked Peter Montopoli directly whether the Caps and Impact would be eligible for the CCL if they were playing in a non-recognized league. He pretty much came out and directly said no: http://www.24thminute.com/2009/12/concacaf-champions-league-eligibility.html

It's also becoming increasingly clear that the NASL group is in a whole lot of trouble when it comes to USSF sanctioning. And the CSA ain't keen on stepping up to fil that role: http://www.24thminute.com/2009/12/nasl-in-trouble-csa-not-ready-to-bail.html

Richard

12-08-2009, 02:11 AM

I find it hard to believe that the USSF would refuse to sanction the NASL with 10 clubs already committed, in favour of the USL with 2.5 clubs. What hope is there of negotiating a long term amicable resolution if an intransigent USL is threatening to sue everbody and his dog including the TOA if the USL doesn't get its way, this is like a little kid threatening to take its ball and go home because its not winning the game? Besides, the TOA group could probably pay off any genuine debts still owed to the USL by a few of its member clubs without making much of a dent in its communal bank account. I think there is a touch of alarmism on the part of Peter Montopoli and the CSA here.

the biologist

12-08-2009, 02:53 AM

quote:Originally posted by Richard

I find it hard to believe that the USSF would refuse to sanction the NASL with 10 clubs already committed, in favour of the USL with 2.5 clubs. What hope is there of negotiating a long term amicable resolution if an intransigent USL is threatening to sue everbody and his dog including the TOA if the USL doesn't get its way, this is like a little kid threatening to take its ball and go home because its not winning the game? Besides, the TOA group could probably pay off any genuine debts still owed to the USL by a few of its member clubs without making much of a dent in its communal bank account. I think there is a touch of alarmism on the part of Peter Montopoli and the CSA here.
I so much agree.

quote:"He wasn't happy," an insider said of Montopoli's mode after he spoke to the USSF today. "The NASL might be in big trouble. There may not be a NASL."Wow, if that is not overexaggerating, I don't know what is.

quote:Another source close to the situation in the U.S. said that the USL was "threatening to sue everyone at the table."Yeah, and my name is Kenny McCormick and I OMG they just killed me... [xx(] Seriously, I think we just have to sit down and relax while the TOA get their act together and the USSF understands there's simply no hope for an eventual USLD1 next year.

quote:"We are hopeful that the USSF will sanction the league, whether it's called the NASL or something else," he said. "Once that happens we invite the Whitecaps and Impact, and any other team looking to be a part of it, to approach us to be sanctioned."Just the 836th symptom of how low the importance of the CSA is.

Cheeta

12-08-2009, 08:46 AM

Okay, analysis from the little we know. Lord knows what's been said so far outside of public knowledge.

1). Think we all agree that the USL are blowing smoke out of their ass. At the end of the day there will be a NASL and there is nothing the USL brass can do about it. They're pissed and looking to get as much out of the TOA group as they can and the way to do that is to jerk them around as much as possible. Odd (or perhaps it isn't) that the USSF is playing along with that game. Wonder how many threads, relationships, connect the the current USL ownership & USSF HQ?

2). It's true that the CSA is in a bad spot. But it's also true two-thirds of Canada's pro clubs are part of this NASL scheme and two-thirds of the major footie shakers and their bank accounts are also part of this. It really comes down to how serious Kerfoot & Saputo are about this. Let things sort themselves out and lose a year or go all in. If they figure the gloves are off and want to go all in they could as much as tell Montopoli the CSA should sanction the league, and the CSA is going to sanction the league. USSF & USL be damned and dare CONCACAF/FIFA to overrule the decision. Grow a pair for fu'ks sake. Plus if the USSF were to be politely & privately told the CSA will not allow two of it's three domestic clubs go "outlaw" in 2010 USSF efforts between the two groups may take a slightly different and probably more effective direction.

3). Lawyer up boys. The courts are a two way street. That being said, until Saputo and Co. are awarded an MLS franchise things may be a bit more delicate for the Montreal group than say the WhiteCap organization.

4) Isn't this fun!

redhat

12-08-2009, 09:04 AM

The funny (strange) thing is, the CSL is already recognized as a legitimate league by FIFA.
If the NASL Canadian teams want, they can create an alliance with the CSL for a "Canadian Pro"
division, and thus may still be recognized by NCC, CONCACAF, and FIFA.

Just thinking out loud with the 'whatifs' scenario ...

Massive Attack

12-08-2009, 10:07 AM

quote:Originally posted by Richard

this is like a little kid threatening to take its ball and go home because its not winning the game?

Isn't this a good way to describe the TOA clubs as well? Or do we give them a free pass because Vancouver and Montreal are involved?

Richard

12-08-2009, 10:08 AM

^ Despite several requests on my part - formal and informal - the CSA has steadfastly refused to answer my questions about FIFA recognition of the CSL as 'Canada's national league' or it's formal status as far as the CSA is concerned. One would think if it was all true a simple 'yes' to my questions would do. Instead all I get is prevarication, have to wonder why.

masster

12-08-2009, 03:58 PM

The CSA should simply sanction the Nutrilite Canadian Championship as a League and request Concacaf to follow suit. The NCC is in a league format and not just a knockout cup competition.

Jeffery S.

12-08-2009, 05:35 PM

Anything the CSA sanctions as a Canadian championship is such for FIFA's purposes. If they want to appoint some team from Sudbury champion and go alphabetically from there, I bet they could get away with it. If the national Association or Fed sets it up, whatever the teams from whatever the league, the FIFA structures are always going to say yes to it. So I am not worried at all.

The USSF may have more problems doing an Open Cup with teams from USL and NASL though, that could be tricky.

Richard

12-08-2009, 05:49 PM

^ I doubt it is quite as simple as that. CONCACAF only gave Canada a spot once Toronto FC arrived on the scene.

Jeffery S.

12-08-2009, 06:00 PM

quote:Originally posted by Richard

^ I doubt it is quite as simple as that. CONCACAF only gave Canada a spot once Toronto FC arrived on the scene.

No, I think it goes the other way: the CSA only decided to organize a national championship when TFC was on the scene. It had nothing to do with Concacaf. Fifa doesn't work that way Richard, I mean I was exagerrating in my first post, for sure, but basically anything a national FA sanctions within reasonable limits will be respected by Concacaf for ConcaChampions.

SteveBeau

12-08-2009, 11:58 PM

quote:Originally posted by Richard

^ I doubt it is quite as simple as that. CONCACAF only gave Canada a spot once Toronto FC arrived on the scene.

No, they only gave Canada a spot when they changed the format of the tournament in 2008 (adding more teams) and renamed it the Concacaf Champions League..

Free kick

12-09-2009, 01:17 PM

quote:Originally posted by masster

The CSA should simply sanction the Nutrilite Canadian Championship as a League and request Concacaf to follow suit. The NCC is in a league format and not just a knockout cup competition.

That would be perfect. And why not, I have always viewed the V-cup competition as our league championship. Currently its three teams but so what, over time that can grow. And who knows, in 20 years, it may resemble what league championships arounf the globe look like.

Free kick

12-09-2009, 01:38 PM

quote:Originally posted by SteveBeau

quote:Originally posted by Richard

^ I doubt it is quite as simple as that. CONCACAF only gave Canada a spot once Toronto FC arrived on the scene.

No, they only gave Canada a spot when they changed the format of the tournament in 2008 (adding more teams) and renamed it the Concacaf Champions League..

As far as I know previous three Canadian USL clubs ( Montreal Impact, Vancouver Whitecaps and Toronto Lynx) were not interested in a national championship or playing in Concacaf prior to teh arrival of MLS in canada.

Concacaf has been crowning a champion to play at the FIFA world club cup for a very long time. And no canadian club was enterred in that competition despite the fact that US based USL teams were ( through the US open cup). Like it or not TFC had everything to do with why we have the NCC. TFC was interested whereas indications were that the Lynx were not. As far as Mon and Van, I am sure that the chamce to play an MLS side ( TFC brought greater exposure to the table) was their motivation for agreeing to play in NCC.

RJB

12-09-2009, 01:57 PM

quote:Originally posted by MediaGuy

I asked Peter Montopoli directly whether the Caps and Impact would be eligible for the CCL if they were playing in a non-recognized league. He pretty much came out and directly said no: http://www.24thminute.com/2009/12/concacaf-champions-league-eligibility.html

It's also becoming increasingly clear that the NASL group is in a whole lot of trouble when it comes to USSF sanctioning. And the CSA ain't keen on stepping up to fil that role: http://www.24thminute.com/2009/12/nasl-in-trouble-csa-not-ready-to-bail.html

As far as I understood, the CCL place for Canada goes to the winner of the Voyageurs Cup. What difference does it make what other league the teams play in?

Trillium

12-09-2009, 07:24 PM

quote:Originally posted by Jeffrey S.

quote:Originally posted by Richard

^ I doubt it is quite as simple as that. CONCACAF only gave Canada a spot once Toronto FC arrived on the scene.

No, I think it goes the other way: the CSA only decided to organize a national championship when TFC was on the scene. It had nothing to do with Concacaf. Fifa doesn't work that way Richard, I mean I was exagerrating in my first post, for sure, but basically anything a national FA sanctions within reasonable limits will be respected by Concacaf for ConcaChampions.
Your right the CSA never asked to send a team to the Concacaf championships ... for a lot of historical reasons, and your right the CSA can do pretty much as it wishes as long as it delvers cash and its votes to FIFA and our friend from the Island of Trinidad ( and no I am not talking about Mr. Hart ).

Duane Rollins

12-10-2009, 06:19 AM

quote:Originally posted by RJB

quote:Originally posted by MediaGuy

I asked Peter Montopoli directly whether the Caps and Impact would be eligible for the CCL if they were playing in a non-recognized league. He pretty much came out and directly said no: http://www.24thminute.com/2009/12/concacaf-champions-league-eligibility.html

It's also becoming increasingly clear that the NASL group is in a whole lot of trouble when it comes to USSF sanctioning. And the CSA ain't keen on stepping up to fil that role: http://www.24thminute.com/2009/12/nasl-in-trouble-csa-not-ready-to-bail.html

As far as I understood, the CCL place for Canada goes to the winner of the Voyageurs Cup. What difference does it make what other league the teams play in?

The winner of the Voyageurs Cup will be the Canadian champions. Nothing changes there.

However, the Canadian representative in the CONCACAF Champions League must be in a recognized and sanctioned league. So, if Montreal or Vancouver were to win, as it stands, they would not be eligible to move on.

FIFA requires that here be eight teams in a league before it can be recognized. The V-Cup is not a "league" as some here have suggested. It's a cup tournament.

There may be loopholes that the CSA could use to make sure the clubs were recognized – or the spot could just be handed to TFC ( NOTE – I am not advocating for that), but it will take some effort on its part.

I asked Montopoli if the CSA could sanction Vancouver and Montreal as independent clubs. He came back by saying that they were "welcome to apply for sanctioning after they have found a league.

CONCACAF is the wildcard here. I'm not trying to be alarmist, but they could pull the spot altogether if things don't change. I don't think they will -- Canada has really taken to the tournament -- but do you really want things hanging on the whims of CONCACAF?

This has been a concern of mine since this whole mess started. Nothing Montopoli said to Monday reassured me.

beachesl

12-10-2009, 08:17 AM

quote:Originally posted by Trillium

quote:Originally posted by Jeffrey S.

quote:Originally posted by Richard

^ I doubt it is quite as simple as that. CONCACAF only gave Canada a spot once Toronto FC arrived on the scene.

No, I think it goes the other way: the CSA only decided to organize a national championship when TFC was on the scene. It had nothing to do with Concacaf. Fifa doesn't work that way Richard, I mean I was exagerrating in my first post, for sure, but basically anything a national FA sanctions within reasonable limits will be respected by Concacaf for ConcaChampions.
Your right the CSA never asked to send a team to the Concacaf championships ... for a lot of historical reasons, and your right the CSA can do pretty much as it wishes as long as it delvers cash and its votes to FIFA and our friend from the Island of Trinidad ( and no I am not talking about Mr. Hart ).

Canadian clubs, amateur teams, did pplay twice in the CONCACAF club championships in the 1970s.

Eric

12-10-2009, 02:24 PM

^ What amateur clubs were they?

TFCRegina

12-10-2009, 02:35 PM

Does anyone else think SuperLiga should be expanded into a virtual "Europa League" of CONCACAF?

As it stands right now, it's a big joke. If we had a Champions League and an Americas League it'd be kinda cool and would offer more opportunities to have our teams playing against competition from across the region.

TFCRegina

12-10-2009, 02:35 PM

Lord Bob

12-10-2009, 02:58 PM

quote:Originally posted by Eric

^ What amateur clubs were they?

The Serbian White Eagles and Toronto Italia each went once, if memory serves me right.

Lord Bob

12-10-2009, 02:58 PM

quote:Originally posted by Eric

^ What amateur clubs were they?

The Serbian White Eagles and Toronto Italia each went once, if memory serves me right.

Eric

12-10-2009, 03:11 PM

^ Right, but those clubs were not amateur back then.

piltdownman

12-10-2009, 04:05 PM

The money from SuperLiga flows into SUM and not CONCACAF. I'm sure CONCACAF would want control of it, but there is no benifit for SUM to give up this control.

Montreal_FC_fan

12-19-2009, 10:59 AM

Another source close to the situation in the U.S. said that the USL was "threatening to sue everyone at the table."

Let them sue everyone. The the USSF will probably tell the USL to stfu before FIFA finds out about this and suspends the US from the World Cup.

:D

Richard

12-19-2009, 11:20 AM

The USL response certainly smacks of desperation.

Jeffery S.

12-19-2009, 03:40 PM

The US federation has a hot potato on the table as well, when it comes to the Open Cup. Are they going to allow teams from rival leagues to potentially face each other? I think that could be polemical, as from what we are seeing the USL will not recognize the validity of a TOA club. What do they do if they are drawn against one in an Open Cup round?

Richard

12-19-2009, 03:45 PM

If both leagues are sanctioned I doubt the USL would have any grounds for not playing in the example you set but they could always voluntarily default I guess. Surely that decision would be up to the club not the league however.

BringBackTheBlizzard

01-05-2010, 05:52 AM

Latest on this is that the Impact and Caps are sanctioned for the Nutrilite Canadian Championship no matter what happens with the NASL:-

http://www.torontosun.com/sports/soccer/2010/01/05/12349666-sun.html

Toronto FC will get the chance to defend its Nutrilite Canadian Championship crown in 2010, even if the Montreal Impact and Vancouver Whitecaps have no leagues of their own in which to play.

The Canadian Soccer Association confirmed this week that the three-team championship still is slated to go ahead as it has the past two seasons, despite rumours to the contrary.

The CSA made the decision to sanction Montreal and Vancouver in December, meaning that they still can compete for a national championship.....

Oldtimer

01-05-2010, 07:47 AM

Good news. I can understand why the CSA won't sanction the whole NASL, but they called it right in sanctioning the Canadian clubs. Now we can have a real competition for the Voyageurs Cup.

Cheeta

01-05-2010, 08:09 AM

So the CSA has sanctioned the teams even though the teams don't have a sanctioned league to play in. Reads a bit odd doesn't it?

So two things. 1). Being sanctioned for the Vs Cup makes them eligible for CCL play? 2). If so does that eligibility have strings attached? If the clubs play in a non-sanctioned NASL will it disqualify them from CCL? From the Club World Cup? From receiving Holy Communion? Anything?

Ivan

01-05-2010, 08:18 AM

^ Maybe the CSA sanctioned the Nutralite Canadian Championship (Voyageurs Cup) as a Canadian League thereby allowing Caps and Impact access to the CCL?

Edit: Post clarified as noted in BBTB's post below.

BringBackTheBlizzard

01-05-2010, 08:25 AM

The best way to think of it maybe is that the Nutrilite Canadian Championship is Canada's national league in CONCACAF terms even if there are only six games involved in total so what the USSF gets up to with the NASL and USL-D1 isn't actually relevant because that has no bearing on entry to CONCACAF competition by Canadian clubs. The understandable pushing of the name Voyageurs Cup for the competition on here probably obscures that a bit for some people. Worth bearing in mind that in the eyes of the CSA at least the Voyageurs Cup is only the name of the trophy awarded to the winners of the competition in the same way that the Mita Cup was awarded to the champions of the original CSL back in the late 80s and early 90s.

Footman89

01-05-2010, 02:58 PM

quote:Originally posted by BringBackTheBlizzard

The best way to think of it maybe is that the Nutrilite Canadian Championship is Canada's national league in CONCACAF terms even if there are only six games involved in total so what the USSF gets up to with the NASL and USL-D1 isn't actually relevant because that has no bearing on entry to CONCACAF competition by Canadian clubs. The understandable pushing of the name Voyageurs Cup for the competition on here probably obscures that a bit for some people. Worth bearing in mind that in the eyes of the CSA at least the Voyageurs Cup is only the name of the trophy awarded to the winners of the competition in the same way that the Mita Cup was awarded to the champions of the original CSL back in the late 80s and early 90s.

Actually it is not considered Canada's league. CONCACAF gives Canada (CSA) 1 place (actually 1/2 place) in the CL tournament and it is up to CSA to determine how it awards the 1 place to its members. Had all 3 teams been in the same league together, I suppose the CSA could have said the place goes to the highest ranked team during regular season.

Personally, I would like the CSA to push hard for 2 places in 2013(actually 1 1/2), where the winner of the Nutrilite Championship gets 1 automatic place in group phase, and highest ranked team in regular season (MLS) gets the 1/2 place (based on 2012 MLS reg season, assuming Montreal is in by then).

BringBackTheBlizzard

01-05-2010, 08:30 PM

Your basis for saying it isn't effectively Canada's national league is what? In other countries around the world the primary basis for entry into premier tiered international club competitions like the CONCACAF Champions League is being the national league champion when there is only one place available. It would be absolutely bizarre in FIFA politics terms (and therefore a dangerous precedent from a FIFA standpoint) to have entry by Canadian teams into what are effectively the qualifiers for FIFA's Club World Cup determined by games played in another country's league so there was a very real need for a separate CSA rather than USSF sanctioned national championship to make entry by TFC, the Impact and Whitecaps possible. It's worth bearing in mind that back in the 1970s top NSL teams like the Serbian White Eagles and Toronto Italia entered CONCACAF's top club competition as Canada's representatives at a time when there were Canadian teams playing at a level roughly comparable to MLS and USL-D1 today in the original NASL and that the present day CSL have been angling for similar access to CONCACAF competition over the last few years.

Martyr

01-06-2010, 06:25 AM

I don't think the CSA sees any need in turning the Nutrilite Championship into an officially sanctioned national league.

The CSA are allowing the Whitecaps and Impact to participate in the 2010 Nutrilite Championship on the basis that they qualified for this tournament through their participation as properly sanctioned USL1 teams during the 2009 campaign.

The question then remaining is... would those two clubs be eligible for the 2011 Nutrilite Championship if they are not in a sanctioned league during 2010?

My guess is 'where there is a will, there is a way'. The CSA seems to be doing a very good job right now in looking out for it's own while the USSF sorts out the USL/TOA situation.

Rudi

01-06-2010, 08:14 AM

^ Vancouver will be in a sanctioned league in 2011, so that's really a question that only concerns Montreal.

the biologist

01-06-2010, 09:35 AM

quote:Originally posted by Rudi

^ Vancouver will be in a sanctioned league in 2011, so that's really a question that only concerns Montreal.
^ Ah, dear Rudi, thanks for the laugh ! I like it the way you NEVER miss a chance to remind us all that:

- Vancouver [u]WILL PLAY</u> in MLS in 2011
- On the other hand, Montreal [u]WILL NOT PLAY</u> in MLS in 2011.

To save yourself some work for next time, just copy and paste the above in your post. Quicker this way. [}:)]

Maybe while reading the previous paragraph some forgot the main idea here, what's most important after all:

- Vancouver [u]WILL PLAY</u> in MLS in 2011
- On the other hand, Montreal [u]WILL NOT PLAY</u> in MLS in 2011.

Yeah, I just copied and pasted it. This works great. [:p] ;)

SteveBeau

01-07-2010, 01:32 AM

quote:Originally posted by Rudi

^ Vancouver will be in a sanctioned league in 2011, so that's really a question that only concerns Montreal.

That got me thinking, lets say hypothetically Vancouver wins the 2010 V-cup, goes into the group stage and makes the quartefinals to be played in the winter of 2011, would they be able to play with their new MLS lineup? Would the team be ready?
Would they even be considered the same team? Since technically it is a completely new franchise, right?

Thoughts?

Duane Rollins

01-07-2010, 08:10 AM

quote:Originally posted by SteveBeau

quote:Originally posted by Rudi

^ Vancouver will be in a sanctioned league in 2011, so that's really a question that only concerns Montreal.

That got me thinking, lets say hypothetically Vancouver wins the 2010 V-cup, goes into the group stage and makes the quartefinals to be played in the winter of 2011, would they be able to play with their new MLS lineup? Would the team be ready?
Would they even be considered the same team? Since technically it is a completely new franchise, right?

Thoughts?

I'll try and find out.

Duane Rollins

01-07-2010, 08:10 AM

Ivan

01-07-2010, 08:49 AM

I would think, as long as no new players are cup-tied.

Rudi

01-07-2010, 11:25 AM

quote:Originally posted by the biologist

quote:Originally posted by Rudi

^ Vancouver will be in a sanctioned league in 2011, so that's really a question that only concerns Montreal.
^ Ah, dear Rudi, thanks for the laugh !

No problem, but I was actually being serious.

the biologist

01-07-2010, 04:42 PM

quote:Originally posted by Rudi

quote:Originally posted by the biologist

quote:Originally posted by Rudi

^ Vancouver will be in a sanctioned league in 2011, so that's really a question that only concerns Montreal.
^ Ah, dear Rudi, thanks for the laugh !

No problem, but I was actually being serious.
I know... that's why I wrote what followed.

Rudi

01-07-2010, 05:04 PM

quote:Originally posted by the biologist

quote:Originally posted by Rudi

quote:Originally posted by the biologist

quote:Originally posted by Rudi

^ Vancouver will be in a sanctioned league in 2011, so that's really a question that only concerns Montreal.
^ Ah, dear Rudi, thanks for the laugh !

No problem, but I was actually being serious.
I know... that's why I wrote what followed.

As much as I love to hate on you guys, I absolutely want Montreal in MLS.

the biologist

01-07-2010, 07:48 PM

quote:Originally posted by Rudi

quote:Originally posted by the biologist

quote:Originally posted by Rudi

quote:Originally posted by the biologist

quote:Originally posted by Rudi

^ Vancouver will be in a sanctioned league in 2011, so that's really a question that only concerns Montreal.
^ Ah, dear Rudi, thanks for the laugh !

No problem, but I was actually being serious.
I know... that's why I wrote what followed.

As much as I love to hate on you guys, I absolutely want Montreal in MLS.
Reading your posts I know that as well and I agree obviously, TOR-MTL will always be a natural rivalry. It was just a remark that has some truth in it, no ?... I find it funny the way people from both Montreal and Toronto prefer to support Vancouver teams as their 2nd team...

Does anybody really hate Vancouver teams ? [:p]

Not in the east at least...

Oh, I hate the Lions. [}:)]