View Full Version : Will Canada lose the U-20 Tournament?
CdnBhoy67 redded
23 Apr 2005, 12:16 PM
The way things are going FIFA will no doubt give the Tournament back to Korea/Japan. Getting the Tournament to Canada in the first place required,
a new soccer stadium being built in Toronto, while that may still happen,
it don't look to promising.
jaydog2008
23 Apr 2005, 12:34 PM
That was part of it but edmonton was also a huge piece.The feeling the tournnemant would still go on with all of the semi's and finals in edmonton.
Gordon
23 Apr 2005, 02:03 PM
Your basic premise is wrong. As has been pointed out on another thread, the government financing for the stadium was contigent upon WC 2007 coming to Canada and Toronto. It was not the other way around. Do some reseach and post a link that shows FIFA awarded the U-20 WC on the basis of the Toronto stadium and then we can talk.
The bottom line is that the the U-20 World Cup has to meet the stadium criteria for FIFA, which I believe is a sufficient # of 10,000 seat stadiums. Obviously Toronto bailing out takes one out of the equation. This thing can be run in 4 cities. I expect that Montreal and Vancouver will step up to the plate, since they are much better soccer markets that Toronto and their respective owners have the money and the moxie to get MLS teams to play in them. Edmonton is already there and Ottawa's Stadium is FIFA approved Field turf. It is possible that the tourney may be moved if Montreal and Vancouver can't get their deals in place, but as I said, they are more able to do so than Toronto.
CdnBhoy67 redded
23 Apr 2005, 06:36 PM
Your basic premise is wrong. As has been pointed out on another thread, the government financing for the stadium was contigent upon WC 2007 coming to Canada and Toronto. It was not the other way around. Do some reseach and post a link that shows FIFA awarded the U-20 WC on the basis of the Toronto stadium and then we can talk.
The bottom line is that the the U-20 World Cup has to meet the stadium criteria for FIFA, which I believe is a sufficient # of 10,000 seat stadiums. Obviously Toronto bailing out takes one out of the equation. This thing can be run in 4 cities. I expect that Montreal and Vancouver will step up to the plate, since they are much better soccer markets that Toronto and their respective owners have the money and the moxie to get MLS teams to play in them. Edmonton is already there and Ottawa's Stadium is FIFA approved Field turf. It is possible that the tourney may be moved if Montreal and Vancouver can't get their deals in place, but as I said, they are more able to do so than Toronto.
Don't sell Toronto short they have lots of soccer fans in the city and surrounding areas. The only thing Montreal and Vancouver have that
Toronto doesn't is good quality owners for thier USL franchises. The
Toronto ownership[ group has pissed off so many soccer fans with
their terrible running of the Lynx Soccer Club.
Daniel from Montréal
24 Apr 2005, 02:55 AM
Damn.
If only the ignore button did threads, too.
Guys, seriously, jump onto this bandwagon, it's good for the soul.
eurodad
24 Apr 2005, 08:28 AM
Your basic premise is wrong. As has been pointed out on another thread, the government financing for the stadium was contigent upon WC 2007 coming to Canada and Toronto. It was not the other way around. Do some reseach and post a link that shows FIFA awarded the U-20 WC on the basis of the Toronto stadium and then we can talk.
The bottom line is that the the U-20 World Cup has to meet the stadium criteria for FIFA, which I believe is a sufficient # of 10,000 seat stadiums. Obviously Toronto bailing out takes one out of the equation. This thing can be run in 4 cities. I expect that Montreal and Vancouver will step up to the plate, since they are much better soccer markets that Toronto and their respective owners have the money and the moxie to get MLS teams to play in them. Edmonton is already there and Ottawa's Stadium is FIFA approved Field turf. It is possible that the tourney may be moved if Montreal and Vancouver can't get their deals in place, but as I said, they are more able to do so than Toronto.
Good points for sure, however, make no mistake about it, FIFA was sold on Canada having a stadium in its biggest city. I dont know what all the fall out will be from this. I have no doubt that the other Canadian cities could make up for the down fall of Toronto, but if we think that FIFA is not dissappointed in not having Toronto in the picture, then we are not looking at the whole picture either. I still think that the stadium deal may still go through but this is a major set back for soccer in the GTA. Stay tune, Im sure we have not heard the last of this, both for the stadium and from FIFA.
MT mojo
24 Apr 2005, 12:38 PM
Even if the York Stadium didn't get built, couldn't they put in grass temporarily in the Rogers Center?
jaydog2008
24 Apr 2005, 12:59 PM
No the its been rulled the rogers centre can not be used for this tournemant.
Gordon
24 Apr 2005, 01:47 PM
Good points for sure, however, make no mistake about it, FIFA was sold on Canada having a stadium in its biggest city. I dont know what all the fall out will be from this. I have no doubt that the other Canadian cities could make up for the down fall of Toronto, but if we think that FIFA is not dissappointed in not having Toronto in the picture, then we are not looking at the whole picture either. I still think that the stadium deal may still go through but this is a major set back for soccer in the GTA. Stay tune, Im sure we have not heard the last of this, both for the stadium and from FIFA.
I don't doubt FIFA would be disappointed. It was them, afterall that effectively paid for the design. I also don't doubt that they very much want to see a stadium in Toronto, and soccer to developi n Canada, particulalrly at the pro level. But pulling tournaments after they are awarded without good reason (i.e. the failure to have the required stadiums) also looks bad for an organization like FIFA. It makes it seem that they don't what they are doing. Also, FIFA pulled the Women's World Cup and gave it to China because of the SARS situation in China around time of the last WWC. FIFA will be very reticent about doing it again without a slam dunk reason (not enough stadiums).
I also think the stadium will go through, ultimately, in Toronto. Certainly if it doesn't the hope of an MLS franchise evaporates. Maybe they (MLwhatever it is called)) don't care enough about it to actually pony up for a stadium. But maybe they will step in if the Argos pull out. Or maybe the City of Toronto will pony up some of the money to make the deal better. Who knows? There is always a lot of posturing about things like this.
CdnBhoy67 redded
24 Apr 2005, 01:50 PM
Even if the York Stadium didn't get built, couldn't they put in grass temporarily in the Rogers Center?
Fifa ruled a few years back that the skydome aka Rogers Center can't be used for A-internationals, or major Fifa tournaments. This no doubt had to do with the poor quality artifical surface at the Dome. No Toronto needs a new soccer stadium badly, if it doesn't get one, this tournament will be lost, MLS in Toronto will de delayed and the sport will never recover from thiis latest setback.
Scottish Premier League : Rangers 1 Celtic 2 :)
Gordon
24 Apr 2005, 03:20 PM
Well 'Bhoy, given that fact, reason and common sense are all against you on this, I don't think bluster and hyperbole will be enough to get anyone in a tizzy. Perhaps you should trot out one of your sockpuppets to agree with you?
CdnBhoy67 redded
24 Apr 2005, 07:54 PM
Well 'Bhoy, given that fact, reason and common sense are all against you on this, I don't think bluster and hyperbole will be enough to get anyone in a tizzy. Perhaps you should trot out one of your sockpuppets to agree with you?
What makes you think.. :) . that Canada will still keep this tournament if the Toronto stadium project fails to come about. There is more on the line then just the U-20 Torunament you know. Toronto's MLS future (a place for Canadian players to play at home) will also be in doubt. although the Blue Jays ownership (Rogers) was looking at MLSa couple of years ago, might still bring MLS to the dome. But the facts are these, if the Stadium is not built in Toronto ,there goes the U-20 tournament, Fifa will take it back, if you don't believe they will just wait. Time is running short.
Rangers 1 Celtic 2 5 points clear....Come on the Hoops. :)
eurodad
24 Apr 2005, 07:59 PM
What we may have going on here smells of high stakes politices between Rogers and Maple Leaf Corp. There is much more to come to the surface. This is just the begining. I have a hard time believing that the Maple Leaf Corp. will just walk away from this deal with out a fight. Stay tuned. Its going to be interesting.
CdnBhoy67 redded
24 Apr 2005, 08:05 PM
What we may have going on here smells of high stakes politices between Rogers and Maple Leaf Corp. There is much more to come to the surface. This is just the begining. I have a hard time believing that the Maple Leaf Corp. will just walk away from this deal with out a fight. Stay tuned. Its going to be interesting.
But who would you rather see as a owner for an MLS franchise in Toronto.
MLSE you have not built a winner since taking over from Ballard or Rogers
who also don't have a good track record in sports (Blue Jays). If i had
my choice, it would be MLSE they seem to be into sports long term,
Rogers ?
eurodad
24 Apr 2005, 08:34 PM
To be honest, Im not sure what Corp. that I would prefer. There are pros. and cons. to both I guess. Both are solid companies that would provide financial stability to a MLS team in Toronto. As far as operating the team better ? I dont know. Will a stadium be built ? Depends on who gets the MLS team, I would think. If Rogers gets the team, then they will want to operate the team out of Rogers stadium. That, I dont think will go over vary well with FIFA. If Maple Leafs get the MLS team then yes, somehow, with some partners, there will be a stadium built. That is what FIFA is in favour of. The Argos leaving, IMO is not as big a deal as many say. Loss of a tenant ? yes. loss of major financial backing ? I dont think so.
Khansingh
25 Apr 2005, 02:30 AM
The Argonauts were willing to front $20 million and cover any cost overruns. That's hardly pocket change. MLSE hasn't, in my mind, done anything to indicate that they'll put up that kind of money. In this entire process, they've been totally unreliable. If this is any sign of what to expect from them as I/O of Toronto MLS, I feel very nervous for the fans.
eurodad
25 Apr 2005, 09:24 AM
The Argonauts were willing to front $20 million and cover any cost overruns. That's hardly pocket change. MLSE hasn't, in my mind, done anything to indicate that they'll put up that kind of money. In this entire process, they've been totally unreliable. If this is any sign of what to expect from them as I/O of Toronto MLS, I feel very nervous for the fans.
Fair enough, but one thing that I do not understand. Usually, when an organization (Argos) makes that committment, it is usually done so in writting. If that was the case, how could they have just walked away so easilly from this deal or committment. Sounds like there was not a real committment if it was not in writting. MLSE is a privately run Corp. They are under no obligation to disclose financial intentions to the public. Unlike the Sky Dome that Rogers owns and operates now, MLSE financed their own building. Having said that, Im not taking sides as to who is better to get the new soccer team, only that if you tie it into the FIFA tournament, then the MLSE deal is better because of the new soccer stadium.
Daniel from Montréal
25 Apr 2005, 04:20 PM
The "in writing" part was supposed to be finalized soon, which explains why the doubts are coming out now.
Khansingh
25 Apr 2005, 04:34 PM
I betting that it's like the Patriots' abortive move to Hartford. They probably had a drop-dead date, a point of no return, after which they could face litigation. Maybe this is a little brinksmanship on the Argos' part. Maybe they're trying to wring some more money out of the government. You'd have to examine all of their reasons for moving in the first place. Is it really the cost of using the Rogers Centre? Is it only the scheduling? Man, that's an obsurd name for a ballpark.
LostintheBarrens
26 Apr 2005, 11:27 AM
If Ted wants to squeeze out soccer in TO I say fine, Montreal and Vancouver can both do a better job of supporting soccer.
Give those cities a proper soccer stadium.
Bucking Faseball!!!