Harkes and Wynalda have been photographed together since. Feelings can't be too hard. http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://rysa.org/images/WynaldaHarkesm.JPG&imgrefurl=http://rysa.org/about-rysa.php&usg=__Cuof0CgFgyAFrhfujEWkGQzjK6g=&h=190&w=300&sz=29&hl=en&start=3&itbs=1&tbnid=VphxYMS4JIPGwM:&tbnh=73&tbnw=116&prev=/images%3Fq%3DWynalda%2BHarkes%26gbv%3D2%26hl%3Den They've also played together for Hollywood United: http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.firsttouchonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/hu_10.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.firsttouchonline.com/%3Fattachment_id%3D1466&usg=__7bHsxWFpK1AclLFPofECdmPqD9g=&h=453&w=680&sz=137&hl=en&start=2&itbs=1&tbnid=ffXhn8tGG6tNhM:&tbnh=93&tbnw=139&prev=/images%3Fq%3DWynalda%2BHarkes%26gbv%3D2%26hl%3Den I guess if George Harrison and Eric Clapton could remain friends, why not Eric Wynalda and John Harkes
Bingo! Depending on how good friends they are, and the personality of the people involved, time heals all, and most adults end up realizing a friendship is alot of times worth more then holding on to grudges. I am sure eric lost some respect for John but at the end of the day, they are both men, and know that women can be a pain in the ass sometimes. If John MARRIED her, that would be totally different! I am sure eric got over it, let his heart heal, and realizes how much of a skank his ex' wife was, and possibly that he had it coming given the rumors in this thread that he has had his own indescretions (sp).
LOL. It would be like this scene from Talladega Nights: [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BeTkKiQdmo8"]YouTube- Lelsie Bibb in Talladega nights: The ballad of Ricky Bobby[/ame]
Of course, the stupid douche does not want to discuss the issue now.... after having done a masterful job of whining and bitching while portraying himself as the innocent victim back in 98...
You've gotta be kidding. Eric Wynalda co-hosts a television program that covers goings-on in the soccer world. The biggest story in the soccer world right now is about an international player's embarrassing affair. Eric Wynalda was himself part of a situation that involved an international player's embarrassing affair, which was fairly common knowledge in his program's universe. So he had three choices: (1) Ignore the topic altogether, which raises questions about news judgment, fuels the gossip machine, and leaves the impression he's scared of the subject. (2) Discuss the topic and pretend he's just another neutral observer, which fuels the gossip machine, lets everyone stare at Eric Wynalda while he's being misleading, and leaves the impression he's dishonest about the subject. (3) Discuss the topic and speak of his own experience, which gives viewers valuable insight, subdues the gossip machine, and lets him behave honestly in front of everyone. I mean, really... I'm as cynical as they come, but the idea that this was some niftily conceived plan to get "promotion" for a book that's not even available is just kind of ridiculous. Give the guy a break. Sheez.
No. This was a private matter. Sampson was the coach of the team. This happened between two individuals. his job was to put the best eleven on the field and Harkes was one of them. This wasn't a divorce situation, it was an affair. If he wanted to show true leadership, then maybe he should have gone to the other team leaders and gotten their feedback. I started working in the late 70's. I used to see this happen all the time.
I agree this wasn't about self-promotion. He briefly referred to allegations, but then focused on the locker room element, and tried to brush it under the rug, moving on to other topics. The callers from then on didn't even acknowledge the admission.
But if the private matter had the potential to affect on-field performance, he has an obligation to address it. I think reasonable people can disagree on the correctness of Sampson's decision (based on the limited information we have, I tend to currently fall on the "wrong decision" side of the fence), but I definitely strongly think that airing players dirty laundry is not appropriate for the coach. So, is it a private matter or not? It's Sampson's responsibility to manage the team, not the captains/leaders, and the fact of the matter is that those other players have no right to be informed of the affair without the consent of Wynalda (as the wronged party). Bruce S mentioned that morale suffers when someone is fired without a clear reason being given; that's true. But Sampson had no right to be anything but vague. Also, the idea that this is "excuse making" is ridiculous. It's 12 years later, and he never said boo until one of the principles disclosed the affair. Explaining what happened - how he found out, etc - isn't finger-pointing.
I assumed you would realize that hundreds was hyperbole. I did not keep records in anticipation of your posting but I have seen MANY-ok now?
Convenient how you ignore the rest of the points made in the post. I've followed the national team adamently since I was 12 years old watching Paul Caligiuri lift this country to the World Cup in Trinidad. I can honestly say this is the first I've heard of the affair as the reason Harkes was left out in 98. It may have been rumored in soccer circles, but it wasn't acknowledged as fact for all to see including his ex-wife, kids, parents, her parents, Harkes' wife, Harkes' kids. It was extremely self serving. Especially if it was a direct reaction to his cheating on the wife with Ms. Germany as reported. Obviously Harkes is a prick and deserves the shame and embarrassment from this. But his wife and kids don't, nor do Wynalda's kids. I usually like Wynalda's contrarian points as a talking head. But this is a disgrace. He lost any moral high ground in my eyes.
i hope harkes' wife leaves him, and espn drops him. Also, I'd like to see wynalda, who is gaining more and more respect from me, kick his ass.
I didn't "ignore" the rest of your points. You made a SINGLE point about "self promotion," and it's the one I was interested in addressing. The rest of your post was irrelevant to it. Perhaps you'll recall what you wrote... See the "Also"? It's there because you started off on other, separate lines of thought. If someone else cares to respond to those parts -- about his kids, or about your wife and kids, etc. -- they can. But they had nothing to do with what I was responding to. And anyway, talk about ignoring people's points: I gave you a detailed argument why this shouldn't be seen as self-serving promotion. It may be right. It may be wrong. But you've completely ignored it and just blindly steamrolled on ahead, even upping your assertion to "extremely self-serving" and loss of "moral high ground," as if there was no counterargument sitting there to be acknowledged. So it's a weird complaint you've got here.
And again, directly to your point: "Self serving" is an awfully bizarre phrase to describe somebody who is forced, by totally random circumstance, to admit that his wife wanted to screw his buddy, and did. I explained to you how someone like Wynalda is stuck between a rock and a hard place in a situation like this. You choose instead to make the most uncharitable interpretation possible, and decry him as self-serving. It's kind of creepy, to be honest. I think maybe what you're overlooking is that Wynalda has a particular job -- analyst and pundit -- where trust, authority and reliability are the coin of the realm. That's why the Terry thing would have put him in a difficult spot. It forced him to make a choice: Either play make-believe and potentially erode those crucial perceptions of trust, etc.; or be upfront about it and convey something really embarrassing and painful (and, apparently, set himself up for accusations of being "self serving" on top of it).
Sampson talks extensively today with Ridge Mahoney of Soccer America. I get their emails and I don't have a link, but there are some quotes about some things that have been discussed in this thread, most specifically as to what he did or did not tell the team at the time: So he didn't tell even the (remaining) leadership of the team the whole extent of the issue. Obviously some players knew, but it wasn't discussed via Sampson. And lastly, he says it definitely affected the team's attitude and performance.: Geez. What a mess it must have been back then. And the sad part of it (besides the individual pain suffered): Sorry if this goes on too long. Just figured I'd share a bit of something that didn't have a link.
Yikes! Man Imagine if john stayed, things could have easily been fixed off of a setup from john to wynalda, at least on the field.
You have got to be kidding - this only affected two individuals? Wegerle knew and Harkes and Wynalda knew and who else might have known? .... If Harkes was with a women of any guy not on the national team it is a different matter .. but it is with a national team teammate for crissakes .... and it became a divorce later with kids and all .... if you don't think that went thru Sampson's mind then you are naive. yes just because it happened all the time in the 70s or since then (or before then) does not make it any less egregious or any less of an effect on the squad. you don't go to the other "team leaders" and ask them for their input ... that puts all of them on the spot and puts them in a bind of picking sides. No as a coach you choose the harder right and be done with it. The fault in all of this lies with John Harkes - black and white.
thanks for the info and follow up .... Sampson made his call and did the right thing .... had to have been hard as hell on him at the time .... it must have been really hard on John Harkes to do that to Eric and then to write a book about being a "Captain for Life" later ... I mean I feel so sorry for him (not).
Wynalda was "forced" to disclose this on FFF because of the Terry situation? That's a hoot. He has a TV show and book he's selling, saw the similarities between himself and Bridge, and decided to play his angle. I guess all of Tiger Woods mistresses were forced to run to the tabloids because all of the others were doing the same. As I said before, I like Eric. I liked during the 06 WC he said what he thought instead of pulling punches. I just disagree with the decision he made here.
So you liked Wynalda in the 2006 World Cup because in his commentary on soccer situations, he said what he believed and pulled no punches. But here in a situation that he experienced himself in the past, you wanted him to not say what he believed and pull his punches on his commentary of John Terry. ...
Amen! A leader makes the call and takes the credit or heat for it. As time has shown, Sampson was right and Harkes was wrong.
You see no difference between commenting on what goes on on the field, and what went on with his marriage 12-13 years ago? Really?
These are the actions I'd expect from a guy who until he took over the national team had no experience managing anyone over the age of 22. He was managing a group of professional athletes, and he probably would have been better served treating them as such. Regarding Harkes - Many years ago I attended a practice match at the Crew's training facility. After the match, I wasnt' paying attention, hopped in the truck, and proceeded to back up halfway up the hood of the car parked behind me (I was parallel parked). Being a model citizen, I waited around to exchange information with the owner. The lot cleared out. A group of players (including Harkes) comes walking over toward my truck. Harke's sees the hood, let's out a WTF. I explained that I did the damage and offered him my insurance info. He responded that he was surprised that I waited around and told me not to worry about it. I thought that was cool as hell. Now I wish I had driven over the entire damn car and left. What a douchebag.