U-17 CONCACAF WWC qualifying

who goes to the wc?

what rules apply when games are cancelled?

(i was quietly fuming with go90 that they weren't showing games that they promised)

 

The U.S. ought to find a way to get out of Concacaf. Where we--and Canada and maybe Mexico, too--would go for WC qualifying, I don't know--but being lumped in with a bunch of tiny, often unstable central American and Caribbean countries is weird, unbalanced and not good. Here is a WC qualifying match--and we are playing a not good Costa Rican team in a tiny central American country where there is rioting, in front of no fans.

 

don't most feds have small, not good countries as part of their group?

some of those concacaf countries on the men's side have a better culture than us, and are pretty vibrant and competitive, which has pushed us to grow the game. we can look to get out now, (where would we go in this part of the globe to get stronger distaff competition?), or we can reciprocate on the women's side.

 

All but CONMEBOL have some.

 

on the women's side, they may not have too many "small", but there is a lot of "not good".

 

The U17s can get international experience by going to Europe to play, say, 3 UEFA teams or to Asia to play Japan, Korea and China, and/or three teams can come to the states for a mini-tournament. That's plenty of international competition--and you're playing reasonably comparable competition. Do that and be done with it. This idea that the U17s need a World Cup--with all of the time and qualifying and travel and matches against weak opponents that goes with it--is utterly absurd. And nothing shouted absurd more than the U.S. playing a bad Costa Rica team (0 shots!) in front of 30 people in what looked like a half-dark stadium in Managua.

I respect all nations, I get inclusivity, but you've got to look at things practically, too. The fact is that tiny nations are never going to be competitive with large nations. Indeed, instead of going to all the trouble to stimulate interest in soccer in Surinam or Papua New Guinea (where FIFA inexplicably decided to hold the last U20 World Cup--why?), FIFA should break up the sport into two or three divisions--let the Caribbean and all other small nations play each other, and then do the same with larger nations, much as our college system is broken up by size of school. Let the smaller nations compete in their own World Cup--they'd probably enjoy it a lot more than being tokens in amongst the big boys.

 

The federations exists even if they currently is not fielding a WNT.

 

...if they're ok with being in the little girls/boys wc.

are they?

 

therefore why break them up or separate them just because they have some "small" or "not good" teams.

i'm agreeing with you...i think.

 

The USSF spends much too much on these YNT and with what return?

Recently, FIFA voted down a proposal to move to a single U19 WC format for 2020.That would have cut the drama and expense in half. Having the venue in such countries as Jordan and New Gunea simply adds unnecessary danger and drama to the process. New Guinea has a long history of misogyny. Who thought that was a good idea? Jordan? where the kids have to play in 90 plus degree heat while limiting their ability to dissipate heat with their heads covered? Further they add a tomato can "host" country to the table unbalancing the competition even further.

The best "development" for our national teams would be to have an academy system in place that was financially driven to produce outstanding players. That won't happen any time soon in the US. Therefore the USSF should select a few (like 20) clubs with a proven history of developing great players with some geographic diversity and sink much of the money they are blowing on u15 international. trips etc and fully subsidize these programs, buff up the coaches and pay them enough to stay, so that the programs are free to the players. Then scout the nation to make sure any kid 14 and older, good enough and willing to be boarded at a school or sheltered by a host family if necessary, is included. From this group you pull 60 all stars into a two week camp each year on each coast. In YNT WC years, you have maybe 8 camps in the year leading up to the competition to build the team.

That way you are developing about 360 kids per age group instead of the repetitive maybe 40 per age group we are doing now. Yes we will still miss some kids, some will not want to participate in the model. But we need to leave behind the vision that we can scout and provide the same opportunity to every child no matter where they live in our giant country. We will have to make it a little smaller to keep the dilutional effect of all the resources financial and otherwise minimal.

 

I won't answer the whole of your post, but I'll just single-out this claim, because it shows that people should get informed before speaking of things that they happen to just know from hearsay.

If you'd ever looked at half a match from Jordan women's NT, you'd know that, unlike what happens in other countries from that area (Iran, for instance), their players are not forced to wear an hijab or to cover their heads in any way. It's a free choice for each of the players: in fact, if you'd care to watch highlights from any of Jordan's game at recent AFC Asian Cup (the debut one, for instance), you'd notice that more than half of the players chose not to wear any hijab, while others did. Now, don't you think that women's football in a muslim country where women have the choice if wearing hijab or not, as they like best, should be encouraged?

It seems to me, instead, that your prejudice made you rush to the equation: "muslim country" = "no rights for women" = "mandatory hijab" = "no player is allowed to transpire" (and I won't even mention hijabs that are expressly meant to do sport).
The difference is that I'll admit that I don't know everything about women's condition in Jordan, so I won't claim that there won't be problems for them there (heck, parity is far from being reached in many western countries), but at least I don't make claims about things I don't know and I don't talk about a NT while not having seeing a single minute of any of their games.

 

I stand corrected on the Jordanian youth team I must have been thinking of another youth game where not only the team was forced to wear head coverings but also long sleeves and pants. May have been an Iranian team and the u16s or 18s a year or so ago. I have daughters and yes object to limitation of girls in any way. I do admit to having a problem with Muslim countries in general as my sons have risked their lives to protect the rights and indeed lives of the men, women and children who live there. One is presently preparing to go to Afghanistan. The head coverings and frankly other body coverings limit women and that does cause me to object.

I don't think that offering a youth World Cup venue to countries without a history of success as the youth level and introducing an unnecessary uncompetitive set of games is a good decision. Further I don't believe that the failure of offering such an opportunity to a country has any effect on their overall treatment of women. That's my opinion. I did by the way watch every available u17 game but as I was typing I superimposed the Iranian game in my mind- my bad. My points still stand as my opinion. .


https://www.ussoccer.com/stories/20...t-defeats-iran-6-0-in-historic-match-in-italy

 

The discussion about Jordan/Iran reminds me of a session I once participated in with former director of the CIA Bill Casey. A point he made was that the meaning, of a fact about an event in a country, depends on context. For the event in Iran, given the context, the most important fact may have been that the women were playing at all, not that they wore body coverings while playing. Indeed, the two combined -- playing, but with body coverings -- may indicate that there is progress for women in Iran but that they have a very long way to go. The Jordan game, in that context, may indicate that Jordan has made even more progress, but still has a long way to go but not as long as Iran. There's something to celebrate in each case, but also something to grieve.

I just wanted to put that thought out there because although the session with Casey was about 40 years ago, for some reason I've been thinking about it recently.

 

I do appreciate the sentiment.
However the question under discussion was regarding the wisdom that FIFA has shown in the choosing of venues for girls YNT WC. I do not think that supporting ephemeral "progress" should be substantial enough reason to subject our girls, many still children, to a potentially unsafe and unwelcoming environment. That is my opinion.

 

I agree completely. Papua, New Guinea, is an example I thought was ridiculous. Young players should not be used to promote FIFA's politics or desires for self-promotion.

Of course, look at where the men's world cups are going to be, including this year. Are they serious?

 

Ditto.

Double Ditto.

 

Amman, Jordan has summer temperatures cooler than the American South -- and is probably safer on average than the United States. As another poster has noted, girls and women in Jordan can dress as they wish -- as is true in many, probably most, Muslim countries.

 

The risk is that this thread drifts towards political off-topicness. Of course, it's something that somehow can't be avoided, because U-17 WWC has been cancelled for reasons that are eminently tied with politics.

Anyway, I can't help answering at least this last thing that was written by @olelaliga, then I probably won't say anything more about the subject, or I'll ask to move the discussion to different, not-soccer-related threads.
I have maximum respect for your sons and their sacrifices, but are you sure they were fighting "Muslim countries" in general? Would it surprise you to know that Jordan, for instance (since it was the country whose involvement in women's soccer you were questioning in the first place), although a Muslim country, fought most of those wars on the same side as your sons? Probably you remember that, about 3 years ago, a Jordanian Air Force pilot was captured by ISIS and burnt alive in a cage? Wouldn't the family of that pilot be allowed to object that what you said about "Muslim countries in general" is indeed what you're admitting yourself it is, i.e. a generalization, with all of the unfairness that generalizations use to risk bringing on?

 

That's exactly what I was saying. I am gracious enough to admit that I should endeavor to protect myself against my bias in writing too quickly before completely thinking the point out. I would cease this political offshoot but was asked a direct question: My son's position is that he will be fighting ( he does not have a desk job) to protect the rights and lives of those people living In what most likely to be Afganiststan this summer. Similarly to my bias, I would ask those who have not served or who do not have a loved one directly in the line of fire to be sensitive as well.
Freedom to choose regarding apparel may be supported legally although I am not sure whether in Jordan a woman may yet secure an abortion in the event of a rape or incest, but may not be so socially.

My original position which has been somewhat ignored, with the emphasis shifted to my error on Jordan, regarding the wisdom related to the venue selection, safety, and competitive spirit within the intent of the youth world Cup stands; If arguably Jordan was an acceptable venue to some. Clearly Nicaragua and New Guinea were not.

 

To put a bit of levity into this intense discussion, I would imagine that European women footballers who plan a visit to the U.S. are advised not to take their bikini tops off on American beaches -- or risk arrest for indecent exposure if they do so.

I know that Japanese men visiting the US used to be -- and maybe still are -- warned not to wander around hotel hallways in their underwear.

In other words, "appropriate" dress has some culturally-specific aspects to it -- and is not in itself grounds for condemnation.

 

That's probably what exposed you to much too easy objections.

As I said above I am inclined to cease the offshoot too. I'll admit I am not in your situtation, but I hope my position, when I started by saying that I was anyway respecting your sons and what they chose to do, can be considered a sensitive enough approach to the subject.

And I also agree (how couldn't I?) that there are Muslim countries where women's rights are severely limited

What was important to me was getting out of the way some statements that were incorrect to my eyes. Now, getting back to your original point (but with those statements out of the way) I still not completely agree with your position, although I respect it. Call me an idealist, but In my opinion, sport is not just entertainement industry and it should contribute to making the world a better place. If this involves organizing tournaments around the world in places where women's football still has difficult times (for whatever reasons: not necessarily involving prejudice or violence), so be it. Of course safety of the players, expecially Under 17 ones, has to be a priority, but, apart from the unpredictible (at least to me and to that extent: but I'll admit I don't know enough and I could be wrong) recent situation in Nicaragua, I never actually had the feeling that the players were in danger in places where FIFA tournament were played.

I followed the whole coverage of U-17 WWC in Papua New Guinea: I am of course not denying the appalling stats about gender violence in that country, but, as far as I know, international players where always in the relatively safe surroundings of the capital city Port Moresby and lived the tournament in a festive atmosphere, with people that was heartily supporting each NT by filling the streets leading to the stadiums to wave at the buses and were happy to be just for once the "center of the world" for a change, instead of a country that no-one remembers about: can such a feeling empower changes? I am not sure, but why not giving it a try?

I am not claiming we're all living in a fairy-tale, we well know what the world around us is, and i am not ignoring, as @lil_one pointed out, that a lot of FIFA's choices were driven by corruption instead of being made for the right reasons, but I anyway embrace their idea of supporting youth women's football in countries that are somehow deprived of that.
And I also admit (I just said that in another thread) that seeding the host teams in those cases can lead to problems. But if, two years after the event, a single goal scored by Papua New Guinea in their home tournament still unclenches positive memories, made a young girl some kind of a national hero and even maybe gave a minuscule contribute in appeasing the relationships between PNG landmass and their strife-torn far island of Bouganville, well, in my eyes it means it was worth going there:
http://www.samoaplanet.com/goal-rocked-nation/

 

This levity (that's a very different thing from careless disengagement) was much appreciated.