WOW, you must read this !!! or is it old news by now? Revolution sold the home game for no more then $ 25 k to the costa ricans http://www.tauntongazette.com/site/news.cfm?BRD=1711&dept_id=24231&newsid=7303471&PAG=461&rfi=9 I know this has been discussed here on the Boards, but this is an excelent read on the issue
Ahh, an opportunity to rip the Revs again over their idiotic CCC decision. I hope MLS figures a way to ban the Revs from future similar competitions. For shame!
Hmm... lose money playing in an empty Razor or take the $25k to cover your expenses of having to travel to Central America for a match... Hate to say it, but I agree with their decision. Its all about $.
You know what. I don't care. It's the Revs. If this were DC United, I would be marching through their office like a bull in a china shop, but I rejoiceth in the iniquity of others. Sachin
In every sport there is a local radius zone. It's when you buy into the league you are granted a zone that insures that no other competing team can be established with X miles of your city without your approval. I.e., MLB (Baseball) cannot move a team to Washington, DC without the approval of the owner of the Baltimore Orioles, because DC is within Baltimore's local radius zone. I think MLS should make a rule about any international competition that has home and away legs. The rule should be that any MLS team competing in these competitions must play their "home" leg within the local radius zone, or forfeit the spot to the next highest ranked MLS team. This sort of rule will prevent embarassing situations like the current one the Revolution have put MLS in. It essentially gives up a chance to advance to the next round. If this type of rule had been in place last season, then the Dallas Burn could have surely hosted their home leg without any difficulty, and at least some MLS fans would be afforded the opportunity to see their team in international competition. Yes, it is disgraceful. No, it shouldn't ever happen again. Making this simple rule would prevent it. Let's get that rule made ASAP. -Tron
it doesn't give up a chance to make it to the next round. it shouldn't be banned... if the club owner decides to play both games in costa rica... if he decides he wants the home game played in riyadh then its his decision. you think you fools would have made $25.000 if you'd held it as a home game??
Not necessarily... To say nothing of the fact that yesterday, the Boston Globe reported the Revs weren't certain if the Razor's pitch was going to in decent enough shape for their MLS opener on April 12. And the Champions Cup tie would've been 3 weeks earlier!
Yeah, it's all about money. But don't expect new fans to show up to back a team that would sell out like this. They may make a few bucks in March but will it hurt any efforts to attract and keep a fan base? This comes from a management team that aggressively marketed qualifier tickets to enemy teams such as Trinidad, Barbados and Jamaica, canceling out some of the efforts made by fans all over this nation to have a home field advantage for our national team. Remember the Revs pitch? Good seats are still available. This management also had the bright idea of playing Ole Ole Ole! over the sound system when Holland scored against the USMNT. That game was broadcast in Europe. They must really think Americans are stupid if the management celebrates when the foreign team scores. Just my opinions
Re: Not necessarily... Yet the Red Sox first home game is March 31st - only 5 days after the the Revs "home" game in Costa Rica. I guess the Fenway field and grounds crew are better than the state of the art field and its NFL crew at Gillette.
I disagree. Teams should have the right to play whereever they want. The only punishment should come from any resultant disloyalty by the "fans". Club America is playing its home leg in Dallas. Are they whining about it in the Mexico forum? No. The big deal is that this is the Revs first ever meaningful international play. If the Revs had been ruling the league for 7 years, and had played plenty of CONCACAF, Copa MercoNorte, etc.. games - this wouldn't be a big deal. The problem is one of perception and timing. It's also the fact that they have lied repeatedly about why they're not playing at home. The reason is 100% about money and 0% about field conditions, extra training in good weather.
Re: Re: Not necessarily... C'mon, that's not even fair. Yeah, did Fenway have FOOTBALL players tearing up the turf less than three months ago? Oh, and, does Baseball have NEARLY the same wear-and-tear on its outfield and infield as soccer does EVERYWHERE, especially around the goals? If we're going to make arguments about being mistreated, let's at least make GOOD arguments...
Re: Re: Re: Not necessarily... C'mon, that is not fair, how many baseball games were there played and how many football games . I agree with AndyMead "The problem is one of perception and timing. It's also the fact that they have lied repeatedly about why they're not playing at home. The reason is 100% about money and 0% about field conditions, extra training in good weather "
Hate to say it, but I agree with their decision. Its all about $. Funny then how the Revolution are spinning weather as the excuse. The following is part of an Op-Ed I wrote for Soccer New England: "A downsized Gillette Stadium could also have an option should the weather have posed a problem (which it has). I mean, Robert and Jonathan Kraft pumped millions into financing 92,300 square feet of hydronically conditioned Kentucky Blue Grass, not to mention the 153,000 lineal feet of PEX tubing pumping a water/glycol antifreeze mix through the facility’s the state-of-the-art radiant heating/turf warming system. Don’t forget the Alfa-Laval heat exchanger, Taco zone circulators and a DDC temperature control system as well, all helping to ensure that a perfect soil temperature can be maintained, even in the harshest of weather conditions…a “near-perfect system” according to the Dennis Brolin, the N.E. Patriots’ field superintendent." But it's not a “near-perfect system” when the over-fed Mastadons that are the New England Patriots were allowed to practice on the Gillette Stadium pitch for the last three weeks of their NFL season, and not when it's been suggested that no efforts were made to recondition the pitch at the end of their season. The result, a field that might not be "ready" (whatever that means) in time for the start of the season. The fact of the matter is this: 1. Kraft did not spend the money to take care of the pitch that might have allowed for the CONCACAF match to be played at Gillette Stadium. 2. Kraft wasn't going to open the facilty anyway, the cost, not the weather being the reason. 3. The Revs have traded their home match and any competative advantage for $25,000 and a working holiday. But what can you do. The Krafts can't compete with the Anschutz's and Hunt's of MLS financially. The Magpie
Having followed the Revs from day -200, I can tell you that they have consistently made the same mistake with the fan base. They have always taken the "white lie" path instead of the honest truth. They could have come out directly and said "this is a money loser for us and we think the money would be better directed elsewhere for the Revs" Everyone could have said "that sucks" but no one could have really called them on it. This spin about weather and not being able to find a single stadium in the entire country to play at is just too sad for words. Tell the truth. In the end the fans will appreciate more, no matter how painful the truth is. Andy
1) That's the "big picture" 2) Does the blanket let light in? If so, and the field is heated below, then it should be fine.
That "blanket" seems to be transparent, so it should allow light through. The field is also heated, that is, if they're actually paying to have it heated. But it doesn't matter... The Magpie
Looks playable to me. I buy the "cost of opening the stadium" argument. Fair enough. The weather one is bull - that's called home field advantage especially when you consider the team they would play is from Costa Rica. I just don't understand why they could not have found a place to play in America somewhere. How much would it cost to open up Lockhart? Giving the game away like that is just plain cheap and lazy. I understand cheap - its the lazy that gets to me. They're just giving it away.
I am coaching a team which is playing outdoors (confirmed today) , next Saturday, at Northeastern University in Boston. Parsons field has an AstroPlay surface which I believe is FIFA acceptable. www.gonu.com And, the Rev's couldn't swing a deal with Northeastern University???? Absurd!
Hey Sunil, I found a field in Boston for you! Incredible as it may seem, but yes, my 11 year olds will play soccer outdoos on a cleared pitch in Boston. Whilst the Rev's "couldn't find a place to play locally." Northeastern is 20 miles North (as the crow flies) of Foxboro. Where do I apply for that part time position of Director of Soccer Operations for the Patriots?