Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by JohnnyFranchise

  1. 4 hours ago, Yoginess said:

    Millar on for the last 14 minutes in a game Kilmarnock is dominating. He looks like Canada winger most eager to run right at defenders. Could've had a goal and got an assist.

    EDIT: As some others pointed out, the SPL is a weird league. It's somehow both decent level of soccer yet also not very good at the same time. 

    Liam can torch up the wing in this league. 


    Hopefully he can start getting more than the <20 minutes he's been getting, but if he keeps up the strong performances it shouldn't be too long. 

  2. 30 minutes ago, Zem said:

    It's literally the most standard tiebreakers in football, unless you consider the World Cup "bush league". Putting head-to-heads first is very much the exception, not the rule.

    We should also probably work on that whole "beating the US" thing first before we start bitching about tiebreakers.

    Pretty much all UEFA competitions, plus la liga and serie a use head to head as first tiebreaker. And Fifa uses head to head after goal diff. So thanks for that comment.

    And yes, we shall focus on beating the US first before looking at tiebreakers from here on 😎

  3. 23 minutes ago, Zem said:

    Tiebreakers are as follows, which were the same ones used in the qualifying tournament:

    1. Points
    2. Goal Difference
    3. Goals Scored
    4. Away Goals
    5. Fair Play Points
    6. Drawing of lots


    So actually, there will be no head-to-head tiebreakers at all.

    Ugh. So if we beat the states by 2, and they beat us by 1, it comes down to who pumped Cuba by more. Bush league.

    I'm not surprised by it, I just hate it.

  4. 3 hours ago, apbsmith said:

    "Balance of probabilities" haha, above 51% chance. 

    UEFA nations league used that tiebreaker format and we have the identical structured tournament. 

    UEFA & CONCACAF are both subsidiaries of FIFA.

    As much as CONCACAF has done some strange things, I can't see our Nations League A structure not being identical to UEFA's. 


    Valid points. Except that UEFA almost always uses head to head as first tiebreaker, and FIFA uses goal diff as first tiebreaker. Given the sports climate around here I would guess CONCACAF will go with goal diff to encourage more scoring.

  5. 1 hour ago, apbsmith said:

    For the most part I would agree with this, but because the first 4 tiebreakers are head to head (I don't mind getting our two games vs Cuba out of the way early in the competition).

     Based on our history of "away games in Concacaf" our players can purely focus on getting all 6 points from Cuba in the same window. 

    Then prep for the 2 American matches, if we don't advance because tiebreak #7 or something, it would be lame, but our players would have had great prep for WCQ and still be in group A next tournament.

    Where did you see the tiebreaking procedures? I can't find it anywhere.

    Agree with the points there. Get the Cuba matches out of the way and use them as preps for the US matches. 

    And good keeping in mind that the point of this tournament is to better prep our guys for WCQ. If we get into that finals bracket, great, but staying in league A is the real focus, gives us a few more competitive matches against the top concacaf teams. 

  6. 20 minutes ago, BrennanFan said:

    There's a good point here.  Perhaps November is too cold in Toronto for the players' liking.  I don't think we would get any kind of cold weather advantage against the Americans and its not like our players are used to the conditions.  Still, I just don't see the players ever opting for a turf field when other options are available.

    Thank you for beating me to that comment. Our players are NOT used to playing in cold conditions, last time I checked the lower mainland of BC is the only place where soccer is played outside through the winter (anybody feel free to correct me if I'm wrong). The whole "take advantage of our weather conditions" ploy only worked once, EVER. Time to get that out of the conversation and talk about where our guys on the pitch want to play, not where we think the opposition doesn't. 

  7. 4 hours ago, dyslexic nam said:

    I would like to see us utilize location strategically.  I am not as informed as many on here about barriers and possibilities, but something like Commonwealth in Edmonton might be far enough to deter US fans from traveling.  Anything right along the border risks a huge influx.  

    How quickly we forget the days when Commonwealth was our home stadium and drew <10,000 fans in a 60,000 seat stadium. I'll take 5,000 or 6,000 US fans at bc place to get drowned out by 45,000 of us, and I would assume our players would take that too.

  8. 11 minutes ago, Kent said:

    As much as I'd love to have the game(s) in Toronto so that I can go, I also wouldn't be against spreading it to other areas, especially newly minted CPL areas. Winnipeg or Hamilton could be good for the USA match because they have big stadiums. Halifax for the Cuba match would be cool since I imagine the opponent would matter less in a small stadium in a market that isn't used to getting national team games. They could probably get a good turn out there. Let's find where our home field advantage is in this country!

    We did, it's called BC Place

    .....also not biased at all

  • Create New...