After 24 years out of the World Cup, Canada 'can't get any worse'

clutch

Time Out
Jan 23, 2010
149
2
18
Peter J. Thompson/National Post
Canadians such as K'Naan can't cheer for Canada in the World Cup because Canada hasn't had a team in the Cup since 1986.








Joe O’Connor, National Post · Friday, Jun. 11, 2010
Canadians will be watching the World Cup in South Africa and cheering wildly for their team. But the team they are cheering for will certainly not be Canada. Our hockey-crazed nation failed to qualify for the World Cup. Again.
It is no surprise. The last — and first and only — time the country actually participated in the beautiful game’s big fiesta was in Mexico in 1986, when a crew of plucky Canucks lost three games while failing to score a single goal.
The World Cup drought is now at 24 years and counting, a more than two decade dry spell that Paris-based author and award winning soccer journalist, Simon Kuper, says is destined to end — in our lifetimes.
His collaboration with Stefan Szymanski is called Soccernomics: Why England Loses, Why Germany and Brazil Win, and Why the U.S., Japan, Australia, Turkey — and even Iraq — are Destined to Become the Kings of the World’s Most Popular Sport.
It is a mouthful of a title. One of the countries Mr. Kuper neglected to mention in it, with no offence intended, is Canada. But even lowly Canada, according to Mr. Kuper, is destined to play among the World Cup giants.
“Canada is going to catch up rapidly in soccer because you are in an easy Confederation to qualify for the World Cup,” Mr. Kuper says from Johannesburg. “Pretty soon, Canada will put some of its financial might and size, in terms of inhabitants, into the game and get much better — because you can’t get any worse.”
He is not just playing nice for his Canadian audience. His optimism is genuine. He even has a theory supported by reams of data to back it up.
Call it the four pillars for World Cup success. Pillar one is population. The more people a country has, the more potential players there are. Pillar two is per capita income: wealthy nations, with Brazil as the great exception, excel at international soccer.
Next is experience. Countries with long histories of playing and competing in international circles hold an edge. Complementing experience are “soccer knowledge networks.” Western Europe, where there is a constant dialogue about the sport, and cross-border exchanges of talent, coaches and tactics, is the Mona Lisa of soccer knowledge networks.
The final pillar is a wild card, or as Mr. Kuper labels it: a nation’s “intrinsic soccer qualities.” Take Brazil. Poor, and far from European knowledge networks, Brazil should be a second rate soccer power. But every single Brazilian kid on every beach and in every grinding slum plays the game every spare minute they can.
“Brazil’s specialty is producing great individual players, the best in the world,” Mr. Kuper says. “They have a secret, some intrinsic quality, like Canada has for producing great hockey players.”
Brazil has Peles. We produce Gretzkys. We also have two pillars in place suggesting a bright World Cup future: population and money.
There are about 2.6 million soccer players in Canada, which is about 2.5 million more than tiny Slovenia, which is making its second appearance at the World Cup. Canada is also rich, with an average annual income of $43,000 — or about six times what the average Brazilian brings home.
We have pluses. Even so, Canada’s World Cup drought continues. Our curse, says Mr. Kuper, is simple geography. Canada is a knowledge desert in soccer circles.
“In England, you have French and Italian coaches transferring best practice soccer [knowledge],” he says. “In Canada, you are at the end of the line in soccer. Nobody with best practice knowledge goes there. You can’t earn big money sharing your knowledge in Canada, so why would you go there?”
Why indeed. And why on earth would you stay if you were a talented Canadian and wanted to learn from European luminaries? Canada produces elite prospects. They just do not stick around. Owen Hargreaves, from Calgary, plays in England and would be playing for England — his father’s country — at the World Cup if not for an injury. Jonathan de Guzman, from Toronto, took out Dutch citizenship and represented the Netherlands at the 2008 Beijing Olympics.
Losing both players was crushing for Canada. Still, Mr. Kuper believes change is coming. World Cup fever is contagious. Canada is rich, multicultural and full of soccer-loving hosers, some of whom own companies who will begin investing in the sport.
Increased funding benefited Canada’s Winter Olympians. They captured a record 14 gold medals in Vancouver. Winning on the big stage made Canadians proud. And there is no bigger stage than the World Cup.
Mr. Kuper’s enthusiasm for Canada’s coming soccer greatness has its limits. He is bullish, though can’t promise a 39-year-old Canadian reporter his country will win a World Cup during his lifetime.
“That’s very unlikely, but your children may see that,” Mr. Kuper says. “What you will live to see is Canada play in several World Cups.”
And hopefully score a goal.
National Post



 

Kreskin

Doctor of Thinkology
Feb 23, 2006
21,155
149
63
If Canada ever scores a goal in a World Cup I'll become a drunken hooligan and riot in the streets.
 

Risus

Genius
May 24, 2006
5,373
25
38
Toronto
Well at least Canada can beat these other countries in hockey.
Who cares about soccer anyway? Boring.....
 

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
I'll be smashing a window to those medical clinics for one of those new-fangled transplant kits. Grow a heart from your saliva in 48 hours or a new liver from your boogers! Costly though...I'll get an extra one for a price...hooligans might want a new liver...:D

I think it says a lot about North America's instant gratification complex that so many find soccer boring. Please! Baseball? I actually like both sports, and I played baseball for more years than I played soccer, but soccer is far more entertaining to watch than baseball.
 

Downhome_Woman

Electoral Member
Dec 2, 2008
588
24
18
Ontariariario
I don't like hockey - football leaves me snoring, but soccer? I love it!It's got to be the most egalitarian game in the world! Males and females play it - unlike hockey, you don't need a deep pocket to play. It is the universal game. I don't claim to understand all the rules but I love the energy. I love knowing that some kid in a barrio can make a soccer ball out of paper and tape and a game will happen. It's magic - and it's a gorgeous game. I see the players, and at the most, all the protection they have on are shin guards. I SEE the players. No helmets, no body armour, just people playing a wonderful game.
Look, I understand our cultural attachment to hockey, and I understand the football thing - but they are limiting. They - on the basic 'family on the street' level, are elitist.Not every family can put their children into football or hockey programs - they're expensive, but soccer? It's a sport that is inexpensive and universal - it's gorgeous, it's inexpensive and it has no class boundries. I'm living in Ottawa where they keep trying to revive the dead body of football - and worse, baseball. It blows my mind that they don't see the goodness of soccer. And all this - coming from someone who doesn't even like sports!
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
I'm all for Canada improving, but not at the expense of our tax dollars. Let the private sector deal with this. This is not the government's business any more than are the NHL and the Olympics... or at least ought not be.
 

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
I don't think it will take government funds to get soccer talent. DHW listed many of the selling points. It'ss not even played at the same time of year as hockey, I played soccer with many hockey kids too. It's already one of the most popular sports, and I wouldn't be surprised if it overtakes hockey for enrollment across the country.