SoccerOffside: Fixing Canadian Soccer - Who's in charge?

Beginning of Story Content

If you find yourself experiencing a strong sense of déjà vu after reading the document, you’re not alone. I felt the exact same emotion the first time I read the Crawford Report.

In fact, I came away from it thinking that if I substituted the word “Canada” for “Australia” throughout the document, I would have a fairly accurate reflection of the problems we face in our own country.

Now I admit, there are some major differences between the states of the game in the two countries.

For example, the government of Australia, particularly the Australian Sports Commission, contributes significant amounts of money to the sport of soccer down under. The same level of financial support does not exist between the Canadian government and the sport of soccer in Canada.

There is also a significant difference in the quantity and quality of training facilities in Australia compared to Canada. The Australian Institute of Sport, for example, is a stunning facility, with 35 sport programs available in 26 different sports. It offers Australia’s best athletes access to world-class coaches, sports scientists and sports medicine practitioners in a bid to help the athletes fulfill their potential.

Quite frankly, we have nothing like it in Canada, certainly not for the game of soccer.

However, for all the differences between the two countries, there are even more similarities between them with regard to the governance of soccer. Here are some of the findings of the Crawford Report that might sound familiar:

• Poor governance and management practices within the sport.
• In-fighting between Soccer Australia and state federations resulting in an attitude of each protecting their ‘own turf’ at the expense of the broader interests of the sport as a whole.
• A lack of integration and mutual trust between Soccer Australia and its constituent bodies.
• Malaise, lack of decision-making, poor financial management and lack of accountability within the sport.
• State and territory-based associations competing against one another.
• Failure to translate the enthusiasm for junior soccer to senior soccer.

These are all problems that we have been facing for many years in Canada, and many people believe we are not doing anything to fix them.

It is difficult to disagree with that sentiment, because when I ask the question - “Why have we not changed the structure of the game in our country?” - I get the following answers:

• At the national level, I am told the provincial associations are not unanimously supportive of change.
• At the provincial level, I am told the districts are not unanimously supportive of change.
• At the district level, I am told the clubs are not unanimously supportive of change.

This political divisiveness has got to stop.

Politics a main cause of interference

When are we going to realize that the only way for us to move the game of soccer forward in Canada is to have everyone pushing in the same direction?

The game is rife with individuals who want to have their own little fiefdom, to rule their own kingdom. Part of that is due to the intoxication that comes with being in a position of power, such as a provincial, district or club president.

But another part of that stems from the fact that we do not have a unified structure of development and governance across the country. Each province, district or club chooses to do things its own way because it can, because there is no model to follow for guidance.

This leaves us in a situation where we have too many generals and not enough soldiers. If we are going to implement change, there needs to be one general: the Canadian Soccer Association.

The CSA is the governing body for the game of soccer in our country. As such, it should be the organization that dictates policy, be it administrative or developmental. The provincial and district associations should follow that policy, without exception.

Pyramid not working

While such a chain of command sounds great in theory, the reality is that the power in Canadian soccer does not lie where it should, with the CSA.

The real power lies with the clubs and districts, because the provincial associations and the CSA are both entirely dependent on the income generated from player registrations at the club level. The clubs dictate to the districts, which dictate to the provinces, which dictate to the CSA. The pyramid that represents the chain of command in Canadian soccer is actually reversed.

Of the 53 recommendations that came out of the Crawford report, these were some of the most significant:

• Soccer Australia should be governed by a board of six elected independent directors.
• The management of Soccer Australia and state member affiliates should be structured in a similar way for effective communication and effective delivery of programs on a national scale.
• A clearer separation of the roles of boards and managements should established.

One of the reasons there is so much indignation directed towards the CSA is that the organization is almost entirely governed by representatives of the provinces and territories.

The CSA Board of Directors is made up of the provincial association presidents, as well as a representative of the professional game. We also have an Executive Committee that is largely made up of former provincial association presidents.

The make up of those governing bodies is hardly independent, is it?

Separate agendas, not one umbrella

In fact, you could argue that the provincial associations are actually running the CSA. In which case, how is anything productive ever going to happen if everyone comes to the table with their own provincial agenda?

You wouldn’t vote for a national policy that might be detrimental to your own province, would you, even if it was in the best interests of the country?

This same conflict of interest exists at the provincial level, as their boards are made up of district representatives. Again, there is little independence in that structure, is there?

If we had an elected, independent board at every level of governance in Canadian soccer, how much easier do you think it would be for us to implement nation-wide programs for the benefit of the game?

Which leads me to the third point, one that I think is especially important: there has to be a clear separation between the board level and management.

The elected, independent board should appoint a qualified chief executive officer to run the association, with responsibilities and mandates to which he or she can be held accountable. That is how successful businesses are run, and that is how our soccer associations should be run as well.

Ian Campbell, a successful businessman and president of Canada’s newest Premier Development League franchise, FC London, recently told me that to be successful, you have to have three things: a vision of what you want to achieve, a plan of how you are going to achieve it, and the courage and will to implement that plan.

I found those words very meaningful; so let’s apply them to Canadian soccer.

The CSA has a vision, and it is there for all to see in the Wellness to World Cup document.

I haven’t seen a plan on how this vision is going to be implemented, but I am hopeful that if we all work together, we can come up with one that is realistic and achievable.

The courage and the will is the easy part; that is what being Canadian is all about, isn’t it?

The Offside blog series concludes next week with Jason tackling the issue of what Canada has to do to qualify for the World Cup.

End of Story Content

Back to accessibility links