Dom Apollon Mountain View, Calif. I was just wondering about Mike Woitalla’s response to the question about the lack of Mexican player success in Euro leagues [Q&A with the SA Editors, May 7, 1999]. A Mexican-American friend of mine seems to think it is the rampant corruption in the Mexican league that keeps the best domestic players from going abroad. I think he told me that the transfer fees quoted are astronomical, because these owners (who also own the television rights?) don’t want to let go of their stars? Have you or any of your other editors heard that argument, and what’s your view on the validity? Mike Woitalla: Dom, it is an interesting theory, and I don’t have the background information to give you a perfect response. But there are some things to consider with this theory: It is true that many clubs are owned by extremely rich people and companies, including the mighty Televisa. But other clubs are owned by more modest entities, and could be enticed by transfer fees of a couple million dollars, more or less. Many of the rising stars in Mexico start out with the modest clubs before going to teams like Club America (Televisa owned) or Cruz Azul (owned by a large cement factory). Pumas, for example, is run by alumni of UNAM and is not particulary rich. Thus it depends on developing young players, and has produced players like Hugo Sanchez, Luis Garcia and Jorge Campos. I am not well versed in Mexican League transfer rules, but I doubt there is free agency. That means a club could demand a transfer fee even for a player out of contract. But I believe the buying club can appeal to FIFA when a transfer fee for a player out of contract seems exorbitant. But if what your friend says is true, and Mexican clubs have that reputation, foreign clubs might not bother making offers. (Especially considering the poor track record of Mexican players abroad.) Although, when rich European clubs really like a player, they tend to go to great lengths. I know that when Luis Hernandez went to Boca Juniors, Televisa (also the owner of Necaxa) held on to his rights. It must have been a loan of sorts. Still, the reason he came back to Mexico was simply because he couldn’t crack the starting lineup. I don’t know if clubs trying to hold on to their stars by asking for large transfer fees can be classified as corruption. Preventing free agency, as you may know, is common everywhere and has created intense legal battles within American sports and in international soccer (e.g.: Curt Flood, Bosman etc.). Thanks for bringing this up. We’ll see if we can’t get some more information on this. Rich Faber Plantsville, Conn. Why is everybody buggin’ about the Shootout? I tell you this: I had Revolution season tickets for Year 1 & 2 and I drove four hours roundtrip to see a game. I would rather see the Revs lose in a shootout than see a tie game, or a draw like the soccer “purists” would call it. It sickens me to see all the fuss lately about this. I just read that Jason Kreis “can’t stand it.” He believes that a team that fights hard on the road deserves to go home with a point. Well you know what, instead of playing for a tie, play for the win. Too many times in soccer, teams play ugly, unattractive defensive trap like soccer. Fans want to see exciting soccer and I know that does not always mean a lot of goals. A 1-0 game can be very exciting offensively. Maybe a regulation win should be 3 points, a shootout win 2 points and for all you purists, a shootout loss can be 1 point. Nearly every MLS game I go to I hear young children screaming “Shootout shootout…” early in the 2nd half until the game ends. I’m sure Soccer America has a great influence with soccer fans in this country, so give the shootout some credit. Instead of complaining how many shootouts there’s been, think about how many ties there would have been instead. Remember, most games that go to a shootout are more than likely 1-1, or 0-0 games, not faster paced 2-2 or 3-3 games. Give the shootout a break. Tie games stink! Ridge Mahoney: And it’s your opinion that several operator-investors had in mind when they adopted the tiebreaker, Rich, although the NHL doesn’t seem to have a problem with ties. My only gripe at the time was they didn’t consider any form of overtime, ostensibly because of TV time constraints and the possibility overtime might not break the tie. But your defense of the shootout is rooted in your distaste of ties, not in any appreciation of the shootout itself. As a longtime soccer fan who doesn’t insist the “pure” version to be played in America — I like the clock counting down, and the playoffs, although most of the nicknames still leave me aghast — I’d have hoped the MLS honchos try something else before immediately latching onto a postgame gimmick that both the diehard soccer fans and most casual sports fans find Mickey-Mouse. Speaking of MM, kids will chant and cheer for almost anything, perhaps they know the shootout means they can stay at the stadium 10 more minutes and maybe get another ice cream. To me, a lot of ties and a lot of shootouts are equally distasteful. That’s why I’d increase the value of a win to four points, to further devalue either the tie or the shootout win in relation to a regulation win. In a low-scoring sport like soccer, ties are inevitable, like it or not. The fact you attend Rev games regardless is a key point — you’re supporting a team and a sport you enjoy, and that’s the product MLS must upgrade and refine, irrespective of how games turn out. Just keep in mind the Revs have a lot of fans weaned on this great sport, and they just wish the league could use fewer gimmicks like the shootout when it markets its version. Tom Shenk New York City Steve Cherundolo has had a quick start for his German Bundesliga 2 club Hannover 96. There is some question though as to what position he plays there, and also what position he plays for the national team. Specifically, I am interested to know if he might be a younger option at defensive midfield who could potentially serve as an understudy to Chris Armas. Is there anyone else who might be a better option for this role? Scott French: Hi, Tom: Yes, Steve Cherundolo just might be our best young bet at defensive midfielder — that’s where he plays for Hannover, and it’s one of the positions he’s played for the Americans. Hannover plays a 1-2-4-1-2 formation, with Cherundolo in front of the sweeper and two marking backs. He also is capable of sweeping or playing a wing. During the World Youth Championship in Nigeria, he was the Americans’ sweeper against England and Japan and moved into one of the central midfield slots (one of 2-3 DMFs, depending on the situation) against Cameroon and Spain. Sigi Schmid, the coach, said the move was so that the U.S. could benefit from his ball skills and creativity. (Japan’s high pressure had prevented Steve from playmaking out of the back, which is what Schmid wanted.) Cherundolo needed just two games after his return to Hannover to regain his starting spot and has played the full 90 in the last two matches (3-3 vs. Fortuna Cologne and 1-1 at Fortuna Duesseldorf). Bruce Arena believes that Cherundolo is a future national team player — Arena rated him highest among the U-20 Americans in Nigeria — and he’s already seeing time with the U-23s. Nick Downing, who plays at Maryland, and Nick Garcia, from Indiana, also are potential national team defensive midfielders. Garcia is incredibly gifted and can play just about anywhere — he might be at his best as a wild card, somebody with the freedom to do whatever he chooses. Downing is a very solid, versatile midfielder who thrives on the dirty work that comes with the position. Also worth watching for is Ken Cutler, one of the U-17 captains. We’ll have a better idea on how good he can be in the next couple years. Herb Thatcher Kingston, Wash. Concerning possible sites for future expanssion of the MLS an early leader was Seattle. During the campaign for a new stasium for the Seahawks a concious decision was made to target the soccer population of the state by using the term “football/soccer facility”. During the campaign Commissioner Logan visited the area and stated something to the effect of ‘when the stadium opens the MLS will come’. Recent discussions concerning expansion have not mentioned Seattle as a contender. Would you comment on the percieved pluses and minuses of Seattle as a site for one of what appears to be 4 to 8 possible MLS franchises? Would you hazzard a guess as to the probability of Seattle obtaining an MLS franchise in the next 5 years? Paul Kennedy: Seattle has an advantage of having a new stadium going up, but there are other bigger markets — notably Philadelphia and Houston — that MLS covets. Assuming no movement out of the existing 12 cities, here’s the list of top expansion candidates: Houston, Philadelphia, New York II, San Diego and Seattle. There’s also Rochester. Finally, the projected 25,000-seat stadium in Atlanta would make it a candidate. The bottom line in each city is finding a suitable stadium and owner-operator. Seattle will have the stadium. If it finds a backer, it could be a major contender for expansion in 2003 (I’m assuming there’s a jump from 12 to 14 teams in 2001, not 2000). Fred Bruce-Oliver Claremont, Calif. I’m sure you watch ESPN and ESPN2’s telecasts of Champions league play. I do too, and commend the channels and their broadcast crews for their finework. I have a problem with the critical style of one of the color commentators: Tommy Smyth. He is always second-guessing referees and their assistants’ calls; also, the tactics and selections of coaches. In my view, he is almost always wrong and his partner does not disagree with him. No one else seems to either. My concern, as a coach, is the bad example he is setting for young players who watch these matches. Ridge Mahoney: Part of the analyst’s job is to critique and comment on just those subjects. I think he should make his views known, and if savvy viewers like you disagree with him, a fair number of coaches and players will, too. A bland, colorless, gee-whiz announcer might not offend anybody, but neither will he inform and entertain the audience as he should. In the booth, the commentators have to support each other (much as players must do if a few of them are struggling, or as business associates must do), although how they interact often depends on their personalities and chemistry along with their personal views. They, too, are a team. In my work for FOX, if I disagree with my partner, I try to do so respectfully. If I see a controversial refereeing decision is correct, I praise the official. If I disagree with a subsitution or tactic, I’ll try to interpret why the coach is doing what he’s doing, and substantiate my own opinion rather than just blurt it out. It’s as much a matter of how you say something as what you say. I often find Tommy Smyth’s analysis flawed, but if the referee makes a mistake that is revealed, he can’t very well back up the official. As a coach or parent, you should use that occasion to remind your players they cannot beat the referee — he always wins, regardless of how right he is — and therefore they must concentrate on the task at hand. Coaches who constantly criticize and abuse the referee, and they are all too numerous, sow far more dissent and disrespect for referees than a befuddled TV commentator.