Canadian Soccer Association president Victor Montagliani took part in a media conference call Wednesday to detail what went into the formal response the association filed last week to the 2015 Women's World Cup turf lawsuit, and he made it clear the association isn't not going to back down. The call covered several of the key issues the CSA sees with the lawsuit and discussed their plans to fight it in court, but the most notable tidbit emerging from it may well be that as of right now (with less than eight months before the tournament's first game), the organization is not considering alternatives to turf surfaces and has not talked to their city or stadium partners about switching to temporary grass. The CSA is doubling down on their stance that holding the tournament on grass isn't discrimnatory, and betting that this lawsuit won't lead to an outcome that forces them to change.
Wednesday's call with Montagliani and lawyer Sean Hern (a partner in B.C. firm Farris, Vaughan, Wills and Murphy) was largely them taking questions from journalists, and their responses to questions about if they'd considered grass at any point in the process or were currently considering it were particularly notable. Montagliani said the CSA's bid for the tournament included FIFA 2-star turf and met the international organization's specifications, and the organization plans to stay the course with that approach despite this opposition from foreign players.
"We knew our facilities were world-class," he said. "We were very happy with our bid. FIFA was very happy with our bid."
Montagliani said the CSA's turf plan fufilled the bid guidelines FIFA handed out, and that they've seen no reason to alter it.
"Our bid was well within the scope that was provided," he said. "[Grass] is not something we've looked at because there's been no need. ... The playing surfaces are within the parameters allowed by FIFA." Montagliani added that they haven't talked to other stakeholders, such as city officials, stadium officials or CFL teams (who would be impacted by a surface change at a shared facility), about the possibility of changing surfaces, as the CSA doesn't see the need for that at this time.
"The discussions with our stakeholders have all been in preparation for where we are now," he said. "We haven't engaged in any discussions with them because we haven't seen the need to."
A key argument the players suing over this are making is that the men's World Cup has never been played on turf. However, Montagliani argued that plenty of high-profile men's tournaments (including the U-20 World Cup in Canada in 2007) have featured at least some turf surfaces.
"There are games being played by men's A-teams on FIFA two-star surfaces," Montagliani said, citing in particular a Canada-Mexico Gold Cup match in Seattle last July and last week's Turkey-Czech Republic Euro 2016 qualification match. "The core issue in the claim that's being advanced is that FIFA 2-star turf is somehow second-class, and it's not."
The players suing the CSA argue that a high-profile men's tournament in Canada would not be held on turf, but the U-20 World Cup was partly played on turf surfaces. The CSA intends to bid for the 2026 men's World Cup, so a reporter asked if the plan for that event would include grass or turf.
Montagliani responded by saying that the CSA can't comment there, as FIFA's bid requirements for 2026 likely won't be out until at least 2016.
"It's very early days in the process," he said. "We don't know what the parameters or scope of that bid will be. ...We're a long ways away from looking at that."
Another issue discussed was the specific identities and numbers of the players who have filed the lawsuit, which Hern said is not at all clear.
"We have raised questions about who is in the applicant group, because there are some discrepancies," he said. "It was filed as 'players on national teams participating in FIFA Women's World Cup 2015'.
That's obviously not accurate; it's not all players."
Hern said 16 players were mentioned in the suit, but only seven are listed on the consent form to release their names, and some of those players may have withdrawn.
"We'd like to know who is involved," he said.
Another issue is whether the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal that the case has been brought to has jurisdiction over a multi-province event run by a Swiss body (FIFA). Hern said the CSA plans to raise jurisdictional arguments.
"It's unclear whether the Ontario tribunal has any jurisdiction.over stadium conditions in other provinces," he said. "We would say it doesn't, but that has to be argued."
Speaking of FIFA, it's been noted that they haven't filed a formal response yet. Hern said that's because they haven't been properly served with the suit.
"FIFA has not been served with the complaint under the relevant international treaties, known as the Hague conventions," he said.
Comparisons have been drawn between this case and the ski jumping one ahead of the 2010 Olympics, where a B.C. judge ruled that female ski jumpers were discriminated against, but that the International Olympic Committee was beyond the court's reach. Hern said there are some common points in the cases. "There are some similarities, with the IOC being international and FIFA being international," he said. However, this case is before a provincial human rights tribunal, rather than a provincial court, so the legal process is rather different. It's not likely to be a quick one, though. The plaintiffs have filed for an expedited hearing, but Hern said the CSA's position is that the claims about turf's safety in particular can't be settled without a lot of expert testimony.
"Our view that the case be argued on its merits is that it's going to require extensive evidence." So, there's likely a long legal road ahead. The start of the World Cup is drawing ever closer, but it's clear the CSA is not planning to concede and look at temporary grass options. They appear determined to fight this out in court. We'll see how that goes.
No comments:
Post a Comment