Blogue||Nous sommes - noussommes.ca

Following his two goal performance in a 3-1 victory for Italy over the United States at the Confederations Cup soccer tournament, Giuseppe Rossi finds himself a topic of discussion among American sports writers and commentators.

You see, Rossi is originally from Joisey (also referred to New Jersey) who happens to have dual American and Italian citizenship who decide to play soccer for Italy.

The 22 year-old Rossi is such a special talent several European teams have expressed interest in him. After starting his professional career at FC Parma in Italy, Manchester United acquired his services until they sold him to Spanish club Villareal where he currently plays. Count ‘em, that’s three major soccer nations who saw something in him.

It wasn’t long before he caught the eyes of the Azzurri - Italy’s national side - and he’s been representing them at every level since 2003.

For its part, USA soccer has come under some criticism for not trying harder to keep him within the American system. In fairness, Rossi and his family were committed to Italy, so I’m not sure how much then-coach Bruce Arena could have done. Still, he could, should have tried, no?

Does anyone have a problem with Rossi’s decision for choosing Italy over the United States? I don’t and in the case of Rossi, the American media doesn’t either. Put it you this way, who would you choose if you had the choice between a soccer powerhouse like Italy or USA? Not to disparage the U.S. program. The United States have steadily remained a top 15 soccer nation in recent years.

By this point this example should remind Canadians sports fans of a similar situation with Owen Hargreaves. Hargreaves was somehow overlooked by Team Canada but was good enough to be signed by Germany’s Bayern Munich - one of the world’s biggest and successful clubs. His development there eventually earned him a spot on England’s national side and represented them at the 2006 World Cup.  I didn’t see Hargreaves’ decision as anything but a wise move.

Jonathan de Guzman is another stand out talent born in Canada who decided to play for another country. This time, the nation in question is yet another great soccer nation: The Netherlands. His club stint was with Feyenoord and he made his international debut for the Under-21 Dutch national team in 2008.

The history of soccer has been filled with similar cases. Great players have often played for nations other than their place of birth albeit each for their own reasons. Alfredo di Stefano, one of the greatest players in history, was born in Argentina and ended up playing for Spain. Omar Sivori, also Argentinean, played for Italy. Brazilian player Alessandro dos Santos (Alex) represented Japan. Even the great Juste Fontaine wasn’t born in France proper but rather in Morocco. But that brings into question former colonies of imperial powers. My point is that Rossi and Hargreaves are hardly alone as these precious few selected examples show.

And it doesn’t stop at soccer.

In hockey, Brett Hull, like de Guzman, was ludicrously called a “traitor” for choosing to play for the Team USA back in the 1980s. His situation was a little different. A marginal player early in his career, he knew he would never crack a Canadian line-up knee-deep in talent. Team USA offered him a spot in 1986 and he took it. By 1989, Hull was on his way to becoming one of the most prolific scorers in the history of the NHL.

Pro heavyweight champion Lennox Lewis decided to box under the British flag even after winning a gold medal for Canada at the 1988 Olympics in Seoul. Tennis player Greg Rusedski also bolted for the UK.

When it comes to sports, is it right to hold back an athlete in the name of nationality especially if that nation simply can’t offer anything?

In the case of soccer in particular, North America is simply not the best place to be. If Europe comes knocking, they have players at “buon giorno, bonjour, guten tag, and hello”.

A few years ago I wrote an article on Intersportswire exploring two unlikely sports teams: the Montreal Canadiens of the NHL and soccer club Athletic Bilbao in Spain’s La Liga. The crux of the piece was about how sports and politics collide.

Sports and politics are often intertwined, sometimes unwittingly and sometimes by design. What makes Montreal and Bilbao unique is their conscious effort to maintain identity in a global sports environment. Can a team maintain a local cultural identity and still win on a global scale?

It must be said that Bilbao’s case is more rigid than Montreal’s. Bilbao rarely, if ever, employs anyone outside its Basque heritage. Pragmatically, Montreal doesn’t constrict itself at the player level this way, or else they simply wouldn’t compete – especially considering they don’t have the rights of French-Canadian players through the territorial draft anymore. However, at the coaching and management level it’s a different matter.

Recently, Montreal Canadiens president Pierre Boivin publicly proclaimed the next coach of the fable (but faltering) Canadiens would be a francophone - or at the very least a coach who spoke French. Boivin further stipulated it was the duty of the club to give Quebecers a chance to coach in the NHL.

To some this was an odd (if not discriminatory) assertion to make. The only duty of a sports franchise is to win and make profits.

To others, there was nothing obscure in what he said. In fact, it’s a question of being practical. He was merely stating the reality of the Canadiens being intricately woven into the French-Canadian fabric of Quebec society. They are one and the same, and not to be separated.

I think both arguments are valid. For the most part, the organization does seek a healthy balance but when push comes to making hard decisions that benefits the team will they lead with conviction?

However, there are consequences to both scenarios aforementioned. The first may mean tolerating no French-Canadian representation for a coaching stint, while the second can lead to mediocre results.

Employing a person to lead a great brand like the Canadiens is a serious thing and a question we can ask is, should it come at the expense of a better candidate? If it does, then are the Montreal Canadiens a meritocracy operating in a free market system or are they a provincial operation in a global competitive system?

A blunter question is, are Quebecers willing to accept mediocrity in the name of identity? We often hear about how we Montrealers don’t tolerate losing seasons.

As a prominent member in the community, Boivin should stay clear of cultural nationalist rhetoric and speak as a business leader. In this way, he could help change the public narrative concerning this issue and usher in a fresh way of looking at its hiring practices.

After all, as the greatest hockey franchise in history, isn’t it beholden to the Montreal Canadiens to give its fans nothing but the best?