It’s part of the human condition to nit pick, I suppose.
We tend to find fault, to point out deficiencies, even when something truly remarkable and memorable happens. Take the Montreal Impact, for example.
The Impact survived—just barely—their CONCACAF Champions League semifinal second leg on Tuesday in Costa Rica to win the tie on the away goals rule. In doing so, Montreal became the first Canadian side and only the second MLS team to reach the Champions League final. This really is a great achievement, as five of the six finals since the inaugural tournament in 2008-09 have been all-Mexican affairs.
Cue the madness back home in hockey-crazy Montreal, where even though the city is gearing up for a prolonged playoff run from the Habs (fingers crossed), the locals started buying up tickets for the second leg of the CONCACAF final. In less than 24 hours, the Impact had sold 20,000 tickets for the April 29 contest at Olympic Stadium, proving once again that Montreal sports fans love a big event.
Huzzahs all around to the Impact, right?
For the most part, Montreal’s achievement was rightfully celebrated within the Canadian soccer community. But, as always is the case, there was a vocal minority on social media who tried to poke holes in the Impact’s run to the final.
It was pointed out that if not for some dubious refereeing decisions going their way against FC Edmonton in the semifinals of the Canadian club championship that Montreal wouldn’t have even qualified for the CONCACAF Champions League.
There’s no denying Montreal received the benefit of the doubt against Edmonton, but why should that undermine or take away from the Impact’s Champions League achievement? Is good luck not sometimes an integral part of success?
It was also suggested that Montreal’s path to the CONCACAF final was rather fortuitous—that they topped an easy group that included an uninterested New York Red Bulls team and FAS, some side from El Salvador that most fans had never even heard of before.
Maybe the Impact had a bit of an easy time of it in the group stage. Maybe. But the knockout round was a far different story, with the Impact drawing tough teams in Pachuca and Alajuelense. MLS clubs have traditionally struggled against Mexican and Costa Rica teams in this competition, especially on the road. But the Impact defied the odds and overcame two tough opponents and hostile atmospheres to book their place in the final.
It was also pointed out that Montreal isn’t exactly MLS’s best hope of finally ending the Mexican stranglehold on the CONCACAF club championship. Such a pity that Sporting Kansas City or New York couldn’t represent MLS. Why did it have to be Montreal?
What does it say about the tournament that the Impact, who finished dead last in MLS in 2014, was able to qualify for the final?
Again, this is nonsense. The fact that the worst team in MLS a year ago made it to the final isn’t an indictment of the CONCACAF Champions League.
Soccer Central podcast: SPORTSNET.CA’s Soccer Central podcast, hosted by John Molinaro and James Sharman, takes an in-depth look at the beautiful game and offers timely and thoughtful analysis on the sport’s biggest issues. To listen and subscribe to the podcast, CLICK HERE.
What does it say about the Masters that Jack Nicklaus, who looks every bit of his 75 years, sunk a hole in one on Wednesday at the pre-tournament par-three contest? Does the fact a senior citizen can hit a hole in one devalue golf’s most prestigious event or the sport in any way?
It doesn’t. And the Champions League isn’t devalued because of Montreal’s presence in the final. If anything, it enhances the competition’s reputation.
Is club soccer these days not far too predictable? Does the overwhelming majority not complain about how only three or four teams really have a shot at winning the Premier League? Do we not moan that Real Madrid and Barcelona are virtual locks to finish 1-2 in La Liga most seasons?
The Impact’s run to the final is a great story, and proof that even in the increasingly predictable world of soccer that the unpredictable can still happen.
That shouldn’t be questioned, it should be celebrated—and so should the Impact.