Brazil and France joined Germany, Argentina, Ukraine, Italy, England and Portugal in the quarter-finals. Six European teams, and the traditional two powerhouse South Americans. Ronaldo made history becoming the all-time leading scorer in World Cup history. And he has at least one game remaining. His goal was classic jogo bonito, but the rest of Brazil's performance was, well, Italian. They played like a team that wanted to win more than they wanted to play beautiful soccer. Who could blame them?
At one point, it seemed that Brazilian fans could. It was wonderful to see them clap for Asamoah Gyan following one of his shots, shortly before he was given a second yellow card for diving. It's worth noting that both referees today managed to avoid becoming the focus of attention--for the most part. Ghana deserve tremendous credit for their performance. I had questioned keeper Kingson earlier, but if it hadn't been for him, Brazil would have won 6-0. Ghana played jogo bonito throughout the tournament, and out-Braziled Brazil for much of the match. They delighted the crowds and played the role of surprise team to perfect effect. Hopefully, we'll enjoy their performance in 2010 as well. It's hard to criticize Brazil, but it was shocking to see Adriano, Roberto Carlos and Cafu take ineffective shots when a simple pass to a teammate would have resulted in a sure goal. The margin for error--and selfishness--diminishes with each match.
Vive La France. They, and Zidane in particular, offered an inspiring performance against Spain. A few days ago, I speculated that France might be better without Zidane because they were asking too much of him. So much for my soccer foresight. He was instrumental in the victory, even finding the net in stoppage time. I will note that he should have been fresher than other players because he missed a match, but perhaps I'm splitting hairs. I hope he plays with the same passion and energy against Brazil.
Unfortunately, Spanish manager Aragones and French striker Henry were part of the storyline even before the match started. It's unfortunate because of Aragones asinine comment during a Spanish practice session when he referred to Henry as a "black piece of s**t." I think it would have been poetic justice if Henry had scored the winning goal. He had a part in it, but not in an elegant manner. Watching the replay, I have to say that I don't think Puyol fouled Henry. Puyol said as much, complained about the call, regretted the second goal, but then offered the following quote:
"It hurts to lose this way, because I think we deserved more and we were playing a great game. But that's football. We now have to recover and think ahead to the next tournament."
Wise advice for those who are still bemoaning their favorite team's departure because of a bad call. Puyol obviously had the ability to put matters into perspective. It was really encouraging to see Spanish players greeting, congratulating and exchanging jerseys with French players without hesitation or bias. Soccer players sometimes know better than their managers.
I'm willing to eat my words and admit that I was wrong about Zidane. On a much more serious note, I hope Aragones is willing to do the same about Henry.
Tuesday, June 27, 2006
Racism in Soccer
As I'm watching the thoroughly enjoyable Brazil v. Ghana match, ESPN's halftime show reminded me of the one of the most unpleasant, distasteful aspects of soccer--the displays of racism. While there are unfortunate, indefensible signs of racism from the fans, they showed a TV clip of Spanish manager, Aragones, referring to France's Thierry Henry as a "black piece of s**t." I've been really admiring Spanish football, but this is inexcusable. Aragones claims he was simply using whatever tools or methods necessary to motivate his players. Maybe Aragones think's it would be OK to place a burning cross in the middle of the pitch? The Spanish football federation responded by fining him about four thousand dollars. Big deal.
I've talked about soccer being great escapism, but when winning soccer games becomes more important than respecting human beings, we have a serious problem.
After being critical of Ukraine's playing style, I now see that there's a much more serious concern about their manager, Blokhin. Here's a quote from an article in the PalmBeachPost.com:
In Ukraine, national-team coach Oleg Blokhin told reporters that his countrymen should stay in their national league so younger players could learn from them "and not some zumba-bumba whom they took off a tree, gave two bananas and now he plays in the Ukrainian league." No apology followed. One South African paper said Blokhin "has the politics of a mentally ill T-Rex."
This comment is simply unbelievable and reprehensible, especially from someone who's team is playing anti-soccer. As far as I can tell, there hasn't been a problem with the fans during The World Cup. But if FIFA won't discipline managers for this type of behavior, how can they claim to take this problem seriously?
Go ahead and criticize US soccer style or its parochial sports, but I'm glad to note that there's no way a US coach or player would get away with saying such things.
I've talked about soccer being great escapism, but when winning soccer games becomes more important than respecting human beings, we have a serious problem.
After being critical of Ukraine's playing style, I now see that there's a much more serious concern about their manager, Blokhin. Here's a quote from an article in the PalmBeachPost.com:
In Ukraine, national-team coach Oleg Blokhin told reporters that his countrymen should stay in their national league so younger players could learn from them "and not some zumba-bumba whom they took off a tree, gave two bananas and now he plays in the Ukrainian league." No apology followed. One South African paper said Blokhin "has the politics of a mentally ill T-Rex."
This comment is simply unbelievable and reprehensible, especially from someone who's team is playing anti-soccer. As far as I can tell, there hasn't been a problem with the fans during The World Cup. But if FIFA won't discipline managers for this type of behavior, how can they claim to take this problem seriously?
Go ahead and criticize US soccer style or its parochial sports, but I'm glad to note that there's no way a US coach or player would get away with saying such things.
Monday, June 26, 2006
A Day of Penalty Kicks
When one hears about penalty kicks, it would be natural to assume that the Italians found themselves on the short end of the stick. Italian fans are convinced that the Azzurri are cursed to lose through penalty kicks, or doomed to failure because of conspiracies (most often manifesting themselves through referees' decisions against the Italians). So when the Italians were a man down, through a questionable red card, it seemed that they might be heading for another self-fulfilling prophecy. But not on this day.
Italian manager, Marcello Lippi, showed some courage by putting Totti on the bench, and starting Del Piero in the midfield. On another day, Luca Toni would have had a hat trick. Today, he just kept shaking his head after near misses. Lippi showed a willingness to adapt to the needs of the day when he brought Totti into the fray, something Van Basten wasn't willing to do with Van Nistelrooij. Lippi showed even more courage by allowing Totti to take the penalty kick. I thought it was important to have someone fresh take the kick, but I thought it would be Iaquinta. Totti did not hesitate, and he did not disappoint. Given the Italians recent woes with penalty kicks, it must have been very satisfying for the Italians to win with a penalty kick in the 95th minute.
As for the Socceroos, they deserve a lot of respect. I have been questioning their move into the Asian confederation but, after their performance in the Cup, it's only right to state that the Asian confederation will be richer for Australia's presence. I'm not sure what Australian defender, Lucas Neill, was doing or thinking. Perhaps he just lost his head. At that point in the match, Neill could have shouldered or bumped Grosso fairly aggressively without consequence. But when he lay down on the pitch and reached back, the referee had to call the penalty.
I think Hiddink might have been assuming that the game was destined for extra time. He has made so many prescient substitutions in earlier games, but he made only one today. More than anyone else, the Italians find a way to win through one quick strike, so perhaps he should have not expected more time for additional substitutes. But it's hard to criticize Hiddink. He showed class when he gathered his players, and persuaded them to absorb and recognize their fans' cheering and applause. Now Russia get a chance to experience the Hiddink effect.
"Where's the quality?" John Harkes said it best when he asked this question in the Ukraine v. Switzerland match. He later added, "ambition, imagination, and creativity" to the list of missing elements. For much of the match, both teams worked hard, but an errant pass, or a missed run, or a poor finish left the match without a goal. Both Shevchekno and Frei hit the woodwork, providing evidence that with appropriate service, they could have broken the deadlock.
At least the Swiss kept trying until the end. I fear that we may have found the "anti-soccer" team of the tournament with the Ukraine. After showing that they can score against the Saudis, Ukraine has chosen too often the lowest common denominator. Honestly, Switzerland deserved to win, but even their penalty kicks didn't have enough quality.
It''s too bad they couldn't bring Totti into their lineup.
Italian manager, Marcello Lippi, showed some courage by putting Totti on the bench, and starting Del Piero in the midfield. On another day, Luca Toni would have had a hat trick. Today, he just kept shaking his head after near misses. Lippi showed a willingness to adapt to the needs of the day when he brought Totti into the fray, something Van Basten wasn't willing to do with Van Nistelrooij. Lippi showed even more courage by allowing Totti to take the penalty kick. I thought it was important to have someone fresh take the kick, but I thought it would be Iaquinta. Totti did not hesitate, and he did not disappoint. Given the Italians recent woes with penalty kicks, it must have been very satisfying for the Italians to win with a penalty kick in the 95th minute.
As for the Socceroos, they deserve a lot of respect. I have been questioning their move into the Asian confederation but, after their performance in the Cup, it's only right to state that the Asian confederation will be richer for Australia's presence. I'm not sure what Australian defender, Lucas Neill, was doing or thinking. Perhaps he just lost his head. At that point in the match, Neill could have shouldered or bumped Grosso fairly aggressively without consequence. But when he lay down on the pitch and reached back, the referee had to call the penalty.
I think Hiddink might have been assuming that the game was destined for extra time. He has made so many prescient substitutions in earlier games, but he made only one today. More than anyone else, the Italians find a way to win through one quick strike, so perhaps he should have not expected more time for additional substitutes. But it's hard to criticize Hiddink. He showed class when he gathered his players, and persuaded them to absorb and recognize their fans' cheering and applause. Now Russia get a chance to experience the Hiddink effect.
"Where's the quality?" John Harkes said it best when he asked this question in the Ukraine v. Switzerland match. He later added, "ambition, imagination, and creativity" to the list of missing elements. For much of the match, both teams worked hard, but an errant pass, or a missed run, or a poor finish left the match without a goal. Both Shevchekno and Frei hit the woodwork, providing evidence that with appropriate service, they could have broken the deadlock.
At least the Swiss kept trying until the end. I fear that we may have found the "anti-soccer" team of the tournament with the Ukraine. After showing that they can score against the Saudis, Ukraine has chosen too often the lowest common denominator. Honestly, Switzerland deserved to win, but even their penalty kicks didn't have enough quality.
It''s too bad they couldn't bring Totti into their lineup.
Sunday, June 25, 2006
An Ugly Day of Soccer
Today's matches provided plenty of ammunition for the soccer detractors throughout the world.
For all the talent that England possesses in its midfield players and strikers, it is amazing how they produce some of the dullest, uninspiring, and numbing soccer. I'm so hard on England because I really like the way they are capable of playing. Individual players such as Cole, Lampard, Gerrard, and certainly Rooney have had their moments, but as a collective, they just aren't performing. Say what you will about David Beckham, but his free kicks have been directly responsible for two England victories, against the two South American teams they have faced. One might argue that it's a high price to pay for keeping him in the lineup if all he does is take charge of set pieces. But given how much England has come to rely upon these set pieces, it seems worth it. Rooney demonstrated that he can play the full 90 minutes, and that he can still cause havoc. I got the feeling that he is beginning to conclude that he has to take matters into his own hands, which is good for England--and bad for its opponents.
Apparently, Ecuador's manager, Luis Suarez, said they were happy to make it past the first round. They certainly played this way. Maybe the offensive flair they displayed against Costa Rica and Poland was possible only against weaker competition. It was conspicuously absent against both Germany and England. The most surprising aspect of their play was a lack of urgency, but not everyone is obsessed with marching through the tournament. They certainly represented their country well.
England and Ecuador may be criticized for playing poorly. As for the Netherlands and Portugal, they should be ashamed for behaving poorly. The Dutch and Portugese teams are amongst the most creative, elegant and talented teams in the world, which made it even more sad to see the WWE debacle during this match. Having watched so many of these players in club and national team matches, I was shocked to see them behave in this manner. World class players were anything but world class. Lost amongst the wrestling, head-butting, kicking and shoving, we witnessed this evening was a fantastic goal by Maniche. It offered such fleeting promise for the match.
I wonder about Van Basten's coaching this evening. Hindsight is always 20/20, but keeping out Van Nistelrooij was a curious decision. He's obviously not the most popular guy around these days, and perhaps he didn't play with tremendous intensity in the first three games. But the Dutch needed one goal to keep alive, and Van Nistelrooij represents a great option for that one special moment. I also think Scolari used the 4-5-1 formation masterfully. The Dutch couldn't find any space in the midfield or Portugese end of the field.
I'm a great admirer of both Dutch and Portugese, but this match was one of the worst displays in World Cup history. It's too bad we can't replace Portugal with Mexico.
And just when we thought the refereeing could not get any worse. How can a referee hand out 101,351 cards and still lose complete control of the match? FIFA has indicated that it will send home referees who perform poorly. I hope Ivanov was sent to the airport right after the match. If FIFA follows through with their plans, who will be left to referee the final matches?
Where are you, Pierluigi Collina :-)
For all the talent that England possesses in its midfield players and strikers, it is amazing how they produce some of the dullest, uninspiring, and numbing soccer. I'm so hard on England because I really like the way they are capable of playing. Individual players such as Cole, Lampard, Gerrard, and certainly Rooney have had their moments, but as a collective, they just aren't performing. Say what you will about David Beckham, but his free kicks have been directly responsible for two England victories, against the two South American teams they have faced. One might argue that it's a high price to pay for keeping him in the lineup if all he does is take charge of set pieces. But given how much England has come to rely upon these set pieces, it seems worth it. Rooney demonstrated that he can play the full 90 minutes, and that he can still cause havoc. I got the feeling that he is beginning to conclude that he has to take matters into his own hands, which is good for England--and bad for its opponents.
Apparently, Ecuador's manager, Luis Suarez, said they were happy to make it past the first round. They certainly played this way. Maybe the offensive flair they displayed against Costa Rica and Poland was possible only against weaker competition. It was conspicuously absent against both Germany and England. The most surprising aspect of their play was a lack of urgency, but not everyone is obsessed with marching through the tournament. They certainly represented their country well.
England and Ecuador may be criticized for playing poorly. As for the Netherlands and Portugal, they should be ashamed for behaving poorly. The Dutch and Portugese teams are amongst the most creative, elegant and talented teams in the world, which made it even more sad to see the WWE debacle during this match. Having watched so many of these players in club and national team matches, I was shocked to see them behave in this manner. World class players were anything but world class. Lost amongst the wrestling, head-butting, kicking and shoving, we witnessed this evening was a fantastic goal by Maniche. It offered such fleeting promise for the match.
I wonder about Van Basten's coaching this evening. Hindsight is always 20/20, but keeping out Van Nistelrooij was a curious decision. He's obviously not the most popular guy around these days, and perhaps he didn't play with tremendous intensity in the first three games. But the Dutch needed one goal to keep alive, and Van Nistelrooij represents a great option for that one special moment. I also think Scolari used the 4-5-1 formation masterfully. The Dutch couldn't find any space in the midfield or Portugese end of the field.
I'm a great admirer of both Dutch and Portugese, but this match was one of the worst displays in World Cup history. It's too bad we can't replace Portugal with Mexico.
And just when we thought the refereeing could not get any worse. How can a referee hand out 101,351 cards and still lose complete control of the match? FIFA has indicated that it will send home referees who perform poorly. I hope Ivanov was sent to the airport right after the match. If FIFA follows through with their plans, who will be left to referee the final matches?
Where are you, Pierluigi Collina :-)
A Beautiful Day of Soccer
Germany continues to play elegant, flowing, and highly effective soccer. Jürgen Klinsmann had a nice touch as a striker, and it seems that as a manager, he's conveying some of his artistry to his team. In 2002, Klose basically disappeared after the first round. While he didn't score in the game against Sweden, he was absolutely instrumental in both goals, with Podolski being the fortunate recipient of Klose's hard work and deft passing. Ballack kept pounding shot after shot at Swedish keeper, Isaksson, who kept the scoreline low. Anyone watching the Germans' soccer showcase must have been impressed.
Just ask the Swedish midfielders and defenders, who seemed as equally impressed as the fans. They were guilty of ball watching and not closing down space on German players. After some speculation about their defense in their first game against Costa Rica, Germany has recorded three shutouts. But there's no time to rest on their laurels. Argentina awaits them in the quarter-finals, offering a highly anticipated matchup.
A matchup that almost didn't happen because of an inspired, wonderful performance by Mexico. The first half, in particular, of the Argentina v. Mexico match offered soccer at its finest. Both teams were surging forward with their attacks, playing end to end soccer. The offside call against Messi during stoppage time was questionable. But having that goal waved off gave us the opportunity to see what must be the best goal so far. Maxi Rodriguez's shot was one for the ages.
Argentina showed an important resiliency in this match. Even as Mexico continued to assail them, they showed a calm resolve that ultimately paid dividends. Perhaps Riquelme's deliberate approach to the beautiful game is the ideal soothing effect for this team. Both Germany and Argentina have shown us the elegance of soccer. It is a shame that one of them will be out after Friday. These two teams met in the finals in 1986 and 1990. In 1986, some questioned whether (West) Germany was a worthy finalist; in 1990, some questioned whether Argentina was a worthy finalist. I think most soccer fans would agree that both of them would make worthy finalists in 2006.
Just ask the Swedish midfielders and defenders, who seemed as equally impressed as the fans. They were guilty of ball watching and not closing down space on German players. After some speculation about their defense in their first game against Costa Rica, Germany has recorded three shutouts. But there's no time to rest on their laurels. Argentina awaits them in the quarter-finals, offering a highly anticipated matchup.
A matchup that almost didn't happen because of an inspired, wonderful performance by Mexico. The first half, in particular, of the Argentina v. Mexico match offered soccer at its finest. Both teams were surging forward with their attacks, playing end to end soccer. The offside call against Messi during stoppage time was questionable. But having that goal waved off gave us the opportunity to see what must be the best goal so far. Maxi Rodriguez's shot was one for the ages.
Argentina showed an important resiliency in this match. Even as Mexico continued to assail them, they showed a calm resolve that ultimately paid dividends. Perhaps Riquelme's deliberate approach to the beautiful game is the ideal soothing effect for this team. Both Germany and Argentina have shown us the elegance of soccer. It is a shame that one of them will be out after Friday. These two teams met in the finals in 1986 and 1990. In 1986, some questioned whether (West) Germany was a worthy finalist; in 1990, some questioned whether Argentina was a worthy finalist. I think most soccer fans would agree that both of them would make worthy finalists in 2006.
Saturday, June 24, 2006
John Tierney Weighs In on The World Cup
In his op-ed piece in today's New York Times, John Tierney talks about "kicking the soccer habit." Tierney mentions that he lived in Chile as a child, during which time he played soccer and watched Brazil electrify the soccer world during the 1962 World Cup. So this is someone who had found--and has apparently lost--religion. He makes some very good points about the difficulty of watching soccer on TV. It's hard to see much of the field, to note the runs off the ball, the way in which defenses align themselves, and the great vision of the gifted passers in the game. Hockey also suffers some of these problems on TV. Watching soccer and hockey on HD makes a big difference. How many of us are putting up with ESPN/ABC's coverage because of HD?
Tierney asserts that "American couch potatoes" enjoy the breaks in baseball, basketball or football because it allows them to watch instant replays, or evaluate (i.e., second guess) the coach's decisions or strategies, and that the actions of individuals (e.g., "the pitcher dueling the batter") are more clearly pronounced and enjoyed. When speaking about the rest of the world's fascination with soccer, he states: "maybe they love soccer because they haven't been given better alternatives."
I think he's right that many folks in the US, including me, prefer sitting on a couch, living vicariously through athletes, and second guessing the coaches. Once upon a time, I used to actually participate in athletics. And I can tell you it's infinitely preferable. As I move slovenly and inevitably toward becoming overweight and unhealthy, I realize maybe I should participate in sports, rather than passively consume them. If you've ever kicked around a soccer ball, and tried to play on any reasonably sized field for any length of time, you get a deep appreciation for the skill and stamina of soccer players.
I don't doubt for a moment that sports fans in the US marvel at individual athletic accomplishments. The US canonizes the individual, sometimes at the cost of the community. The superstar athlete can act any way he wishes as long as he can make the great play. Manchester United and England defender Rio Ferdinand was suspended for eight months when he missed a drug test. Would a US-based athlete face such a suspension for his first offense? Ferdinand didn't get to play for a team in Toronto during his suspension either (and I say this as someone who cheers for the Miami Dolphins while sitting on my couch).
As for not having any alternatives to soccer, quite frankly, I don't know what Tierney is talking about. There are several other sports with fairly widespread interest such as rugby, ice hockey, field hockey and handball. I don't appreciate a sport that has "numerous intervals for lunch and tea", but even cricket has widespread appeal. If you've ever watched TV coverage of the Olympics or read the sports pages of a newspaper in Europe or Asia, you will quickly realize that they actually enjoy athletics, even when their national teams are not competitive. Imagine actually being able to watch Olympic sporting events in their entirety, instead of only the portions that are "relevant" to the US. There are so many cases of individual nations that revere other sports with local appeal. The Aussies have shown a real appreciation for soccer, but Australian rules football and swimming are almost certainly more popular sports down under.
As a global community, there are many, many things we can and should do that are much more important than soccer. But maybe the rest of the world enjoys soccer because it's a chance for the entire planet to share an experience, express themselves, and celebrate regardless of whether their team wins or not.
Tierney admits that part of his frustration stems from the referee's penalty decision during the US-Ghana match. In my opinion, that was a really bad call. Deal with it. It's time to admit that the US World Cup basically ended when Czech Republic beat them soundly in the first game, and that Bruce Arena probably over-analzyed and under-inspired this team in critical ways.
I think it's hard enough for people in the US to watch a sport without dominating it, but it seems even harder to watch a sport in which we can't overturn results or decisions through replays, appeals and legal actions.
Tierney asserts that "American couch potatoes" enjoy the breaks in baseball, basketball or football because it allows them to watch instant replays, or evaluate (i.e., second guess) the coach's decisions or strategies, and that the actions of individuals (e.g., "the pitcher dueling the batter") are more clearly pronounced and enjoyed. When speaking about the rest of the world's fascination with soccer, he states: "maybe they love soccer because they haven't been given better alternatives."
I think he's right that many folks in the US, including me, prefer sitting on a couch, living vicariously through athletes, and second guessing the coaches. Once upon a time, I used to actually participate in athletics. And I can tell you it's infinitely preferable. As I move slovenly and inevitably toward becoming overweight and unhealthy, I realize maybe I should participate in sports, rather than passively consume them. If you've ever kicked around a soccer ball, and tried to play on any reasonably sized field for any length of time, you get a deep appreciation for the skill and stamina of soccer players.
I don't doubt for a moment that sports fans in the US marvel at individual athletic accomplishments. The US canonizes the individual, sometimes at the cost of the community. The superstar athlete can act any way he wishes as long as he can make the great play. Manchester United and England defender Rio Ferdinand was suspended for eight months when he missed a drug test. Would a US-based athlete face such a suspension for his first offense? Ferdinand didn't get to play for a team in Toronto during his suspension either (and I say this as someone who cheers for the Miami Dolphins while sitting on my couch).
As for not having any alternatives to soccer, quite frankly, I don't know what Tierney is talking about. There are several other sports with fairly widespread interest such as rugby, ice hockey, field hockey and handball. I don't appreciate a sport that has "numerous intervals for lunch and tea", but even cricket has widespread appeal. If you've ever watched TV coverage of the Olympics or read the sports pages of a newspaper in Europe or Asia, you will quickly realize that they actually enjoy athletics, even when their national teams are not competitive. Imagine actually being able to watch Olympic sporting events in their entirety, instead of only the portions that are "relevant" to the US. There are so many cases of individual nations that revere other sports with local appeal. The Aussies have shown a real appreciation for soccer, but Australian rules football and swimming are almost certainly more popular sports down under.
As a global community, there are many, many things we can and should do that are much more important than soccer. But maybe the rest of the world enjoys soccer because it's a chance for the entire planet to share an experience, express themselves, and celebrate regardless of whether their team wins or not.
Tierney admits that part of his frustration stems from the referee's penalty decision during the US-Ghana match. In my opinion, that was a really bad call. Deal with it. It's time to admit that the US World Cup basically ended when Czech Republic beat them soundly in the first game, and that Bruce Arena probably over-analzyed and under-inspired this team in critical ways.
I think it's hard enough for people in the US to watch a sport without dominating it, but it seems even harder to watch a sport in which we can't overturn results or decisions through replays, appeals and legal actions.
Friday, June 23, 2006
The More Things Change, The More They Stay the Same
For the round of sixteen, we have ten teams from Europe, three from South America, one from CONCACAF, one from Oceania and one from Africa. No team from Oceania had previously advanced to the second round, but Australia's an outlier in more ways than one. With their move into the Asian confederation, one wonders what will become of Oceania. Having a team from Africa in the knockout phase is becoming a trend, but most people wouldn't have expected Ghana to advance from Group E. Both the United States and Trinidad and Tobago had a sliver of hope on the final day, but Mexico alone represents CONCACAF. Everyone expected Brazil and Argentina to advance, but Ecuador surprised quite a few people. Asia, after having the co-hosts advance in 2002, is the only confederation watching the rest of tournament from the sidelines. There's been much said about the effects of playing on European soil, and perhaps with good reason.
Will there be any surprises in the next round?
My best pick for an upset is Ecuador. They played very well against Costa Rica and Poland, but didn't show up against Germany (resting players in the process). England is a different team when Wayne Rooney plays, but their defense was shaky against the Swedes. The game I am most eager to watch is Brazil v. Ghana. And, with all due respect, the game I am least eager to watch is Switzerland v. Ukraine. For what it's worth, here are my picks for the quarter-finals:
Germany, Argentina, Ecuador, Netherlands, Italy, Switzerland, Brazil, and Spain.
Let the madness continue.
Will there be any surprises in the next round?
My best pick for an upset is Ecuador. They played very well against Costa Rica and Poland, but didn't show up against Germany (resting players in the process). England is a different team when Wayne Rooney plays, but their defense was shaky against the Swedes. The game I am most eager to watch is Brazil v. Ghana. And, with all due respect, the game I am least eager to watch is Switzerland v. Ukraine. For what it's worth, here are my picks for the quarter-finals:
Germany, Argentina, Ecuador, Netherlands, Italy, Switzerland, Brazil, and Spain.
Let the madness continue.
Group G Finales
France found its scoring touch today. In addition to their two goals, they had several missed opportunities. Was it the presence of Trezeguet up front with Henry or was it perhaps, dare I say it, the absence of Zidane? Sacre bleu!! Without Zidane, it seemed that Les Bleus found other ways to move the ball through the midfield. Viera certainly stepped up, and Togo found it difficult to deal with both Trezeguet and Henry. I would imagine the Spaniards would as well. It may be sacreligious to suggest that Zidane's absence actually helped the French, but they may be asking too much of him. Don't get me wrong. I am very pleased that Zidane gets to play again, but it was illuminating to see France play without him. Just something for France's manager Domenech to think about :-) Two other pieces of unsoliciated advice for the French. Ribery worked very hard, and made some great passes, but he should drink some decaf before he shoots at goal. And Barthez needs to stop trying to make extraordinary saves out of ordinary ones. Barthez will get France in trouble if he persists in not grabbing the ball.
Let's hope Togo resolves the situation with its soccer federation. If Togo qualifies in 2010, it would be great to see them play soccer without a constant cloud of controversy hanging over their heads.
For South Korea, they went to the well one time too many. A team that has rightly earned a reputation for miraculous comebacks, it eventually caught up with them. Their high-spirited play led to several chances but with no margin for error, especially given France's result, they find themselves heading home. The "no, wait, it isn't really offside" incident was bizarre, and unfair to the Koreans. It effectively ended the game but the Koreans would be wise to learn how to score first and hold onto a lead, rather than keep playing catch-up. In each of their games in Group G, the opposition scored first. At this level, it's too much of a mountain to climb every game.
Perhaps the biggest concern for Switzerland at this point is the health of Senderos. Switzerland is the only team to keep a clean sheet through the first round, but they haven't faced tremendous firepower. Senderos is a key figure in their defense, which will eventually face stiffer challenges.
On a programming note, I'm very glad to hear Adrian Healey refer to "crystal clear high definition" (instead of "glorious high definition"). Maybe he's reading this blog :-)
Let's hope Togo resolves the situation with its soccer federation. If Togo qualifies in 2010, it would be great to see them play soccer without a constant cloud of controversy hanging over their heads.
For South Korea, they went to the well one time too many. A team that has rightly earned a reputation for miraculous comebacks, it eventually caught up with them. Their high-spirited play led to several chances but with no margin for error, especially given France's result, they find themselves heading home. The "no, wait, it isn't really offside" incident was bizarre, and unfair to the Koreans. It effectively ended the game but the Koreans would be wise to learn how to score first and hold onto a lead, rather than keep playing catch-up. In each of their games in Group G, the opposition scored first. At this level, it's too much of a mountain to climb every game.
Perhaps the biggest concern for Switzerland at this point is the health of Senderos. Switzerland is the only team to keep a clean sheet through the first round, but they haven't faced tremendous firepower. Senderos is a key figure in their defense, which will eventually face stiffer challenges.
On a programming note, I'm very glad to hear Adrian Healey refer to "crystal clear high definition" (instead of "glorious high definition"). Maybe he's reading this blog :-)
Group H Finales
Resting players in the final game of the first round is common, but I can't recall an occasion when a manager selected an entirely new lineup. There are a few teams that are so deep that they could field two formidable teams. Spain is one of them. So maybe it's not too surprising for them to chose a full substitution of their entire lineup. What was more surprising was seeing these substitutes play in a rather tepid manner. I recall how Brazil's Robinho, and Argentina's Tevez played when giving the opportunity to start. It was clear these guys wanted to convince their managers to give them more game time. I think Tevez might still be running around the pitch. Spain is probably worried about fading in the knockout round, but they certainly faded from this match. Saudi Arabia played well enough to create a few chances, and generate some more respect. For US team fans, consider that each team earned a point. It's true that the US had a better goal differential (by one goal), but the Saudis displayed more creative soccer skills.
Unfortunately, creative soccer skills are still being overshadowed by referees. The FIFA rules of the game mention the "opinion of the referee" when considering whether a player is offside. Calls that are based on the (mis)judgment are frustrating, but situations when the referee simply misses a blatant foul are mind boggling. In the Ukraine v. Tunisia match, the referee missed a blatant hand ball by a Ukranian player during a free kick. Players are told to keep their hands down or to the side when standing in the wall. This player's hand was over his head. How could the referee miss this? This referee also missed Swiss defender Müller's kick/trip of a Togo player in the box. Hmmm...two matches featuring a European team v. an African team and...well, I had mentioned that I sometimes seek patterns to a fault.
Ukraine took a big step forward by defeating Saudi Arabia 4-0, but they took a step backwards today. They seemed content with a draw, which is understandable from a strategic perspective, but gaining the man advantage actually seemed to deflate them. They scored only because of a dubious penalty call; Switzerland remains the only team yet to concede a goal. Ukraine will need to play much better if they hope to continue in the tournament.
Unfortunately, creative soccer skills are still being overshadowed by referees. The FIFA rules of the game mention the "opinion of the referee" when considering whether a player is offside. Calls that are based on the (mis)judgment are frustrating, but situations when the referee simply misses a blatant foul are mind boggling. In the Ukraine v. Tunisia match, the referee missed a blatant hand ball by a Ukranian player during a free kick. Players are told to keep their hands down or to the side when standing in the wall. This player's hand was over his head. How could the referee miss this? This referee also missed Swiss defender Müller's kick/trip of a Togo player in the box. Hmmm...two matches featuring a European team v. an African team and...well, I had mentioned that I sometimes seek patterns to a fault.
Ukraine took a big step forward by defeating Saudi Arabia 4-0, but they took a step backwards today. They seemed content with a draw, which is understandable from a strategic perspective, but gaining the man advantage actually seemed to deflate them. They scored only because of a dubious penalty call; Switzerland remains the only team yet to concede a goal. Ukraine will need to play much better if they hope to continue in the tournament.
Thursday, June 22, 2006
Group E Finales
Let's hail Pavel Nedved. He is a gifted player, who came out of international retirement to help the Czech Republic qualify. When he gets bumped, he keeps trying to play, rather than offer Razzie quality acting and diving. And one of my friends pointed out that he has the best hair on the pitch since Carlos Valderrama. Today, he played with a passion and persistence that was inspiring. Milan Baros did
his best to energize the proceedings, but his timing was understandably off, and he eventually ran out of gas. If ESPN's (screen hogging) lineup graphic was correct, Rosicky was playing as striker in a 4-4-2 formation. Whether he was supposed to be in the midfield or up front, he was a ghost during the game. This was the same man who wreaked havoc on the US, and scored those two magnificent goals?
As for the rest of Czechs, they kept their game in check. It was disappointing to see Nedved work so hard, with his teammates as spectators. Even if they didn't feel the desire, couldn't they have respected his drive and determination? Nedved provided opportunities, had the best shots on goal and, in the 93rd minute, two goals down, still chased after a ball. After the game, he laid down on the pitch, exhausted. It seemed that every Italian player wanted to acknowledge him. I am sorry to see him leave the World stage.
For every goodbye to familiar figures, we have opportunities for hellos to newcomers. Ghana, in its first World Cup, advances into the secound round, keeping alive Africa's streak since 1990. Even without the two goal scorers from the victory over the Czech Republic, they found the net twice. On their first goal, I do not understand why Keller did not rush off his line. There were three US players heading into the box to cover possible passes, and Keller's stance gave Draman ample opportunity to slow down, collect himself, pick his spot and drill the ball past Keller. The penalty call against Onyewu was a harsh assessment. Onyewu has a problematic tendency to defend with his hands, but on this occasion he went out of his way to refrain from doing so. He was also unfortunate with his header, which barely missed the net. It was sad to see Claudio Reyna hobbling off the field from an injury caused by being dispossessed just prior to the first goal. He was obviously in pain, yet he tried to keep playing. Eddie Lewis joined the Brian McBride "grit club" by getting cut, getting treated, and getting back on the pitch. Several US players showed a great deal of character in the face of adversity.
Which is more than I say for Bruce Arena. He is absolutely correct that the penalty call was dubious, and it greatly influenced the game. For better or worse, the referee's bad calls or missed calls is a part of soccer. Other managers get upset with bad calls, or bad fortunes, but they seem to recover and urge their players to move on. Arena seems to assume that if the game had remained 1-1, the US would have won. Maybe so. But instead of dwelling on this, he should have been urging the US players onward, and dealing with reality. At the press conference after the game, he was still talking about the penalty. I didn't see the entire press conference, but I sincerely hope he recognized the efforts of his players, and applauded them for picking themselves up repeatedly. Perhaps it's time to look beyond US borders for a manager, someone who might bring out the best in this team and remain positive in adversity. I'm sure someone would relish the challenge of taking the US team to new heights. It's too bad Guus Hiddink has committed to coach Russia.
As for Ghana, they deserve great recognition for an impressive accomplishment. Apparently, Ghanians admire Brazilian soccer. They'll have a close-up opportunity to admire Brazil's offensive firepower. Ghana's keeper still looks suspect to me. He looked completely frozen during Dempsey's goal. If McBride had managed to direct his header a few inches to the right, he would have beaten Kingson on the near post. I could have sworn Kingson dived well after the ball banged off the post. Essien's second yellow card will be costly. While he has been called on for offensive duties, his defensive midfield skills will be missed even more. Gyan and Muntari return from suspension, which should provide more offensive options, but it's a rare team that can outscore Brazil.
his best to energize the proceedings, but his timing was understandably off, and he eventually ran out of gas. If ESPN's (screen hogging) lineup graphic was correct, Rosicky was playing as striker in a 4-4-2 formation. Whether he was supposed to be in the midfield or up front, he was a ghost during the game. This was the same man who wreaked havoc on the US, and scored those two magnificent goals?
As for the rest of Czechs, they kept their game in check. It was disappointing to see Nedved work so hard, with his teammates as spectators. Even if they didn't feel the desire, couldn't they have respected his drive and determination? Nedved provided opportunities, had the best shots on goal and, in the 93rd minute, two goals down, still chased after a ball. After the game, he laid down on the pitch, exhausted. It seemed that every Italian player wanted to acknowledge him. I am sorry to see him leave the World stage.
For every goodbye to familiar figures, we have opportunities for hellos to newcomers. Ghana, in its first World Cup, advances into the secound round, keeping alive Africa's streak since 1990. Even without the two goal scorers from the victory over the Czech Republic, they found the net twice. On their first goal, I do not understand why Keller did not rush off his line. There were three US players heading into the box to cover possible passes, and Keller's stance gave Draman ample opportunity to slow down, collect himself, pick his spot and drill the ball past Keller. The penalty call against Onyewu was a harsh assessment. Onyewu has a problematic tendency to defend with his hands, but on this occasion he went out of his way to refrain from doing so. He was also unfortunate with his header, which barely missed the net. It was sad to see Claudio Reyna hobbling off the field from an injury caused by being dispossessed just prior to the first goal. He was obviously in pain, yet he tried to keep playing. Eddie Lewis joined the Brian McBride "grit club" by getting cut, getting treated, and getting back on the pitch. Several US players showed a great deal of character in the face of adversity.
Which is more than I say for Bruce Arena. He is absolutely correct that the penalty call was dubious, and it greatly influenced the game. For better or worse, the referee's bad calls or missed calls is a part of soccer. Other managers get upset with bad calls, or bad fortunes, but they seem to recover and urge their players to move on. Arena seems to assume that if the game had remained 1-1, the US would have won. Maybe so. But instead of dwelling on this, he should have been urging the US players onward, and dealing with reality. At the press conference after the game, he was still talking about the penalty. I didn't see the entire press conference, but I sincerely hope he recognized the efforts of his players, and applauded them for picking themselves up repeatedly. Perhaps it's time to look beyond US borders for a manager, someone who might bring out the best in this team and remain positive in adversity. I'm sure someone would relish the challenge of taking the US team to new heights. It's too bad Guus Hiddink has committed to coach Russia.
As for Ghana, they deserve great recognition for an impressive accomplishment. Apparently, Ghanians admire Brazilian soccer. They'll have a close-up opportunity to admire Brazil's offensive firepower. Ghana's keeper still looks suspect to me. He looked completely frozen during Dempsey's goal. If McBride had managed to direct his header a few inches to the right, he would have beaten Kingson on the near post. I could have sworn Kingson dived well after the ball banged off the post. Essien's second yellow card will be costly. While he has been called on for offensive duties, his defensive midfield skills will be missed even more. Gyan and Muntari return from suspension, which should provide more offensive options, but it's a rare team that can outscore Brazil.
Group F Finales
Reports of Ronaldo's death were greatly exaggerated.
He has now tied Gerd Müller's all-time scoring record, and he stands poised to pass all the great strikers who have graced the pitch during The World Cup. Brazilian manager, Parreira, deserves a lot of credit for properly gauging the Ronaldo pulse. With a few turns, a well placed header and a thunderous shot, Ronaldo announced his arrival in Germany. Robinho's presence has proven useful for Brazil, and he might displace Adriano in the starting lineup.
I'm sure Zico wished that Ronaldo had remained in abeyance. If Zico had asked Japan to begin in a defensive shell, he might have been called a hypocrite. How could he encourage Japan to emulate Brazilian football and then put every man behind the ball against Brazil? Japan should be credited for playing with Brazil in the early stages, and even taking the lead. After their goal, Zico seemed to realize that waking up a sleeping giant is a dangerous affair. While Japan started to sit back, waiting for a counter-attack, they faced a barrage of shots, near misses and, eventually, goals. Falling behind might have been the wake-up call that Brazil needed. It's amazing that they have a winning record in World Cup play when they concede the first goal.
Japan can't be happy to have the dubious distinction of leading, but ultimately losing two games, and remaining winless outside of Asia during World Cup play. Zico may be right in pushing Japanese players to be more creative and free-flowing, but they might have more to accomplish on the defensive side of the pitch. Maybe it's difficult to generate offense when you're back on your heels, but Brazil's opponents don't score many goals. For now, Japan has to be considered an Asian power, still waiting to make its big splash on the World stage.
There is an Asian team that's already made a splash on this World Cup stage. OK, I'm being premature. No, I'm not referring to South Korea, who may or may not qualify tomorrow. I'm referring to Australia's move into the Asian Confederation following the tournament. For now, Oceania can claim a team in the knockout phase.
Though they must be pleased (and rightly so), I don't think the Australians are ready to name stadiums or bestow honorary citizenship to Guus Hiddink yet. He deserves credit for getting Australia into the knockout phase, but I didn't understand his decision to play Kalac in goal today. Perhaps Schwarzer was hurt? Maybe Schwarzer was being disciplined? When Kalac's blunder gave Croatia the lead, Guus Hiddink looked like he was thinking about whether Korean Airlines flies directly to Russia. But, it seems, he and the team that he manages lead a charmed life. Kewell was clearly offside when he struck the second goal. As I mentioned elsewhere, missed calls are a part of soccer. Australia has now scored four goals in the last quarter hour of their three games. Given the way that Italy plays, the Socceroos might find themselves needing one of those last minute miracle comebacks.
He has now tied Gerd Müller's all-time scoring record, and he stands poised to pass all the great strikers who have graced the pitch during The World Cup. Brazilian manager, Parreira, deserves a lot of credit for properly gauging the Ronaldo pulse. With a few turns, a well placed header and a thunderous shot, Ronaldo announced his arrival in Germany. Robinho's presence has proven useful for Brazil, and he might displace Adriano in the starting lineup.
I'm sure Zico wished that Ronaldo had remained in abeyance. If Zico had asked Japan to begin in a defensive shell, he might have been called a hypocrite. How could he encourage Japan to emulate Brazilian football and then put every man behind the ball against Brazil? Japan should be credited for playing with Brazil in the early stages, and even taking the lead. After their goal, Zico seemed to realize that waking up a sleeping giant is a dangerous affair. While Japan started to sit back, waiting for a counter-attack, they faced a barrage of shots, near misses and, eventually, goals. Falling behind might have been the wake-up call that Brazil needed. It's amazing that they have a winning record in World Cup play when they concede the first goal.
Japan can't be happy to have the dubious distinction of leading, but ultimately losing two games, and remaining winless outside of Asia during World Cup play. Zico may be right in pushing Japanese players to be more creative and free-flowing, but they might have more to accomplish on the defensive side of the pitch. Maybe it's difficult to generate offense when you're back on your heels, but Brazil's opponents don't score many goals. For now, Japan has to be considered an Asian power, still waiting to make its big splash on the World stage.
There is an Asian team that's already made a splash on this World Cup stage. OK, I'm being premature. No, I'm not referring to South Korea, who may or may not qualify tomorrow. I'm referring to Australia's move into the Asian Confederation following the tournament. For now, Oceania can claim a team in the knockout phase.
Though they must be pleased (and rightly so), I don't think the Australians are ready to name stadiums or bestow honorary citizenship to Guus Hiddink yet. He deserves credit for getting Australia into the knockout phase, but I didn't understand his decision to play Kalac in goal today. Perhaps Schwarzer was hurt? Maybe Schwarzer was being disciplined? When Kalac's blunder gave Croatia the lead, Guus Hiddink looked like he was thinking about whether Korean Airlines flies directly to Russia. But, it seems, he and the team that he manages lead a charmed life. Kewell was clearly offside when he struck the second goal. As I mentioned elsewhere, missed calls are a part of soccer. Australia has now scored four goals in the last quarter hour of their three games. Given the way that Italy plays, the Socceroos might find themselves needing one of those last minute miracle comebacks.
David Brooks Weighs in on The World Cup
In his New York Times Op-Ed piece today, David Brooks lets us know that he's keeping an eye on The World Cup. He states:
"Going into today's World Cup match against Ghana, no American player has managed to put a ball into the back of the net, but the U.S. team does lead the world in one vital category: college degrees."
Brooks points out that most (not all?) of the US team's players have attended college whereas most of the elite players in the rest of the world are sent to soccer clubs when they are kids. This is true, and I'm sure that there are many kids who showed promise as youngsters, but didn't make it into the elite clubs or national teams. Without an education, it's disconcerting to imagine what happens to these kids. Brooks goes on to point out the prowess of the US educational systems, and how US college sports bring together communities, provide a nexus for social and intellectual activities, and act as engines of productivity for the economy. Implicitly, no explicitly, he asserts that the US has consciously chosen to accentuate the educational system which, therefore, means that our brightest soccer talent remains unfulfilled (and, as he points out, unable to find the back of the net in The World Cup).
Hard to argue with his line of reasoning, right? Of course, Brooks doesn't ask the question of how would our college educated national team players react if they had a chance to join the elite club team academies? Would they choose college over the (slim) chance of being a soccer superstar? I mean, the US would never compromise a child's education in an effort to bolster his or her soccer prospects. Oh, you might want to check out DC United's page on Freddie Adu, bragging about how young he was when he started for them. To his, and his parents', credit, he plays for DC United because it's the closest team to home, and he continues to participate in the US educational system. But I wonder what would have happened if DC United had a professional soccer academy.
Brooks also provides a utopian picture of collegiate athletics, mentioning that love of a college athletics breaks down social barriers and builds a sense of community. I'm sure the poor and disenfranchised tailgate with the rich and powerful. My aunt lived a university college town for a few years. She told me about a conversation with an ardent (US college) football fan who said that when she saw a black person, she assumed he was a football player or "just passing through." Heartwarming. Brooks conveniently forgets the dark side of college athletics, including corruption and violence.
While soccer may be an obsession, even religion, for much of the world, this is certainly not the case in the US. Brooks' piece provides evidence of an obsession in the US: money. It is sad that he believes one of the successful metrics for education is contribution to the economy. How about creating critical, independent thinkers? The reality of the situation is that soccer is a secondary consideration in the US for two reasons: the US team is not very good, and there isn't big money in the sport. This is a chicken and egg situation in that the US team won't be very good until there's more money, and there won't be more money until the US team is very good. But I can assure you this: if the US poured money into soccer the way it does for baseball, US football, and basketball, the US would have a damn good team. This might happen if the US tires of being defensive about having a good, but far from dominant, team. And college soccer world would become as competitive as the college football and basketball world, with all the unfortunate influences that the relentless pursuit of profit maximation brings.
Like when a prominent newspaper of record charges people for access to "select" online articles.
"Going into today's World Cup match against Ghana, no American player has managed to put a ball into the back of the net, but the U.S. team does lead the world in one vital category: college degrees."
Brooks points out that most (not all?) of the US team's players have attended college whereas most of the elite players in the rest of the world are sent to soccer clubs when they are kids. This is true, and I'm sure that there are many kids who showed promise as youngsters, but didn't make it into the elite clubs or national teams. Without an education, it's disconcerting to imagine what happens to these kids. Brooks goes on to point out the prowess of the US educational systems, and how US college sports bring together communities, provide a nexus for social and intellectual activities, and act as engines of productivity for the economy. Implicitly, no explicitly, he asserts that the US has consciously chosen to accentuate the educational system which, therefore, means that our brightest soccer talent remains unfulfilled (and, as he points out, unable to find the back of the net in The World Cup).
Hard to argue with his line of reasoning, right? Of course, Brooks doesn't ask the question of how would our college educated national team players react if they had a chance to join the elite club team academies? Would they choose college over the (slim) chance of being a soccer superstar? I mean, the US would never compromise a child's education in an effort to bolster his or her soccer prospects. Oh, you might want to check out DC United's page on Freddie Adu, bragging about how young he was when he started for them. To his, and his parents', credit, he plays for DC United because it's the closest team to home, and he continues to participate in the US educational system. But I wonder what would have happened if DC United had a professional soccer academy.
Brooks also provides a utopian picture of collegiate athletics, mentioning that love of a college athletics breaks down social barriers and builds a sense of community. I'm sure the poor and disenfranchised tailgate with the rich and powerful. My aunt lived a university college town for a few years. She told me about a conversation with an ardent (US college) football fan who said that when she saw a black person, she assumed he was a football player or "just passing through." Heartwarming. Brooks conveniently forgets the dark side of college athletics, including corruption and violence.
While soccer may be an obsession, even religion, for much of the world, this is certainly not the case in the US. Brooks' piece provides evidence of an obsession in the US: money. It is sad that he believes one of the successful metrics for education is contribution to the economy. How about creating critical, independent thinkers? The reality of the situation is that soccer is a secondary consideration in the US for two reasons: the US team is not very good, and there isn't big money in the sport. This is a chicken and egg situation in that the US team won't be very good until there's more money, and there won't be more money until the US team is very good. But I can assure you this: if the US poured money into soccer the way it does for baseball, US football, and basketball, the US would have a damn good team. This might happen if the US tires of being defensive about having a good, but far from dominant, team. And college soccer world would become as competitive as the college football and basketball world, with all the unfortunate influences that the relentless pursuit of profit maximation brings.
Like when a prominent newspaper of record charges people for access to "select" online articles.
Wednesday, June 21, 2006
Group C Finales
I am really sorry that we won't get to see the Ivory Coast play in the next round. Even without Drogba, they offered up some impressive soccer against Serbia and Montenegro. Anyone watching the second half realized that it wasn't a question of if Ivory Coast would score, but a question of how many. It turned out to be just enough. Serbia and Montenegro showed some great finishing skills, and being a man down proved insurmountable for them (though Stankovic's missed header must have tormented their fans). It was refreshing to see Drogba join his teammates for their post-goal celebrations. There was a certain release each time they scored, and a huge sigh of relief when they netted their third goal. This team would have almost certainly advanced to the knockout phase if it had been drawn into another group. This is the last time that Serbia and Montenegro play as a unified team. Given that there were only two players on this team from Montenegro, it may be a sign that we may not hear much from them in soccer circles. Somehow, I don't think this was on their mind when they voted for independence.
Sometimes, great teams neutralize each other when they play, but Argentina and the Netherlands may have been neutralized even before they stepped onto the pitch. Both teams rested players. I would not be surprised if the possession was even, but the Argentinians made the most of their possession, mainly because of Messi and Tevez who had a chance to showcase their skills. Tevez, in particular, did his best impression of the Energizer Bunny. Riquelme did his part, offering several opportunities for others to find the net. Even then, he seemed about fifteen degrees off his best game. There were many, many moments of individual flair and skill, and a few sequences of surgical passing. But these moments only reminded everyone of what these teams are capable of doing. Some might assume that the Netherlands wasn't too picky between facing Portugal or Mexico, but I think this game just shows that both Argentina and the Netherlands are confident they can play with any team. It wouldn't be a shock if these two teams met again--with much higher stakes.
Sometimes, great teams neutralize each other when they play, but Argentina and the Netherlands may have been neutralized even before they stepped onto the pitch. Both teams rested players. I would not be surprised if the possession was even, but the Argentinians made the most of their possession, mainly because of Messi and Tevez who had a chance to showcase their skills. Tevez, in particular, did his best impression of the Energizer Bunny. Riquelme did his part, offering several opportunities for others to find the net. Even then, he seemed about fifteen degrees off his best game. There were many, many moments of individual flair and skill, and a few sequences of surgical passing. But these moments only reminded everyone of what these teams are capable of doing. Some might assume that the Netherlands wasn't too picky between facing Portugal or Mexico, but I think this game just shows that both Argentina and the Netherlands are confident they can play with any team. It wouldn't be a shock if these two teams met again--with much higher stakes.
Good God, ESPN!!!
What a ridiculous moment during the Ivory Coast v. Serbia and Montenegro match. First, in my book, when a player is that deliberate with a handball in the box, it should be a red card. Second, why did the referee make Ivory Coast retake the penalty kick? Did the "encroachment" really impact the kick, especially if it was a Serbia and Montenegro player who was responsible?
But leave it to ESPN to make this absurd moment even more ridiculous. Just as they are broadcasting the replay, perhaps offering an insight into the ref's decision, ESPN SHOWED ONE OF THE LARGE, STUPID GRAPHICS THAT COVERS UP THE SCREEN!!!
Nice job, guys. I'm so glad you reminded us of the halftime show at that particular moment.
But leave it to ESPN to make this absurd moment even more ridiculous. Just as they are broadcasting the replay, perhaps offering an insight into the ref's decision, ESPN SHOWED ONE OF THE LARGE, STUPID GRAPHICS THAT COVERS UP THE SCREEN!!!
Nice job, guys. I'm so glad you reminded us of the halftime show at that particular moment.
Group D Finales
Perhaps I'm being unfair, but I didn't sense a joie de football from Angola today. Contrast their performance with Trinidad and Tobago, who also found themselves with unexpected possibilities during the final game. On more than one occasion, Angola's players were yelling at and pointing fingers at each other. Soccer can provide great escapism, but reality, both on and off the pitch, eventually has a way of making its inevitable impact. It couldn't have been easy to rely on Portugal for help, though they did their part for Angola (from a soccer perspective only, I repeat, from a soccer perspective only). Iran has played positive soccer throughout each of its games, and they deserved some reward. Angola didn't reach what must have been initially an unthinkable summit, but they did end up with two points, and their first World Cup goal. I hope they don't mind sharing the points with Iran on this day, who managed to salvage one point. More importantly, they showed that a country's place in the political landscape doesn't have to define its place in the soccer landscape. Can you think of another country for which this might be true?
Portugal and Mexico seemed intent on scoring goals. Even at the end of the match when Portugese manager Scolari was asking his players to hold the ball, they persisted in attacking the Mexican goal. Mexico must have known that their passage into the next round was never really in jeopardy, but even at the end of the match, they wanted more goals. The game featured another missed penalty kick (by a country mile), and a stutter step penalty kick. Not quite the style that Socrates used in the classic Brazil v. France match in 1986 but Simao had a better outcome :-)
In 2002, Mexico looked formidable during the group stage, but lost to the US in the second round. They haven't played as impressively in the current offering and they now face a match with Argentina. It's going to take a special performance from Mexico--or anyone for that matter--to beat Argentina. Portugal advances past the first round for the first since 1966 when the magnificent Eusebio led them to a third place finish. Perhaps Portugal has paced itself, and today they rested five players with yellow cards, but they haven't been pushed yet. I'm sure the Netherlands will offer a serious test.
Portugal and Mexico seemed intent on scoring goals. Even at the end of the match when Portugese manager Scolari was asking his players to hold the ball, they persisted in attacking the Mexican goal. Mexico must have known that their passage into the next round was never really in jeopardy, but even at the end of the match, they wanted more goals. The game featured another missed penalty kick (by a country mile), and a stutter step penalty kick. Not quite the style that Socrates used in the classic Brazil v. France match in 1986 but Simao had a better outcome :-)
In 2002, Mexico looked formidable during the group stage, but lost to the US in the second round. They haven't played as impressively in the current offering and they now face a match with Argentina. It's going to take a special performance from Mexico--or anyone for that matter--to beat Argentina. Portugal advances past the first round for the first since 1966 when the magnificent Eusebio led them to a third place finish. Perhaps Portugal has paced itself, and today they rested five players with yellow cards, but they haven't been pushed yet. I'm sure the Netherlands will offer a serious test.
Tuesday, June 20, 2006
Group B Finales
It was good to see both England and Sweden show up today. Both teams played to win--perhaps knowing that Germany awaits the second place team had an impact. Perhaps England just wanted to build up some momentum, and Sweden wanted to find the offense that helped them qualify for The World Cup. Joe Cole had a great game for England, with the best individual goal so far, and a great pass to set up Gerrard's goal. It's unfortunate to see Michael Owen helped off the field, well before he had much of a chance to get going. ESPN commentator Marcelo Balboa wondered why Sweden didn't press its one man advantage while Owen was getting treatment. As one of my wise soccer buddies mentioned during the game, maybe the Swedes did the sporting thing and let England deal with Owen, bring in Crouch and restore the balance. No team should be criticized for not taking advantage of an injured player. If Owen is hurt badly, and Rooney needs more time to get fit, are we going to see Theo Walcott? How many players get their first national cap before they even play for the club team?
I wasn't terribly impressed by Paul Robinson's performance. He seemed confused and indecisive at times, especially during Sweden's second goal. Why didn't he come off his line and grab the ball? Of course, the backup is David James, who's had some rather interesting moments as England's keeper. Both teams looked better, but neither still looks like they could challenge the top teams that are already clicking.
Trinidad and Tobago's dream ends. It was great to see their fans celebrating, even when their team was behind. They did not suffer from expectation escalation. No team wants to leave with zero points, and Paraguay was no exception. Brent Sancho looked devastated with his own goal. Let's hope he doesn't forget his heroic performance against Sweden, and dwell on this one unfortunate moment. I was surprised that Beenhakker played Kelvin Jack in goal, but he probably wanted Jack to get his World Cup opportunity. I don't think it would have mattered if Hislop had played instead, and Hislop has his World Cup memories. It seemed that both managers wanted to give some players recognition and a chance to play on the World stage. Both teams can leave with a sense of pride and accomplishment, and for ending their World Cup experience with an energetic performance.
I wasn't terribly impressed by Paul Robinson's performance. He seemed confused and indecisive at times, especially during Sweden's second goal. Why didn't he come off his line and grab the ball? Of course, the backup is David James, who's had some rather interesting moments as England's keeper. Both teams looked better, but neither still looks like they could challenge the top teams that are already clicking.
Trinidad and Tobago's dream ends. It was great to see their fans celebrating, even when their team was behind. They did not suffer from expectation escalation. No team wants to leave with zero points, and Paraguay was no exception. Brent Sancho looked devastated with his own goal. Let's hope he doesn't forget his heroic performance against Sweden, and dwell on this one unfortunate moment. I was surprised that Beenhakker played Kelvin Jack in goal, but he probably wanted Jack to get his World Cup opportunity. I don't think it would have mattered if Hislop had played instead, and Hislop has his World Cup memories. It seemed that both managers wanted to give some players recognition and a chance to play on the World stage. Both teams can leave with a sense of pride and accomplishment, and for ending their World Cup experience with an energetic performance.
Group A Finales
Ecuador didn't show up today. Aside from resting both their starting strikers, the rest of the team looked completely different from the first two games. John Harkes said there's a fine line between pacing yourself and giving it too much effort. I wonder about Ecuador's decision. They played well in the first two games, but will they lose some much needed momentum for their second round encounter? Apparently, their manager has stated that they are pleased to advance into the knockout phase. Perhaps this is true. But if he has greater aspirations--and who wouldn't--then it will be interesting to see how they play against England. If they are flat and out of sync, his decision to rest players and coast will be costly. It would have been illuminating to see Ecuador test Germany's defense, which still hasn't the firepower of a top offense.
Germany, on the other hand, continued to impress. I have no doubt that previous German teams would have taken the foot off the gas after the first goal. Klinsmann seems determined to keep this team flowing. Perhaps we should expect nothing less from a former striker. Their third goal displayed timing, precision passing and team understanding that we've been looking for from Brazil (and seen from Argentina). Klose is rapidly moving up the all-time scoring list, but he basically disappeared during the knockout phase of the 2002 World Cup. As Germany faces some tighter defenses, he'll have to keep contributing--and making the home crowds cheer. I've read that Germans are somewhat reluctant to display and wave their flags. You wouldn't guess this from the stadium today.
When teams reach the point where they know their World Cup is over, interesting things can happen. Some managers empty their benches, allowing younger players to get a taste of the ultimate soccer tournament. Others retain their starters, but clearly given instructions to play freely. Both Poland and Costa Rica kept their starters on the field, and they played an entertaining game. While Poland's first goal should not have counted, given the clear foul on Porras by a Polish player, they did play well. Polish defender, Bosacki, certainly made an impression.
As did Polish goalkeeper, Artur Borac--but not the kind you want to make. Gomez's strike was strong, but Borac looked completely befuddled by the shot, which basically went through his legs. Anytime a team with high expectations doesn't advance, the manager comes under scrutiny. Borac's blunder makes one wonder about keeping Jerzy Dudek off the squad. Would Dudek have made the save against Germany, which would have preserved the draw? Maybe, but I doubt it would have made too much of a difference. Germany and Ecuador have played better than Poland and Costa Rica, both of whom will probably look to younger players and perhaps new managers as they look toward the 2010 World Cup.
Germany, on the other hand, continued to impress. I have no doubt that previous German teams would have taken the foot off the gas after the first goal. Klinsmann seems determined to keep this team flowing. Perhaps we should expect nothing less from a former striker. Their third goal displayed timing, precision passing and team understanding that we've been looking for from Brazil (and seen from Argentina). Klose is rapidly moving up the all-time scoring list, but he basically disappeared during the knockout phase of the 2002 World Cup. As Germany faces some tighter defenses, he'll have to keep contributing--and making the home crowds cheer. I've read that Germans are somewhat reluctant to display and wave their flags. You wouldn't guess this from the stadium today.
When teams reach the point where they know their World Cup is over, interesting things can happen. Some managers empty their benches, allowing younger players to get a taste of the ultimate soccer tournament. Others retain their starters, but clearly given instructions to play freely. Both Poland and Costa Rica kept their starters on the field, and they played an entertaining game. While Poland's first goal should not have counted, given the clear foul on Porras by a Polish player, they did play well. Polish defender, Bosacki, certainly made an impression.
As did Polish goalkeeper, Artur Borac--but not the kind you want to make. Gomez's strike was strong, but Borac looked completely befuddled by the shot, which basically went through his legs. Anytime a team with high expectations doesn't advance, the manager comes under scrutiny. Borac's blunder makes one wonder about keeping Jerzy Dudek off the squad. Would Dudek have made the save against Germany, which would have preserved the draw? Maybe, but I doubt it would have made too much of a difference. Germany and Ecuador have played better than Poland and Costa Rica, both of whom will probably look to younger players and perhaps new managers as they look toward the 2010 World Cup.
Where are you, Pierluigi Collina?
Yet again, we have a refereeing decision, or lack thereof, that is inexplicable. Costa Rica and Poland are playing for pride, but as one of the commentators stated, the referee should still treat this game as seriously as the Final. How could he not have seen the Polish player tripping Costa Rican goalkeeper, Jose Porras? It looked like a blatant trip no less.
I miss Pierluigi Collina.
I know he reached FIFA's mandatory retirement age, Everton and Juventus fans (who created a "I Hate Collina" website) may not view him so kindly, and his sponsorship deal caused some noise. But, objectively, he was one of the best referees. We hear about great teams that are missing from The World Cup, but what about great referees?
As the stakes, and $$$, continue to rise with The World Cup, teams, fans, soccer federations, will increasingly seek ways to address--and redress--referees' actions or inactions.
I miss Pierluigi Collina.
I know he reached FIFA's mandatory retirement age, Everton and Juventus fans (who created a "I Hate Collina" website) may not view him so kindly, and his sponsorship deal caused some noise. But, objectively, he was one of the best referees. We hear about great teams that are missing from The World Cup, but what about great referees?
As the stakes, and $$$, continue to rise with The World Cup, teams, fans, soccer federations, will increasingly seek ways to address--and redress--referees' actions or inactions.
Monday, June 19, 2006
Day Eleven
Togo's team continues to swirl around in the storm of controversy related to compensation. As if playing in The World Cup isn't enough!! Apparently, they threatened to boycott the match against Switzerland. I never had much of a soccer career, and I'm certainly out of shape now. But I'd be happy to play in their place. Whatever the reason for this ongoing controversy, it's unfortunate to have this drama taking place during the games. They are arguing over compensation for wins, draws and for reaching the secound round, and they've been eliminated after two losses. During the last World Cup, Nike ran an ad using a remix of Elvis Presley's song "A Little Less Conversation [A Little More Action Please]" Maybe Togo's players should listen to this tune.
I hadn't seen much of Switzerland before the tournament, but I'm dismayed to see some of their tactics. They used their hands twice in the match against France, and both of the moves appeared to be deliberate. In this match against Togo, their defender Müller demonstrated tremendous skills in the box--karate skills. I'm not sure what the referee was looking at as he waved off Togo's pleas for a penalty kick. Maybe he's a karate fan.
What a difference one game can make. Ukraine not only soundly beats Saudi Arabia, they make up their entire goal differential in one game. You have to admire the Saudis, who keep on running and gunning, despite the scoreline. There's no doubt that drawing with Tunisia was a huge accomplishment. Perhaps it's a little harder to find progress in a 4-0 loss, but it's better than the 8-0 pounding from Germany in 2002. Maybe the Saudis should tighten up their defense when they concede a goal. Nah. It's fun to watch this team play so freely, even when they are behind. Ukraine will certainly sleep better tonight. Shevchenko's pass on the final goal was perfect. Arsenal fans don't want to see that sight next season in the Premiership.
Spanish fans must have been horrified when Tunisia took the lead today. Especially given that the Spanish defense seemed frozen in place. Even Casillas could have done better by punching the ball away from goal. But Spain is still looking very good. For many years, I was convinced that Morientes was the Rodney Dangerfield of Spanish soccer. Now it appears that Raul is on the outside looking in. Looking in the back of the net. He's certainly making the case for starting, alongside Torres.
As we move into the final games of the first round, I would put Spain in the top four performers, along with Argentina, the Netherlands and Brazil. Yes, I know that Brazil has only scored three goals, but I think we all know there will be more to come.
I hadn't seen much of Switzerland before the tournament, but I'm dismayed to see some of their tactics. They used their hands twice in the match against France, and both of the moves appeared to be deliberate. In this match against Togo, their defender Müller demonstrated tremendous skills in the box--karate skills. I'm not sure what the referee was looking at as he waved off Togo's pleas for a penalty kick. Maybe he's a karate fan.
What a difference one game can make. Ukraine not only soundly beats Saudi Arabia, they make up their entire goal differential in one game. You have to admire the Saudis, who keep on running and gunning, despite the scoreline. There's no doubt that drawing with Tunisia was a huge accomplishment. Perhaps it's a little harder to find progress in a 4-0 loss, but it's better than the 8-0 pounding from Germany in 2002. Maybe the Saudis should tighten up their defense when they concede a goal. Nah. It's fun to watch this team play so freely, even when they are behind. Ukraine will certainly sleep better tonight. Shevchenko's pass on the final goal was perfect. Arsenal fans don't want to see that sight next season in the Premiership.
Spanish fans must have been horrified when Tunisia took the lead today. Especially given that the Spanish defense seemed frozen in place. Even Casillas could have done better by punching the ball away from goal. But Spain is still looking very good. For many years, I was convinced that Morientes was the Rodney Dangerfield of Spanish soccer. Now it appears that Raul is on the outside looking in. Looking in the back of the net. He's certainly making the case for starting, alongside Torres.
As we move into the final games of the first round, I would put Spain in the top four performers, along with Argentina, the Netherlands and Brazil. Yes, I know that Brazil has only scored three goals, but I think we all know there will be more to come.
ESPN/ABC Coverage
ESPN/ABC's coverage is becoming unbearable. If I weren't addicted to HD, I would watch Spanish TV coverage. And, no, I don't speak Spanish.
Someone needs to stop ESPN/ABC from blocking up large portions of the screen (even on HD) with non-transparent graphics. Remember that the folks watching these games are either taping them and taking up their evenings with soccer, or taking time off from work to watch soccer live. Do you really think these people need the ticker along the bottom that reminds us when all the baseball games are beginning? Why not use the ticker for the soccer information that's filling up the screen.
Having said this, stop showing us meaningless, inane statistics!! Did you know that Brazil has never beaten a team when the moon is full, the planets are in full alignment, there's a hurricane on both coasts of the US, it's Tuesday, and aliens are invading the planet? Oh my God, surely, Brazil is going to lose the World Cup!!!! From the wisdom of the investment world, past performance is no guarantee of future results. What prior World Cup stat would have given us insight into France's victory in 1998 or South Korea's semi-final finish in 2002. Stop it with the stupid statistics!
There's also the continuous "wisdom" from the commentators that teams are trying to come in first or second in their groups in order to obtain a "favorable" pairing in the second round. For example, they keep talking about how Group A teams want to avoid England. Really? With the way England is playing, I would love to get them in the second round. And what's to guarantee that England will win their group. When was the last time England beat Sweden (I believe it was 1968). And think about Ecuador v. Germany. If that game ends in a tie, Ecuador wins the group. Stop assuming that Germany will win the group. We've already seen some great upsets, and some teams getting punished by looking for a particular result.
I'm also amazed by some of the basic points that the commentators seem to miss. I could have sworn Crespo's goal in Argentina's 6-0 drubbing of Serbia and Montenegro was an own goal. Instead of checking on this during the replay, they were too busy playing up the human interest angle of Lionel Messi getting his first assist. When a goalkeeper makes an acrobatic save, sometimes it's because of great reflexes; sometimes, it's because the keeper is out of position. Great goalkeepers make most saves look easy, and make the great ones when you need them. Not every wild jump or contorted body is a reflection of a great save. Help people understand when a keeper is out of position.
I should be fair in saying that I think JP Dellacamera, John Harkes and Tommy Smyth are doing a nice job. Adrian Healey's doing OK as well, though he needs to stop saying "games in glorious high definition." It not only sounds strange, it reminds me of my dependency. Other folks seem out of place. No mater how hard he tries, Brent Musberger looks completely out of his element. While he obviously knows about soccer, please stop Eric Wynalda from making inappropriate comments, like using the Japanese keeper's name as material for a joke.
Hardly a way to follow FIFA's advice to make new friends.
Someone needs to stop ESPN/ABC from blocking up large portions of the screen (even on HD) with non-transparent graphics. Remember that the folks watching these games are either taping them and taking up their evenings with soccer, or taking time off from work to watch soccer live. Do you really think these people need the ticker along the bottom that reminds us when all the baseball games are beginning? Why not use the ticker for the soccer information that's filling up the screen.
Having said this, stop showing us meaningless, inane statistics!! Did you know that Brazil has never beaten a team when the moon is full, the planets are in full alignment, there's a hurricane on both coasts of the US, it's Tuesday, and aliens are invading the planet? Oh my God, surely, Brazil is going to lose the World Cup!!!! From the wisdom of the investment world, past performance is no guarantee of future results. What prior World Cup stat would have given us insight into France's victory in 1998 or South Korea's semi-final finish in 2002. Stop it with the stupid statistics!
There's also the continuous "wisdom" from the commentators that teams are trying to come in first or second in their groups in order to obtain a "favorable" pairing in the second round. For example, they keep talking about how Group A teams want to avoid England. Really? With the way England is playing, I would love to get them in the second round. And what's to guarantee that England will win their group. When was the last time England beat Sweden (I believe it was 1968). And think about Ecuador v. Germany. If that game ends in a tie, Ecuador wins the group. Stop assuming that Germany will win the group. We've already seen some great upsets, and some teams getting punished by looking for a particular result.
I'm also amazed by some of the basic points that the commentators seem to miss. I could have sworn Crespo's goal in Argentina's 6-0 drubbing of Serbia and Montenegro was an own goal. Instead of checking on this during the replay, they were too busy playing up the human interest angle of Lionel Messi getting his first assist. When a goalkeeper makes an acrobatic save, sometimes it's because of great reflexes; sometimes, it's because the keeper is out of position. Great goalkeepers make most saves look easy, and make the great ones when you need them. Not every wild jump or contorted body is a reflection of a great save. Help people understand when a keeper is out of position.
I should be fair in saying that I think JP Dellacamera, John Harkes and Tommy Smyth are doing a nice job. Adrian Healey's doing OK as well, though he needs to stop saying "games in glorious high definition." It not only sounds strange, it reminds me of my dependency. Other folks seem out of place. No mater how hard he tries, Brent Musberger looks completely out of his element. While he obviously knows about soccer, please stop Eric Wynalda from making inappropriate comments, like using the Japanese keeper's name as material for a joke.
Hardly a way to follow FIFA's advice to make new friends.
Sunday, June 18, 2006
Days Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten
Before The World Cup began, I had imagined that Ivory Coast might have been the sleeper or dark horse team. Being placed in the group of death has been hard on them (though, it seems, even harder on Serbia and Montenegro). Having watched Ecuador play twice, I have to say that I believe they are the most promising, surprise team so far. It was so refreshing to see their defenders neutralize Costa Rica's strikers by actually running with them, toward the goal. They didn't rely (exclusively) on the offside trap, having defenders run away from the goal with their hands up in the air. If they tie or beat Germany in the final game of the first round, they win the group.
As for who they might meet in the second round, England still continues to underwhelm. On one level, it was great to see Wayne Rooney in action. The World Cup features the best players in the world, and he certainly fits the bill. But on another level, why did England need his (and Lennon's) boost? Peter Crouch had to resort to hair pulling for the first goal. They just don't seem to be rising to the occasion, and it's worth nothing they haven't beaten Sweden since 1968. If England beats Sweden, and Trinidad and Tobago beats Paraguay, we have to look at tie breakers. As much as I've enjoyed seeing T&T's spirit, I don't see this happening. BTW, major respect to John Terry for that goal line clearance.
Argentina 6, Serbia and Montenegro 0. Argentina has managed this scoreline before in The World Cup in 1978 by beating Peru 6-0, which helped them advance on goal differential over Brazil. However, that match remains controversial to this day. Soccer being soccer, I can even recall articles at the time speculating that Argentina had threatened military action against, or even offered nuclear technology, to Peru (conspiracy theories cut both ways). On this occasion, there's no controversy--just admiration for Argentina's fantastic play. Let's hope both the Netherlands and Argentina continue playing great soccer when they meet in the final game of the first round.
In the "other confederation" arena, it seems that the African confederation is reasserting itself. Ivory Coast played well in a losing effort, Angola tied Mexico, and Ghana's strikers and keeper found their stride against the Czech Republic. From Asia, Iran lost to Portugal, but Japan managed a tie against Croatia, and South Korea came back to tie France. From the CONCACAF realm, there's the US-Italy game.
Let's hope that we witnessed the worst refereeing of the tournament. That ref was hopeless. It takes a lot of courage to hand out a red card to a soccer power like Italy. De Rossi deserved the red card, but many refs would have given him a yellow card and a stern warning. But he almost certainly used Mastroeni for a make-up call. I also don't think he realized that Eddie Pope already had a yellow card. In the end, the US has to be pleased with being alive, though beating Ghana is no easy task. Onyewu seemed to settle into his role, but Eddie Pope still looked lost. The image of him holding up his hand, standing still, during Italy's first goal was rather pathetic. Of course, I'm not sure who's going to play in the back line now that he's suspended.
Both the US-Italy and South Korea-France match left me wondering about European soccer entitlement. What do I mean? De Rossi was clearly upset that his teammate, Zaccardo, scored an own goal (and what a bizarre strike of the ball). Maybe he should have had his words with him. Instead, he decided to elbow Brian McBride. When South Korea scored its goal, William Gallas (who should attend the John Terry school for goal line clearing) was clearly upset. Shortly after the goal, he grabbed (an offside) South Korean player and threw him to the pitch. So, what I wonder about is whether certain Italian or French players would behave this way if they were playing each other (or another of the soccer "powers")? How much of their frustration arose from an expectation, even entitlement, that they were the better team and therefore "deserved" to win.
Regardless of whether I'm just idly (or even unfairly) speculating, it was a very sad sight to see Zidane leave the field, throwing something off to the side. Given his second yellow card, he won't play in France's next game. If teams in their group play better than France, then they decide to advance. But I have to confess that I hope this isn't the last image of Zidane from The World Cup.
As for Brazil, everyone seems to think they're still going at 50%. All I have to say is that Brazil can put anyone into the game, even a guy named Fred, and he will find a way to score :-)
As for who they might meet in the second round, England still continues to underwhelm. On one level, it was great to see Wayne Rooney in action. The World Cup features the best players in the world, and he certainly fits the bill. But on another level, why did England need his (and Lennon's) boost? Peter Crouch had to resort to hair pulling for the first goal. They just don't seem to be rising to the occasion, and it's worth nothing they haven't beaten Sweden since 1968. If England beats Sweden, and Trinidad and Tobago beats Paraguay, we have to look at tie breakers. As much as I've enjoyed seeing T&T's spirit, I don't see this happening. BTW, major respect to John Terry for that goal line clearance.
Argentina 6, Serbia and Montenegro 0. Argentina has managed this scoreline before in The World Cup in 1978 by beating Peru 6-0, which helped them advance on goal differential over Brazil. However, that match remains controversial to this day. Soccer being soccer, I can even recall articles at the time speculating that Argentina had threatened military action against, or even offered nuclear technology, to Peru (conspiracy theories cut both ways). On this occasion, there's no controversy--just admiration for Argentina's fantastic play. Let's hope both the Netherlands and Argentina continue playing great soccer when they meet in the final game of the first round.
In the "other confederation" arena, it seems that the African confederation is reasserting itself. Ivory Coast played well in a losing effort, Angola tied Mexico, and Ghana's strikers and keeper found their stride against the Czech Republic. From Asia, Iran lost to Portugal, but Japan managed a tie against Croatia, and South Korea came back to tie France. From the CONCACAF realm, there's the US-Italy game.
Let's hope that we witnessed the worst refereeing of the tournament. That ref was hopeless. It takes a lot of courage to hand out a red card to a soccer power like Italy. De Rossi deserved the red card, but many refs would have given him a yellow card and a stern warning. But he almost certainly used Mastroeni for a make-up call. I also don't think he realized that Eddie Pope already had a yellow card. In the end, the US has to be pleased with being alive, though beating Ghana is no easy task. Onyewu seemed to settle into his role, but Eddie Pope still looked lost. The image of him holding up his hand, standing still, during Italy's first goal was rather pathetic. Of course, I'm not sure who's going to play in the back line now that he's suspended.
Both the US-Italy and South Korea-France match left me wondering about European soccer entitlement. What do I mean? De Rossi was clearly upset that his teammate, Zaccardo, scored an own goal (and what a bizarre strike of the ball). Maybe he should have had his words with him. Instead, he decided to elbow Brian McBride. When South Korea scored its goal, William Gallas (who should attend the John Terry school for goal line clearing) was clearly upset. Shortly after the goal, he grabbed (an offside) South Korean player and threw him to the pitch. So, what I wonder about is whether certain Italian or French players would behave this way if they were playing each other (or another of the soccer "powers")? How much of their frustration arose from an expectation, even entitlement, that they were the better team and therefore "deserved" to win.
Regardless of whether I'm just idly (or even unfairly) speculating, it was a very sad sight to see Zidane leave the field, throwing something off to the side. Given his second yellow card, he won't play in France's next game. If teams in their group play better than France, then they decide to advance. But I have to confess that I hope this isn't the last image of Zidane from The World Cup.
As for Brazil, everyone seems to think they're still going at 50%. All I have to say is that Brazil can put anyone into the game, even a guy named Fred, and he will find a way to score :-)
Wednesday, June 14, 2006
Day Six
We saw the worst refereeing decision to date.
The ref during the Spain v. Ukraine match gave a red card inexplicably to Ukranian defender Vashchuk. When the striker who was allegedly fouled (Luis Garcia) ends up consoling Vashchuk, you know something must have been amiss. I doubt Ukraine would have won, or even tied, this match with eleven players; Spain was definitely firing on all cylinders. But the red card ruined the chance to see the full, complete Ukranian response to a relentless Spanish attack. By the end of the match, we witnessed the most lopsided match so far.
Spain has started previous World Cup campaigns with a blaze of glory, only to flicker out later in the tournament. Part of the reason I didn't include Spain in my list of the best teams to never win The World Cup is that they haven't come close to winning the tournament. They did place fourth in 1950, but other teams came really close. If Puskas hadn't been injured, Hungary would have probably defeated West Germany in 1954 (Hungary had defeated the West Germans 8-3 in the earlier rounds). The Dutch lost to the host nations both times in 1974 and 1978; if Johan Cryuff had played in 1978, they might have won in Argentina. And while Les Bleus "only" made the semi-finals in 1982 and 1986, they gloriously won the European Cup in 1984, as did the Dutch in 1988 (remember Van Basten's goal in the finals?). Spain, with its phenonemal talent, has 20 European club championships, but only the one national club championship in Euro 1964. Let's hope they have some staying power this time, and that Ukraine gets a chance to fully demonstrate its potential in their next match. I can imagine that Chelsea fans certainly want to see Shekchenko show off his skills.
Part of the subtext in The World Cup relates to which confederation will rise up to challenge South America and Europe, who can claim all the winners of the Cup. Mexico, within CONCACAF, offers some hope, but they haven't made it over the hump. Besides, if Mexico wins, one can argue it would be validation for the South American style of play. As for the US, at this point, let's just hope they put up a good show against the Italians. While Africa made inroads in earlier tournaments (and the Algerians were cheated out of a second round appearance in 1982 by a disgusting display between West Germany and Austria), one could argue that Africa really announced itself in 1990 when Cameroon reached the quarter-finals. Most recently in 2002, South Korea definitely made a splash for Asia by reaching the semi-finals. Notably, Senegal repeated Cameroon's accomplishment by reaching the quarter-finals in 2002.
In the first Africa-Asia encounter, South Korea made history yet again by winning for the first time away from Asian soil. When Tunisia and Saudi Arabia played today, it was against the backdrop of Saudi Arabia hoping to erase all memories of a 8-0 thumping at the hands of the Germans in 2002, and Tunisia representing the last hope for the African confederation to secure any points from their first games.
Jaziri's impressive strike set up Tunisia very nicely. But Tunisia seemed content to seek the 1-0 victory, while bending to Saudi Arabia's attacks. When Saudi Arabia, deservedly, took the lead 2-1, it seemed that Asia could claim a degree of bragging rights over Africa based on first game results. Tunisia's 93rd minute goal in stoppage time seemed to say "not so fast." Nonetheless, the Saudis should be pleased with a result that is infinitely preferable to a 8-0 scoreline.
And what about the Germans who gave the Saudis this thrashing four years ago? They faced Poland today, a team that had never beaten the Germans, in a stadium where the Germans had never lost. Not an ideal set of circumstances. And while the Poles sought chances to score, they did seem content with a draw, perhaps hoping for one point as part of a plan to secure four points by beating Costa Rica in the next game. Their goalkeeper, Boruc, even took a yellow card for time wasting.
I suppose the Germans could have cooperated; four points from two games would be OK. But they clearly wanted to win this game. The goal in the 91 minute (in stoppage time again!) came from one of the substitutes (Odonkor) passing to another of the substitutes (Neuville). I've been praising Dutch managers for inspired substitutions that result in goals, so it's only fair to recognize Klinsmann as well. Klose and Podolski should have buried their point blank shots into the back of the net, but instead of beamoning lost chances, he kept pushing and the Germans were duly rewarded. I hope he gets to enjoy at least one night of peace and appreciation during the roller coaster ride he's in for.
During one of the matches, the ESPN commentators pointed out that there is a fine of 5,000 Swiss francs for receiving a card, but that the national soccer federations will pay these fines.
I say to the players of Togo...have you asked your national soccer federation to confirm this :-)
The ref during the Spain v. Ukraine match gave a red card inexplicably to Ukranian defender Vashchuk. When the striker who was allegedly fouled (Luis Garcia) ends up consoling Vashchuk, you know something must have been amiss. I doubt Ukraine would have won, or even tied, this match with eleven players; Spain was definitely firing on all cylinders. But the red card ruined the chance to see the full, complete Ukranian response to a relentless Spanish attack. By the end of the match, we witnessed the most lopsided match so far.
Spain has started previous World Cup campaigns with a blaze of glory, only to flicker out later in the tournament. Part of the reason I didn't include Spain in my list of the best teams to never win The World Cup is that they haven't come close to winning the tournament. They did place fourth in 1950, but other teams came really close. If Puskas hadn't been injured, Hungary would have probably defeated West Germany in 1954 (Hungary had defeated the West Germans 8-3 in the earlier rounds). The Dutch lost to the host nations both times in 1974 and 1978; if Johan Cryuff had played in 1978, they might have won in Argentina. And while Les Bleus "only" made the semi-finals in 1982 and 1986, they gloriously won the European Cup in 1984, as did the Dutch in 1988 (remember Van Basten's goal in the finals?). Spain, with its phenonemal talent, has 20 European club championships, but only the one national club championship in Euro 1964. Let's hope they have some staying power this time, and that Ukraine gets a chance to fully demonstrate its potential in their next match. I can imagine that Chelsea fans certainly want to see Shekchenko show off his skills.
Part of the subtext in The World Cup relates to which confederation will rise up to challenge South America and Europe, who can claim all the winners of the Cup. Mexico, within CONCACAF, offers some hope, but they haven't made it over the hump. Besides, if Mexico wins, one can argue it would be validation for the South American style of play. As for the US, at this point, let's just hope they put up a good show against the Italians. While Africa made inroads in earlier tournaments (and the Algerians were cheated out of a second round appearance in 1982 by a disgusting display between West Germany and Austria), one could argue that Africa really announced itself in 1990 when Cameroon reached the quarter-finals. Most recently in 2002, South Korea definitely made a splash for Asia by reaching the semi-finals. Notably, Senegal repeated Cameroon's accomplishment by reaching the quarter-finals in 2002.
In the first Africa-Asia encounter, South Korea made history yet again by winning for the first time away from Asian soil. When Tunisia and Saudi Arabia played today, it was against the backdrop of Saudi Arabia hoping to erase all memories of a 8-0 thumping at the hands of the Germans in 2002, and Tunisia representing the last hope for the African confederation to secure any points from their first games.
Jaziri's impressive strike set up Tunisia very nicely. But Tunisia seemed content to seek the 1-0 victory, while bending to Saudi Arabia's attacks. When Saudi Arabia, deservedly, took the lead 2-1, it seemed that Asia could claim a degree of bragging rights over Africa based on first game results. Tunisia's 93rd minute goal in stoppage time seemed to say "not so fast." Nonetheless, the Saudis should be pleased with a result that is infinitely preferable to a 8-0 scoreline.
And what about the Germans who gave the Saudis this thrashing four years ago? They faced Poland today, a team that had never beaten the Germans, in a stadium where the Germans had never lost. Not an ideal set of circumstances. And while the Poles sought chances to score, they did seem content with a draw, perhaps hoping for one point as part of a plan to secure four points by beating Costa Rica in the next game. Their goalkeeper, Boruc, even took a yellow card for time wasting.
I suppose the Germans could have cooperated; four points from two games would be OK. But they clearly wanted to win this game. The goal in the 91 minute (in stoppage time again!) came from one of the substitutes (Odonkor) passing to another of the substitutes (Neuville). I've been praising Dutch managers for inspired substitutions that result in goals, so it's only fair to recognize Klinsmann as well. Klose and Podolski should have buried their point blank shots into the back of the net, but instead of beamoning lost chances, he kept pushing and the Germans were duly rewarded. I hope he gets to enjoy at least one night of peace and appreciation during the roller coaster ride he's in for.
During one of the matches, the ESPN commentators pointed out that there is a fine of 5,000 Swiss francs for receiving a card, but that the national soccer federations will pay these fines.
I say to the players of Togo...have you asked your national soccer federation to confirm this :-)
Tuesday, June 13, 2006
Day Five
The red card. Is there any worse punishment in sports?
It's possible to ejected in other sports, but the team retains its full complement of players (albeit without the offending player in question). Hockey has its power play concept where one team is "short handed" but it is a temporary measure, which ends when the team on the power play scores a goal or the penalty period ends (apparently, the Montreal Canadiens during the "Rocket" Richard era prompted the NHL to institute the goal ending the power play because they would put away teams with multiple goals during a power play). In soccer, the red card means you are gone and your team can't even put someone else into your position (the exception is the goalie in which case one of your unfortunate teammates has to leave). And the other team can keep scoring as many as goals as they can muster. The red card represents continuous insult to injury.
Assuming that the team with the advantage actually takes advantage of its position. Trinidad and Tobago actually stiffened its resolve, holding the Swedes at bay for nearly an entire half. Seeing a team manage this is inspiring. It provides evidence that it's worth battling on in the face of adversity. Of course, the far more typical case presented itself in the Togo v. South Korea match.
Togo looked the better side until the 53rd minute. Their goal was a fantastic strike, and they clearly frustrated the Koreans in the first half. With the red card (or was a second yellow card that resulted in a red card?), everything changed. With Lee's superb free kick, Korea was instantly back in the game. Togo, however, still looked threatening and held its ground. But, with the stadium roof closed to prevent distracting shadows, and the heat and humidity rising, they inevitably tired. Ahn's goal was an excellent shot, but one wonders what would happened if the Koreans didn't hold the manpower advantage for nearly forty minutes. Advocaat's decision to bring Ahn onto the team and into the game paid dividends. Once again, a Dutch manager makes a prescient substitution. It's becoming a trend.
An unfortunate trend for France is the goose egg. Before Les Bleus won the Cup in 1998, they were among the best teams to never win The World Cup. Hungary in 1950s, the Dutch in 1970s and 1990s and the French in the 1980s. Platini led France to European Cup glory in 1984 with nine goals in five games, but The World Cup eluded them. Zinedine Zidane healed this wound in 1998. In the eight years since 1998, Thierry Henry has become a force to be reckoned with. As an Arsenal fan, I welcome this development. In the eight years since 1998, other players on France's team have simply gotten eight years older. There a few younger players on the team, but they didn't make much of an impression. The rest of the team, including Henry, seemed out of sync, out of energy, out of place. After scoring three goals in the 1998 final, France has gone four complete games without a goal.
There was something about the Swiss that reminded me of (not surprisingly) clock-like precision. It appears very hard to score on them, yet I didn't see much creativity in their attacks. The referee caught a handball by one of the Swiss players at the end of the match, but he didn't catch the one in the box earlier (which should have resulted in a penalty). In this game, that missed call could have been the difference. Referees should never become part of the story--and neither should the shadows or sun glare. Was Barthez just hamming it up on that save, or was he really blinded by the sun? If the latter, weren't the stadium designers thinking about this issue?
I honestly think the French and Swiss will have problems with both Togo and South Korea.
Everyone has been waiting for Brazil to take the field. Well, maybe not Ronaldo. What happened out there? One of the ESPN commentators said "he has disappeared from the game..." In order to disappear, one has to appear in the first place. Except for his thunderous shot (which reminded everyone of how he can strike at any time), he was a ghost. Is he really out of shape? Is he sick? Is he hurt? Is he bored? For someone three goals from breaking the all-time scoring record at The World Cup, he looked completely uninterested. He barely made it in time onto the field as the second half started. If he's hurt or sick or bored, why would Parreira start him? Maybe because if he didn't start him, there would be an uproar in Brazil. Perhaps Parreira started him knowing that Ronaldo would underwhelm, thereby "freeing" Parreira to replace him with a much livlier, creative Robinho. There were boos as Ronaldo left the field. If Parreira sits Ronaldo down at this point, he might even get away with it. I sincerely hope that this isn't the last we've seen of Ronaldo who, despite all the criticism, is one of the most gifted strikers the game has seen. Having said this, it wouldn't be so bad if Gerd Müller, Just Fontaine and Pele (and Ronaldo) remain in the top three spots on the all-time scoring list. I just hope Ronaldo, assuming he's fit, shows some effort to move further up the list.
Kaka's goal was magnificient. It left the Croatian keeper, Pletikosa, no chance whatsoever. But the rest of Brazil's play was mediocre (at least for Brazil). Perhaps they are pacing themselves, perhaps they need some more time to find their rhythm, but they didn't look like the best team so far. Perhaps it's just another case of high expectations for Brazil, a team that just won its eight straight game in The World Cup.
Croatia certainly showed that they can play, and that they'll create problems for both Japan and Australia. This is still Brazil's group to lose, but Croatia has a very good chance to making it to the knockout stage, especially if their fans continue to hypnotize opponents with those checkered red and white shirts in the stands.
It's possible to ejected in other sports, but the team retains its full complement of players (albeit without the offending player in question). Hockey has its power play concept where one team is "short handed" but it is a temporary measure, which ends when the team on the power play scores a goal or the penalty period ends (apparently, the Montreal Canadiens during the "Rocket" Richard era prompted the NHL to institute the goal ending the power play because they would put away teams with multiple goals during a power play). In soccer, the red card means you are gone and your team can't even put someone else into your position (the exception is the goalie in which case one of your unfortunate teammates has to leave). And the other team can keep scoring as many as goals as they can muster. The red card represents continuous insult to injury.
Assuming that the team with the advantage actually takes advantage of its position. Trinidad and Tobago actually stiffened its resolve, holding the Swedes at bay for nearly an entire half. Seeing a team manage this is inspiring. It provides evidence that it's worth battling on in the face of adversity. Of course, the far more typical case presented itself in the Togo v. South Korea match.
Togo looked the better side until the 53rd minute. Their goal was a fantastic strike, and they clearly frustrated the Koreans in the first half. With the red card (or was a second yellow card that resulted in a red card?), everything changed. With Lee's superb free kick, Korea was instantly back in the game. Togo, however, still looked threatening and held its ground. But, with the stadium roof closed to prevent distracting shadows, and the heat and humidity rising, they inevitably tired. Ahn's goal was an excellent shot, but one wonders what would happened if the Koreans didn't hold the manpower advantage for nearly forty minutes. Advocaat's decision to bring Ahn onto the team and into the game paid dividends. Once again, a Dutch manager makes a prescient substitution. It's becoming a trend.
An unfortunate trend for France is the goose egg. Before Les Bleus won the Cup in 1998, they were among the best teams to never win The World Cup. Hungary in 1950s, the Dutch in 1970s and 1990s and the French in the 1980s. Platini led France to European Cup glory in 1984 with nine goals in five games, but The World Cup eluded them. Zinedine Zidane healed this wound in 1998. In the eight years since 1998, Thierry Henry has become a force to be reckoned with. As an Arsenal fan, I welcome this development. In the eight years since 1998, other players on France's team have simply gotten eight years older. There a few younger players on the team, but they didn't make much of an impression. The rest of the team, including Henry, seemed out of sync, out of energy, out of place. After scoring three goals in the 1998 final, France has gone four complete games without a goal.
There was something about the Swiss that reminded me of (not surprisingly) clock-like precision. It appears very hard to score on them, yet I didn't see much creativity in their attacks. The referee caught a handball by one of the Swiss players at the end of the match, but he didn't catch the one in the box earlier (which should have resulted in a penalty). In this game, that missed call could have been the difference. Referees should never become part of the story--and neither should the shadows or sun glare. Was Barthez just hamming it up on that save, or was he really blinded by the sun? If the latter, weren't the stadium designers thinking about this issue?
I honestly think the French and Swiss will have problems with both Togo and South Korea.
Everyone has been waiting for Brazil to take the field. Well, maybe not Ronaldo. What happened out there? One of the ESPN commentators said "he has disappeared from the game..." In order to disappear, one has to appear in the first place. Except for his thunderous shot (which reminded everyone of how he can strike at any time), he was a ghost. Is he really out of shape? Is he sick? Is he hurt? Is he bored? For someone three goals from breaking the all-time scoring record at The World Cup, he looked completely uninterested. He barely made it in time onto the field as the second half started. If he's hurt or sick or bored, why would Parreira start him? Maybe because if he didn't start him, there would be an uproar in Brazil. Perhaps Parreira started him knowing that Ronaldo would underwhelm, thereby "freeing" Parreira to replace him with a much livlier, creative Robinho. There were boos as Ronaldo left the field. If Parreira sits Ronaldo down at this point, he might even get away with it. I sincerely hope that this isn't the last we've seen of Ronaldo who, despite all the criticism, is one of the most gifted strikers the game has seen. Having said this, it wouldn't be so bad if Gerd Müller, Just Fontaine and Pele (and Ronaldo) remain in the top three spots on the all-time scoring list. I just hope Ronaldo, assuming he's fit, shows some effort to move further up the list.
Kaka's goal was magnificient. It left the Croatian keeper, Pletikosa, no chance whatsoever. But the rest of Brazil's play was mediocre (at least for Brazil). Perhaps they are pacing themselves, perhaps they need some more time to find their rhythm, but they didn't look like the best team so far. Perhaps it's just another case of high expectations for Brazil, a team that just won its eight straight game in The World Cup.
Croatia certainly showed that they can play, and that they'll create problems for both Japan and Australia. This is still Brazil's group to lose, but Croatia has a very good chance to making it to the knockout stage, especially if their fans continue to hypnotize opponents with those checkered red and white shirts in the stands.
Monday, June 12, 2006
Day Four
In Guns, Germs and Steel, Jared Diamond provides interesting evidence and arguments regarding the impact of geography on a matter no less important than the fate of civilizations. On a less important scale (well, at least to some people ;-) Australia's place on the globe has haunted them for World Cup qualification. As part of Oceania, they have been asked to win their region, and then meet the fifth place qualifier from South America in a playoff game. Until the 2006 World Cup, they had lost this playoff game. They have argued that a region winner should automatically qualify. Seems reasonable. But when one of the results from this region is Australia 31, American Samoa 0 (or was it 32-0? Apparently, the scorekeeper lost track of the score), one has to wonder about the relatively quality of the region. South Americans, of course, argued that Australia simply needed to beat their fifth place qualifier. It's my understanding that Australia will now qualify in Asia, ostensibly because they believe this arrangement will result in their qualification on a more regular basis. Is Australia seeking soccer justice? Or are they acting with a sense of entitlement?
This backdrop provided some interesting context for their match with Japan, a team coached by legendary Brazilian striker, Zico. On the other bench, Guus Hiddink hoped to continue his winning ways in The World Cup. Zico has encouraged Japanese players to be more creative, more confident, more free-flowing, more...Brazilian. Some Japanese players, including star Nakata, have questioned this approach. It would be great if more teams played like Brazil, but few teams can even come close to the talent level of Brazil. Hiddink, on the other hand, seems to manage to a team's strengths. When the Dutch complained about Australian rough play following a recent friendly, he declared that everyone should realize soccer is a man's game. This might resonate with the Socceroos, but I wonder what women's soccer teams thought of his comment.
So when the first goal came as a result of some pushing and shoving--and a really bad read by Australian keeper, Schwarzer--it seemed that if you live by physical play, you might die by physical play. It was especially odd because goalies often bowl over players in their efforts to reach the ball. If Schwarzer had aggressively punched the ball, and the Japanese player, I doubt the ref would have called a foul. Unfortunately, this referee didn't seem to follow a consistent pattern with calling fouls. He had too much of an impact on the game, which is always a problem for a referee.
For nearly the rest of the game, the Japanese looked to be in control, and the Australians looked increasingly frustrated. But things can change so quickly in soccer--especially with crafty intervention from a manager. The Japanese had their chances to put in another goal, without pushing and shoving, but they failed to do so. You have to admire Hiddink's willingness to throw caution to the wind with his substitutions. Soccer is also a game of adjustments. And with the three substitutions, two of whom who scored three goals in eight minutes, Hiddink showed everyone why his stock as a manager continues to soar.
Did the Australians prove that they belong in The World Cup? Yes. Did they prove that they are one of the premier teams? I think the jury is still out on that one.
At the other end of the managerial spectrum, Bruce Arena didn't make a lot of friends with his decisions before, during or after the ass kicking that the US experienced at the hands of the Czech Republic. I really wish that the US commentators, press, etc. would just stop making predictions or claims about the US team. When the US team faced no pressure or expectations in 1994 and 2002, they performed well. In 1998, with higher expectations, they collapsed. This team looked confused and befuddled; the Czechs outclassed them in every aspect of the game. Eddie Johnson showed that playing with energy can make a difference, but Arena's willingness to hang out to dry certain players is a curious choice. I know he's trying to get them pumped up. But he made the decision to play the 4-5-1, and to put DeMarcus Beasley on the right side--both moves that proved ineffective. During the game, he didn't do much of anything to get this team out of its funk. And, afterwards, he talked about how the players didn't rise to the occasion. They didn't. But is this the best approach as they prepare for the Italians? Does Arena bear any responsibility for what happened?
It's difficult for casual soccer fans in the US to understand that building soccer capacity takes time. The US could become one of the teams to watch on a regular basis, but almost certainly won't dominate the sport. It's not as if the US doesn't have the athletes--imagine if Deion Sanders had chosen to play soccer. But he didn't. He, like so many other athletes, played a sport with big money. As long as this remains true, the US will have to be content with being one of the good teams. It is the proverbial chicken and egg. It will probably take a World Cup victory for people in the US to really care (i.e., put up the $$$), but it takes $$$ to create the right conditions to win The World Cup. Did I just admit that soccer is actually about money? Speaking of money...
The Italian team is surrounded by controversy. A match fixing scandal has gripped the nation, and created massive distractions for the Azzuri. It didn't seem to matter. This team had a different feel than previous offerings from Italy. It's still strange not to see Paolo Maldini in the back line. And it was even stranger to see so many offensive options for the Italians. It's not as if the Italians haven't had their fare share of great strikers; it's just that they seem to feature them one at a time during The World Cup. Not so on this occasion. It was encouraging to see the Italians making sincere efforts to extend their 1-0 lead.
Ghana held its own for much of the match. Their bookends seem to be the concern. Their keeper, Kingston, actually had a good overall game, but he looked really lost on several corner kicks or crosses into the box. Their defense also looked shaky on several occasions. If Jan Koller recovers from his injury during the US game, imagine what he might do against Ghana. They also suffered from a lack of finishing or firepower from their forwards. On too many occasions, their midfield would admirably gain possession, move it through the Italian midfield only to take long shots, or pass to strikers who didn't complete the task. Nonetheless, it was their first World Cup game, and they certainly shouldn't feel embarrassed by their effort. They lost to a very good Italian team.
It's worth noting that the second place team from this group will face the winner from Group F in the second round. That would be the group with Brazil.
This backdrop provided some interesting context for their match with Japan, a team coached by legendary Brazilian striker, Zico. On the other bench, Guus Hiddink hoped to continue his winning ways in The World Cup. Zico has encouraged Japanese players to be more creative, more confident, more free-flowing, more...Brazilian. Some Japanese players, including star Nakata, have questioned this approach. It would be great if more teams played like Brazil, but few teams can even come close to the talent level of Brazil. Hiddink, on the other hand, seems to manage to a team's strengths. When the Dutch complained about Australian rough play following a recent friendly, he declared that everyone should realize soccer is a man's game. This might resonate with the Socceroos, but I wonder what women's soccer teams thought of his comment.
So when the first goal came as a result of some pushing and shoving--and a really bad read by Australian keeper, Schwarzer--it seemed that if you live by physical play, you might die by physical play. It was especially odd because goalies often bowl over players in their efforts to reach the ball. If Schwarzer had aggressively punched the ball, and the Japanese player, I doubt the ref would have called a foul. Unfortunately, this referee didn't seem to follow a consistent pattern with calling fouls. He had too much of an impact on the game, which is always a problem for a referee.
For nearly the rest of the game, the Japanese looked to be in control, and the Australians looked increasingly frustrated. But things can change so quickly in soccer--especially with crafty intervention from a manager. The Japanese had their chances to put in another goal, without pushing and shoving, but they failed to do so. You have to admire Hiddink's willingness to throw caution to the wind with his substitutions. Soccer is also a game of adjustments. And with the three substitutions, two of whom who scored three goals in eight minutes, Hiddink showed everyone why his stock as a manager continues to soar.
Did the Australians prove that they belong in The World Cup? Yes. Did they prove that they are one of the premier teams? I think the jury is still out on that one.
At the other end of the managerial spectrum, Bruce Arena didn't make a lot of friends with his decisions before, during or after the ass kicking that the US experienced at the hands of the Czech Republic. I really wish that the US commentators, press, etc. would just stop making predictions or claims about the US team. When the US team faced no pressure or expectations in 1994 and 2002, they performed well. In 1998, with higher expectations, they collapsed. This team looked confused and befuddled; the Czechs outclassed them in every aspect of the game. Eddie Johnson showed that playing with energy can make a difference, but Arena's willingness to hang out to dry certain players is a curious choice. I know he's trying to get them pumped up. But he made the decision to play the 4-5-1, and to put DeMarcus Beasley on the right side--both moves that proved ineffective. During the game, he didn't do much of anything to get this team out of its funk. And, afterwards, he talked about how the players didn't rise to the occasion. They didn't. But is this the best approach as they prepare for the Italians? Does Arena bear any responsibility for what happened?
It's difficult for casual soccer fans in the US to understand that building soccer capacity takes time. The US could become one of the teams to watch on a regular basis, but almost certainly won't dominate the sport. It's not as if the US doesn't have the athletes--imagine if Deion Sanders had chosen to play soccer. But he didn't. He, like so many other athletes, played a sport with big money. As long as this remains true, the US will have to be content with being one of the good teams. It is the proverbial chicken and egg. It will probably take a World Cup victory for people in the US to really care (i.e., put up the $$$), but it takes $$$ to create the right conditions to win The World Cup. Did I just admit that soccer is actually about money? Speaking of money...
The Italian team is surrounded by controversy. A match fixing scandal has gripped the nation, and created massive distractions for the Azzuri. It didn't seem to matter. This team had a different feel than previous offerings from Italy. It's still strange not to see Paolo Maldini in the back line. And it was even stranger to see so many offensive options for the Italians. It's not as if the Italians haven't had their fare share of great strikers; it's just that they seem to feature them one at a time during The World Cup. Not so on this occasion. It was encouraging to see the Italians making sincere efforts to extend their 1-0 lead.
Ghana held its own for much of the match. Their bookends seem to be the concern. Their keeper, Kingston, actually had a good overall game, but he looked really lost on several corner kicks or crosses into the box. Their defense also looked shaky on several occasions. If Jan Koller recovers from his injury during the US game, imagine what he might do against Ghana. They also suffered from a lack of finishing or firepower from their forwards. On too many occasions, their midfield would admirably gain possession, move it through the Italian midfield only to take long shots, or pass to strikers who didn't complete the task. Nonetheless, it was their first World Cup game, and they certainly shouldn't feel embarrassed by their effort. They lost to a very good Italian team.
It's worth noting that the second place team from this group will face the winner from Group F in the second round. That would be the group with Brazil.
Sunday, June 11, 2006
Microcredit - Macroimpact
It's good to watch PBS, even during The World Cup. We saw a program on microcredit, the incredible program that Muhammed Yunus started. Soccer is primarily a male obsession; microcredit is primarily a female endeavor. While nations can show pride, or gain respect, on the soccer pitch, there is nothing quite like hearing a woman tell her story about gaining self-respect through the microcredit journey. It isn't the panacea for all poverty, but it has clearly made a positive impact. Much more so than any soccer victory. It's too bad nations don't gather to cheer for the women, and men, who have the courage to take microcredit loans.
Day Three
What did Arjen Robben have for breakfast?
In addition to his excellent skills, he displayed an incredible amount of energy. It didn't matter if he faced one, two, three, or four defenders, he kept charging at them and causing havoc. That had to be the performance of the tournament to date. When the Netherlands is firing on all cylinders, they are a sight to behold. The one curious aspect of their play was their repeated back passes that put Van der Saar into awkward situations. Given that he kept nursing a cramp, was it wise to keep pushing the ball back to him?
They looked better than Argentina on this day. It will be interesting to see what might happen to Argentina if a team inhibits Riquelme. While Robben shined today, there are other Dutch players who can rise to the occasion. How does one close down space on eleven players? Serbia and Montenegro certainly tried, but there were so many occasions the Dutch simply controlled play. Having said this, Serbia and Montenegro also had its moments. I think this is the group of death because each team has shown great skill and ability to control play. Ivory Coast and Serbia and Montenegro showed they can keep their opponents back on their heels. I think there's quite a bit of drama left in this group, perhaps culimating with the Argentina v. Netherlands encounter on June 21st.
I once heard that Marco van Basten preferred playing club soccer to playing for the national team. Perhaps that was true, but maybe one of the most gifted strikers (not just in the Netherlands) has particular insights into how to make the Dutch play as a cohesive, brilliant unit. He seemed fairly reserved as a player, and even more so as a manager. He must have been pleased at the end of this match, but he also looked like someone who knew that the uphill journey had only just begun.
During The World Cup, what transpires outside the soccer stadium sometimes makes more news than what happens inside the stadium. Iran has been the in the news for various political matters, and their President has made insensitive, indefensible comments about the Holocaust. Apparently, the crowd booed the Iranian team as they came onto the pitch. Mexico, on the other hand, had a personal tragedy given that goalkeeper Sanchez's father passed away this week. There was one political aspect to their team as well since there seems to be some controversy about two players who are naturalized citizens.
During The World Cup, what eventually happens inside the soccer stadium sometimes provides relief from what happens outside the stadium. Iranian keeper, Mirzapour, gave Sanchez a bouquet of flowers at the beginning of the game. Zinya, a Brazilian born Mexican, assisted brilliantly on the second goal and, despite being five foot, four inches, rose mightily to head home the third goal. Everyone on the team and every Mexican fan in the stadium cheered.
At the end of the game, Sanchez's teammates surrounded him, joining him in what must have been a bittersweet moment for him. I'm sure he is thrilled with the victory, but I'm also sure he has other things on his mind. The final image from the broadcast was an Iranian player applauding the crowd. Iran played a clean, positive, decent game. It was very encouraging to hear former US players emphasizing that they viewed their 1998 World Cup match with Iran as a game. That, as athletes, they were concerned about what happened on the field. Even as nations rattle sabres, players on the field can exchange gifts or swap jerseys. I do not know how specific Iranian players feel about their President or country's politics. But I do know that they represented themselves well on the pitch. I hope no one booed them on their way out of the stadium.
How do you measure progress?
The last time Portugal and Angola met on the soccer pitch, Portugal won 5-1, but the match was suspended after 68 minutes when a fourth Angolan player was shown the red card. When faced with a force that once dominated them, both on and off the field, it was natural to be nervous and anxious. Angola avoided disaster in the first minute, only to have it return in the fourth minute. At that point, if someone had told me that Portugal would score eight goals, I would have believed it. In another reality, Angola might have buckled and the Portugese goalfest would have commenced. But the Angolan players steadied themselves, and responded well. There was no chance that this group would receive four red cards. Tommy Smyth spoke well when he said "this team knows a little something about soccer..."
Portugal was humiliated by their performance in the 2002 World Cup. They played well in Euro2004, but two losses to Greece left the home crowd disappointed. They won today, albeit with more difficulty than they might have imagined. So three points from the first game is progress.
But the progress for the Angolans was more impressive. It was a courageous performance. If there is honor in defeat, the Angolans can claim it.
In addition to his excellent skills, he displayed an incredible amount of energy. It didn't matter if he faced one, two, three, or four defenders, he kept charging at them and causing havoc. That had to be the performance of the tournament to date. When the Netherlands is firing on all cylinders, they are a sight to behold. The one curious aspect of their play was their repeated back passes that put Van der Saar into awkward situations. Given that he kept nursing a cramp, was it wise to keep pushing the ball back to him?
They looked better than Argentina on this day. It will be interesting to see what might happen to Argentina if a team inhibits Riquelme. While Robben shined today, there are other Dutch players who can rise to the occasion. How does one close down space on eleven players? Serbia and Montenegro certainly tried, but there were so many occasions the Dutch simply controlled play. Having said this, Serbia and Montenegro also had its moments. I think this is the group of death because each team has shown great skill and ability to control play. Ivory Coast and Serbia and Montenegro showed they can keep their opponents back on their heels. I think there's quite a bit of drama left in this group, perhaps culimating with the Argentina v. Netherlands encounter on June 21st.
I once heard that Marco van Basten preferred playing club soccer to playing for the national team. Perhaps that was true, but maybe one of the most gifted strikers (not just in the Netherlands) has particular insights into how to make the Dutch play as a cohesive, brilliant unit. He seemed fairly reserved as a player, and even more so as a manager. He must have been pleased at the end of this match, but he also looked like someone who knew that the uphill journey had only just begun.
During The World Cup, what transpires outside the soccer stadium sometimes makes more news than what happens inside the stadium. Iran has been the in the news for various political matters, and their President has made insensitive, indefensible comments about the Holocaust. Apparently, the crowd booed the Iranian team as they came onto the pitch. Mexico, on the other hand, had a personal tragedy given that goalkeeper Sanchez's father passed away this week. There was one political aspect to their team as well since there seems to be some controversy about two players who are naturalized citizens.
During The World Cup, what eventually happens inside the soccer stadium sometimes provides relief from what happens outside the stadium. Iranian keeper, Mirzapour, gave Sanchez a bouquet of flowers at the beginning of the game. Zinya, a Brazilian born Mexican, assisted brilliantly on the second goal and, despite being five foot, four inches, rose mightily to head home the third goal. Everyone on the team and every Mexican fan in the stadium cheered.
At the end of the game, Sanchez's teammates surrounded him, joining him in what must have been a bittersweet moment for him. I'm sure he is thrilled with the victory, but I'm also sure he has other things on his mind. The final image from the broadcast was an Iranian player applauding the crowd. Iran played a clean, positive, decent game. It was very encouraging to hear former US players emphasizing that they viewed their 1998 World Cup match with Iran as a game. That, as athletes, they were concerned about what happened on the field. Even as nations rattle sabres, players on the field can exchange gifts or swap jerseys. I do not know how specific Iranian players feel about their President or country's politics. But I do know that they represented themselves well on the pitch. I hope no one booed them on their way out of the stadium.
How do you measure progress?
The last time Portugal and Angola met on the soccer pitch, Portugal won 5-1, but the match was suspended after 68 minutes when a fourth Angolan player was shown the red card. When faced with a force that once dominated them, both on and off the field, it was natural to be nervous and anxious. Angola avoided disaster in the first minute, only to have it return in the fourth minute. At that point, if someone had told me that Portugal would score eight goals, I would have believed it. In another reality, Angola might have buckled and the Portugese goalfest would have commenced. But the Angolan players steadied themselves, and responded well. There was no chance that this group would receive four red cards. Tommy Smyth spoke well when he said "this team knows a little something about soccer..."
Portugal was humiliated by their performance in the 2002 World Cup. They played well in Euro2004, but two losses to Greece left the home crowd disappointed. They won today, albeit with more difficulty than they might have imagined. So three points from the first game is progress.
But the progress for the Angolans was more impressive. It was a courageous performance. If there is honor in defeat, the Angolans can claim it.
Saturday, June 10, 2006
Day Two
The English are the Brazilians of Europe. What's that, you say? What about Spain (maybe not in The World Cup), the French, the Netherlands, or the Czech Republic. The Netherlands v. Czech Republic game in Euro2004 was a clinic on beautiful soccer. Well, the English have their share of elegant play. But what I'm really referring to is the fan and press reaction to the English team. It seems that unless they play elegantly and win The World Cup, their fans will be disappointed.
There was 1966. Geoff Hurst, the hat trick, the goal that did or did not cross the line. What English fans may not be willing to acknowledge is that if you take away the 1966 World Cup, England's World Cup record is equalled, even surpassed by other countries who have yet to win the Cup. You can't minimize the importance of winning the Cup; only seven nations have managed it. But, for a moment, imagine that Pele hadn't been hacked out of the 1966 tournament...The English team in 1986 and 1990 was one of their best. If Maradona hadn't inspired the Argentinians in 1986 and had a hand in their victory over England (sorry, I couldn't resist), England would have made the semi-finals. 1990 was the only other occasion when England made it to the semis or finals. This team featured many great players, but I always thought that Gary Lineker didn't get enough recognition.
Beyond these tournaments, the English have not particularly excelled in The World Cup. Yet, each time when The World Cup comes around, we hear about how the English are one of the tournament favorites (at least in the US). In 2006, they certainly have a great midfield and potent strikers (especially if Rooney is ready to play). But they also have a bad habit of playing down to their opponents. Perhaps it is part of Sven Goran Ericsson's strategy to slow down, conserve energy, and contain the game. But an own goal off a Beckham free kick hardly represents a powerful offensive display. And Paraguay had a few chances. If only one of them bounced the right way (or wrong way depending on your perspective), it would have been a disaster for England. Rooney not only provides considerable talent, but he also brings a certain passion and fire to the team. He doesn't want to win 1-0. He wants to score goals. Perhaps more than anything, he'll bring intensity, throughout the entire game, that might elevate England to the top. Assuming he's fit.
Of course, the result from the second game in Group B must have come as welcome news to England, and Trinidad and Tobago, given 2000-1 odds of winning the Cup. Even their manager guaranteed that they would not win The World Cup. Sweden has world class players and loads of experience. Trinidad and Tobago is the smallest nation to qualify for The World Cup. Then their first choice goalkeeper injures himself during the warm-ups (for the first thirteen minutes, the commentators kept referring to Kelvin Jack, instead of Shaka Hislop). During the second half, they are reduced to ten men. Surely, Sweden would win easily. This, my friends, is why they play the game.
Thirty-four year old Dwight Yorke came out of retirement to join Trinidad and Tobago. And I'm sure they are glad he did so. Shaka Hislop is thirty-seven years old; he had the energy of a twenty-year old. Brent Sacho, plays for a third division English club, but he played like a premier Italian defender. They, along with their teammates, stood very tall on this day. If you've ever played sports, at any level, you might know those rare convergences of being "in the zone" or rising above your natural talents. To watch an entire team, even one man down, an entire nation ride this wave of energy, inspiration, even magic, is really something. I'll be the first to admit that many 0-0 soccer games are dour, dull affairs. But this game showed that a 0-0 game can feature plenty of entertainment and suspense.
In 2002, when Belarus defeated Sweden in Olympic ice hockey, Swedish newspapers declared it the greatest upset in Swedish sports history. If Trinidad and Tobago had somehow beaten Sweden (and they hit the crossbar at one point!), I suspect this one would have been even bigger. I know, I know, hockey is king in Sweden, but still...
For 90 minutes, Trinidad and Tobago became everyone's favorite soccer team--except for the Swedes, of course. But they deserve a great deal of credit for how they handled this game. Ljungberg showed frustration in the final minutes, but who could blame him. At the end of the game, the Swedes shook hands, swapped jerseys and showed their respect. They knew they were on the short end of this moment, but they seemed to acknowledge (albeit begrudgingly) their role in creating World Cup lore.
After Belarus defeated Sweden in Olympic hockey, they came back down to reality. Even the Belarus goalie who seemed impenetrable against Sweden, looked very average in the next game. Jon Davidson, one of the hockey commentators, said that he hoped everyone remembered Belarus' goalie as he was during the game with Sweden. Shaka Hislop may come back down to earth as well but, on this day, he was king.
During ESPN's post-game show, Eric Wynalda said that Argentina was the best team we've seen so far. I agree. Argentina displayed creativity on offense, and enough discipline on defense to beat a talented Ivory Coast team. They "choked" the game without turning it into a sloppy, boring affair. I have to admit that I wondered about how Riquelme's deliberate style would fit within the Argentinian scheme. So I have to admit that I was very wrong. He had a role in both goals, and his pass to Saviola for the second goal was pure genius. Saviola's deft touch must have made Argentinian fans feel better about the striking duo with Crespo.
Ivory Coast had its moments, and if they had scored first, the game would have been very different indeed. The defender who was marking Crespo simply froze on the first goal. They also didn't manage to find the "optimal" play with the referee, who I believe missed several calls. Drogba was pushed in the box, but perhaps his (undeserved?) reputation as a diver cost him. Argentina kept Droga off balance throughout the game--literally. While the ref should have kept a better handle on this, the Argentinians did manage to take full advantage without crossing the line (or was that the first "goal" of the game that I'm referring to)? Ivory Coast probably could have pushed, nudged, even fouled Riquelme more than they did. The Netherlands and Serbia and Montenegro (I think it's still OK to refer to them in this manner) will almost certainly close him down more quickly. And they should. He wears no. 10, and while he's not Maradona, he certainly has exceptional vision and skills.
Drogba showed why he can be so dangerous with their goal, after the Ivory Coast seemed to wake up with about twenty-five minutes left in the game. If they can tighten up the defense and play with intensity throughout the match, I still think they can advance to the next round. In groups of death, it's possible for each team to end with four points in the round robin beating that each team will face. Goal differential and goals scored will be important.
Perhaps the novelty and pressure of being in The World Cup for the first time was too much for the Ivory Coast. Maybe they could have watched the Trinidad and Tobago game for inspiration :-)
There was 1966. Geoff Hurst, the hat trick, the goal that did or did not cross the line. What English fans may not be willing to acknowledge is that if you take away the 1966 World Cup, England's World Cup record is equalled, even surpassed by other countries who have yet to win the Cup. You can't minimize the importance of winning the Cup; only seven nations have managed it. But, for a moment, imagine that Pele hadn't been hacked out of the 1966 tournament...The English team in 1986 and 1990 was one of their best. If Maradona hadn't inspired the Argentinians in 1986 and had a hand in their victory over England (sorry, I couldn't resist), England would have made the semi-finals. 1990 was the only other occasion when England made it to the semis or finals. This team featured many great players, but I always thought that Gary Lineker didn't get enough recognition.
Beyond these tournaments, the English have not particularly excelled in The World Cup. Yet, each time when The World Cup comes around, we hear about how the English are one of the tournament favorites (at least in the US). In 2006, they certainly have a great midfield and potent strikers (especially if Rooney is ready to play). But they also have a bad habit of playing down to their opponents. Perhaps it is part of Sven Goran Ericsson's strategy to slow down, conserve energy, and contain the game. But an own goal off a Beckham free kick hardly represents a powerful offensive display. And Paraguay had a few chances. If only one of them bounced the right way (or wrong way depending on your perspective), it would have been a disaster for England. Rooney not only provides considerable talent, but he also brings a certain passion and fire to the team. He doesn't want to win 1-0. He wants to score goals. Perhaps more than anything, he'll bring intensity, throughout the entire game, that might elevate England to the top. Assuming he's fit.
Of course, the result from the second game in Group B must have come as welcome news to England, and Trinidad and Tobago, given 2000-1 odds of winning the Cup. Even their manager guaranteed that they would not win The World Cup. Sweden has world class players and loads of experience. Trinidad and Tobago is the smallest nation to qualify for The World Cup. Then their first choice goalkeeper injures himself during the warm-ups (for the first thirteen minutes, the commentators kept referring to Kelvin Jack, instead of Shaka Hislop). During the second half, they are reduced to ten men. Surely, Sweden would win easily. This, my friends, is why they play the game.
Thirty-four year old Dwight Yorke came out of retirement to join Trinidad and Tobago. And I'm sure they are glad he did so. Shaka Hislop is thirty-seven years old; he had the energy of a twenty-year old. Brent Sacho, plays for a third division English club, but he played like a premier Italian defender. They, along with their teammates, stood very tall on this day. If you've ever played sports, at any level, you might know those rare convergences of being "in the zone" or rising above your natural talents. To watch an entire team, even one man down, an entire nation ride this wave of energy, inspiration, even magic, is really something. I'll be the first to admit that many 0-0 soccer games are dour, dull affairs. But this game showed that a 0-0 game can feature plenty of entertainment and suspense.
In 2002, when Belarus defeated Sweden in Olympic ice hockey, Swedish newspapers declared it the greatest upset in Swedish sports history. If Trinidad and Tobago had somehow beaten Sweden (and they hit the crossbar at one point!), I suspect this one would have been even bigger. I know, I know, hockey is king in Sweden, but still...
For 90 minutes, Trinidad and Tobago became everyone's favorite soccer team--except for the Swedes, of course. But they deserve a great deal of credit for how they handled this game. Ljungberg showed frustration in the final minutes, but who could blame him. At the end of the game, the Swedes shook hands, swapped jerseys and showed their respect. They knew they were on the short end of this moment, but they seemed to acknowledge (albeit begrudgingly) their role in creating World Cup lore.
After Belarus defeated Sweden in Olympic hockey, they came back down to reality. Even the Belarus goalie who seemed impenetrable against Sweden, looked very average in the next game. Jon Davidson, one of the hockey commentators, said that he hoped everyone remembered Belarus' goalie as he was during the game with Sweden. Shaka Hislop may come back down to earth as well but, on this day, he was king.
During ESPN's post-game show, Eric Wynalda said that Argentina was the best team we've seen so far. I agree. Argentina displayed creativity on offense, and enough discipline on defense to beat a talented Ivory Coast team. They "choked" the game without turning it into a sloppy, boring affair. I have to admit that I wondered about how Riquelme's deliberate style would fit within the Argentinian scheme. So I have to admit that I was very wrong. He had a role in both goals, and his pass to Saviola for the second goal was pure genius. Saviola's deft touch must have made Argentinian fans feel better about the striking duo with Crespo.
Ivory Coast had its moments, and if they had scored first, the game would have been very different indeed. The defender who was marking Crespo simply froze on the first goal. They also didn't manage to find the "optimal" play with the referee, who I believe missed several calls. Drogba was pushed in the box, but perhaps his (undeserved?) reputation as a diver cost him. Argentina kept Droga off balance throughout the game--literally. While the ref should have kept a better handle on this, the Argentinians did manage to take full advantage without crossing the line (or was that the first "goal" of the game that I'm referring to)? Ivory Coast probably could have pushed, nudged, even fouled Riquelme more than they did. The Netherlands and Serbia and Montenegro (I think it's still OK to refer to them in this manner) will almost certainly close him down more quickly. And they should. He wears no. 10, and while he's not Maradona, he certainly has exceptional vision and skills.
Drogba showed why he can be so dangerous with their goal, after the Ivory Coast seemed to wake up with about twenty-five minutes left in the game. If they can tighten up the defense and play with intensity throughout the match, I still think they can advance to the next round. In groups of death, it's possible for each team to end with four points in the round robin beating that each team will face. Goal differential and goals scored will be important.
Perhaps the novelty and pressure of being in The World Cup for the first time was too much for the Ivory Coast. Maybe they could have watched the Trinidad and Tobago game for inspiration :-)
A Question of Priorities
ABC showed the first two games of day two, but the afternoon game will be on ESPN. Why? Because of the Belmont Stakes. When I told one of my friends that this is another sign of the US's lack of appreciation for soccer, he pointed out that the Belmont is one of the three Triple Crown races, a big deal. He said that this is important regardless of what type of sports fan I might be. Sure, the Belmont Stakes is important...if you're a horse.
Another (what I admit is an) even more important question of priorities relates to a phone call from my lovely wife just as the first game was ending. She told me that's a beautiful day outside. I told her that I could see how beautiful it was because I had a view of the TV and the windows in our living room. She suggested that we eat lunch together, outside to enjoy the weather. When I tell her that the next game will begin soon, she asks "Is that a big deal?" Is that a big deal? Do horses care about the Belmont Stakes?
Understanding that I need to maintain human relationships, even during The World Cup, I agree to have a wonderful lunch with her. I realize that perhaps I shouldn't subject my mom to soccer while she's visiting me. Then I realize that DVR is a godsend, and that I can probably deal with watching part of the Sweden v. Trinidad and Tobago recorded. Then again, that game turned out to be a great example of how you never know when World Cup history will be made...
Another (what I admit is an) even more important question of priorities relates to a phone call from my lovely wife just as the first game was ending. She told me that's a beautiful day outside. I told her that I could see how beautiful it was because I had a view of the TV and the windows in our living room. She suggested that we eat lunch together, outside to enjoy the weather. When I tell her that the next game will begin soon, she asks "Is that a big deal?" Is that a big deal? Do horses care about the Belmont Stakes?
Understanding that I need to maintain human relationships, even during The World Cup, I agree to have a wonderful lunch with her. I realize that perhaps I shouldn't subject my mom to soccer while she's visiting me. Then I realize that DVR is a godsend, and that I can probably deal with watching part of the Sweden v. Trinidad and Tobago recorded. Then again, that game turned out to be a great example of how you never know when World Cup history will be made...
Day One
The first day is over. The host nation has never lost the opening game, and the Germans continued this tradition--emphatically. Jurgen Klinsmann has the most difficult job in sports at the moment. Any manager of a World Cup squad faces criticism, but to be the manager of the host nation with such high expectations must be something. He has been criticized for living in the US, for marrying an American, for using American training tactics, for sending email messages instead of speaking in person...
In the victory over Costa Rica, he went from goat to hero to goat to hero in the first 16 minutes as the score changed. Even with the victory, there are still questions that Germans will raise. And perhaps rightly so. Germany won its first game in 2002 with an impressive 8-0 over Saudi Arabia. But they didn't impress throughout the rest of the tournament. Having said this, they reached the finals. Germans are capable of playing fantastic soccer. But they're also capable of taking the life out of a game. Previous German managers have noted that the World Cup is a marathon, a test of endurance and the road to the Cup is littered with elegant, creative teams who ran out of energy or lost because of one mistake (especially in the knockout stages). German teams, even those with less talent with their opponents, have a World Cup record surpassed only by Brazil (the one team whose elegance and creativity seems more than enough to overcome hurdles). Does anyone believe the German team in 1986 was more talented than the Platini-inspired Bleus of France? (There's an Adidas ad that cleverly shows Zidane and Platini paying mutual respects; imagine both of them in the same midfield). Following the memorable match in Guadalajara between France and Brazil, Les Bleus looked completely drained. Even their inspired play wasn't enough to overcome the German team. Newsweek magazine referred to the 1980s German team as "Karl-Heinz Rummenigge and ten robots."
Nonetheless, they reached the finals in 1982 and 1986, knocking out the French on both occasions (with Toni Schumacher horribly and literally knocking out Patrick Battiston in 1982).
Where was the steady, efficient, inexorable play of the Germans on the first day of the 2006 offering? Well, it was superceded by an attacking style that led to four goals. That's the good news. The bad news is that their defense looked suspect, getting caught on the offsides trap more than once. As one of my soccer viewing friends points out, the offsides trap is dangerous not only because players can get it wrong, but also because the linesman can get it wrong (and probably did so on Costa Rica's second goal). Lehmann didn't have his best game, but he can't be faulted for either of the goals.
Ecuador showed what can happen against a team with a (sometimes) slow to react defense by beating them on two occasions with precision passing and shooting (or heading). They also showed how to play impassioned, energetic defense. Poland repeatedly tried to exploit their height advantage, but to no avail. Poland might have been the better team, but they lost because of a few mistakes. If Ecuador beats Costa Rica, they will almost certainly advance to the second round. Poland is in the difficult situation of needing three points, but playing their next match against Germany.
If Germany plays attacking, free flowing soccer, but then loses because a mistake or running of energy, Jurgen Klinsmann better head back to the US.
In the victory over Costa Rica, he went from goat to hero to goat to hero in the first 16 minutes as the score changed. Even with the victory, there are still questions that Germans will raise. And perhaps rightly so. Germany won its first game in 2002 with an impressive 8-0 over Saudi Arabia. But they didn't impress throughout the rest of the tournament. Having said this, they reached the finals. Germans are capable of playing fantastic soccer. But they're also capable of taking the life out of a game. Previous German managers have noted that the World Cup is a marathon, a test of endurance and the road to the Cup is littered with elegant, creative teams who ran out of energy or lost because of one mistake (especially in the knockout stages). German teams, even those with less talent with their opponents, have a World Cup record surpassed only by Brazil (the one team whose elegance and creativity seems more than enough to overcome hurdles). Does anyone believe the German team in 1986 was more talented than the Platini-inspired Bleus of France? (There's an Adidas ad that cleverly shows Zidane and Platini paying mutual respects; imagine both of them in the same midfield). Following the memorable match in Guadalajara between France and Brazil, Les Bleus looked completely drained. Even their inspired play wasn't enough to overcome the German team. Newsweek magazine referred to the 1980s German team as "Karl-Heinz Rummenigge and ten robots."
Nonetheless, they reached the finals in 1982 and 1986, knocking out the French on both occasions (with Toni Schumacher horribly and literally knocking out Patrick Battiston in 1982).
Where was the steady, efficient, inexorable play of the Germans on the first day of the 2006 offering? Well, it was superceded by an attacking style that led to four goals. That's the good news. The bad news is that their defense looked suspect, getting caught on the offsides trap more than once. As one of my soccer viewing friends points out, the offsides trap is dangerous not only because players can get it wrong, but also because the linesman can get it wrong (and probably did so on Costa Rica's second goal). Lehmann didn't have his best game, but he can't be faulted for either of the goals.
Ecuador showed what can happen against a team with a (sometimes) slow to react defense by beating them on two occasions with precision passing and shooting (or heading). They also showed how to play impassioned, energetic defense. Poland repeatedly tried to exploit their height advantage, but to no avail. Poland might have been the better team, but they lost because of a few mistakes. If Ecuador beats Costa Rica, they will almost certainly advance to the second round. Poland is in the difficult situation of needing three points, but playing their next match against Germany.
If Germany plays attacking, free flowing soccer, but then loses because a mistake or running of energy, Jurgen Klinsmann better head back to the US.
Monday, June 05, 2006
The World Cup
There is a madness, a fever, that has been rising throughout the world. No, I'm not talking about bird flu or its associated hysteria. I am talking about the anticipation for The World Cup. There are multiple sports that have a World Cup, but when referring to The World Cup, it can mean only one sport. Soccer, football, futbol, the beautiful game.
There are many in the US who do not appreciate soccer. It's too boring. It's not athletic enough. It doesn't have enough equipment or rules. It allows games to end in a tie (or draw if you prefer). What I find interesting is people who say this love baseball or golf or poker. So I'm supposed to be captivated by the "showdown" between a first base runner and a pitcher? And I love watching those TV shots of a golfer watching his or her shot...if someone were to watch me at this moment, we'd have recursive sports viewing. The athleticism of poker, the way those guys flick their cards when they fold, brings tears to my eyes. As for rules or equipment, the notable absence is what makes soccer so elegant (ok, the offsides rule is the exception). In The Power of Myth, Joseph Campbell discusses how US sports are obsessed with rules to enforce behavior, which is perhaps a reflection of our litigious society. England created sports with relatively few rules, but many expectations of appropriate behavior or codes of conduct (OK, the offsides rule seems like something a lawyer would come up with).
Wikipedia lists "243 entities considered to be countries" (BTW, this includes the newly declared independence of Montenegro...you gotta love Wikipedia's timeliness of information). To the critics of soccer in the US, I offer this statement: 242 COUNTRIES CAN'T BE WRONG!!!
A fan in England has purchased "trauma insurance" in case England is knocked out early; a Dutch company is offering insurance for the inevitable, sudden rise in sick leave. The Portugese government has wisely rescheduled a Parliament session that was to be held during a Portugal match. The World Cup has undoubtedly caused conflicts, but it has also caused conflicts to end (at least for the duration of the tournament). Prisoners in Brazil started rioting when told that they would not have access to TVs during The World Cup (in Brazil, this must have been viewed as cruel and unusual punishment). The World Cup offers a chance for Africa to compete with the mighty powers of Europe. And how grateful were the South Koreans to Guus Hiddink, who led them to the semi-finals? From Wikipedia:
"Hiddink was given the unofficial title of the most popular individual in the country, and became the first-ever person to be given honorary South Korean citizenship. In addition other rewards soon followed - a private villa in Jeju island; free flights for life on Korean Airlines and Asiana Airlines, free taxi rides, and so forth. The World Cup stadium in Gwangju was renamed Guus Hiddink Stadium in his honor shortly after the World Cup. His hometown became a popular stopover for South Koreans visiting the Netherlands.
Good grief, what would have they done if they had won the Cup?
When the US hosted The World Cup in 1994, it was left to immigrants and visitors to build this festive spirit. Without the host nation's energy behind it, it was perhaps the first time in recent memory that The World Cup was a secondary thought in the host nation. In some ways, the 94 Cup propelled US soccer, and FIFA realizes the potential benefits of raising interest in soccer within the US. But many people in the world must still be upset about this choice. Asia proved it could host The World Cup in 2002, and Africa will have to wait until 2010 for its chance to do so. And Latin America has not hosted it since 1986.
But for me, the 1994 World Cup was a godsend. I had the great pleasure of attending games in Washington DC and a quarter-final match in New Jersey (Bulgaria 2-1 Germany). I sat next to an Italian grad student from my department during the Italy-Mexico first round game. He told me he wasn't much of a soccer fan. The Italian team seems to enjoy tormenting its fans during the first round. Even during their most recent Cup victory in 1982, they advanced to the second round only by virtue of scoring one more goal than Cameroon. In 1994, they would advance in the same manner, and only in the very late stages of the final game in the first round. I watched this "casual" soccer fan get anxious, distraught, with perhaps even tears in his eyes, at the thought that Italy would not advance to the second round. And then elation. Italy scored a goal, tying Mexico, raising a flicker of hope. Still, the Italians were waiting for the Ireland-Norway result. 0-0 (surely, the most dreaded score for a soccer detractor). The Italians were through. As I watched my fellow grad student, who was now dancing in his seat, I said to him, "I thought you weren't much of a soccer fan." He said, "I'm not...look at those other Italian fans."
And he was right. Grown men were crying, some men were still covering their eyes, avoiding the scoreboard that might bring them news of the unthinkable. Others were dancing, kissing women, kissing other men, kissing their flags...it was sheer exuberance. It was something to see men expressing such unbridled, passionate emotion. You can see this exuberance in the grainy films of a 17-year old Pele in the 1958 World Cup, or in the corner flag dance of a 38-year old Roger Milla in the 1990 World Cup.
Of course, there is an ugly side to unbridled emotion that most often takes the form of hooliganism. Most recently, there's been an indefensible, reprehensible growth of racial slurs, signs, and sounds. The English are imploring their fans not to make references to WWII; the Germans are worried about new (and therefore unknown) hooligans from Eastern Europe, and about their own hate groups. It seems that some men, when given a chance to express their emotions, still choose to focus on the negative ones.
Franklin Foer has written an interesting book, How Soccer Explains the World: An Unlikely Theory of Globalization. I'm not convinced soccer explains the world. But I am convinced it reflects the world, and it allows the world to express itself--in all the wonderful and repugnant ways that we choose to do so. And the detachment, disinterest, and indifference that so many in the US feel toward soccer is perhaps an accurate but sad reflection of the US in the global village.
But for those in the US who feel the fever, and for all those throughout the world who will take sick leave starting June 9, I say to you: let the madness begin.
There are many in the US who do not appreciate soccer. It's too boring. It's not athletic enough. It doesn't have enough equipment or rules. It allows games to end in a tie (or draw if you prefer). What I find interesting is people who say this love baseball or golf or poker. So I'm supposed to be captivated by the "showdown" between a first base runner and a pitcher? And I love watching those TV shots of a golfer watching his or her shot...if someone were to watch me at this moment, we'd have recursive sports viewing. The athleticism of poker, the way those guys flick their cards when they fold, brings tears to my eyes. As for rules or equipment, the notable absence is what makes soccer so elegant (ok, the offsides rule is the exception). In The Power of Myth, Joseph Campbell discusses how US sports are obsessed with rules to enforce behavior, which is perhaps a reflection of our litigious society. England created sports with relatively few rules, but many expectations of appropriate behavior or codes of conduct (OK, the offsides rule seems like something a lawyer would come up with).
Wikipedia lists "243 entities considered to be countries" (BTW, this includes the newly declared independence of Montenegro...you gotta love Wikipedia's timeliness of information). To the critics of soccer in the US, I offer this statement: 242 COUNTRIES CAN'T BE WRONG!!!
A fan in England has purchased "trauma insurance" in case England is knocked out early; a Dutch company is offering insurance for the inevitable, sudden rise in sick leave. The Portugese government has wisely rescheduled a Parliament session that was to be held during a Portugal match. The World Cup has undoubtedly caused conflicts, but it has also caused conflicts to end (at least for the duration of the tournament). Prisoners in Brazil started rioting when told that they would not have access to TVs during The World Cup (in Brazil, this must have been viewed as cruel and unusual punishment). The World Cup offers a chance for Africa to compete with the mighty powers of Europe. And how grateful were the South Koreans to Guus Hiddink, who led them to the semi-finals? From Wikipedia:
"Hiddink was given the unofficial title of the most popular individual in the country, and became the first-ever person to be given honorary South Korean citizenship. In addition other rewards soon followed - a private villa in Jeju island; free flights for life on Korean Airlines and Asiana Airlines, free taxi rides, and so forth. The World Cup stadium in Gwangju was renamed Guus Hiddink Stadium in his honor shortly after the World Cup. His hometown became a popular stopover for South Koreans visiting the Netherlands.
Good grief, what would have they done if they had won the Cup?
When the US hosted The World Cup in 1994, it was left to immigrants and visitors to build this festive spirit. Without the host nation's energy behind it, it was perhaps the first time in recent memory that The World Cup was a secondary thought in the host nation. In some ways, the 94 Cup propelled US soccer, and FIFA realizes the potential benefits of raising interest in soccer within the US. But many people in the world must still be upset about this choice. Asia proved it could host The World Cup in 2002, and Africa will have to wait until 2010 for its chance to do so. And Latin America has not hosted it since 1986.
But for me, the 1994 World Cup was a godsend. I had the great pleasure of attending games in Washington DC and a quarter-final match in New Jersey (Bulgaria 2-1 Germany). I sat next to an Italian grad student from my department during the Italy-Mexico first round game. He told me he wasn't much of a soccer fan. The Italian team seems to enjoy tormenting its fans during the first round. Even during their most recent Cup victory in 1982, they advanced to the second round only by virtue of scoring one more goal than Cameroon. In 1994, they would advance in the same manner, and only in the very late stages of the final game in the first round. I watched this "casual" soccer fan get anxious, distraught, with perhaps even tears in his eyes, at the thought that Italy would not advance to the second round. And then elation. Italy scored a goal, tying Mexico, raising a flicker of hope. Still, the Italians were waiting for the Ireland-Norway result. 0-0 (surely, the most dreaded score for a soccer detractor). The Italians were through. As I watched my fellow grad student, who was now dancing in his seat, I said to him, "I thought you weren't much of a soccer fan." He said, "I'm not...look at those other Italian fans."
And he was right. Grown men were crying, some men were still covering their eyes, avoiding the scoreboard that might bring them news of the unthinkable. Others were dancing, kissing women, kissing other men, kissing their flags...it was sheer exuberance. It was something to see men expressing such unbridled, passionate emotion. You can see this exuberance in the grainy films of a 17-year old Pele in the 1958 World Cup, or in the corner flag dance of a 38-year old Roger Milla in the 1990 World Cup.
Of course, there is an ugly side to unbridled emotion that most often takes the form of hooliganism. Most recently, there's been an indefensible, reprehensible growth of racial slurs, signs, and sounds. The English are imploring their fans not to make references to WWII; the Germans are worried about new (and therefore unknown) hooligans from Eastern Europe, and about their own hate groups. It seems that some men, when given a chance to express their emotions, still choose to focus on the negative ones.
Franklin Foer has written an interesting book, How Soccer Explains the World: An Unlikely Theory of Globalization. I'm not convinced soccer explains the world. But I am convinced it reflects the world, and it allows the world to express itself--in all the wonderful and repugnant ways that we choose to do so. And the detachment, disinterest, and indifference that so many in the US feel toward soccer is perhaps an accurate but sad reflection of the US in the global village.
But for those in the US who feel the fever, and for all those throughout the world who will take sick leave starting June 9, I say to you: let the madness begin.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
