The memories of the 2006 World Cup have begun to fade. As the intensity of the event dissipates, I find myself remembering Argentina as the most memorable team, with team brilliance exemplified by a goal preceded by 24 passes and individual brilliance showcased by Rodriguez's goal against Mexico. While the escapism was fun, it's time to think about other matters.
I wrote earlier about my reasons for calling this blog "Decide." I have made an important decision: I am eating less.
This isn't part of a starvation diet, or a fast, or anything of the sort. I'm simply eating less food because I don't need to eat as much food. When I was in the UK for ten days, I ate less than I normally do. I didn't choose to do so. It's just harder to keep snacking and eating large quantities of food in the UK. The English and the Scots aren't the healthiest Europeans, but they eat less than folks in the US of A. And they walk much more. So, as I found myself eating less and exercising more, I asked myself why I eat so much when I'm at home.
This is something my wife has been encouraging me to do for a long time. There are moments in life when we experience an epiphany, notice with greater clarity, turn the corner, or [insert your favorite phrase here]. For my first lunch after I returned home, I ate only half of my usual sandwich. I worked out that evening as well.
Then I felt hungry. I haven't felt hungry in a long, long time.
Not the kind of hunger that's debilitating, which far too many people face all too often, but a hunger that urged me to refuel. There's something very wrong when people are hungry and don't know when and where their next meal will come from. But there's nothing wrong with a little hunger to remind you that it's time to eat. That you need to eat. I've been eating on auto-pilot for a long time. For too long. I've been eating an appetizer, a main course, often with a soda and dessert and stuffing myself to the limit for every meal. It still isn't too late for me to reverse course, but my father spent his life eating on auto-pilot and it ruined his health. I'm about eating about half as much as I used to eat and exercising more often. And I'm doing just fine. In fact, after only about a month of this change, I feel better than I have in a long time.
Everyone is reminded not to waste food. Typically, this well-meaning reminder manifests itself in eating everything on your plate. Less often it results in people ordering less food to begin with. I can sense the immediate impact on my health and well-being, but I also think about the broader impacts.
I have picked up, and put down repeatedly (remember, I've only taken a few steps along my thousand mile journey) Returning to Silence by Dainin Katagiri. The first time I started to read it, I was prepared to launch myself into Buddhist wisdom. Seeking the timeless wisdom of the Buddhist masters, I came across the phrases in the Foreward:
"We can help in many ways. Using toilet paper carefully is helping others. Don't expect helping to be a big deal. In everyday life, we can help someone or something all the time."
Even before I started reading the book proper, I put it down.
Using toilet paper carefully? I wanted to change the world!!! Since then, I have contemplated the "ripple effect" of using toilet paper carefully. Less waste, less production, less energy usage, less harm to the environment...Less is more indeed. More for others who need it much more than I do.
Bumper sticker wisdom: "Live Simply so that Others May Simply Live" (Actually, I think Gandhi said this).
Yesterday, when I ordered less than my usual amount of food for lunch, I gave back two packets of honey mustard sauce. What if everyone gave back unwanted or unused sauce, or as I will do when I've taken another step along the journey, used no sauce at all? And given the state of the world today, what if we didn't keep driving around until we found that "perfect" spot right near the entrance. What if we actually walked, or used mass transit (of course, we'd have to follow Portland's example first and build effective mass transit).
Many have stated that you can't change the world; you can only change yourself, or your place in it. As for the inertial idea that time will heal all wounds, Andy Warhol said, "They say that time changes things, but you actually have to change them yourself."
Sunday, July 30, 2006
Tuesday, July 18, 2006
Civility and Soccer
I waited to write this final post about the 2006 World Cup until I had a chance to meet with Professor P. M. Forni at Johns Hopkins University. Professor Forni has become a leading authority on the topic of civility. I submitted to him that this World Cup, more than any before it, was defined by the issue of civility.
France played cautiously versus Portugal in their semi-final encounter. Perhaps they were saving energy; perhaps they were aware that Portugal would spend more effort diving, faking injuries and acting rather than trying to score an equalizer. By this point, it seemed, the referees were all too familiar with Portugese antics. Scolari only sealed Portugal's place from as the least civil team when he chose to berate the referees at the end of the match, rather than focus on his players, the other players, the fans...No moment defined Portugal's "performance" more than one of Christiano Ronaldo's dives during this game. At the edge of the box, he launched himself into one of his numerous dives. Anyone who's played soccer knows that if you're really tripped, your first thoughts rest upon getting your bearings, putting your hands out, bracing yourself, etc. Since Ronaldo initiated his own fall, he had the opportunity to stare longingly at the referee, appealing for a foul or penalty even before he hit the ground.
His dive may have appeared swanlike, but it definitely reflected an ugly duckling.
He has some interesting times ahead. Let's hope he concentrates his efforts on bolstering his considerable gifts as a soccer player and not taking lessons to augment his less than considerable acting skills.
As Portugal continued its uncivil ways in the third-fourth place match against Germany, France played more passionately during the final with Italy. Materazzi did not deserve to be penalized in the box, and Zidane's cheeky spot kick nearly cost him. These two men would become intertwined in a most memorable--and unfortunate--way. France did play better overall, and while Italy had its opportunities, they did resort to the defensive-minded play of previous days. But all of these considerations would be lost for a few minutes of madness.
I was watching the finals in London at a student cafeteria at Imperial College in London. Everyone in the room gasped and then fell into silence as we watched Zidane head butt Materazzi. Even now, we do not know what Materazzi said, but we know that Zidane reacted in a most inappropriate manner.
Zidane has apologized--sort of. While he stated that he was sorry for the children who witnessed his act, he went to assert that if he hadn't acted in this manner, whatever Materazzi said would have been validated. So much for turning the other cheek. Materazzi, even if he did not use the vile type of insult insinuated by Zidane's statements, certainly tried to inflame him. Materazzi has apparently been involved in similar incidents before.
Perhaps even more bizarre than the incident itself is the fact that Zidane won the Golden Ball award (FIFA needs to let people vote until the day after the finals), and that the French have applauded and celebrated him. It's understandable that they wish to honor his legendary career, but it almost seems as if they're saying it's OK to head butt someone as long as you're an exceptional soccer player. When David Beckham received his red card in the 1998 World Cup, even Manchester United fans gave him a hard time (at least for a brief time). Soccer laurels--individual, club, and national--may be enough for the French to forgive Zidane, but they are obviously insufficient to exorcise Zidane's inner demons.
In a fundamental way, this head butt incident reflects the 2006 World Cup. Zidane played so elegantly at times, reminded us of greater glory days of soccer, but he also showed the very nasty side of soccer. With so much at stake, it's perhaps surprising that we don't see even more uncivil behavior.
Franz Beckenbauer has called for a summit to identify ways to remedy the diving, shirt tugging, injury faking, name calling, head butting, and racism that is present in soccer. And there's good reason to do so beyond generating more goals. But it's worth noting that the fans try to introduce their own brand of judgment. Christiano Ronaldo was booed passionately each time he touched the ball in latter games. The fans whistle and jeer when teams play negatively, and criticize managers adopt defensive tactics. It seems that at least some fans still expect a beautiful game, played with a gentleman's code of conduct.
And then there are the Germans. The Italians are probably still celebrating in the eternal city, but the Germans were the real winners during this World Cup. They proved to be the best examples of civility, both on and off the pitch.
France played cautiously versus Portugal in their semi-final encounter. Perhaps they were saving energy; perhaps they were aware that Portugal would spend more effort diving, faking injuries and acting rather than trying to score an equalizer. By this point, it seemed, the referees were all too familiar with Portugese antics. Scolari only sealed Portugal's place from as the least civil team when he chose to berate the referees at the end of the match, rather than focus on his players, the other players, the fans...No moment defined Portugal's "performance" more than one of Christiano Ronaldo's dives during this game. At the edge of the box, he launched himself into one of his numerous dives. Anyone who's played soccer knows that if you're really tripped, your first thoughts rest upon getting your bearings, putting your hands out, bracing yourself, etc. Since Ronaldo initiated his own fall, he had the opportunity to stare longingly at the referee, appealing for a foul or penalty even before he hit the ground.
His dive may have appeared swanlike, but it definitely reflected an ugly duckling.
He has some interesting times ahead. Let's hope he concentrates his efforts on bolstering his considerable gifts as a soccer player and not taking lessons to augment his less than considerable acting skills.
As Portugal continued its uncivil ways in the third-fourth place match against Germany, France played more passionately during the final with Italy. Materazzi did not deserve to be penalized in the box, and Zidane's cheeky spot kick nearly cost him. These two men would become intertwined in a most memorable--and unfortunate--way. France did play better overall, and while Italy had its opportunities, they did resort to the defensive-minded play of previous days. But all of these considerations would be lost for a few minutes of madness.
I was watching the finals in London at a student cafeteria at Imperial College in London. Everyone in the room gasped and then fell into silence as we watched Zidane head butt Materazzi. Even now, we do not know what Materazzi said, but we know that Zidane reacted in a most inappropriate manner.
Zidane has apologized--sort of. While he stated that he was sorry for the children who witnessed his act, he went to assert that if he hadn't acted in this manner, whatever Materazzi said would have been validated. So much for turning the other cheek. Materazzi, even if he did not use the vile type of insult insinuated by Zidane's statements, certainly tried to inflame him. Materazzi has apparently been involved in similar incidents before.
Perhaps even more bizarre than the incident itself is the fact that Zidane won the Golden Ball award (FIFA needs to let people vote until the day after the finals), and that the French have applauded and celebrated him. It's understandable that they wish to honor his legendary career, but it almost seems as if they're saying it's OK to head butt someone as long as you're an exceptional soccer player. When David Beckham received his red card in the 1998 World Cup, even Manchester United fans gave him a hard time (at least for a brief time). Soccer laurels--individual, club, and national--may be enough for the French to forgive Zidane, but they are obviously insufficient to exorcise Zidane's inner demons.
In a fundamental way, this head butt incident reflects the 2006 World Cup. Zidane played so elegantly at times, reminded us of greater glory days of soccer, but he also showed the very nasty side of soccer. With so much at stake, it's perhaps surprising that we don't see even more uncivil behavior.
Franz Beckenbauer has called for a summit to identify ways to remedy the diving, shirt tugging, injury faking, name calling, head butting, and racism that is present in soccer. And there's good reason to do so beyond generating more goals. But it's worth noting that the fans try to introduce their own brand of judgment. Christiano Ronaldo was booed passionately each time he touched the ball in latter games. The fans whistle and jeer when teams play negatively, and criticize managers adopt defensive tactics. It seems that at least some fans still expect a beautiful game, played with a gentleman's code of conduct.
And then there are the Germans. The Italians are probably still celebrating in the eternal city, but the Germans were the real winners during this World Cup. They proved to be the best examples of civility, both on and off the pitch.
Tuesday, July 04, 2006
A Classic Semi-Final
If you watched the Germany v. Italy semi-final match today, and found it boring, then you're just not going to enjoy soccer. Or you could watch coverage in a country (the UK) that knows soccer, as I had the great opportunity to do so today. Hearing English commentators made me realize even more just how bad ESPN/ABC coverage has been.
This match demonstrated that a 0-0 scoreline does not preclude tremendous end-to-end, free-flowing soccer. Each team generated several great scoring opportunities, only to be thwarted by even better defending and goalkeeping. Soccer is so demanding, that it's understandable players took pauses to catch their breath--but not for long. Finally, we saw players getting up quickly after taking a knock, and a referee who managed to maintain control, allowed the match to flow, without resorting to cards and penalties.
Truth be told, Italy was the better team. In fact, Argentina was the better team against Germany, but this German team has over-achieved. Klinsmann took a team with only a couple of superstars and took them within two minutes of the finals. Does anyone doubt that Germany would have won a penalty kick shootout? And let's offer tremendous credit to the Germans for not playing negatively or cynically for penalty kicks. Germany looked more fatigued at the end, perhaps because having to chase a team with superior play took its toll.
For the first goal, four German defenders lost sight of Grosso and chased Pirlo holding the ball. Pirlo's pass was a wonderful reverse pass that gave Grosso the opening--and he made no mistake. It was simultaneously sad and fitting to see Ballack moving through the box to close the space on Grosso. He has done so much to propel this German team, but even he couldn't save them on this occasion.
After the match ended, the fans in the stands immediately waved their German flags and clapped for their team. As Boris Becker stated in an interview, "we displayed patriotism, not nationalism." And rightly so. They should be very proud of the way this team played, and what they accomplished. Klinsmann stated that he needs to think about what comes next. The Germans will certainly want him to continue through the Euro 2008. And he'd be crazy to turn down this offer to coach the US team just because he lives in California. It seems, even in soccer, the world is flat and a great manager can manage across continents.
The Italians are worthy finalists. How ironic that their domestic league faces turmoil, discord, and controversy while their national team provides the exact opposite. This team continues to play positive, attractive soccer. They are, as usual, solid in the back, but perhaps more than ever, they feature creative, flowing, energized play in the midfield with deadly strikers up front. Gilardino's vision to note Del Piero--and his willingness to deftly pass him the ball--is the kind of teamwork and skill that Brazil could have, but never, delivered. If we are to be without the samba of Brazilian, then at least we can enjoy the danza seria of the Italians.
This match demonstrated that a 0-0 scoreline does not preclude tremendous end-to-end, free-flowing soccer. Each team generated several great scoring opportunities, only to be thwarted by even better defending and goalkeeping. Soccer is so demanding, that it's understandable players took pauses to catch their breath--but not for long. Finally, we saw players getting up quickly after taking a knock, and a referee who managed to maintain control, allowed the match to flow, without resorting to cards and penalties.
Truth be told, Italy was the better team. In fact, Argentina was the better team against Germany, but this German team has over-achieved. Klinsmann took a team with only a couple of superstars and took them within two minutes of the finals. Does anyone doubt that Germany would have won a penalty kick shootout? And let's offer tremendous credit to the Germans for not playing negatively or cynically for penalty kicks. Germany looked more fatigued at the end, perhaps because having to chase a team with superior play took its toll.
For the first goal, four German defenders lost sight of Grosso and chased Pirlo holding the ball. Pirlo's pass was a wonderful reverse pass that gave Grosso the opening--and he made no mistake. It was simultaneously sad and fitting to see Ballack moving through the box to close the space on Grosso. He has done so much to propel this German team, but even he couldn't save them on this occasion.
After the match ended, the fans in the stands immediately waved their German flags and clapped for their team. As Boris Becker stated in an interview, "we displayed patriotism, not nationalism." And rightly so. They should be very proud of the way this team played, and what they accomplished. Klinsmann stated that he needs to think about what comes next. The Germans will certainly want him to continue through the Euro 2008. And he'd be crazy to turn down this offer to coach the US team just because he lives in California. It seems, even in soccer, the world is flat and a great manager can manage across continents.
The Italians are worthy finalists. How ironic that their domestic league faces turmoil, discord, and controversy while their national team provides the exact opposite. This team continues to play positive, attractive soccer. They are, as usual, solid in the back, but perhaps more than ever, they feature creative, flowing, energized play in the midfield with deadly strikers up front. Gilardino's vision to note Del Piero--and his willingness to deftly pass him the ball--is the kind of teamwork and skill that Brazil could have, but never, delivered. If we are to be without the samba of Brazilian, then at least we can enjoy the danza seria of the Italians.
If Only Soccer Could Solve Political Problems
There are several instances of major soccer tournaments resulting in cease-fires--for at least the duration of the tournament. As the 2006 offering of The World Cup reaches the final, troops are amassed along the Gaza strip, rockets are fired from North Korea, explosions continue in Iraq, and a host of other conflicts and near conflicts remain.
People throughout the world take pause during The World Cup but it seems clear that political, ethnic, and religious tensions dominate over interest in soccer. It's a nice thought that a month-long party could help the world find peace--if only for a brief interlude--but it's clear that these conflicts won't be solved on the soccer pitch.
People throughout the world take pause during The World Cup but it seems clear that political, ethnic, and religious tensions dominate over interest in soccer. It's a nice thought that a month-long party could help the world find peace--if only for a brief interlude--but it's clear that these conflicts won't be solved on the soccer pitch.
Sunday, July 02, 2006
Denouement
It's hard for this soccer diehard to admit it, but in recent offerings, The World Cup undergoes a certain drag from the quarter-finals onward. Yes, the powerhouse teams face off against each other, but this is part of the reason we start to see inordinate emphasis on doing whatever is necessary to win. As the stakes rise, we are presented with tantalizing matchups, only to see over-cautious play from managers who take the games out of the players' hands and, in some cases, resort to dirty tactics.
Argentina dominated Germany throughout most of their match. Initially, I thought Germany might have been playing cautiously on purpose, but I think Argentina simply had more skill on the ball, keeping the Germans at bay. After scoring their goal, Argentina inexplicably and completely changed its tactics. Obviously, they wanted to protect their lead, but if they had kept playing at 80% instead of 30%, I'm convinced Germany would not have found its rhythm. A team doesn't change its tactics so drastically unless the manager has instructed them to do so. Pekerman's substitutions were, to say the least, curious. Unless Riquelme was injured, why would you take out the one player who can control possession better than anyone else on the pitch? And why did he not bring Messi or Savioli into the game instead of Cruz? The Argentines had their best chances through speed and skill, not through size and strength. Pekerman has offered to resign. Obviously, he's done a great job in building up this team, and one game doesn't make or break a manager's career. But I wish he had let Argentina play soccer, instead of getting too caught up in managerial tactics.
On the other hand, what is happening to Italy? The team that perfected catenaccio played with an offensive flair that led to three goals, including two for Luca Toni, who must be thrilled to finally find the back of the net. Italy did not seem content with a 1-0 scoreline. As for Ukraine, they started playing soccer again. And it nearly paid dividends. They hit the woodwork on two separate occasions and had a close, direct shot before Toni found his scoring touch at the other end. If they had found Shevchenko on those occasions, they might have equalized. I wonder if they might have scored more easily if they hadn't turned off their offense for nearly two games.
England, on the other hand, has never turned its offense on. Sven Goran Eriksson said that reaching the quarter-finals was "not good enough." No kidding. Given the talent that England possesses, being bounced out in the quarter-finals for three successive tournaments has to be inadequate. England is capable of playing elegant, attractive soccer. During Eriksson's tenure, they have apparently decided to bore their opponents to death while waiting for Beckham to score on a set piece. It's a strange choice for a team with so much potential. And talk about strange substitutions. What exactly was Eriksson thinking when he waited until the 118th minute to substitute for a substitute? Aaron Lennon was one of the few bright spots on the pitch. Does he take bad penalty kicks? Put him tenth on the list. Carragher had obviously practiced his "no look" penalty kick; it's too bad he didn't wait for the whistle. If Eriksson wasn't going to play Theo Walcott, why did he pick him for the squad? John Terry was getting cramps. Why not put in experienced Sol Campbell to help a tiring defense and to offer another target for set pieces?
Only a few of their players seem to rage against this machine of Eriksson's sleep walking soccer. Wayne Rooney is one of them. But he showed us the dark side of his passion. Regardless of what might have happened, Rooney needs to show more composure in these circumstances. England already knows who will take the helm of this team. Hopefully, Steve McLaren will tap into his players' natural skills, rather than suppress them only to lose in penalty kicks. What isn't clear is who will take the helm on the pitch. Watching Beckham limp off the pitch, while Gerrard yelled at teammates for missed assignments and Terry organized them in the back, made everyone wonder about the captaincy.
Portugese manager Scolari has a twelve game winning streak in The World Cup. He has managed to send England home in the last three major tournaments. It's an impressive streak. But what I find most disconcerting about Scolari's impact on his teams is the dirty tactics. Let's not forget that the Scolari-led 2002 Brazil team featured Rivaldo's distasteful cheating tactic. Brazil plays a very clean, fair brand of soccer, often resulting in the fair play award (even though they play so many games). It was shocking to see Rivaldo act in this way and even more shocking to hear him admit he cheated. Scolari defended Rivaldo's action. On this occasion, several Portugese players are engaged in time wasting, diving, injury faking, and who knows what Cristiano Ronaldo said or did during Rooney's red card episode. Ronaldo apparently winked at the Portugese bench after Rooney was ejected. Ronaldo went on to lecture Peter Crouch when one of his Portugese teammates was clearly faking. It's great to see that someone of Christiano Ronaldo's talents is using his time in the Premier League to "learn" about his English club teammates. Given the number of players, and the number of incidents, one has to believe this is part of Scolari's tactics. Marcelo Balboa sadly (and repeatedly) believes that such cheating is part of the game, but does Scolari not believe Portugal can simply play great soccer? He has a great winning streak in The World Cup, but I think it comes with an asterisk.
I chose a French word for the title of this entry to honor Zidane. I eat my words yet again for suggesting that maybe the French would be better off without him in the lineup--and I'm glad to do so. It was fantastic to seeing him play with such joy, skill and passion. Was Brazil simply overwhelmed? On more than one occasion, Zidane weaved his way through stunned Brazilian players, but Brazil also didn't come to play. For the entire World Cup. Perhaps the selfishness they displayed in their match against Ghana was evidence of a lack of teamplay. I don't think the 4-5-1 formation helped matters either. While he leaves with the all-time scoring record, Ronaldo certainly hasn't been working hard up front. Once Brazil fell behind (and how could Henry rush forward completely unmarked?), we saw Adriano and Robinho, which changed matters. There was finally urgency but, again, it was basically driven by individual initiative, rather than cohesive teamwork.
If we're praising Zidane for his individual inspiration that led to great teamwork, it's time to admit something that few are saying at this point:
Ronaldinho was the biggest disappointment of the 2006 World Cup.
Zidane's prime performance was eight years ago (or perhaps over the next two games?) and it's been three years since he was chosen World Player of the Year. Ronaldinho is coming off back to back recognition of this pinnacle of individual accomplishment, and a Champions League title with Barcelona. If anyone should have matched Zidane's brilliance, it was Ronaldinho. Perhaps when Zidane was sitting on the bench during France's final first round match, he realized how few opportunities even someone of his considerable gifts would experience. It would take a meteor strike for Brazil to miss the 2010 World Cup. So Ronaldinho should get another chance, and hopefully he will fully embrace the idea that he should bring his best game to The World Cup.
For all the tactics, clean and dirty, that managers bring to their teams, it's important to realize that the players must win the matches by simply playing soccer--and that's when the game is its most beautiful.
Argentina dominated Germany throughout most of their match. Initially, I thought Germany might have been playing cautiously on purpose, but I think Argentina simply had more skill on the ball, keeping the Germans at bay. After scoring their goal, Argentina inexplicably and completely changed its tactics. Obviously, they wanted to protect their lead, but if they had kept playing at 80% instead of 30%, I'm convinced Germany would not have found its rhythm. A team doesn't change its tactics so drastically unless the manager has instructed them to do so. Pekerman's substitutions were, to say the least, curious. Unless Riquelme was injured, why would you take out the one player who can control possession better than anyone else on the pitch? And why did he not bring Messi or Savioli into the game instead of Cruz? The Argentines had their best chances through speed and skill, not through size and strength. Pekerman has offered to resign. Obviously, he's done a great job in building up this team, and one game doesn't make or break a manager's career. But I wish he had let Argentina play soccer, instead of getting too caught up in managerial tactics.
On the other hand, what is happening to Italy? The team that perfected catenaccio played with an offensive flair that led to three goals, including two for Luca Toni, who must be thrilled to finally find the back of the net. Italy did not seem content with a 1-0 scoreline. As for Ukraine, they started playing soccer again. And it nearly paid dividends. They hit the woodwork on two separate occasions and had a close, direct shot before Toni found his scoring touch at the other end. If they had found Shevchenko on those occasions, they might have equalized. I wonder if they might have scored more easily if they hadn't turned off their offense for nearly two games.
England, on the other hand, has never turned its offense on. Sven Goran Eriksson said that reaching the quarter-finals was "not good enough." No kidding. Given the talent that England possesses, being bounced out in the quarter-finals for three successive tournaments has to be inadequate. England is capable of playing elegant, attractive soccer. During Eriksson's tenure, they have apparently decided to bore their opponents to death while waiting for Beckham to score on a set piece. It's a strange choice for a team with so much potential. And talk about strange substitutions. What exactly was Eriksson thinking when he waited until the 118th minute to substitute for a substitute? Aaron Lennon was one of the few bright spots on the pitch. Does he take bad penalty kicks? Put him tenth on the list. Carragher had obviously practiced his "no look" penalty kick; it's too bad he didn't wait for the whistle. If Eriksson wasn't going to play Theo Walcott, why did he pick him for the squad? John Terry was getting cramps. Why not put in experienced Sol Campbell to help a tiring defense and to offer another target for set pieces?
Only a few of their players seem to rage against this machine of Eriksson's sleep walking soccer. Wayne Rooney is one of them. But he showed us the dark side of his passion. Regardless of what might have happened, Rooney needs to show more composure in these circumstances. England already knows who will take the helm of this team. Hopefully, Steve McLaren will tap into his players' natural skills, rather than suppress them only to lose in penalty kicks. What isn't clear is who will take the helm on the pitch. Watching Beckham limp off the pitch, while Gerrard yelled at teammates for missed assignments and Terry organized them in the back, made everyone wonder about the captaincy.
Portugese manager Scolari has a twelve game winning streak in The World Cup. He has managed to send England home in the last three major tournaments. It's an impressive streak. But what I find most disconcerting about Scolari's impact on his teams is the dirty tactics. Let's not forget that the Scolari-led 2002 Brazil team featured Rivaldo's distasteful cheating tactic. Brazil plays a very clean, fair brand of soccer, often resulting in the fair play award (even though they play so many games). It was shocking to see Rivaldo act in this way and even more shocking to hear him admit he cheated. Scolari defended Rivaldo's action. On this occasion, several Portugese players are engaged in time wasting, diving, injury faking, and who knows what Cristiano Ronaldo said or did during Rooney's red card episode. Ronaldo apparently winked at the Portugese bench after Rooney was ejected. Ronaldo went on to lecture Peter Crouch when one of his Portugese teammates was clearly faking. It's great to see that someone of Christiano Ronaldo's talents is using his time in the Premier League to "learn" about his English club teammates. Given the number of players, and the number of incidents, one has to believe this is part of Scolari's tactics. Marcelo Balboa sadly (and repeatedly) believes that such cheating is part of the game, but does Scolari not believe Portugal can simply play great soccer? He has a great winning streak in The World Cup, but I think it comes with an asterisk.
I chose a French word for the title of this entry to honor Zidane. I eat my words yet again for suggesting that maybe the French would be better off without him in the lineup--and I'm glad to do so. It was fantastic to seeing him play with such joy, skill and passion. Was Brazil simply overwhelmed? On more than one occasion, Zidane weaved his way through stunned Brazilian players, but Brazil also didn't come to play. For the entire World Cup. Perhaps the selfishness they displayed in their match against Ghana was evidence of a lack of teamplay. I don't think the 4-5-1 formation helped matters either. While he leaves with the all-time scoring record, Ronaldo certainly hasn't been working hard up front. Once Brazil fell behind (and how could Henry rush forward completely unmarked?), we saw Adriano and Robinho, which changed matters. There was finally urgency but, again, it was basically driven by individual initiative, rather than cohesive teamwork.
If we're praising Zidane for his individual inspiration that led to great teamwork, it's time to admit something that few are saying at this point:
Ronaldinho was the biggest disappointment of the 2006 World Cup.
Zidane's prime performance was eight years ago (or perhaps over the next two games?) and it's been three years since he was chosen World Player of the Year. Ronaldinho is coming off back to back recognition of this pinnacle of individual accomplishment, and a Champions League title with Barcelona. If anyone should have matched Zidane's brilliance, it was Ronaldinho. Perhaps when Zidane was sitting on the bench during France's final first round match, he realized how few opportunities even someone of his considerable gifts would experience. It would take a meteor strike for Brazil to miss the 2010 World Cup. So Ronaldinho should get another chance, and hopefully he will fully embrace the idea that he should bring his best game to The World Cup.
For all the tactics, clean and dirty, that managers bring to their teams, it's important to realize that the players must win the matches by simply playing soccer--and that's when the game is its most beautiful.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
