There are so many western influences in Japan, it's possible to forget at moments that I'm in Asia. I have heard from fellow Asians some resentment about Japan's alignment with the West, rather than the rest of Asia. The current G-8 Summit is a reminder of this tension. Perhaps hosting the conference in Japan will allow for greater emphasis on China and India. It's strange to imagine an economic consortium without explicit representation from China and India, or Brazil for that matter.
At one point during a trip between hotels, my taxi stopped in front of an Indian restaurant. Almost anyone of South Asian descent will know the moment. No matter our origins, no matter our self-perceptions, South Asians in these circumstances will often look at each other and smile. As if to acknowledge a bond that transcends national or cultural boundaries. Even the vast differences between Indians, Pakistanis, and Bangladeshis seem to disappear when we leave South Asia. I suppose we finally focus more on what is common, rather than what is different.
In this case, each of the people in the restaurant smiled and bowed slightly. One of them came up to the taxi and handed me a menu from the restaurant. I can't deny a certain comfort when I saw curry, naan, and mango lassi on the menu. He spoke to me in Japanese. When I said "thank you" in English, he must have realized I do not live in Tokyo. He made the leap to Hindi, which I also do not understand. I'm embarrassed enough not understanding Japanese, but I'm even more embarrassed not understanding Hindi (after all, my wife speaks it fairly fluently). I miss out on so much because of my poor language skills.
One language that does seem to transcend boundaries is business. I'm struck by the Asian business shows, with men in suits and ties, using the same jargon as the Wall Street pundits. It's a 24 hour a day obsession, spoken in the language of currency. It's difficult to translate English into Japanese, but it's easy to find out the latest conversion rate between the British pound and the Japanese yen. BBC Asian Business Report featured a story on malnutrition in India. The story focused on a young woman who mentioned that her four children are starving. They certainly looked that way. The report mentioned that malnutrition causes $29 billion of lost productivity in India, or nearly 4% of its GDP. India's long-term productivity might be adversely affected if "they can not tap properly into these human resources". We should feed these people only because they can contribute to the economy?
When did human misery and suffering become measured as an adverse impact on GDP?
Showing posts with label brazil. Show all posts
Showing posts with label brazil. Show all posts
Tuesday, July 08, 2008
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.
Tuesday, June 27, 2006
And Then There Were Eight
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.
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.
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.
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.
Thursday, June 22, 2006
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.
Wednesday, June 21, 2006
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 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.
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 :-)
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.
Saturday, June 10, 2006
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)
