I waited to write this final post about the 2006 World Cup until I had a chance to meet with Professor P. M. Forni at Johns Hopkins University. Professor Forni has become a leading authority on the topic of civility. I submitted to him that this World Cup, more than any before it, was defined by the issue of civility.
France played cautiously versus Portugal in their semi-final encounter. Perhaps they were saving energy; perhaps they were aware that Portugal would spend more effort diving, faking injuries and acting rather than trying to score an equalizer. By this point, it seemed, the referees were all too familiar with Portugese antics. Scolari only sealed Portugal's place from as the least civil team when he chose to berate the referees at the end of the match, rather than focus on his players, the other players, the fans...No moment defined Portugal's "performance" more than one of Christiano Ronaldo's dives during this game. At the edge of the box, he launched himself into one of his numerous dives. Anyone who's played soccer knows that if you're really tripped, your first thoughts rest upon getting your bearings, putting your hands out, bracing yourself, etc. Since Ronaldo initiated his own fall, he had the opportunity to stare longingly at the referee, appealing for a foul or penalty even before he hit the ground.
His dive may have appeared swanlike, but it definitely reflected an ugly duckling.
He has some interesting times ahead. Let's hope he concentrates his efforts on bolstering his considerable gifts as a soccer player and not taking lessons to augment his less than considerable acting skills.
As Portugal continued its uncivil ways in the third-fourth place match against Germany, France played more passionately during the final with Italy. Materazzi did not deserve to be penalized in the box, and Zidane's cheeky spot kick nearly cost him. These two men would become intertwined in a most memorable--and unfortunate--way. France did play better overall, and while Italy had its opportunities, they did resort to the defensive-minded play of previous days. But all of these considerations would be lost for a few minutes of madness.
I was watching the finals in London at a student cafeteria at Imperial College in London. Everyone in the room gasped and then fell into silence as we watched Zidane head butt Materazzi. Even now, we do not know what Materazzi said, but we know that Zidane reacted in a most inappropriate manner.
Zidane has apologized--sort of. While he stated that he was sorry for the children who witnessed his act, he went to assert that if he hadn't acted in this manner, whatever Materazzi said would have been validated. So much for turning the other cheek. Materazzi, even if he did not use the vile type of insult insinuated by Zidane's statements, certainly tried to inflame him. Materazzi has apparently been involved in similar incidents before.
Perhaps even more bizarre than the incident itself is the fact that Zidane won the Golden Ball award (FIFA needs to let people vote until the day after the finals), and that the French have applauded and celebrated him. It's understandable that they wish to honor his legendary career, but it almost seems as if they're saying it's OK to head butt someone as long as you're an exceptional soccer player. When David Beckham received his red card in the 1998 World Cup, even Manchester United fans gave him a hard time (at least for a brief time). Soccer laurels--individual, club, and national--may be enough for the French to forgive Zidane, but they are obviously insufficient to exorcise Zidane's inner demons.
In a fundamental way, this head butt incident reflects the 2006 World Cup. Zidane played so elegantly at times, reminded us of greater glory days of soccer, but he also showed the very nasty side of soccer. With so much at stake, it's perhaps surprising that we don't see even more uncivil behavior.
Franz Beckenbauer has called for a summit to identify ways to remedy the diving, shirt tugging, injury faking, name calling, head butting, and racism that is present in soccer. And there's good reason to do so beyond generating more goals. But it's worth noting that the fans try to introduce their own brand of judgment. Christiano Ronaldo was booed passionately each time he touched the ball in latter games. The fans whistle and jeer when teams play negatively, and criticize managers adopt defensive tactics. It seems that at least some fans still expect a beautiful game, played with a gentleman's code of conduct.
And then there are the Germans. The Italians are probably still celebrating in the eternal city, but the Germans were the real winners during this World Cup. They proved to be the best examples of civility, both on and off the pitch.
Showing posts with label italy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label italy. Show all posts
Tuesday, July 18, 2006
Tuesday, July 04, 2006
A Classic Semi-Final
If you watched the Germany v. Italy semi-final match today, and found it boring, then you're just not going to enjoy soccer. Or you could watch coverage in a country (the UK) that knows soccer, as I had the great opportunity to do so today. Hearing English commentators made me realize even more just how bad ESPN/ABC coverage has been.
This match demonstrated that a 0-0 scoreline does not preclude tremendous end-to-end, free-flowing soccer. Each team generated several great scoring opportunities, only to be thwarted by even better defending and goalkeeping. Soccer is so demanding, that it's understandable players took pauses to catch their breath--but not for long. Finally, we saw players getting up quickly after taking a knock, and a referee who managed to maintain control, allowed the match to flow, without resorting to cards and penalties.
Truth be told, Italy was the better team. In fact, Argentina was the better team against Germany, but this German team has over-achieved. Klinsmann took a team with only a couple of superstars and took them within two minutes of the finals. Does anyone doubt that Germany would have won a penalty kick shootout? And let's offer tremendous credit to the Germans for not playing negatively or cynically for penalty kicks. Germany looked more fatigued at the end, perhaps because having to chase a team with superior play took its toll.
For the first goal, four German defenders lost sight of Grosso and chased Pirlo holding the ball. Pirlo's pass was a wonderful reverse pass that gave Grosso the opening--and he made no mistake. It was simultaneously sad and fitting to see Ballack moving through the box to close the space on Grosso. He has done so much to propel this German team, but even he couldn't save them on this occasion.
After the match ended, the fans in the stands immediately waved their German flags and clapped for their team. As Boris Becker stated in an interview, "we displayed patriotism, not nationalism." And rightly so. They should be very proud of the way this team played, and what they accomplished. Klinsmann stated that he needs to think about what comes next. The Germans will certainly want him to continue through the Euro 2008. And he'd be crazy to turn down this offer to coach the US team just because he lives in California. It seems, even in soccer, the world is flat and a great manager can manage across continents.
The Italians are worthy finalists. How ironic that their domestic league faces turmoil, discord, and controversy while their national team provides the exact opposite. This team continues to play positive, attractive soccer. They are, as usual, solid in the back, but perhaps more than ever, they feature creative, flowing, energized play in the midfield with deadly strikers up front. Gilardino's vision to note Del Piero--and his willingness to deftly pass him the ball--is the kind of teamwork and skill that Brazil could have, but never, delivered. If we are to be without the samba of Brazilian, then at least we can enjoy the danza seria of the Italians.
This match demonstrated that a 0-0 scoreline does not preclude tremendous end-to-end, free-flowing soccer. Each team generated several great scoring opportunities, only to be thwarted by even better defending and goalkeeping. Soccer is so demanding, that it's understandable players took pauses to catch their breath--but not for long. Finally, we saw players getting up quickly after taking a knock, and a referee who managed to maintain control, allowed the match to flow, without resorting to cards and penalties.
Truth be told, Italy was the better team. In fact, Argentina was the better team against Germany, but this German team has over-achieved. Klinsmann took a team with only a couple of superstars and took them within two minutes of the finals. Does anyone doubt that Germany would have won a penalty kick shootout? And let's offer tremendous credit to the Germans for not playing negatively or cynically for penalty kicks. Germany looked more fatigued at the end, perhaps because having to chase a team with superior play took its toll.
For the first goal, four German defenders lost sight of Grosso and chased Pirlo holding the ball. Pirlo's pass was a wonderful reverse pass that gave Grosso the opening--and he made no mistake. It was simultaneously sad and fitting to see Ballack moving through the box to close the space on Grosso. He has done so much to propel this German team, but even he couldn't save them on this occasion.
After the match ended, the fans in the stands immediately waved their German flags and clapped for their team. As Boris Becker stated in an interview, "we displayed patriotism, not nationalism." And rightly so. They should be very proud of the way this team played, and what they accomplished. Klinsmann stated that he needs to think about what comes next. The Germans will certainly want him to continue through the Euro 2008. And he'd be crazy to turn down this offer to coach the US team just because he lives in California. It seems, even in soccer, the world is flat and a great manager can manage across continents.
The Italians are worthy finalists. How ironic that their domestic league faces turmoil, discord, and controversy while their national team provides the exact opposite. This team continues to play positive, attractive soccer. They are, as usual, solid in the back, but perhaps more than ever, they feature creative, flowing, energized play in the midfield with deadly strikers up front. Gilardino's vision to note Del Piero--and his willingness to deftly pass him the ball--is the kind of teamwork and skill that Brazil could have, but never, delivered. If we are to be without the samba of Brazilian, then at least we can enjoy the danza seria of the Italians.
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.
Monday, June 26, 2006
A Day of Penalty Kicks
When one hears about penalty kicks, it would be natural to assume that the Italians found themselves on the short end of the stick. Italian fans are convinced that the Azzurri are cursed to lose through penalty kicks, or doomed to failure because of conspiracies (most often manifesting themselves through referees' decisions against the Italians). So when the Italians were a man down, through a questionable red card, it seemed that they might be heading for another self-fulfilling prophecy. But not on this day.
Italian manager, Marcello Lippi, showed some courage by putting Totti on the bench, and starting Del Piero in the midfield. On another day, Luca Toni would have had a hat trick. Today, he just kept shaking his head after near misses. Lippi showed a willingness to adapt to the needs of the day when he brought Totti into the fray, something Van Basten wasn't willing to do with Van Nistelrooij. Lippi showed even more courage by allowing Totti to take the penalty kick. I thought it was important to have someone fresh take the kick, but I thought it would be Iaquinta. Totti did not hesitate, and he did not disappoint. Given the Italians recent woes with penalty kicks, it must have been very satisfying for the Italians to win with a penalty kick in the 95th minute.
As for the Socceroos, they deserve a lot of respect. I have been questioning their move into the Asian confederation but, after their performance in the Cup, it's only right to state that the Asian confederation will be richer for Australia's presence. I'm not sure what Australian defender, Lucas Neill, was doing or thinking. Perhaps he just lost his head. At that point in the match, Neill could have shouldered or bumped Grosso fairly aggressively without consequence. But when he lay down on the pitch and reached back, the referee had to call the penalty.
I think Hiddink might have been assuming that the game was destined for extra time. He has made so many prescient substitutions in earlier games, but he made only one today. More than anyone else, the Italians find a way to win through one quick strike, so perhaps he should have not expected more time for additional substitutes. But it's hard to criticize Hiddink. He showed class when he gathered his players, and persuaded them to absorb and recognize their fans' cheering and applause. Now Russia get a chance to experience the Hiddink effect.
"Where's the quality?" John Harkes said it best when he asked this question in the Ukraine v. Switzerland match. He later added, "ambition, imagination, and creativity" to the list of missing elements. For much of the match, both teams worked hard, but an errant pass, or a missed run, or a poor finish left the match without a goal. Both Shevchekno and Frei hit the woodwork, providing evidence that with appropriate service, they could have broken the deadlock.
At least the Swiss kept trying until the end. I fear that we may have found the "anti-soccer" team of the tournament with the Ukraine. After showing that they can score against the Saudis, Ukraine has chosen too often the lowest common denominator. Honestly, Switzerland deserved to win, but even their penalty kicks didn't have enough quality.
It''s too bad they couldn't bring Totti into their lineup.
Italian manager, Marcello Lippi, showed some courage by putting Totti on the bench, and starting Del Piero in the midfield. On another day, Luca Toni would have had a hat trick. Today, he just kept shaking his head after near misses. Lippi showed a willingness to adapt to the needs of the day when he brought Totti into the fray, something Van Basten wasn't willing to do with Van Nistelrooij. Lippi showed even more courage by allowing Totti to take the penalty kick. I thought it was important to have someone fresh take the kick, but I thought it would be Iaquinta. Totti did not hesitate, and he did not disappoint. Given the Italians recent woes with penalty kicks, it must have been very satisfying for the Italians to win with a penalty kick in the 95th minute.
As for the Socceroos, they deserve a lot of respect. I have been questioning their move into the Asian confederation but, after their performance in the Cup, it's only right to state that the Asian confederation will be richer for Australia's presence. I'm not sure what Australian defender, Lucas Neill, was doing or thinking. Perhaps he just lost his head. At that point in the match, Neill could have shouldered or bumped Grosso fairly aggressively without consequence. But when he lay down on the pitch and reached back, the referee had to call the penalty.
I think Hiddink might have been assuming that the game was destined for extra time. He has made so many prescient substitutions in earlier games, but he made only one today. More than anyone else, the Italians find a way to win through one quick strike, so perhaps he should have not expected more time for additional substitutes. But it's hard to criticize Hiddink. He showed class when he gathered his players, and persuaded them to absorb and recognize their fans' cheering and applause. Now Russia get a chance to experience the Hiddink effect.
"Where's the quality?" John Harkes said it best when he asked this question in the Ukraine v. Switzerland match. He later added, "ambition, imagination, and creativity" to the list of missing elements. For much of the match, both teams worked hard, but an errant pass, or a missed run, or a poor finish left the match without a goal. Both Shevchekno and Frei hit the woodwork, providing evidence that with appropriate service, they could have broken the deadlock.
At least the Swiss kept trying until the end. I fear that we may have found the "anti-soccer" team of the tournament with the Ukraine. After showing that they can score against the Saudis, Ukraine has chosen too often the lowest common denominator. Honestly, Switzerland deserved to win, but even their penalty kicks didn't have enough quality.
It''s too bad they couldn't bring Totti into their lineup.
Thursday, June 22, 2006
Group E Finales
Let's hail Pavel Nedved. He is a gifted player, who came out of international retirement to help the Czech Republic qualify. When he gets bumped, he keeps trying to play, rather than offer Razzie quality acting and diving. And one of my friends pointed out that he has the best hair on the pitch since Carlos Valderrama. Today, he played with a passion and persistence that was inspiring. Milan Baros did
his best to energize the proceedings, but his timing was understandably off, and he eventually ran out of gas. If ESPN's (screen hogging) lineup graphic was correct, Rosicky was playing as striker in a 4-4-2 formation. Whether he was supposed to be in the midfield or up front, he was a ghost during the game. This was the same man who wreaked havoc on the US, and scored those two magnificent goals?
As for the rest of Czechs, they kept their game in check. It was disappointing to see Nedved work so hard, with his teammates as spectators. Even if they didn't feel the desire, couldn't they have respected his drive and determination? Nedved provided opportunities, had the best shots on goal and, in the 93rd minute, two goals down, still chased after a ball. After the game, he laid down on the pitch, exhausted. It seemed that every Italian player wanted to acknowledge him. I am sorry to see him leave the World stage.
For every goodbye to familiar figures, we have opportunities for hellos to newcomers. Ghana, in its first World Cup, advances into the secound round, keeping alive Africa's streak since 1990. Even without the two goal scorers from the victory over the Czech Republic, they found the net twice. On their first goal, I do not understand why Keller did not rush off his line. There were three US players heading into the box to cover possible passes, and Keller's stance gave Draman ample opportunity to slow down, collect himself, pick his spot and drill the ball past Keller. The penalty call against Onyewu was a harsh assessment. Onyewu has a problematic tendency to defend with his hands, but on this occasion he went out of his way to refrain from doing so. He was also unfortunate with his header, which barely missed the net. It was sad to see Claudio Reyna hobbling off the field from an injury caused by being dispossessed just prior to the first goal. He was obviously in pain, yet he tried to keep playing. Eddie Lewis joined the Brian McBride "grit club" by getting cut, getting treated, and getting back on the pitch. Several US players showed a great deal of character in the face of adversity.
Which is more than I say for Bruce Arena. He is absolutely correct that the penalty call was dubious, and it greatly influenced the game. For better or worse, the referee's bad calls or missed calls is a part of soccer. Other managers get upset with bad calls, or bad fortunes, but they seem to recover and urge their players to move on. Arena seems to assume that if the game had remained 1-1, the US would have won. Maybe so. But instead of dwelling on this, he should have been urging the US players onward, and dealing with reality. At the press conference after the game, he was still talking about the penalty. I didn't see the entire press conference, but I sincerely hope he recognized the efforts of his players, and applauded them for picking themselves up repeatedly. Perhaps it's time to look beyond US borders for a manager, someone who might bring out the best in this team and remain positive in adversity. I'm sure someone would relish the challenge of taking the US team to new heights. It's too bad Guus Hiddink has committed to coach Russia.
As for Ghana, they deserve great recognition for an impressive accomplishment. Apparently, Ghanians admire Brazilian soccer. They'll have a close-up opportunity to admire Brazil's offensive firepower. Ghana's keeper still looks suspect to me. He looked completely frozen during Dempsey's goal. If McBride had managed to direct his header a few inches to the right, he would have beaten Kingson on the near post. I could have sworn Kingson dived well after the ball banged off the post. Essien's second yellow card will be costly. While he has been called on for offensive duties, his defensive midfield skills will be missed even more. Gyan and Muntari return from suspension, which should provide more offensive options, but it's a rare team that can outscore Brazil.
his best to energize the proceedings, but his timing was understandably off, and he eventually ran out of gas. If ESPN's (screen hogging) lineup graphic was correct, Rosicky was playing as striker in a 4-4-2 formation. Whether he was supposed to be in the midfield or up front, he was a ghost during the game. This was the same man who wreaked havoc on the US, and scored those two magnificent goals?
As for the rest of Czechs, they kept their game in check. It was disappointing to see Nedved work so hard, with his teammates as spectators. Even if they didn't feel the desire, couldn't they have respected his drive and determination? Nedved provided opportunities, had the best shots on goal and, in the 93rd minute, two goals down, still chased after a ball. After the game, he laid down on the pitch, exhausted. It seemed that every Italian player wanted to acknowledge him. I am sorry to see him leave the World stage.
For every goodbye to familiar figures, we have opportunities for hellos to newcomers. Ghana, in its first World Cup, advances into the secound round, keeping alive Africa's streak since 1990. Even without the two goal scorers from the victory over the Czech Republic, they found the net twice. On their first goal, I do not understand why Keller did not rush off his line. There were three US players heading into the box to cover possible passes, and Keller's stance gave Draman ample opportunity to slow down, collect himself, pick his spot and drill the ball past Keller. The penalty call against Onyewu was a harsh assessment. Onyewu has a problematic tendency to defend with his hands, but on this occasion he went out of his way to refrain from doing so. He was also unfortunate with his header, which barely missed the net. It was sad to see Claudio Reyna hobbling off the field from an injury caused by being dispossessed just prior to the first goal. He was obviously in pain, yet he tried to keep playing. Eddie Lewis joined the Brian McBride "grit club" by getting cut, getting treated, and getting back on the pitch. Several US players showed a great deal of character in the face of adversity.
Which is more than I say for Bruce Arena. He is absolutely correct that the penalty call was dubious, and it greatly influenced the game. For better or worse, the referee's bad calls or missed calls is a part of soccer. Other managers get upset with bad calls, or bad fortunes, but they seem to recover and urge their players to move on. Arena seems to assume that if the game had remained 1-1, the US would have won. Maybe so. But instead of dwelling on this, he should have been urging the US players onward, and dealing with reality. At the press conference after the game, he was still talking about the penalty. I didn't see the entire press conference, but I sincerely hope he recognized the efforts of his players, and applauded them for picking themselves up repeatedly. Perhaps it's time to look beyond US borders for a manager, someone who might bring out the best in this team and remain positive in adversity. I'm sure someone would relish the challenge of taking the US team to new heights. It's too bad Guus Hiddink has committed to coach Russia.
As for Ghana, they deserve great recognition for an impressive accomplishment. Apparently, Ghanians admire Brazilian soccer. They'll have a close-up opportunity to admire Brazil's offensive firepower. Ghana's keeper still looks suspect to me. He looked completely frozen during Dempsey's goal. If McBride had managed to direct his header a few inches to the right, he would have beaten Kingson on the near post. I could have sworn Kingson dived well after the ball banged off the post. Essien's second yellow card will be costly. While he has been called on for offensive duties, his defensive midfield skills will be missed even more. Gyan and Muntari return from suspension, which should provide more offensive options, but it's a rare team that can outscore Brazil.
Group F Finales
Reports of Ronaldo's death were greatly exaggerated.
He has now tied Gerd Müller's all-time scoring record, and he stands poised to pass all the great strikers who have graced the pitch during The World Cup. Brazilian manager, Parreira, deserves a lot of credit for properly gauging the Ronaldo pulse. With a few turns, a well placed header and a thunderous shot, Ronaldo announced his arrival in Germany. Robinho's presence has proven useful for Brazil, and he might displace Adriano in the starting lineup.
I'm sure Zico wished that Ronaldo had remained in abeyance. If Zico had asked Japan to begin in a defensive shell, he might have been called a hypocrite. How could he encourage Japan to emulate Brazilian football and then put every man behind the ball against Brazil? Japan should be credited for playing with Brazil in the early stages, and even taking the lead. After their goal, Zico seemed to realize that waking up a sleeping giant is a dangerous affair. While Japan started to sit back, waiting for a counter-attack, they faced a barrage of shots, near misses and, eventually, goals. Falling behind might have been the wake-up call that Brazil needed. It's amazing that they have a winning record in World Cup play when they concede the first goal.
Japan can't be happy to have the dubious distinction of leading, but ultimately losing two games, and remaining winless outside of Asia during World Cup play. Zico may be right in pushing Japanese players to be more creative and free-flowing, but they might have more to accomplish on the defensive side of the pitch. Maybe it's difficult to generate offense when you're back on your heels, but Brazil's opponents don't score many goals. For now, Japan has to be considered an Asian power, still waiting to make its big splash on the World stage.
There is an Asian team that's already made a splash on this World Cup stage. OK, I'm being premature. No, I'm not referring to South Korea, who may or may not qualify tomorrow. I'm referring to Australia's move into the Asian Confederation following the tournament. For now, Oceania can claim a team in the knockout phase.
Though they must be pleased (and rightly so), I don't think the Australians are ready to name stadiums or bestow honorary citizenship to Guus Hiddink yet. He deserves credit for getting Australia into the knockout phase, but I didn't understand his decision to play Kalac in goal today. Perhaps Schwarzer was hurt? Maybe Schwarzer was being disciplined? When Kalac's blunder gave Croatia the lead, Guus Hiddink looked like he was thinking about whether Korean Airlines flies directly to Russia. But, it seems, he and the team that he manages lead a charmed life. Kewell was clearly offside when he struck the second goal. As I mentioned elsewhere, missed calls are a part of soccer. Australia has now scored four goals in the last quarter hour of their three games. Given the way that Italy plays, the Socceroos might find themselves needing one of those last minute miracle comebacks.
He has now tied Gerd Müller's all-time scoring record, and he stands poised to pass all the great strikers who have graced the pitch during The World Cup. Brazilian manager, Parreira, deserves a lot of credit for properly gauging the Ronaldo pulse. With a few turns, a well placed header and a thunderous shot, Ronaldo announced his arrival in Germany. Robinho's presence has proven useful for Brazil, and he might displace Adriano in the starting lineup.
I'm sure Zico wished that Ronaldo had remained in abeyance. If Zico had asked Japan to begin in a defensive shell, he might have been called a hypocrite. How could he encourage Japan to emulate Brazilian football and then put every man behind the ball against Brazil? Japan should be credited for playing with Brazil in the early stages, and even taking the lead. After their goal, Zico seemed to realize that waking up a sleeping giant is a dangerous affair. While Japan started to sit back, waiting for a counter-attack, they faced a barrage of shots, near misses and, eventually, goals. Falling behind might have been the wake-up call that Brazil needed. It's amazing that they have a winning record in World Cup play when they concede the first goal.
Japan can't be happy to have the dubious distinction of leading, but ultimately losing two games, and remaining winless outside of Asia during World Cup play. Zico may be right in pushing Japanese players to be more creative and free-flowing, but they might have more to accomplish on the defensive side of the pitch. Maybe it's difficult to generate offense when you're back on your heels, but Brazil's opponents don't score many goals. For now, Japan has to be considered an Asian power, still waiting to make its big splash on the World stage.
There is an Asian team that's already made a splash on this World Cup stage. OK, I'm being premature. No, I'm not referring to South Korea, who may or may not qualify tomorrow. I'm referring to Australia's move into the Asian Confederation following the tournament. For now, Oceania can claim a team in the knockout phase.
Though they must be pleased (and rightly so), I don't think the Australians are ready to name stadiums or bestow honorary citizenship to Guus Hiddink yet. He deserves credit for getting Australia into the knockout phase, but I didn't understand his decision to play Kalac in goal today. Perhaps Schwarzer was hurt? Maybe Schwarzer was being disciplined? When Kalac's blunder gave Croatia the lead, Guus Hiddink looked like he was thinking about whether Korean Airlines flies directly to Russia. But, it seems, he and the team that he manages lead a charmed life. Kewell was clearly offside when he struck the second goal. As I mentioned elsewhere, missed calls are a part of soccer. Australia has now scored four goals in the last quarter hour of their three games. Given the way that Italy plays, the Socceroos might find themselves needing one of those last minute miracle comebacks.
Monday, June 12, 2006
Day Four
In Guns, Germs and Steel, Jared Diamond provides interesting evidence and arguments regarding the impact of geography on a matter no less important than the fate of civilizations. On a less important scale (well, at least to some people ;-) Australia's place on the globe has haunted them for World Cup qualification. As part of Oceania, they have been asked to win their region, and then meet the fifth place qualifier from South America in a playoff game. Until the 2006 World Cup, they had lost this playoff game. They have argued that a region winner should automatically qualify. Seems reasonable. But when one of the results from this region is Australia 31, American Samoa 0 (or was it 32-0? Apparently, the scorekeeper lost track of the score), one has to wonder about the relatively quality of the region. South Americans, of course, argued that Australia simply needed to beat their fifth place qualifier. It's my understanding that Australia will now qualify in Asia, ostensibly because they believe this arrangement will result in their qualification on a more regular basis. Is Australia seeking soccer justice? Or are they acting with a sense of entitlement?
This backdrop provided some interesting context for their match with Japan, a team coached by legendary Brazilian striker, Zico. On the other bench, Guus Hiddink hoped to continue his winning ways in The World Cup. Zico has encouraged Japanese players to be more creative, more confident, more free-flowing, more...Brazilian. Some Japanese players, including star Nakata, have questioned this approach. It would be great if more teams played like Brazil, but few teams can even come close to the talent level of Brazil. Hiddink, on the other hand, seems to manage to a team's strengths. When the Dutch complained about Australian rough play following a recent friendly, he declared that everyone should realize soccer is a man's game. This might resonate with the Socceroos, but I wonder what women's soccer teams thought of his comment.
So when the first goal came as a result of some pushing and shoving--and a really bad read by Australian keeper, Schwarzer--it seemed that if you live by physical play, you might die by physical play. It was especially odd because goalies often bowl over players in their efforts to reach the ball. If Schwarzer had aggressively punched the ball, and the Japanese player, I doubt the ref would have called a foul. Unfortunately, this referee didn't seem to follow a consistent pattern with calling fouls. He had too much of an impact on the game, which is always a problem for a referee.
For nearly the rest of the game, the Japanese looked to be in control, and the Australians looked increasingly frustrated. But things can change so quickly in soccer--especially with crafty intervention from a manager. The Japanese had their chances to put in another goal, without pushing and shoving, but they failed to do so. You have to admire Hiddink's willingness to throw caution to the wind with his substitutions. Soccer is also a game of adjustments. And with the three substitutions, two of whom who scored three goals in eight minutes, Hiddink showed everyone why his stock as a manager continues to soar.
Did the Australians prove that they belong in The World Cup? Yes. Did they prove that they are one of the premier teams? I think the jury is still out on that one.
At the other end of the managerial spectrum, Bruce Arena didn't make a lot of friends with his decisions before, during or after the ass kicking that the US experienced at the hands of the Czech Republic. I really wish that the US commentators, press, etc. would just stop making predictions or claims about the US team. When the US team faced no pressure or expectations in 1994 and 2002, they performed well. In 1998, with higher expectations, they collapsed. This team looked confused and befuddled; the Czechs outclassed them in every aspect of the game. Eddie Johnson showed that playing with energy can make a difference, but Arena's willingness to hang out to dry certain players is a curious choice. I know he's trying to get them pumped up. But he made the decision to play the 4-5-1, and to put DeMarcus Beasley on the right side--both moves that proved ineffective. During the game, he didn't do much of anything to get this team out of its funk. And, afterwards, he talked about how the players didn't rise to the occasion. They didn't. But is this the best approach as they prepare for the Italians? Does Arena bear any responsibility for what happened?
It's difficult for casual soccer fans in the US to understand that building soccer capacity takes time. The US could become one of the teams to watch on a regular basis, but almost certainly won't dominate the sport. It's not as if the US doesn't have the athletes--imagine if Deion Sanders had chosen to play soccer. But he didn't. He, like so many other athletes, played a sport with big money. As long as this remains true, the US will have to be content with being one of the good teams. It is the proverbial chicken and egg. It will probably take a World Cup victory for people in the US to really care (i.e., put up the $$$), but it takes $$$ to create the right conditions to win The World Cup. Did I just admit that soccer is actually about money? Speaking of money...
The Italian team is surrounded by controversy. A match fixing scandal has gripped the nation, and created massive distractions for the Azzuri. It didn't seem to matter. This team had a different feel than previous offerings from Italy. It's still strange not to see Paolo Maldini in the back line. And it was even stranger to see so many offensive options for the Italians. It's not as if the Italians haven't had their fare share of great strikers; it's just that they seem to feature them one at a time during The World Cup. Not so on this occasion. It was encouraging to see the Italians making sincere efforts to extend their 1-0 lead.
Ghana held its own for much of the match. Their bookends seem to be the concern. Their keeper, Kingston, actually had a good overall game, but he looked really lost on several corner kicks or crosses into the box. Their defense also looked shaky on several occasions. If Jan Koller recovers from his injury during the US game, imagine what he might do against Ghana. They also suffered from a lack of finishing or firepower from their forwards. On too many occasions, their midfield would admirably gain possession, move it through the Italian midfield only to take long shots, or pass to strikers who didn't complete the task. Nonetheless, it was their first World Cup game, and they certainly shouldn't feel embarrassed by their effort. They lost to a very good Italian team.
It's worth noting that the second place team from this group will face the winner from Group F in the second round. That would be the group with Brazil.
This backdrop provided some interesting context for their match with Japan, a team coached by legendary Brazilian striker, Zico. On the other bench, Guus Hiddink hoped to continue his winning ways in The World Cup. Zico has encouraged Japanese players to be more creative, more confident, more free-flowing, more...Brazilian. Some Japanese players, including star Nakata, have questioned this approach. It would be great if more teams played like Brazil, but few teams can even come close to the talent level of Brazil. Hiddink, on the other hand, seems to manage to a team's strengths. When the Dutch complained about Australian rough play following a recent friendly, he declared that everyone should realize soccer is a man's game. This might resonate with the Socceroos, but I wonder what women's soccer teams thought of his comment.
So when the first goal came as a result of some pushing and shoving--and a really bad read by Australian keeper, Schwarzer--it seemed that if you live by physical play, you might die by physical play. It was especially odd because goalies often bowl over players in their efforts to reach the ball. If Schwarzer had aggressively punched the ball, and the Japanese player, I doubt the ref would have called a foul. Unfortunately, this referee didn't seem to follow a consistent pattern with calling fouls. He had too much of an impact on the game, which is always a problem for a referee.
For nearly the rest of the game, the Japanese looked to be in control, and the Australians looked increasingly frustrated. But things can change so quickly in soccer--especially with crafty intervention from a manager. The Japanese had their chances to put in another goal, without pushing and shoving, but they failed to do so. You have to admire Hiddink's willingness to throw caution to the wind with his substitutions. Soccer is also a game of adjustments. And with the three substitutions, two of whom who scored three goals in eight minutes, Hiddink showed everyone why his stock as a manager continues to soar.
Did the Australians prove that they belong in The World Cup? Yes. Did they prove that they are one of the premier teams? I think the jury is still out on that one.
At the other end of the managerial spectrum, Bruce Arena didn't make a lot of friends with his decisions before, during or after the ass kicking that the US experienced at the hands of the Czech Republic. I really wish that the US commentators, press, etc. would just stop making predictions or claims about the US team. When the US team faced no pressure or expectations in 1994 and 2002, they performed well. In 1998, with higher expectations, they collapsed. This team looked confused and befuddled; the Czechs outclassed them in every aspect of the game. Eddie Johnson showed that playing with energy can make a difference, but Arena's willingness to hang out to dry certain players is a curious choice. I know he's trying to get them pumped up. But he made the decision to play the 4-5-1, and to put DeMarcus Beasley on the right side--both moves that proved ineffective. During the game, he didn't do much of anything to get this team out of its funk. And, afterwards, he talked about how the players didn't rise to the occasion. They didn't. But is this the best approach as they prepare for the Italians? Does Arena bear any responsibility for what happened?
It's difficult for casual soccer fans in the US to understand that building soccer capacity takes time. The US could become one of the teams to watch on a regular basis, but almost certainly won't dominate the sport. It's not as if the US doesn't have the athletes--imagine if Deion Sanders had chosen to play soccer. But he didn't. He, like so many other athletes, played a sport with big money. As long as this remains true, the US will have to be content with being one of the good teams. It is the proverbial chicken and egg. It will probably take a World Cup victory for people in the US to really care (i.e., put up the $$$), but it takes $$$ to create the right conditions to win The World Cup. Did I just admit that soccer is actually about money? Speaking of money...
The Italian team is surrounded by controversy. A match fixing scandal has gripped the nation, and created massive distractions for the Azzuri. It didn't seem to matter. This team had a different feel than previous offerings from Italy. It's still strange not to see Paolo Maldini in the back line. And it was even stranger to see so many offensive options for the Italians. It's not as if the Italians haven't had their fare share of great strikers; it's just that they seem to feature them one at a time during The World Cup. Not so on this occasion. It was encouraging to see the Italians making sincere efforts to extend their 1-0 lead.
Ghana held its own for much of the match. Their bookends seem to be the concern. Their keeper, Kingston, actually had a good overall game, but he looked really lost on several corner kicks or crosses into the box. Their defense also looked shaky on several occasions. If Jan Koller recovers from his injury during the US game, imagine what he might do against Ghana. They also suffered from a lack of finishing or firepower from their forwards. On too many occasions, their midfield would admirably gain possession, move it through the Italian midfield only to take long shots, or pass to strikers who didn't complete the task. Nonetheless, it was their first World Cup game, and they certainly shouldn't feel embarrassed by their effort. They lost to a very good Italian team.
It's worth noting that the second place team from this group will face the winner from Group F in the second round. That would be the group with Brazil.
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)
