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.

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.

Group B Finales

It was good to see both England and Sweden show up today. Both teams played to win--perhaps knowing that Germany awaits the second place team had an impact. Perhaps England just wanted to build up some momentum, and Sweden wanted to find the offense that helped them qualify for The World Cup. Joe Cole had a great game for England, with the best individual goal so far, and a great pass to set up Gerrard's goal. It's unfortunate to see Michael Owen helped off the field, well before he had much of a chance to get going. ESPN commentator Marcelo Balboa wondered why Sweden didn't press its one man advantage while Owen was getting treatment. As one of my wise soccer buddies mentioned during the game, maybe the Swedes did the sporting thing and let England deal with Owen, bring in Crouch and restore the balance. No team should be criticized for not taking advantage of an injured player. If Owen is hurt badly, and Rooney needs more time to get fit, are we going to see Theo Walcott? How many players get their first national cap before they even play for the club team?

I wasn't terribly impressed by Paul Robinson's performance. He seemed confused and indecisive at times, especially during Sweden's second goal. Why didn't he come off his line and grab the ball? Of course, the backup is David James, who's had some rather interesting moments as England's keeper. Both teams looked better, but neither still looks like they could challenge the top teams that are already clicking.

Trinidad and Tobago's dream ends. It was great to see their fans celebrating, even when their team was behind. They did not suffer from expectation escalation. No team wants to leave with zero points, and Paraguay was no exception. Brent Sancho looked devastated with his own goal. Let's hope he doesn't forget his heroic performance against Sweden, and dwell on this one unfortunate moment. I was surprised that Beenhakker played Kelvin Jack in goal, but he probably wanted Jack to get his World Cup opportunity. I don't think it would have mattered if Hislop had played instead, and Hislop has his World Cup memories. It seemed that both managers wanted to give some players recognition and a chance to play on the World stage. Both teams can leave with a sense of pride and accomplishment, and for ending their World Cup experience with an energetic performance.

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 :-)

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.

Day Two

The English are the Brazilians of Europe. What's that, you say? What about Spain (maybe not in The World Cup), the French, the Netherlands, or the Czech Republic. The Netherlands v. Czech Republic game in Euro2004 was a clinic on beautiful soccer. Well, the English have their share of elegant play. But what I'm really referring to is the fan and press reaction to the English team. It seems that unless they play elegantly and win The World Cup, their fans will be disappointed.

There was 1966. Geoff Hurst, the hat trick, the goal that did or did not cross the line. What English fans may not be willing to acknowledge is that if you take away the 1966 World Cup, England's World Cup record is equalled, even surpassed by other countries who have yet to win the Cup. You can't minimize the importance of winning the Cup; only seven nations have managed it. But, for a moment, imagine that Pele hadn't been hacked out of the 1966 tournament...The English team in 1986 and 1990 was one of their best. If Maradona hadn't inspired the Argentinians in 1986 and had a hand in their victory over England (sorry, I couldn't resist), England would have made the semi-finals. 1990 was the only other occasion when England made it to the semis or finals. This team featured many great players, but I always thought that Gary Lineker didn't get enough recognition.

Beyond these tournaments, the English have not particularly excelled in The World Cup. Yet, each time when The World Cup comes around, we hear about how the English are one of the tournament favorites (at least in the US). In 2006, they certainly have a great midfield and potent strikers (especially if Rooney is ready to play). But they also have a bad habit of playing down to their opponents. Perhaps it is part of Sven Goran Ericsson's strategy to slow down, conserve energy, and contain the game. But an own goal off a Beckham free kick hardly represents a powerful offensive display. And Paraguay had a few chances. If only one of them bounced the right way (or wrong way depending on your perspective), it would have been a disaster for England. Rooney not only provides considerable talent, but he also brings a certain passion and fire to the team. He doesn't want to win 1-0. He wants to score goals. Perhaps more than anything, he'll bring intensity, throughout the entire game, that might elevate England to the top. Assuming he's fit.

Of course, the result from the second game in Group B must have come as welcome news to England, and Trinidad and Tobago, given 2000-1 odds of winning the Cup. Even their manager guaranteed that they would not win The World Cup. Sweden has world class players and loads of experience. Trinidad and Tobago is the smallest nation to qualify for The World Cup. Then their first choice goalkeeper injures himself during the warm-ups (for the first thirteen minutes, the commentators kept referring to Kelvin Jack, instead of Shaka Hislop). During the second half, they are reduced to ten men. Surely, Sweden would win easily. This, my friends, is why they play the game.

Thirty-four year old Dwight Yorke came out of retirement to join Trinidad and Tobago. And I'm sure they are glad he did so. Shaka Hislop is thirty-seven years old; he had the energy of a twenty-year old. Brent Sacho, plays for a third division English club, but he played like a premier Italian defender. They, along with their teammates, stood very tall on this day. If you've ever played sports, at any level, you might know those rare convergences of being "in the zone" or rising above your natural talents. To watch an entire team, even one man down, an entire nation ride this wave of energy, inspiration, even magic, is really something. I'll be the first to admit that many 0-0 soccer games are dour, dull affairs. But this game showed that a 0-0 game can feature plenty of entertainment and suspense.

In 2002, when Belarus defeated Sweden in Olympic ice hockey, Swedish newspapers declared it the greatest upset in Swedish sports history. If Trinidad and Tobago had somehow beaten Sweden (and they hit the crossbar at one point!), I suspect this one would have been even bigger. I know, I know, hockey is king in Sweden, but still...

For 90 minutes, Trinidad and Tobago became everyone's favorite soccer team--except for the Swedes, of course. But they deserve a great deal of credit for how they handled this game. Ljungberg showed frustration in the final minutes, but who could blame him. At the end of the game, the Swedes shook hands, swapped jerseys and showed their respect. They knew they were on the short end of this moment, but they seemed to acknowledge (albeit begrudgingly) their role in creating World Cup lore.

After Belarus defeated Sweden in Olympic hockey, they came back down to reality. Even the Belarus goalie who seemed impenetrable against Sweden, looked very average in the next game. Jon Davidson, one of the hockey commentators, said that he hoped everyone remembered Belarus' goalie as he was during the game with Sweden. Shaka Hislop may come back down to earth as well but, on this day, he was king.

During ESPN's post-game show, Eric Wynalda said that Argentina was the best team we've seen so far. I agree. Argentina displayed creativity on offense, and enough discipline on defense to beat a talented Ivory Coast team. They "choked" the game without turning it into a sloppy, boring affair. I have to admit that I wondered about how Riquelme's deliberate style would fit within the Argentinian scheme. So I have to admit that I was very wrong. He had a role in both goals, and his pass to Saviola for the second goal was pure genius. Saviola's deft touch must have made Argentinian fans feel better about the striking duo with Crespo.

Ivory Coast had its moments, and if they had scored first, the game would have been very different indeed. The defender who was marking Crespo simply froze on the first goal. They also didn't manage to find the "optimal" play with the referee, who I believe missed several calls. Drogba was pushed in the box, but perhaps his (undeserved?) reputation as a diver cost him. Argentina kept Droga off balance throughout the game--literally. While the ref should have kept a better handle on this, the Argentinians did manage to take full advantage without crossing the line (or was that the first "goal" of the game that I'm referring to)? Ivory Coast probably could have pushed, nudged, even fouled Riquelme more than they did. The Netherlands and Serbia and Montenegro (I think it's still OK to refer to them in this manner) will almost certainly close him down more quickly. And they should. He wears no. 10, and while he's not Maradona, he certainly has exceptional vision and skills.

Drogba showed why he can be so dangerous with their goal, after the Ivory Coast seemed to wake up with about twenty-five minutes left in the game. If they can tighten up the defense and play with intensity throughout the match, I still think they can advance to the next round. In groups of death, it's possible for each team to end with four points in the round robin beating that each team will face. Goal differential and goals scored will be important.

Perhaps the novelty and pressure of being in The World Cup for the first time was too much for the Ivory Coast. Maybe they could have watched the Trinidad and Tobago game for inspiration :-)