Just to Sum Up

Bad, Bad, BAD sports day for Pooh.

I should have known it wouldn't end well after getting up too damn early for this gut-punch. Then Tyge snarfs the fresh pumpkin bread (leaving little pumpkin boogers in his beard for moster of the day, and then...ugh and ugh...

Take Your Pick...

Two entires in the "why I love soccer" notebook...

Matty Taylor:


[Update: Deadspin reminds me that since Taylor has done this before, it's definitely not a fluke:


As I'm sure they're still singing in Portsmouth, Taylor For England!]

Or Michael Essien:

Sorry about the poor quality, when a better one goes up on YouTube, I'll snag it.

(Also sorry, Tim. I along with half of Manchester was hoping that Arsenal would hold on...I would have settled for a draw before a ball was kicked and certainly will live with it considering that shelling Lehman's goal took over the last 10+ minutes.)

Victory Is Mine

Your 'Do You Want the Terrorists to Win' Score: 100%

You are a terrorist-loving, Bush-bashing, "blame America first"-crowd traitor. You are in league with evil-doers who hate our freedoms. By all counts you are a liberal, and as such cleary desire the terrorists to succeed and impose their harsh theocratic restrictions on us all. You are fit to be hung for treason! Luckily George Bush is tapping your internet connection and is now aware of your thought-crime. Have a nice day.... in Guantanamo!

Do You Want the Terrorists to Win?
Quiz Created on GoToQuiz

(via Yglesias, amongst others.)

In a completely unrelated note, can I get a Sheik, What? from my KFAN homies out there?

Program Director, Yasay?

Bookblogging Update and Quick Hits

Well, I'm at 39, just finished Sully's, will get to that sometime this wkkend. Since I'm hopelessly behind in blogging the quest for 50 in 52, I might have to cheat a little and give some quick hits.

#25 - Ghengis Khan and the Making of the Modern World by Jack Weatherford: I can save a ton of time here by simply saying 'What Angelica Said.' The main thing I took away from the book is how ruthlessly utilitarian the more famous of the Khans (Genghis and Kubilai) were. They get a bad rap for being cruel and all that, but the time period, they weren't so bad. Ok, if you were an enemy soldier, they killed you, but there wasn't nearly the wholesale slaughter, rape and pillage which seems to be a staple of other 'civilizational' contests.

#26 - A History of the World in 6 Glasses by Tom Standage: Like Salt, but with liquor instead. Since I like drinking more than I like cooking...

#27 - How Soccer Explains the World by Franklin Foer: Think of P.J. O'Rourke doing his "everything is crap" routine, but instead of warzones, soccer clubs. Really would have been better titled "How Soccer Reflects the World," but that's a minor quibble for a very readable book.

#28 - Brilliant Orange: The Neurotic Genius of Dutch Football by David Winner: Quite possibly the best book I've read this year. Wide ranging discussion of Dutch culture, ingenuity, individualism, racial integration and the 'style vs. substance' debate, seen through the prism of Dutch soccer. The Dutch are, with reason, often known as 'the Brazilians of Europe' for their stylishly attacking football. At least prior to this World Cup's much less extravagant side, they were. But there are particular psychological, perhaps even psychiatric reasons why they never seem to come good in the end. Fascinating read.

#29 - 31 - The Mind of Bill James by Scott Gray; Triumph and Tragedy in Mudville by Stephen Jay Gould; Fantasyland by Sam Walker; 3 baseball books, which I'll cover at TWT sometime soon.

More to come sometime this weekend...

Road Rash

Jumping off any bandwagon, even one moving very slowly is going to leave a mark. I guess the best part of gone for the weekend was that I missed all but one inning (of course it had to be that inning. Bad times...)

So 'dead to me' blahbitty blah, go Twins, etc. At least it's football season. By which I mean the game in which an actual cirucular ball is manipulated by, you know, feet. Glory Glory Man United...

Life Goal Achieved

Like about 4,000 others, I responded to Bill Simmons's request for help in picking an English soccer team to support. Well, he's made his choice (h/t anon (sign your comments, please kids...)), and it's Spurs, as I advised. Not only that, but he quotes me:

1. TOTTENHAM HOTSPUR
American Comparison: As one reader explains, "If the Dodgers had stayed in Brooklyn, they'd be the Spurs."

Twice!

[Blah blah blah. Read all of what I said here]

--Seth, Anchorage, Alaska

I think it's a mark of a weakness in my character that I'm this excited about being Sports Guy approved. I'm such a tool.

Right Book at the Wrong Time - "The Miracle of Castel Di Sangro" (Bookblogging #13)

[N]ot all fairytales have happy endings. Just like not all miracles last forever
- Joe McGinnis, last line of "The Miracle of Castel Di Sangro"

In response to a long ago recomendation from Bill, and to quell my post-World Cup soccer detox shakes, I finally picked up "The Miracle of Castel di Sangro" by Joe McGinnis...and didn't really put it down until I was finished. First of all I very much enjoy the "Season Inside" sports book. Second, soccer, probably better than any team sport, lends itself to intriguing dramatic arcs over the course of a season - part of that is related to the 'squad system', 11 play, the rest largely do not. A much starker contrast to someone's minutes going up or down. Second, the game itself is almost inherently irreducable to simple statistics or a book score. Each match is its own novella in many ways, with heros, villains and themes emerging endogenously.

But those structural factors don't capture the maginificence of this story - it is the perfect example of the cliche about the movie no one would make, because it is too unbelievable. A team from a backwater town of 5,000 in a region of Italy that seems analagous to darkest West Virginia rises to the second level of Italian football, the Serie B - imagine Juneau, Alaska playing ACC Basketball. McGinnis, having caught the madness that is soccer fandom during the 1994 World Cup in the USA, decides to move to Castel di Sangro for the entirety of the teams first season following promotion from Serie C1 to Serie B. Speaking not a word of Italian, and having never been off the beaten Milan/Rome/Venice tourist trail he is welcomed with varying degrees of openess by the town, the team and management. (As for the last group, suffice it to say that describing one as involved in the scare-quoted "construction business" means much the same thing in the Abruzzo region of Italy as it would in say northern New Jersey.)

What unfolds is an almost magical tale as McGinnis becomes something of a team mascot (the scritorre Americano brings good luck, according to the players), and the team becomes something of a family. All sports teams are 'families' to some degree - some more functional than others - but in Castel di Sangro, McGinnis discovers a group which lives up to the very best connatations of the word.

Along the way, American directness co-exists (and often collides) with what might be stereotypically be termed Italian subtlety and cunning (one of the players reminds the author that Italy is not only the birthplace of Dante, but of Machievelli as well.) The results range from the humorous to the tragic - and the final reversal is as incongrous and jarring as was the capstone to Zidane's glittering career. Il Calcio has a way of reminding us that reality trumps romance all too often.

Though when I finished, I was once again feeling Just Not Right, I can't recomend this book highly enough.

Because He Asked (Simmons and Soccer)

In today's ESPN chat, Sports Guy has this:

Joe (Philly): I loved the world cup, and am thinking about continuing to follow soccer through the English Premier League. How can I pick a team to root for and remain a somewhat-principled sports' fan when I know nothing about England?

Bill Simmons: Intriguing question, I have been wondering the same thing. I was thinking about just picking the team that Michael Davies hates the most, just for comedy's sake, but that's too easy. if anyone wants to make the case for an English premier team for me, email me. I might make the leap. Soccer's growing on me, you don't have to pay attention, it's easy to follow, no sideline reporters, no commercials, no annoying announcers, the crowds are fantastic ... there's a lot to like.

WELL...since I'm in a soccer talking mood anyway, let me give the breakdown.

I'm assuming a few ground rules:

1. The team can't be awful - some chance to win something (if not the league than a chance at Europe or a good cup run) - though the threat of 'the drop' adds something to the bottom of the table battles, if your team is relegated it is simply impossible to really follow them from the states, meaning you have to start over. Which defeats the purpose of, you know, picking a team.

2. The team must play an entertaining style - because dour, defensive, negative, 'park the team bus in front of goal' soccer can be excrutiatingly boring. Which is why the Italian league is the worst league for a neophyte to watch at first - you thought the national team is a bunch of cheating divers, wait til you see the guys just a cut below. They make Bruce Bowen look like a goody-two-shoes.

3. The team cannot be 'the Yankees' - because who roots for the house in blackjack? (And to the guy who kept betting 'don't come' last time I was playing craps in Vegas - screw you, jackass.)

So, with those rules in mind, from top to bottom:

Chelsea - Total Yankee frontrunner pick. Plus, despite having a hugely talented squad, they play as if their coach, Mourinho is auditioning for Serie A. Which he might be, come to think of it. How a team with a midfield of Robben, Essien, Lampard, Maniche and now Michael Ballack can play boring soccer is beyond me. Definite nix.

Manchester United - Full disclosure, this is my team. When I first really got into soccer, they seemed to have the most going on, from a high-pressure, almost frenetic style; to a wildly entertaining Scottish manager (Sir Alex has mellowed, a bit, in recent years, but he still gets all red-faced and splotchy from time to time;) to the personal redemption story of Daivd Beckham post World Cup '98. And there was the little thing of the Treble that first year with sensational comeback wins over Juventus and Bayern Munich in the Champions League and the unfathomably good FA CUP Semi-Final replay vs. Arsenal: Down a man, giving up a penalty near the end of regulation, Schmeichel saves from Bergkamp (who IIRC never took another penalty. Ever...) and Giggs scores that goal, the best I've ever seen...


(Not the best video, better is at the 3:54 mark and onward here.)

But, more objectively, big strike against due to their partnership with the actual Yankees. However, though they are definitely a 'big market' team, they are far from profligate spenders, indeed they have declined a bit in recent years as they have not really replaced Beckham or especially Keane, and the suspicion is that the young players brought up from the youth team aren't quite championship quality. They are still challengers both for the league, and in Europe. Still good to watch as well, with Rooney and Ronaldo (assuming he stays) as well as the short fuses of Alan Smith and Gabriel Heinze. In the end though, for a new fan, picking Man U. is a little too close to being a front runner. Though I came by it honestly and naively, probably not the pick.

Reading, Sheffield United, Watford - Three promoted sides, almost assuredly battling just to survive - very rarely do these kind of teams even endeavor to entertain in their first season. Wigan's performance last year was something of an abberation. However, Reading does have an American, Bobby Convey on their roster, but I think all three squads fail both the first and second test.

Aston Villa, Blackburn, Bolton, Charlton Athletic, Portsmouth, West Ham: Zzzzzzz. Some of these teams will finish well, make decent cup runs, threaten European qualification. Some will flirt with relegation and suffer embarassing losses to lower division sides in the cup competitions. None of them will be particularly compelling to watch on a week to week basis. Bolton and Portsmouth have...colorful management which could add an extra bit of spice. West Ham is likely to be the most entertaining of this lot.

Everton, Fulham, Manchester City: Similar to the previous teams, though they might be easier to follow due to American involvement (Tim Howard if he wins the starting GK job at Everton; McBride and Bocanegra at Fulham; Reyna at Man City) Everton and Man City are managed by a fiery (ginger-haired, no less) Scot and a ex-player named "Psycho" respectively. Still not a lot of consistent entertainment, unless Chelsea loan Shawn Wright-Phillips back to Man City, where he was probably worth the price of admission by himself two seasons ago.

Newcastle, Middlesbrough: Probably a step above the last two groups in terms of quality of play and expectations, though Newcastle may struggle to score with Alan Shearer retired and Michael Owen injured for a good portion of the season. If the rumored Oguchi Onyewu deal goes through, Boro will also have U.S. ties. Best analogy would be Cleveland Browns (pre Ravens) fandom - decent teams, rabid supporters in a somewhat provincial environment.

Wigan: Last season's cinderella story - played very nice football for the first half of the season, I'm skeptical as to their ability to sustain, probably not a good pick for a new fan due to the high probability of sucking in a particularly crushing manner.

Which leaves three real candidates:

Arsenal: As a Man U. fan, I have to hate these guys. That said, there is no doubt that they consistently play the best attacking soccer in the league. Henry is an absolute genius in the red shirt, and other World Cup stars such as Spain's Fabregas and Reyes; Sweden's Ljunberg; Holland's Van Persie and the, at times, electric Adebayor of Togo provide plenty of entertainment value. Threat to win the league every year, Champions League runners-up a year ago. Definite 'big market' team, but more the Mets than the Yankees (especially with Chelsea next door) - a fully acceptable choice, if you can handle being called a Gooner (or worse, by me). Also, not too far removed from "boring, boring Arsenal." Just saying.

Liverpool: Steven Gerard, Steven Gerard, Steven Gerard. Saw his best only in flashes in the World Cup, but in the Premier League can completely dominate for weeks on end. And the supporting cast isn't terrible either (Xabi Alonso, Momo Sissoko, Luis Garcia, Harry Kewell.) Rich history, great set of fans, two always dramatic 'derby' matches with Everton every season. The problem here is the (over)reliance on Gerard - if he's hurt (as he tends to be from time to time) they can be unwatchable. If you can stand rooting for the Cavs, you can go for the 'Pool. Best baseball analogy is Cinicinnati - dominant in the late 70's (and early 80s), not much since.

However, this leads us to rule #4 for Yankee soccer love, which is a strong preference for London-based clubs just so it's easier to, you know, go and actually see your team, which leaves only one winner:

Tottenham Hotspur: If the Dodgers had stayed in Brooklyn, they'd be Spurs. A team that almost always promises more than they deliver, partly because their fans not only want to win, they want to win in style. Through the years, the style has been much more reliable than the results, though they just missed out on the 4th Champions League spot last term. A young, energetic and exciting squad, an attack-minded coach, and that particular fanbase make them the best bet for a combination of results and flair if one is going to not jump on the "Big 3" bandwagon.

No Shame

All class:

Marco Materazzi's agent believes a reunion between the Italy defender and Zinedine Zidane would make a 'nice moment'. . . Claudio Vigorelli, Materazzi's agent, told BBC Radio Five Live: 'At the end of the day it is a thing between Zidane and Materazzi. My personal wish would be that one day they could meet again and maybe make a nice moment.'

Interesting to see what happens if Inter Milan plays a French team in the Champions League this season...

Actual, if belated, class looks something like this, however:

'I reacted badly and I would like to apologise for it,' Zidane told Canal Plus. 'I would like to apologise because a lot of children were watching the match. I do apologise but I don't regret my behaviour because regretting it would mean he was right to say what he said. . .'

'Then he said very harsh words to me and repeated them several times. I left but then I went back towards him and things went very fast. The words he said concerned my mother and sister.

'I heard them once, then twice, and the third time I couldn't control myself. I am a man and some words are harder to hear than actions. I would have rather been knocked down than hear that.'

'Afterwards I explained to the referee that I had been provoked, but my behaviour is not forgivable,' Zidane said.

I wasn't quite right when I said I couldn't think of anything similar - the obvious Eric Cantona kung fu incident is remarkably similar in terms of sheer WTF?-ness, though I think there is tiny difference in degree between a league game at Crytsal Palace and the World Cup Final. But that's just me.

In any event, that got me thinking about the certain symmetry involved - Zidane only became the fulcrum of the French national team after Cantona was suspended for 9 months following the above incident. Does the baton now pass to the mercurial Ribery?

With Apologies

...to Sebby (and yes, an Ultimate opponent went slightly Zidane on me before it was cool to Zidane...), and inspired by 'Pick's suggestion that blogging is really the deaf shouting at the deaf....

How do you sell a duck to a nearly deaf guy?

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

"DO YOU WANNA BUY A DUCK?"

(try it in a crowded bar/restaraunt sometime - it's almost cartoon-like the way everything stops and silences...)

WC - Last One, Really.

I don't think my previous post really captured the essence of my feelings post L'affaire Zidane. While the 15-year old boy inside of me, taking a break from Double Dragon, agrees in part with those who say there was something sort of . . . totally awesome about it, I've felt Just Not Right since the incident.

Even now, more than 24 hours on, the incomprehensibility of the occurence is jarring in a tritonic, broken-guitar-string, fingernails on blackboards, baby on an airplane kind of way. I've probably absorbed the Big Game cliche a bit too much from American sports movies - so my dismay over the French loss is understandable. However, even had he (and France) lost, the glory was more in the journey - the killer goal vs. Spain, the roulette spin away from Gilberto Silva vs. Brazil. Is that gone now?

I can't adequately put into words the heaviness such a harsh and unromantic conclusion brings to me. Thankfully, others have not been so inhibited, and I urge you to peruse both Alex Hemon and especially Steve Teles:

ll I can say is that, watching this replayed over and over again on television, I felt sick. Part of this was moral revulsion at the foul, which was wholly beyond the pale. But also, something else. I felt a sense of aching sympathy for Zidane. I am sure that at the moment that he drew his head back from Materrazi’s chest, he realized what he had done, not only to his team, but to his own legend. Every beautiful shot on goal, every gorgeous pass, every elegant weaving down the pitch, was suddenly sullied. No one could remember these moments and simply smile, remembering that he had seen one of the greatest men ever to grace the world’s greatest game. Now, every time one thought of Zidane, that horrible, senseless attack would be the first thing that came to mind. Zidane had done to himself what no other man on the pitch could do to him—transform him from hero to villain. I’m sure that, as he walked, deflated down into the locker room, he realized what he had done. He was brought down not by something outside himself, but by a defect of character that lurked within.

Football is, in and of itself, meaningless, a remarkably silly thing for grown men and women to spend so much time occupying themselves with. What transforms it, what makes it something much more, is narrative interwoven with morality. We watch soccer not just for the beauty of the sport, although beauty there certainly is. We also watch it because of the moral drama that is played out among twenty-two men. Today, in Germany and across the world, we saw possibly the saddest such drama that any of us will have the bad fortune to witness. I do not envy Zizou’s effort to find sleep tonight, or in the nights to come.

I had trouble sleeping last night over incident, I can't imagine his struggles.

How does one recover from this? Especially one with no more games to play? When Beckham was disgraced following his kick to the calf of Diego Simeone in '98, he turned his shame and the his country's ire into 2+ seasons of dazzling, artistic, passionate play - he was able to redeem himself so completely that he is the most (or, at worst, 1A) recognizable athlete in the world today.

What happens now to Zidane? Famously shy, is there any way that he does not destroy himself with regrets? Aeschylus would be proud to have written such a tale.

Update: An explanation?:

BBC just had on an Italian lip-reader. Apparently Materazzi told Zidane that he wished “an ugly death for you and your family”. BBC also said that Zidane found out yesterday that his mother is seriously ill.

Vile, if true. (Assuming also that Materazzi knew about his mother - it may have just been a standard 'yo mama' line that had extra poignance under the circumstances. But this is all simply unvarnished speculation...)

Update II: Or maybe...:

After an exhaustive study of the match video, and with the help of an Italian translator, Rees claimed that Materazzi called Zidane “the son of a terrorist whore” before adding “so just f*** off” for good measure, supporting the natural assumption that the Frenchman must have been grievously insulted.

Hrm. See also the end of the article for a timeline of Zizous indiscretions - a choirboy he was not.

Zidane, Italy and the Rest (World Cup Wrap)

First of all, methinks Marco Materazzi doth protest too much:

It is absolutely not true, I did not call him a terrorist. I'm ignorant. I don't even know what the word means.

Laying it on a little thick, there, Marco. (See here for his 'greatest hits')

That said, Zidane's red card was obviously warranted, completely shocking and fully absurd, no matter what MM said. Zizou played on Italy for five years, for crissake, one would think he was familiar with what some call 'the dark arts of defending.'

I'm still a bit stunned by the whole thing, of course. I had bought in to the fairytale aspect as much as anyone and this was a cold, hard shot of reality. My sporting idealism trumped by the realpolitik for which the Italians are justly famous. (Not meant as disparagement.) My hope is that Zidane will be better remembered for his play in 1998 and 2000 and vs. Spain and especially Brazil in this tournament, but its tough to say - as far as I can tell, there is simply no precedent in sports for this denoument. The closest I can think of is Raffy Palmeiro slinking off in disgrace during the 2005 baseball season following his steroid suspension. And even that is orders of magnitude away.

As for the game, well played to Italy - they were the better team by a bit in the first half, deserving at least a one goal lead. France's penalty was soft, though others have pointed out that between Malouda's two tumbles in the box, he probably deserved to be awarded one spot-kick, so it balanced out. In the second half and extra time, Italy inexplicably returned to dour form, and though they defended with aplomb (Cannavaro and Zambrotta being typically excellent. Speaking of Cannavaro...good work again, FIFA. Is there anything they can't screw up?) the attacking gusto which characterized much of their play was gone.

And I still hate him for his dive vs. Australia, but Fabio Grosso deserves some recogniztion for exceptional clutchness. He didn't even come into the team until Zaccardo was banished for scoring in his own net vs. the US, and since that time, he and Zambrotta have bombed forward like Roberto Carlos and Cafu when they where simply footballers, rather than advertising billboards. Drawing a game winning penalty? check. Scoring a fantastic winner to break the hosts' hearts? check. World Cup winning penlaty? You betcha. Well done, sir.

Final thoughts on the cup? I think the play on the field was not always indicated on the scoreboard. Though few goals were scored, I think that has more to do with poor finishing than overly negative play - only Ukraine - Switzerland and Ukraine - Tunisia really come to mind as poor games (Well, England - Paraguay and England - Ecuador as well, I suppose...) Of the teams that made the knockout phase, there were only 3 or 4 strikers who really had notable cups - Klose and Podolski for Ze Germans, Torres for Spain (Sir Alex, if we have to sell Ronaldo, can we please, please acquire him?) and perhaps Henry. Indeed, some of the more impressive strikers did not make it out of group play: Adebayor and Kader from Togo; Drogba from Cote d'Ivoire; Chun Soo Lee from Korea; Prso of Croatia.

Obviously, too many cards and too much diving, which I think are related. For the American announcers, let's put it this way, during the final there was a crying baby in the bar. And she was both more pleasant on the ears and provided greater insight into the game than did LemonCello Balboa. She sold it well...

As for a positive, it was nice to see aggressive coaching rewarded and timidity punished - England and Brazil, too cowardly to change up a failing system? See ya. Germany and Italy, no longer dour and defensive, finish 1st and 3rd.

And now, back to my life...Update: Or not quite yet...

WC XI

Since it's that time of the tourney (and FIFA's is pretty good as well, aside from the inclusion of both Totti and Toni and the omission of Torres, Miguel, and perhaps Essien or Appiah. Good spot to name Ze Roberto as the pick of the ultimately disappointing Brazillians.)

Here's mine, going with the en vogue 4-5-1:

GK: Buffon. Splendid, all tourney. No real question. Lehman and Ricardo runners up.

LB: Phillip Lahm - From the first game, Germany's best player. Somewhat quieter in the semi, but he and Zambrotta largely cancelled each other out. (Runner up J.P. Sorin)

CB: Fabio Cannavaro, Rafael Marquez. Cannavaro has been transcendant, and will command a huge fee if Juventus is forced to sell him if they are relegated in the match-fixing scandal. Marquez was solid in defense, good on the ball, and very dangerous when moving into a more advanced position. (Backups: Rio Ferdinand, Lilian Thuram.)

RB: Close one here, but Gianlucca Zambrotta is my pick. Energetic, and skillful. For me, he was the best player on the field in the Australia game and hasn't really looked back. Went a long way to muting Lahm in the semi. Close second is Portugal's Miguel.

LM: Cristiano Ronaldo: Yes he's a diver, but was there a more terrifying player with the ball at his feet all tourney? Plus, was anyone cooler from the penalty spot? (Runner up: Joe Cole)

DM: Gattuso. Dead f'ing hard. I tend to like guys who are willing to both dish it out, and take it, and Reno is one. I hope this is a non-denial denial sort of thing.

CM: Zidane. Duh. Just, duh. #2 is Riquelme, the closest thing out there. (Midfield runners up: Hargreaves, Viera, either Essien or Appiah.)

RM: Maxi Rodriguez. Even aside from the goal of the tourney to beat Mexico, driving, physical, menacing force for the Argentines throughout. (Backup: Ribbery)

CF: Miroslav Klose. The model of the modern centerforward. Strong, fast, good in the air, good at holding the ball, good vision and passing, predatory finishing. Not a great tournament for centerforward play all around, but Torres and Henry were the pick of the rest.

PS: I agree with Al, the announcers, Balboa aside haven't been that bad. Tommy Smyth was even bordering on acceptable. And this is spot on:

Back to the Americans: I will not defend O'Brien's partner Marcelo Balboa, except tonsorially. He's a classic example of what Howard Cosell called the "jockocracy"—hired because he played the sport and can (occasionally) form complete sentences. Unless he wears his shin guards while calling the game, his experience as a player is worthless. John Harkes, though, has stood out. The former U.S. National Team stalwart has a discerning eye for the players, knows where they ply their club trade, and has been properly aggrieved at the relentless diving and thuggery on display. Harkes and JP Dellacamera, a veteran of ESPN soccercasts who knows the game and doesn't feel the need to talk for the sake of talking, probably should have been the lead team. The network's studio work has also been surprisingly strong. Eric Wynalda, who's never been afraid to voice strong opinions, is staging a breakout performance. If only there was somewhere for him to break to, post-Germany.

It would be nice if international soccer was to become more accesible to the American fan. Fox Sports World Soccer Channel is still something of a backwater, lacking in any consistent analysis aside from the excellent Bobby McMahon and the amusing Fox Football Friday. Maybe someday we'll see the equivalent of NFL primetime with a fun studio host and a suitably English/Scottish analyst. A guy can dream right?

Belated QF, FS Thoughts

Sorry for the absence. Not dead, or sick, or anything just, tired. I need a vacation from my vacation. Anyway, in no particular order.

1. Zinedine Zidane. What more can be said? Though he wasn't nearly as good against Portugal as he was against Spain or especially Brazil, the word used to describe his performances that I like best is 'magesterial'. He seems to be presiding over these games, rather than simply playing in them. My favorite things about him are the subtle ones. During the final watch him when he receives a pass - he almost never, ever comes to a complete stop. There is always a small, almost imperceptible change in foot positioning or the direction the ball is rolling, but that small change creates passing angles and dribbling lanes not available to the more literal player.

2. The Italians. Good on them, I suppose. I still hate them and their floppy haired, diving, prima donna BS. That said, it's hard to say that they haven't been the better team in every one of their knockout games. Despite the egregious dive, they probably shaded the Aussies (and Materazzi's red card was ludicrous anyway). Even though 3-0 was a ridiculous scoreline given the long periods of Ukranian (WEAK!) dominance in the second half, hard to say the win was undeserved. And, having watched the game for a third time, despite the bias encouraged by the crowd noise, they slightly outplayed the Germans. This squad manages to encapsulate what is both maddening and magical about Italian soccer: corruption and theatricality balanced against unflappably elegant defending and skillful, economical bursts of attacking verve.

3. Ze Germans. Far exceeded expectations. For me, Klose was one of the revelations of the tournament - he was one of my least favorite players of the 2002 WC (the classic teutonic 'head-in-goals vs. crappy teams' strike), but his total game has been elevated several levels. His set up play for Podolski's second goal vs. Sweden was awesome. And on a team wide level, the Germans played like the English think they should - power, pace and passion. If Beckham, Gerard and Lampard did as much running as Frings, Kehl and Schneider, England would probably have beaten Portugal. Just saying.

4. Portugal. Screw the lot of you. Except you Cristiano. Old Trafford surely welcomes you back. Right? Please?

5. The Announcers. JP Dellacamera and John Harkes have actually done pretty well - Dellacamera is experienced at doing soccer, and has a much better voice than does "Baseball" Dave O'Brien (who can't help himself from throwing the Uecker into some of the latin sounding names FABio CannaVARo. I look up at the TV and expect to see El CaBALlo rounding third after parking one...) Harkes has been concise and, when needed, opinionated. Contrast that to LemonCello:

Balboa is unbelieveable. He'll criticize someone for diving and, in the next breath, complement someone the same conduct as a "smart play." Next time, they should give [me] a six pack and let [me] start rambling. It would undoubtedly be more coherent.

Must. Learn. Better. Spanish. by 2010.

6. England. Typical of course. What is it about the English that produces players with the bizarre combination of world class talent and absolutely psychotic temperment, be it Gazza, Beckham or young Roonaldo? (And for a further query, why do the two seem inversely related within those players? As Becks has matured, his game has suffered. From 1998 - 2000 when he was still in "F You" mode he was the best midfielder in the world. Then he became captain and all responsible, and he became the soccer equivalent of Steve Kerr, a 3 point set piece specialist and not much more...) That said, I have some sympathy for Rooney, as two Portuguese wankers defenders (including the immensely provacative Carvalho, tough break for a nice kid that you gave away the penalty vs. France) had been continuously fouling him for about 4 seconds prior to the 'incident'. England may have stumbled on their best lineup going forward, almost by accident when Beckham was injured. The back four of Cole, Terry, Ferdinand (fantastic all tourney) and Neville looked very solid at all times, and a midfield of Joe Cole, Gerrard, Hargreaves (2nd best individual performance of the tourney was his vs. Portugal) and Aaron Lennon, with Crouch up front and Rooney given a free, Henry-like role.

7. As for the final, which Italy shows up? My money is on a reversion to dour, cynical form. Zidane will be kicked mercilessly. However, Thuram and Gallas will crush Toni and Totti like worms, and France will have too much of the game, and win 1-0 on a Viera goal, perhaps 2-0 with a late Henry breakaway.

TIVO Bubble Unpopped

So, was able to see, ostensibly live:

1. The Nutcracker Suite by Wayne Rooney
   
2. Zinedine Zidane partying like it was 1998
3. More jammy BS from the aptly named Italian left-back. Grosso indeed. If Portugal wins tommorow, I'm rooting for lightning, or perhaps a plague of frogs, for the final.

More tommorow when I'm feeling slightly more human.

Cup Quarter Finals Thoughts

This, as they say, is the sharp end. A fine mix of teams, I might add, with only the Ukranians looking out of their depth. (And perhaps the English - though they certainly can play better than they have. Worth noting that they looked their best against the one team, Sweden, that showed any ambition of their own.)

So, 8 games left. Interestingly, there is also one team from each group left, as the two group winners who lost, lost to the corresponding second place teams.

Argentina - Germany

If we're lucky, this could be one of Those Games like Argentina-Holland or Brazil-Denmark in '98. I foresee Saviola, Rodriguez and especially Riquelme giving Metzelder fits in the center of Germany's defense, and am not sure that Mertesacker is mobile enough to track Crespo. At the same time, Ballack and Lahm will surely cause problems (especially Lahm, as right back seems a problem for the Argentines as Scaloni and Coloccini). And as good as Ayala and Heinze are, Klose and Podolski are just phenomenal right now.

I have literally no idea what happens here, whether the Argies suffer any lingering fatigue from playing 98 hard minutes (and 22 at a stroll after Rodriguez reduced the Mexicans to a limp) on Saturday; whether Germany rises or wilts under to national expectations against the toughest team they've encountered by far.

All I do know is that I'll have just arrived at an airport, and my first move will not be to claim luggage or to secure my rental car, but to find a bar showing this game (hoping against hope it's the Beeb feed and not LemonCello.

Feet to the fire, 3-2 Argentina, perhaps 4-2 with a late clincher on a Messi/Tevez breakaway.

Italy - Ukraine

ZZZZZZZ...oh, penalty, 1-0 to the Italy. I think Cannavaro knows Schevchenko too well for the latter to get much joy unless Kalichenko plays like he did against Saudi Arabia (and it was frickin Saudi Arabia, not exactly mid-70's Holland by any stretch.) Though who will play alongside if Nesta can't go and Materazzi suspended is a cuase for concern. If Italy wanted to, they could probably win this game about 3-1, but coming out and using their technical dominance isn't their style.

England - Portugal

What does Sven do here? Neville obviously comes back in at right back (whether he should is another question, but if we know anything about Erickson, it's that, when fit, his 'name' players will always play. The 5 man midfield with Cole and Beckham on the wings worries me, as Joe Cole likes to wander inside, and leaving Ashley Cole to cope with Figo and Miguel (as good at right back as Lahm has been at left for Germany) is Bad Idea Jeans. Similarly, Nuno Valente could repeatedly torch Beckham for sheer pace, leaving Neville to deal with him and either Ronaldo or Simao (pending C.R.'s health.) Of course if Gerard comes to play and Lampard starts hitting what he shoots at, all that won't matter much as I don't think that Portugal's central midfield can cope with Deco and Costinha out. Tough to say what I'd do, but would be strongly tempted to bring on Lennon, move Beckham infield and have Lampard play on the left, where he might be slightly more attentive to defense than Joe Cole. Of course, Cole has been their best midfielder by a piece over the 4 games...ugh.

Having said all that, in the end, I don't think Portugal have enough creativity without Deco and possibly Ronaldo. Pauleta will get nothing from Terry and Rio, Rooney scores a pair and England win 2-0.

France - Brazil

Another fantastic matchup, with revitalised France against pedestrian (by comparison to expectations, at least) Brazil. If Domenech goes 4-4-2 and brings Trezeguet in for Malouda, France wins. Otherwise, they play well, but never have enough men forward to make Brazil defend, and get overrun by Ze Roberto, Roberto Carlos and Cafu (and perhaps Juan and Lucio...and, given that it's Brazil, Dida as well.) Also key will be the Zidane-Ze Roberto and Viera-Ronaldinho matchups. $5 says Emerson (or Gilberto Silva, if he plays) almost literally kicks the crap out of Ribery for the first 10 minutes.

The ride has been fun, but I think even ZiZou suspects that the clincher against Spain was his encore. Hopefully he'll go out playing well in this defeat. Brazil 3-1.

Absurdity, FIFA Style

In case anyone was wondering what I was talking about when I said FIFA is all screwed up, how bout this for an absurd, though telling, example:

The long arm of [FIFA President Sepp] Blatter even reached into the stands. A thousand Dutch fans showed up for a game against Ivory Coast in bright-orange dungarees that were adorned with lion's tails (the lion is the national symbol of Holland) and the logo of a Dutch brewery. (Picture Bert Lahr's cowardly lion going hunting.) FIFA, which is receiving millions from Anheuser-Busch to make Budweiser the official beer of the World Cup, told the fans that if they wanted to enter the stadium, their trousers would be confiscated.

This story is, in a nutshell, illustrative of 2 of the 3 major complaints people have with FIFA. There's the obvious money grubbing (read up on former president Joao Havelange and you'll see graft to rival anything perpetrated by a tin-pot strongman, K Street politician or IOC flunky) as well as the iron-heeled dictatorialism.

The 3rd complaint, that the brain wizards have no feel for football itself has been well and truly demonstrated by the refereeing in this otherwise spectacular Cup. Other instances were requiring mid-day start times in the '94 Cup. In Dallas. In July. Of course this ties in with the power of the almighty Swiss Franc, but soccer is a fall, winter and spring game throughout the rest of the world for a good reason - you can't play 90 minutes straight at high tempo when it's hot. But screw the players, and the fans, their are sponsors to be appeased, money to be made and bureaucratic fiefdoms to defend and expand.

As to the original subject of this post, at least there was a happy ending:

"I watched the game in my [under]pants," one supporter said. "Fortunately I had quite a long T-shirt."

Not Bad

6 of 8, and I'll give myself half credit for calling 0-0 and Penalties in the Swiss-Ukraine napgame. Plus, Oz wuz robbed vs. the I-T's. (Though I missed the enormous obviousness of it given that Hiddink was the Australian coach, and he rather did the same thing to Italy in 2002 - though they are still a diving bunch o' .....NM.

As for Spain - France: 2nd best game of the round, rather obviously. The five minutes after France equalised and before halftime belong in a time capsule. France finally played up to their abilities - Ribery was fantastic all night. He has a little of the street-fighter in him to go along with his speed and skill. Plus he looks about as badass as a Frenchman can look (the scars are apparently from a car accident when he was an infant.) Spain did not play badly at all, but they lacked a certain edge after they gave up a goal. Rather predictably, I might add as the nerves were palpable from everyone over 21 (Fabregas and especially Sergio Ramos are absolutely fantastic; Real Madrid needs to get some central defenders so he can play full back.)

Despite the expected bitching from Spain about the free kick which lead to the second goal (yellow card was perhaps harsh, but Puyol clearly used his arms to hold Henry back. Completely unnecessarily, I might add, as Pernia had the play covered,) the referee was fantastic as well. It's not rocket science folks. Make the calls quickly and decisively, and have a rapport with the players. To paraphrase Churchill, jaw-jaw is better than card-card.

(P.S. I forgive you. Sorta. Ok, not at all...)

World Cup Lush

It's 7:40 in the morning here...and I'm tanked. I've decided to see if my brand new Marcello Balboa Drinking Game makes his commentary any more bearable. Drink every time he says someone "does/did a good job here/there". Drink a shot every time he says it about something that really shouldn't be lauded - case in point his adulation of Grosso's hook-the-foot-swan-dive to 'beat' Australia.

And the answer? No. No it doesn't. Though he is doing his subtle part to blunt the 'English as a national language' movement - I don't think I'm the only one desperately wishing to understand Spanish due to his...stylings.

Adriano was miles offsides. Twice. First when the ball was played to Cafu, and then when it was crossed too him. That's awful, again. I can't imagine how the linesman missed it, other than sheer suckage. Occam's razor! Ghana deserves 1-1 at half time (typically, "Lemon" 'Cello (very tasty before 8, I must admit) was in raputres of the "good job" by Dida in making a save that he knew literally nothing about....)

Update: No I was not actually drinking at 7:40 am. And, no, my absence for the rest of the day was not...induced by bevvies. Let's just say that the IT guys are not my friends right now.

BTW, 3-0 Brazil is criminal on Ghana, but Balboa claimed in about the 77th minute that A) Ghana was the better side and B) that Ronaldinho isn't one of the best players in the world. Had I been drinking, that would have require killing the bottle.

Typical

Italy beaten and battered all day, and come out with a 1-0 victory on a penalty decision that I can only describe as dubious, disgraceful, dire, fortuitous, soft, phantom...or just jammy. I'm not sure that's even a word, but that call was jammy. It's pretty clear on the replay, Neil slides a good foot from Grosso, who's largely stationary. The ball rolls off to one side. Grosso looks down at Neil, who looks back. They both look at the ref. Then Grosso 'savvily' hooks his toe under Neil's prostrate form, and hurtles over. The only thing that convinced me it wasn't a well done cartoon was the lack of Grosso holding up a sign saying "Yipes!" in Italian before he started to fall. Great conversion by Totti, as well.

As for the rest of the game, Oz looked livelier, but there was always a sense that their defenders where absolutely terrified any time Italy got 3 or 4 guys forward. Even down to 10 men, Italy seemed more menacing. Or rather, Australia seemed more menaced than vice versa - score one for unfussy Italian defending, they never looked panicked. Cannavaro and in partiuclar Zambrotta went a ways towards blunting any possible Aussie attacks. The absence of Kewell and Emerton really showed as Stejovski never looked like causing any danger.

So a crap Italian squad goes through to play the ubercrap Ukranians who beat the ultimately super crappy Swiss in the Worst Game Ever. I imagine that if the Swiss continued taking penalties until the start of the Italy-Ukraine game, they might bury one or two, but I wouldn't put money on it.

My World Cup (rather swiftly) Begin to Runneth Empty. (Though I'm not quite here. Yet.)