We needed three seats. We got two. I need happy news.
Luckily, I got it: Major League Soccer just struck a three-year TV deal with NBC. According to the deal, the mothership will air two regular-season MLS games, two playoff games, and two national-team games per year, and Versus- soon to be renamed NBC Sports- will air 38 regular-season games, three playoff games and two nationa-team games.
Those two regular-season games on NBC may not look like much, but they are the first regular-season games to be on American network television. Prior to this, only playoffs and the title game got network play (on ABC).
But soccer will never get over in the US, right?
Showing posts with label soccer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label soccer. Show all posts
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
RNG Week- Liberia
TODAY: Liberia
THURSDAY: Gibraltar
FRIDAY: Turkey
SATURDAY: Congo-Brazzaville
Liberia's history has been mired in violence and bloodshed, dating back to when the country was first christened as such. When slaves in the United States were freed in the wake of the Civil War, some crossed the Atlantic to settle in Africa and declare the foundation of Liberia. They called themselves Americo-Liberians.
Two problems emerged, though. First, these particular people arriving in Africa had never seen Africa before. Slavery had gone on long enough to where everybody had been born on the American side of the Atlantic. Second, nobody told the actual locals that the people just off the boat were their new rulers.
And the Americo-Liberians ruled the only way they knew: total domination. The Americo-Liberians comprised 5% of the population of Liberia, yet were the only people with voting rights. They built residences that resembled Southern plantations. In 1878, they instituted one-party rule.
Eventually, slavery itself would take hold. The very thing Liberia was created to celebrate against. It continues to this day.
The native Liberians would not wait nearly as long as the Americo-Liberians had to start rebelling. Riots, uprisings and wars would be repeatedly waged until 1980, when the Americo-Liberians were dislodged.
This did not quell the violence even a little bit. By 1989, civil war had kicked off once again; two consecutive wars would take the country into 2003. Only since then has the country even begun to move away from its unending cycle of bloodshed, though the fundamental issue of slavery persists.
Part of the recovery process involves how to account for all those wounded by war, including those who have lost limbs.
This brings us to the Cup of African Nations for Amputee Football, the third edition, which Liberia is scheduled to participate in during October. They are the defending champions, having won on home soil in 2008. This year's tournament, back after a two-year hiatus, is slated for Ghana, who won the inaugural 2007 tournament in Sierra Leone by beating Liberia in the final. Aside from Liberia and Ghana, Angola, Niger, Nigeria and Sierra Leone have confirmed their intent to participate. The organizers expect to also see Algeria, DR Congo, Kenya, Mali and South Africa in the field.
How does amputee soccer work? If you have one leg, you play in the field. If you have one arm, you play goalkeeper. The ball cannot touch an outfield player's crutch (no prosthetic limbs allowed) or a goalkeeper's arm stump. The goal is shrunk by half. More detailed rules are here.
Soccer gives the players hope. Employment in Liberia, as in many, many other developing countries, is difficult-to-impossible to find for people with missing limbs. A soccer tournament set aside specifically for amputees gives them a purpose. It gives them recognition. It also gives them a measure of needed respect. Amputees in Liberia, prior to the 2008 victory, were shunned. An amputee was, in the eyes of non-disabled Liberians, a former soldier, and therefore to blame for the nation's many years of misery and for all the people that died. If they suffered, they were seen to have deserved it. Amputees could not so much as get a taxi. With the prominence of the amputee soccer team, though, Liberia's amputees have slowly begun to be treated as people deserving of compassion as opposed to scorn.
How much prominence? In the Guardian article above, in January 2010, the amputee team was scrimmaging next to the club Invincible Eleven, a 13-time Liberian league champion and 15-time winner of the national cup competition. The amputees were drawing the larger crowd.
In addition to being inspiring, with the main Liberian league (in which Invincible Eleven currently lie 7th out of 20) trying to haphazardly sort out a 15-month league schedule this season, following the amputee team more closely may be the logical thing to do anyway.
THURSDAY: Gibraltar
FRIDAY: Turkey
SATURDAY: Congo-Brazzaville
Liberia's history has been mired in violence and bloodshed, dating back to when the country was first christened as such. When slaves in the United States were freed in the wake of the Civil War, some crossed the Atlantic to settle in Africa and declare the foundation of Liberia. They called themselves Americo-Liberians.
Two problems emerged, though. First, these particular people arriving in Africa had never seen Africa before. Slavery had gone on long enough to where everybody had been born on the American side of the Atlantic. Second, nobody told the actual locals that the people just off the boat were their new rulers.
And the Americo-Liberians ruled the only way they knew: total domination. The Americo-Liberians comprised 5% of the population of Liberia, yet were the only people with voting rights. They built residences that resembled Southern plantations. In 1878, they instituted one-party rule.
Eventually, slavery itself would take hold. The very thing Liberia was created to celebrate against. It continues to this day.
The native Liberians would not wait nearly as long as the Americo-Liberians had to start rebelling. Riots, uprisings and wars would be repeatedly waged until 1980, when the Americo-Liberians were dislodged.
This did not quell the violence even a little bit. By 1989, civil war had kicked off once again; two consecutive wars would take the country into 2003. Only since then has the country even begun to move away from its unending cycle of bloodshed, though the fundamental issue of slavery persists.
Part of the recovery process involves how to account for all those wounded by war, including those who have lost limbs.
This brings us to the Cup of African Nations for Amputee Football, the third edition, which Liberia is scheduled to participate in during October. They are the defending champions, having won on home soil in 2008. This year's tournament, back after a two-year hiatus, is slated for Ghana, who won the inaugural 2007 tournament in Sierra Leone by beating Liberia in the final. Aside from Liberia and Ghana, Angola, Niger, Nigeria and Sierra Leone have confirmed their intent to participate. The organizers expect to also see Algeria, DR Congo, Kenya, Mali and South Africa in the field.
How does amputee soccer work? If you have one leg, you play in the field. If you have one arm, you play goalkeeper. The ball cannot touch an outfield player's crutch (no prosthetic limbs allowed) or a goalkeeper's arm stump. The goal is shrunk by half. More detailed rules are here.
Soccer gives the players hope. Employment in Liberia, as in many, many other developing countries, is difficult-to-impossible to find for people with missing limbs. A soccer tournament set aside specifically for amputees gives them a purpose. It gives them recognition. It also gives them a measure of needed respect. Amputees in Liberia, prior to the 2008 victory, were shunned. An amputee was, in the eyes of non-disabled Liberians, a former soldier, and therefore to blame for the nation's many years of misery and for all the people that died. If they suffered, they were seen to have deserved it. Amputees could not so much as get a taxi. With the prominence of the amputee soccer team, though, Liberia's amputees have slowly begun to be treated as people deserving of compassion as opposed to scorn.
How much prominence? In the Guardian article above, in January 2010, the amputee team was scrimmaging next to the club Invincible Eleven, a 13-time Liberian league champion and 15-time winner of the national cup competition. The amputees were drawing the larger crowd.
In addition to being inspiring, with the main Liberian league (in which Invincible Eleven currently lie 7th out of 20) trying to haphazardly sort out a 15-month league schedule this season, following the amputee team more closely may be the logical thing to do anyway.
Monday, May 9, 2011
The Clinton List
Last year, in the runup to the 2010 World Cup in South Africa, we explored one of the many facets of how soccer and politics have been intertwined over the years. Despite all efforts from FIFA to prevent it, politics, both domestic and global, have more of an effect on soccer than in any other sport. There's simply too much civic and national pride at stake and too much of the world involved at every social level for politics not to pop up in multiple forms.
Take the case of Colombian club America de Cali.
For a long time, the Red Devils operated under that most malicious of sports tropes, the anti-title curse. (Us Chicago Cubs fans know a little about those.) Their curse came way back when the club decided to convert from amateur status to professionalism in 1948. Benjamin Urrea, a fan known as Garabato, was extremely disillusioned by this, to the point where he said that if America went pro, they would never be champion. That curse, it's widely believed, was broken in 1979, 31 years later, when America claimed its first league title.
Key phrase, widely believed. A funny thing about soccer is that 'being champion' has more than one meaning. Soccer doesn't work like most sports in North America. For teams in the NFL, NHL, NBA or MLB, victory really only means winning their respective league titles. In soccer, though, being champion can mean not only the league title, but also being champion of lower tiers of play, or champion of a knockout cup competition of some sort, or champion of a larger competition a club gains access to through quality performance in their league, or even champion of some random invitational tournament that pops up from time to time. It is this quirk of the sport that leads some America fans to believe the curse is still alive until such time as the club wins the South American continental competition, the Copa Libertadores.
Enter Bill Clinton.
On October 21, 1995, then-President Clinton signed Executive Order 12978. The order dealt with drug trafficking in Colombia, freezing the American assets of any entity connected with local drug cartels and preventing anyone that does business with American citizens from also doing business with those entities. This is otherwise known as the "Clinton List".
America de Cali was one of those entities. Two high-ranking members of the Cali drug cartel, Gilberto and Miguel Rodriguez Orejuela, were America fans and used some of their drug money to support the club. Convicted in 1998 and placed into a Colombian prison that barely even slowed them down, their involvement landed the Red Devils on the Clinton List that same year along with any other business that involved the brothers.
In a way, the Curse of Garabato had manifested itself: if it couldn't prevent league titles, it could force the club to do without professionalism's benefits. Not only would no sponsor touch America, but they could no longer win prize money from any competition that involved American clubs. That came up in 1999, when the Red Devils won the Copa Merconorte, a competition involving American clubs, and missed out on $200,000.
With no way to make money other than gate receipts and merchandise sales, America's financial situation became dire. All they could afford to pay players was $3,000 a month, or $36,000 a year. There are not many quality soccer players that will take that kind of pay. In fact, you personally quite possibly make more than that yourself, even if you're not an athlete. The club's debt promptly ballooned, and as long as the Rodriguez brothers maintained control of the club, in fact as long as America de Cali remained a business in their current form, getting off the Clinton List was impossible.
Despite this, on the pitch, the Red Devils did surprisingly well. For one thing, they still exist as a soccer club. For another, they racked up five more league titles in 1997, 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2008 (the last two after Colombia converted to a split-season format known in Latin America as Apertura/Clausura). A more familiar way to illustrate different measures of success from team to team is the fact that America considers this a subpar showing.
In 2010, America finally escaped from the Clinton List by restructuring the club to be run by the city of Cali; the Rodriguez brothers had been extradited to the United States in 2004 and no longer had any control- Gilberto to Pennsylvania; Miguel to Kentucky. It just took several more years to wrestle control from the rest of the Rodriguez family. The Red Devils are free, but not without accruing $2 million in debt that they now have to try and pay off.
And while sports curses only hamper one club, the political world has no such restriction. For while America de Cali has freed itself of its drug-addled past, another Colombian club, Santa Fe, has found itself under suspicion of being financed by another trafficker, Bogota kingpin Daniel "El Loco" Barrera.
The Clinton List looms once more.
Take the case of Colombian club America de Cali.
For a long time, the Red Devils operated under that most malicious of sports tropes, the anti-title curse. (Us Chicago Cubs fans know a little about those.) Their curse came way back when the club decided to convert from amateur status to professionalism in 1948. Benjamin Urrea, a fan known as Garabato, was extremely disillusioned by this, to the point where he said that if America went pro, they would never be champion. That curse, it's widely believed, was broken in 1979, 31 years later, when America claimed its first league title.
Key phrase, widely believed. A funny thing about soccer is that 'being champion' has more than one meaning. Soccer doesn't work like most sports in North America. For teams in the NFL, NHL, NBA or MLB, victory really only means winning their respective league titles. In soccer, though, being champion can mean not only the league title, but also being champion of lower tiers of play, or champion of a knockout cup competition of some sort, or champion of a larger competition a club gains access to through quality performance in their league, or even champion of some random invitational tournament that pops up from time to time. It is this quirk of the sport that leads some America fans to believe the curse is still alive until such time as the club wins the South American continental competition, the Copa Libertadores.
Enter Bill Clinton.
On October 21, 1995, then-President Clinton signed Executive Order 12978. The order dealt with drug trafficking in Colombia, freezing the American assets of any entity connected with local drug cartels and preventing anyone that does business with American citizens from also doing business with those entities. This is otherwise known as the "Clinton List".
America de Cali was one of those entities. Two high-ranking members of the Cali drug cartel, Gilberto and Miguel Rodriguez Orejuela, were America fans and used some of their drug money to support the club. Convicted in 1998 and placed into a Colombian prison that barely even slowed them down, their involvement landed the Red Devils on the Clinton List that same year along with any other business that involved the brothers.
In a way, the Curse of Garabato had manifested itself: if it couldn't prevent league titles, it could force the club to do without professionalism's benefits. Not only would no sponsor touch America, but they could no longer win prize money from any competition that involved American clubs. That came up in 1999, when the Red Devils won the Copa Merconorte, a competition involving American clubs, and missed out on $200,000.
With no way to make money other than gate receipts and merchandise sales, America's financial situation became dire. All they could afford to pay players was $3,000 a month, or $36,000 a year. There are not many quality soccer players that will take that kind of pay. In fact, you personally quite possibly make more than that yourself, even if you're not an athlete. The club's debt promptly ballooned, and as long as the Rodriguez brothers maintained control of the club, in fact as long as America de Cali remained a business in their current form, getting off the Clinton List was impossible.
Despite this, on the pitch, the Red Devils did surprisingly well. For one thing, they still exist as a soccer club. For another, they racked up five more league titles in 1997, 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2008 (the last two after Colombia converted to a split-season format known in Latin America as Apertura/Clausura). A more familiar way to illustrate different measures of success from team to team is the fact that America considers this a subpar showing.
In 2010, America finally escaped from the Clinton List by restructuring the club to be run by the city of Cali; the Rodriguez brothers had been extradited to the United States in 2004 and no longer had any control- Gilberto to Pennsylvania; Miguel to Kentucky. It just took several more years to wrestle control from the rest of the Rodriguez family. The Red Devils are free, but not without accruing $2 million in debt that they now have to try and pay off.
And while sports curses only hamper one club, the political world has no such restriction. For while America de Cali has freed itself of its drug-addled past, another Colombian club, Santa Fe, has found itself under suspicion of being financed by another trafficker, Bogota kingpin Daniel "El Loco" Barrera.
The Clinton List looms once more.
Thursday, December 2, 2010
2018/2022 World Cups
Congratulations to Russia and Qatar.
Russia, I'm sure you'll be a fine host. Summer in Russia's fine; you've put a lot of work lately into your soccer product. You're not as good as you were as the Soviet Union, but that's to be expected; some of the former Soviets are now playing as members of other countries, most notably Ukraine.
Qatar, though, is a bit perplexing, having beaten the United States straight-up 14-8 in the finals of the 2022 vote.
The heat in Qatar- it's the Middle East, in case you haven't heard- and the size of Qatar- smaller than Connecticut, the detractors appear fond of saying- are being brought up most often. The surrounding neighborhood is also a concern of many. I'm not terribly worried there; though 2022 is over a decade away and anything could happen, as things stand, the safer parts of the Middle East don't really tend to get hit. They're where all the money is, and if you're engaging in illicit behavior that requires money, that's probably where you get a lot of that money. You don't want to go mess that up.
What I'm worried about is the team itself.
Remember, a host nation is granted an automatic bid- the only automatic bid- into the Cup. We have just given the Qatari national team a spot in the 2022 World Cup.
Unless they qualify for 2014 or 2018, it will be their first. Qatar has never qualified for the World Cup.
Let's go over their previous attempts, beginning in 1978:
ARGENTINA 1978: Were placed into a first-round qualifying group with Bahrain, Kuwait and the UAE. The UAE withdrew. Qatar came in last of the remainder, winning 1 and losing 3. Kuwait, who advanced, came in 3rd out of 5 in the second and final qualifying round.
SPAIN 1982: Qatar was placed in a 5-team group in the first round alongside Bahrain, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Syria. They came in third with 2 wins, 2 losses. Saudi Arabia, who advanced, finished last in the final qualifying group.
MEXICO 1986: Placed in a 4-team group with Jordan, Iraq and Lebanon. Lebanon withdrew; Qatar came in second to Iraq, who despite playing their home games on neutral ground due to the Iran-Iraq War, wound up going to the World Cup. They came in last in Group B alongside Mexico, Paraguay and Belgium.
ITALY 1990: Qatar advanced out of their opening qualifying group for the first time, beating out Iraq, Jordan and Oman. There were two spots in the Cup on offer from a six-team group; Qatar came in third, one point short. South Korea and the UAE qualified; China, Saudi Arabia and North Korea rounded out the group. Losing 2-0 to last-place North Korea was probably what did Qatar in.
UNITED STATES 1994: Qatar came in second in their 5-team first round qualifier; North Korea would come in first, clinching two matchdays early. Then the North Koreans brought up the rear again in the final qualifying group.
FRANCE 1998: Qatar drew luckily in their first round qualifier, cruising past Sri Lanka, India and the Philippines. They came in fourth in their second-round group, losing 1-0 to group winner Saudi Arabia on the last day, who qualified right there as a result. Had Qatar won that game instead, they would have gone through. Second-place Iran went to a playoff with Japan, lost, went to another playoff with Australia, and qualified on the away goals rule.
KOREA/JAPAN 2002: The frist qualifier was another formality, blowing by Palestine, Malaysia and Hong Kong. The second round, though, was another elimination, as Qatar came in 4th out of 5. China qualified automatically in a rout; the UAE went on to be eliminated by Iran in the playoff.
GERMANY 2006: The first round was comprised of twelve weenie teams, of which Qatar was not one, so they entered in the second round. They lost their luck at the first hurdle, drawing against Iran, who would move on and eventually qualify. Jordan also finished in front of them, but hey: they beat Laos.
SOUTH AFRICA 2010: Everybody was drawn into an opening knockout round aside from the top five teams as per the FIFA Ranking; these were Australia, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Japan and Iran. (Please note that there were 4.5 spots available to Asia for this Cup.) Qatar was ranked 16th. They drew Sri Lanka, ranked 30th, and blew by them 6-0 over two legs. The second round saw a four-team group with Australia, China and Iraq. Australia and Qatar both moved on, and were placed into the third round. The ten teams left were split into two groups; in each, two would qualify and the two third-placed teams would play off to see who would go up against the Oceania winner. Qatar came in fourth in their group over right games, four points adrift of the money and nine adrift of automatic qualification, behind Australia, Japan and Bahrain.
In the Asian continental cup, the Asian Cup, Qatar has consistently qualified, but has only once advanced past the first round, that happening in Lebanon 2000. And that really only happened because there were three transfer spots in a four-team group and Uzbekistan was the fourth. Uzbekistan drew one and lost two; guess who they drew against. China then dispatched Qatar 3-1 in the quarterfinals, Qatar's goal only coming after China had done their damage. Their all-time record in the Asian Cup: 4 wins, 11 draws, 10 losses.
And then there's the Gulf Cup of Nations, open only to eight teams in the Middle East. There have been 20 of these; Qatar has won two, both as hosts in 1992 and 2004. This cup has a group stage, and in two of the last three, Qatar has failed to get out of it. The club teams aren't so great either; here's how they've done in continental competition. The last and only win by a Qatari club was Al Sadd in 1988-89; that was prior to the major growth of soccer in Asia.
And they're going to host the World Cup now. We're going to put that in the World Cup, folks.
Russia, I'm sure you'll be a fine host. Summer in Russia's fine; you've put a lot of work lately into your soccer product. You're not as good as you were as the Soviet Union, but that's to be expected; some of the former Soviets are now playing as members of other countries, most notably Ukraine.
Qatar, though, is a bit perplexing, having beaten the United States straight-up 14-8 in the finals of the 2022 vote.
The heat in Qatar- it's the Middle East, in case you haven't heard- and the size of Qatar- smaller than Connecticut, the detractors appear fond of saying- are being brought up most often. The surrounding neighborhood is also a concern of many. I'm not terribly worried there; though 2022 is over a decade away and anything could happen, as things stand, the safer parts of the Middle East don't really tend to get hit. They're where all the money is, and if you're engaging in illicit behavior that requires money, that's probably where you get a lot of that money. You don't want to go mess that up.
What I'm worried about is the team itself.
Remember, a host nation is granted an automatic bid- the only automatic bid- into the Cup. We have just given the Qatari national team a spot in the 2022 World Cup.
Unless they qualify for 2014 or 2018, it will be their first. Qatar has never qualified for the World Cup.
Let's go over their previous attempts, beginning in 1978:
ARGENTINA 1978: Were placed into a first-round qualifying group with Bahrain, Kuwait and the UAE. The UAE withdrew. Qatar came in last of the remainder, winning 1 and losing 3. Kuwait, who advanced, came in 3rd out of 5 in the second and final qualifying round.
SPAIN 1982: Qatar was placed in a 5-team group in the first round alongside Bahrain, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Syria. They came in third with 2 wins, 2 losses. Saudi Arabia, who advanced, finished last in the final qualifying group.
MEXICO 1986: Placed in a 4-team group with Jordan, Iraq and Lebanon. Lebanon withdrew; Qatar came in second to Iraq, who despite playing their home games on neutral ground due to the Iran-Iraq War, wound up going to the World Cup. They came in last in Group B alongside Mexico, Paraguay and Belgium.
ITALY 1990: Qatar advanced out of their opening qualifying group for the first time, beating out Iraq, Jordan and Oman. There were two spots in the Cup on offer from a six-team group; Qatar came in third, one point short. South Korea and the UAE qualified; China, Saudi Arabia and North Korea rounded out the group. Losing 2-0 to last-place North Korea was probably what did Qatar in.
UNITED STATES 1994: Qatar came in second in their 5-team first round qualifier; North Korea would come in first, clinching two matchdays early. Then the North Koreans brought up the rear again in the final qualifying group.
FRANCE 1998: Qatar drew luckily in their first round qualifier, cruising past Sri Lanka, India and the Philippines. They came in fourth in their second-round group, losing 1-0 to group winner Saudi Arabia on the last day, who qualified right there as a result. Had Qatar won that game instead, they would have gone through. Second-place Iran went to a playoff with Japan, lost, went to another playoff with Australia, and qualified on the away goals rule.
KOREA/JAPAN 2002: The frist qualifier was another formality, blowing by Palestine, Malaysia and Hong Kong. The second round, though, was another elimination, as Qatar came in 4th out of 5. China qualified automatically in a rout; the UAE went on to be eliminated by Iran in the playoff.
GERMANY 2006: The first round was comprised of twelve weenie teams, of which Qatar was not one, so they entered in the second round. They lost their luck at the first hurdle, drawing against Iran, who would move on and eventually qualify. Jordan also finished in front of them, but hey: they beat Laos.
SOUTH AFRICA 2010: Everybody was drawn into an opening knockout round aside from the top five teams as per the FIFA Ranking; these were Australia, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Japan and Iran. (Please note that there were 4.5 spots available to Asia for this Cup.) Qatar was ranked 16th. They drew Sri Lanka, ranked 30th, and blew by them 6-0 over two legs. The second round saw a four-team group with Australia, China and Iraq. Australia and Qatar both moved on, and were placed into the third round. The ten teams left were split into two groups; in each, two would qualify and the two third-placed teams would play off to see who would go up against the Oceania winner. Qatar came in fourth in their group over right games, four points adrift of the money and nine adrift of automatic qualification, behind Australia, Japan and Bahrain.
In the Asian continental cup, the Asian Cup, Qatar has consistently qualified, but has only once advanced past the first round, that happening in Lebanon 2000. And that really only happened because there were three transfer spots in a four-team group and Uzbekistan was the fourth. Uzbekistan drew one and lost two; guess who they drew against. China then dispatched Qatar 3-1 in the quarterfinals, Qatar's goal only coming after China had done their damage. Their all-time record in the Asian Cup: 4 wins, 11 draws, 10 losses.
And then there's the Gulf Cup of Nations, open only to eight teams in the Middle East. There have been 20 of these; Qatar has won two, both as hosts in 1992 and 2004. This cup has a group stage, and in two of the last three, Qatar has failed to get out of it. The club teams aren't so great either; here's how they've done in continental competition. The last and only win by a Qatari club was Al Sadd in 1988-89; that was prior to the major growth of soccer in Asia.
And they're going to host the World Cup now. We're going to put that in the World Cup, folks.
Monday, October 11, 2010
Widget Alert
Two changes to the sidebar, and one to the site design:
A) 'Followers' is gone. Sorry to the one person that actually used it. It wasn't worth the space for the sake of one person.
B) In its place, I've inserted the FIFA World Leagues widget, which is a scoreline update on what appears to be every top-level soccer league on Earth as well as a note on the top five in each league. If it wasn't that comprehensive- if it had just stopped at England, Spain, France, Italy and Germany or something- I wouldn't have put it in. But since it got absolutely everybody, even the rinky-dink outfits in places like Burkina Faso and Vanuatu, I figured it was worth an add seeing as I had a spot now freed up. I like to try and hit every part of the world in my posts, not just the popular parts of the world, and that widget, for the world's most popular sport, does fit that MO. (Though it is set to default at the American league, Major League Soccer. Blogger's perogative.) In addition, as noted here before, I am working on a club soccer book as a side project (on deck: team #432, Ferencvaros of Hungary), and that widget might help me out in finding teams that are worth a once-over.
C) The widget wouldn't cooperate in shrinking to fit, which gave me an excuse to do a side-effect change I've been meaning to do for a while: widen both of the text columns. It was driving me nuts having all that blank green space on either side of all the actual content, and not actually doing anything with it. That should also cut down on the scrolling when longer pieces go up, and maybe it means I won't have to shrink down the YouTube videos anymore every time I want to use one.
A) 'Followers' is gone. Sorry to the one person that actually used it. It wasn't worth the space for the sake of one person.
B) In its place, I've inserted the FIFA World Leagues widget, which is a scoreline update on what appears to be every top-level soccer league on Earth as well as a note on the top five in each league. If it wasn't that comprehensive- if it had just stopped at England, Spain, France, Italy and Germany or something- I wouldn't have put it in. But since it got absolutely everybody, even the rinky-dink outfits in places like Burkina Faso and Vanuatu, I figured it was worth an add seeing as I had a spot now freed up. I like to try and hit every part of the world in my posts, not just the popular parts of the world, and that widget, for the world's most popular sport, does fit that MO. (Though it is set to default at the American league, Major League Soccer. Blogger's perogative.) In addition, as noted here before, I am working on a club soccer book as a side project (on deck: team #432, Ferencvaros of Hungary), and that widget might help me out in finding teams that are worth a once-over.
C) The widget wouldn't cooperate in shrinking to fit, which gave me an excuse to do a side-effect change I've been meaning to do for a while: widen both of the text columns. It was driving me nuts having all that blank green space on either side of all the actual content, and not actually doing anything with it. That should also cut down on the scrolling when longer pieces go up, and maybe it means I won't have to shrink down the YouTube videos anymore every time I want to use one.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
What Else I'm Working On
There is a book project I'm currently working on; been plugging away at it since January. If you've ever been to a bookstore and examined the selection on soccer- the Americans among you, at least- there isn't much to speak of. At all. Most of the books are just a bunch of youth drills, and most of the rest is completely World Cup-oriented.
Not much if anything on the club scene, which is what largely goes on the rest of the four year cycle, if anything at all. And the rare time you do see it, it's just general platitudes about Great Clubs of the World, and very little of which does anything to actually tell you about any of them. Imagine reading this about the New York Yankees:
Bland as hell, isn't it? It talks about the Yankees, but it doesn't say a thing. It doesn't say who Babe Ruth is, or any of the others. It doesn't tell about the first Yankee Stadium, it doesn't mention the Red Sox rivalry, nothing that could tell you who the team IS. If you're just getting into baseball, you've learned nothing.
But that's pretty much what you tend to get for soccer bios, though usually in a longer form.
Now, for TV Tropes' writeup on the same team.
Less about the vital stats, but you come away knowing a hell of a lot more about the team. This is basically the format I'm trying to follow, including the one-paragraph limit- it keeps me focused on what's really important to know about a team, and it also serves to keep any one team from overpowering any other team.
Because I'm doing what is primarily a guide to adopting a club soccer team, and I'm going through hundreds and hundreds of clubs. Far, far beyond 'great clubs of the world'. What about everybody else? What about all the teams those Great Clubs of the World had to step on to get where they are? Soccer doesn't stop at Manchester United.
Let's put it this way: so far I'm on Team #371, with no real end in sight. Two of the clubs done so far are from Botswana. Two more are from Haiti. Another is from the Faroe Islands. By the end I intend to have every single FIFA nation covered with at least one team apiece. (Again, they're why I'm instituting a one-paragraph limit. Yes, Manchester United deserves infinitely more accolades than, say, Presidente Hayes of Paraguay. But there should be at least one place where a lesser team gets to be on par with the big guns. Besides, why obscure the fact that Rutherford B. Hayes, of all Presidents, is the one to get a soccer team named after him? And in Paraguay?)
Just so you're aware, this is what I'm doing IN ADDITION to the blog. Any time I post little more than a YouTube clip, that's probably why.
Not much if anything on the club scene, which is what largely goes on the rest of the four year cycle, if anything at all. And the rare time you do see it, it's just general platitudes about Great Clubs of the World, and very little of which does anything to actually tell you about any of them. Imagine reading this about the New York Yankees:
NEW YORK YANKEES
Home: Bronx, NY
Colors: Navy blue, white
Founded: 1901
Titles (27): 1923, 1927, 1928, 1932, 1936, 1937, 1938, 1939, 1941, 1943, 1947, 1949, 1959, 1951, 1952, 1953, 1956, 1958, 1961, 1962, 1977, 1978, 1996, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2009
"The New York Yankees have won more World Series than any other team in MLB. Their greatest period was in the 1920's, when, led by players such as Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig, Tony Lazzeri, and manager Miller Huggins, they won the 1927 World Series with 110 wins. Over the years many other great players have been Yankees, such as Joe DiMaggio, Mickey Mantle, Reggie Jackson, Derek Jeter, and Mariano Rivera. They have played in Yankee Stadium, the second such park by that name, since 2009."
Bland as hell, isn't it? It talks about the Yankees, but it doesn't say a thing. It doesn't say who Babe Ruth is, or any of the others. It doesn't tell about the first Yankee Stadium, it doesn't mention the Red Sox rivalry, nothing that could tell you who the team IS. If you're just getting into baseball, you've learned nothing.
But that's pretty much what you tend to get for soccer bios, though usually in a longer form.
Now, for TV Tropes' writeup on the same team.
"The New York Yankees: Current defending champs. If you can name only one Baseball team, it probably is this one. Being the most sucessful team in the World Series era (27 titles) and the fact that it is based in the Big Applesauce have combined to make the Yankees the most popular team in America.... and the least popular team in America. You must, by internet law, either hate them with a passion that rivals the love you have of your own team or be a obnoxious, unpleasable pinstripe-wearing fan. An entire industry exists of anti-Yankee media, and although primarily centered in Boston, it thrives throughout North America, including New York itself. The same thing goes for pro-Yankee media. Depending on your point of view, is either The Evil Empire or The Chosen Team. Team owners George Steinbrenner and his sons are, however, universally considered an example of Evil Overlord (or at least a Mean Boss), while Lou Gehrig is universally beloved. This is not a new phenomenon. The play Damn Yankees!, about a man who hates them so much he sells his soul to the Devil to beat them, was written over fifty years ago. Notable for having not one (Ruth), not two (Gehrig), not three (DiMaggio), but four (Mickey Mantle) names in the argument for best baseball player ever."
Less about the vital stats, but you come away knowing a hell of a lot more about the team. This is basically the format I'm trying to follow, including the one-paragraph limit- it keeps me focused on what's really important to know about a team, and it also serves to keep any one team from overpowering any other team.
Because I'm doing what is primarily a guide to adopting a club soccer team, and I'm going through hundreds and hundreds of clubs. Far, far beyond 'great clubs of the world'. What about everybody else? What about all the teams those Great Clubs of the World had to step on to get where they are? Soccer doesn't stop at Manchester United.
Let's put it this way: so far I'm on Team #371, with no real end in sight. Two of the clubs done so far are from Botswana. Two more are from Haiti. Another is from the Faroe Islands. By the end I intend to have every single FIFA nation covered with at least one team apiece. (Again, they're why I'm instituting a one-paragraph limit. Yes, Manchester United deserves infinitely more accolades than, say, Presidente Hayes of Paraguay. But there should be at least one place where a lesser team gets to be on par with the big guns. Besides, why obscure the fact that Rutherford B. Hayes, of all Presidents, is the one to get a soccer team named after him? And in Paraguay?)
Just so you're aware, this is what I'm doing IN ADDITION to the blog. Any time I post little more than a YouTube clip, that's probably why.
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Soccer, Technically
Sorry for no post yesterday; Charter decided that it didn't feel like providing Internet service for long enough to get anything fired off. They like to do that a lot lately.
Anyway.
On September 11, 1973, Augusto Pinochet seized power in Chile over Salvadore Allende. Pinochet's reputation, hopefully, precedes him. In the course of seizing power, he immediately went to work "disappearing" or just outright killing his opponents. Many of the opponents were shipped to Estadio Nacional, where they were tortured, raped, beaten, and often killed.
Meanwhile, the 1974 World Cup was looming, and Chile and the Soviet Union were paired against each other in a playoff. Winner goes to the Cup in West Germany.
It was a two-legged tie. The two tied 0-0 in Moscow, and Chile picked Estadio Nacional as the venue for the second leg. The Soviets- even they had standards- were horrified. The national federation appealed to FIFA for a change of venue.
The Soviets learned of the atrocities through a visit from a human-rights organization which, for some reason, Pinochet had allowed to visit. Things were spruced up for the visit, but the human-rights organization didn't buy it for a second.
FIFA organized a fact-finding mission, which given their findings, generated approximately zero actual facts, writing (pdf file, page 13):
And in visiting Estadio Nacional:
The match was ordered to go ahead as scheduled, seeing as "life is back to normal". The Soviets fired off a telegram stating that they would not show up, with federation head Granatkin stating that "Soviet sportsmen cannot at present play at stadium stained with blood of Chilean patriots". Similar sentiments poured in from other countries, but FIFA stuck with its line.
The Soviets stayed home. The Chileans showed up.
That was not a highlight. That was the entire match.
FIFA head Sir Stanley Rous would be voted out of office just prior to the World Cup, with this episode part of a larger tendency to be tone-deaf towards world politics, and was replaced by Joao Havelange. Chile would be bounced in the group stage after three boring matches, including two draws, and forward Carlos Caszely would become the first player to receive a red card in a World Cup (they were introduced in 1970, but nobody was sent off then).
Anyway.
On September 11, 1973, Augusto Pinochet seized power in Chile over Salvadore Allende. Pinochet's reputation, hopefully, precedes him. In the course of seizing power, he immediately went to work "disappearing" or just outright killing his opponents. Many of the opponents were shipped to Estadio Nacional, where they were tortured, raped, beaten, and often killed.
Meanwhile, the 1974 World Cup was looming, and Chile and the Soviet Union were paired against each other in a playoff. Winner goes to the Cup in West Germany.
It was a two-legged tie. The two tied 0-0 in Moscow, and Chile picked Estadio Nacional as the venue for the second leg. The Soviets- even they had standards- were horrified. The national federation appealed to FIFA for a change of venue.
The Soviets learned of the atrocities through a visit from a human-rights organization which, for some reason, Pinochet had allowed to visit. Things were spruced up for the visit, but the human-rights organization didn't buy it for a second.
FIFA organized a fact-finding mission, which given their findings, generated approximately zero actual facts, writing (pdf file, page 13):
In reply to our precise question concerning the stadium, [minister of National Defense Patricio Carvajal Prado] said that in a couple of days the stadium will be at the disposal of the sports organizations as it is expected that the interrogation of the remaining detainees will be terminated (our italics) and most of them will have gone home (p.4).
And in visiting Estadio Nacional:
As mentioned before, the stadium is at present being used as a 'clearing station' and the people in there are not prisoners but merely detainees whose identity has to be established (a large number of foreigners without valid documents)...The stadium is under military guard and entry is only with a special pass. Inside the outer fencing everything seemed to be normal and gardeners are working on the gardens. Inside the stadium itself the seats and pitch were empty and the remaining detainees were in the dressing and other rooms. The grass on the pitch is in perfect condition as were the seating arrangements (p.4).
The match was ordered to go ahead as scheduled, seeing as "life is back to normal". The Soviets fired off a telegram stating that they would not show up, with federation head Granatkin stating that "Soviet sportsmen cannot at present play at stadium stained with blood of Chilean patriots". Similar sentiments poured in from other countries, but FIFA stuck with its line.
The Soviets stayed home. The Chileans showed up.
That was not a highlight. That was the entire match.
FIFA head Sir Stanley Rous would be voted out of office just prior to the World Cup, with this episode part of a larger tendency to be tone-deaf towards world politics, and was replaced by Joao Havelange. Chile would be bounced in the group stage after three boring matches, including two draws, and forward Carlos Caszely would become the first player to receive a red card in a World Cup (they were introduced in 1970, but nobody was sent off then).
Sunday, June 27, 2010
Random News Generator, And Its Bloody Demise
The RNG stops on #78... let's see...
...Ghana.
GHANA. Of all the countries.
It turns out you're just in time for a new segment I call "Let's Make Mathematical Algorithms Scream In Pain."
Let's see... Cup, Cup, Cup, Cup, Cup, Cup, Cup, Cup, Cup, press release, those are always death, Cup, Cup, Cup, Cup, Cup, criticism of governmental appointees that I can't make heads or tails of and desperately wish I was able to today, Cup, Cup, Cup, Cup, SCREAM, RANDOM NEWS GENERATOR, SCREAM!
...sigh. You win, RNG. Ghana won and they're over the moon about it. Twice in a row they've knocked us out now. AGH.
...Ghana.
GHANA. Of all the countries.
It turns out you're just in time for a new segment I call "Let's Make Mathematical Algorithms Scream In Pain."
Let's see... Cup, Cup, Cup, Cup, Cup, Cup, Cup, Cup, Cup, press release, those are always death, Cup, Cup, Cup, Cup, Cup, criticism of governmental appointees that I can't make heads or tails of and desperately wish I was able to today, Cup, Cup, Cup, Cup, SCREAM, RANDOM NEWS GENERATOR, SCREAM!
...sigh. You win, RNG. Ghana won and they're over the moon about it. Twice in a row they've knocked us out now. AGH.
Friday, June 18, 2010
True Facts About Koman Coulibali
*Koman Coulibali of Mali, the referee for the US-Slovenia game, was present at the Hindenburg crash, severely reprimanding the victims for impeding the fire's progress.
*Koman Coulibali's favorite game is 52-card pickup.
*Koman Coulibali once stopped a Presidential inauguration in progress on the basis that a vote in Colorado looked funny. Upon further inspection, it was revealed that Coulibali has never been to Colorado, or in fact North America.
*Koman Coulibali once stopped police officers mid-pursuit for speeding.
*Koman Coulibali's favorite hobby is drinking tears.
*Koman Coulibali once handled a homicide case as a prosecuting attorney. Upon learning that the victim was shot in the face, he requested that the corpse be given the death penalty.
*Koman Coulibali's favorite game is 52-card pickup.
*Koman Coulibali once stopped a Presidential inauguration in progress on the basis that a vote in Colorado looked funny. Upon further inspection, it was revealed that Coulibali has never been to Colorado, or in fact North America.
*Koman Coulibali once stopped police officers mid-pursuit for speeding.
*Koman Coulibali's favorite hobby is drinking tears.
*Koman Coulibali once handled a homicide case as a prosecuting attorney. Upon learning that the victim was shot in the face, he requested that the corpse be given the death penalty.
Monday, June 14, 2010
Back To The Soccer Well
Internet has been down on me for much of the day, leaving me unable to press forward on what it was I was trying to do. So I guess we go back to the soccer well. And since that's what we're doing, it's as good a time as any to address without debate the biggest question concerning American sports fans.
Just what IS it about soccer, anyway? Nobody ever scores! Halfback passes to center, back to wing, back to center! Center holds it! Holds it! Holds it!
Here's what is it about soccer.
By purely looking at the scoreline, you're not really watching the right thing. The excitement of a soccer match doesn't so much come from the actual goals- though those make fans go nuts- so much as it comes from scoring chances, which are much more frequent... or so everyone hopes. Those are where matches live or die. Scoring chances equal excitement. The ball remaining in midfield all day, it's true, is boring. You will get no arguments there. Soccer fans think those games boring too. But when the game is moving back and forth, decent shots are being taken, excitement is generated regardless of whether or not the ball actually goes in the net. (The US/England game, for reference, saw 18 shots on goal by England, and 13 by the US. 31 shots, about one every three minutes... it doesn't look like 'center holds it, holds it, holds it' anymore, does it?)
If a team marches down the field, takes a screamer of a shot, and it has a real chance but it ends up going juuuuuust wide of the post, sure, no goal was scored. If the shot is deflected by the goalkeeper's fingertips and ends up volleyed just over the crossbar, sure, no goal was scored.
But wasn't that fun to watch?
Now imagine the ball ricochets off the keeper, or the crossbar, back into play, and a second shot is taken almost immediately afterwards. The goalkeeper, having just sacrificed his body to make the first save, has to get up immediately and save another. And maybe a third, or even a fourth if the offense is bearing down particularly hard. Even if none of these shots go in, the excitement of the original scoring chance hasn't yet worn off, and while the fans are still coming down from that, they see one or more additional shots in quick succession. The excitement builds with each attempt on goal. By the time the assault is over, the fans are delirious.
And because actual goals are so rare, the appreciation for each goal that does occur increases accordingly. Each and every goal has a huge bearing on the match, because you don't know when or if another one is coming, if any are coming at all. So when a goal does get scored, the fans go absolutely crazy.
Compare to basketball. If Lionel Messi scores a goal, it's huge. It's almost a religious experince for some fans. If you're at that match, 30 years later you can tell your kids "I saw Lionel Messi score a goal." Now imagine saying "I saw Kobe Bryant score a basket." Just the one. You're not thrilled. You're disappointed, because you expected, nay demanded him to score 10-15 more just like it. Your reaction to any one basket is likely "(clap clap) All right." And that's it. On to the next possession.
A good analog in 'American' sports comes in baseball. Not runs, of course; those are much more common than goals. Think instead of home runs, which occur at something resembling equivalent frequency: not every day, and when they do, only one or a couple usually. Home runs pass the tell-your-grandkids test- "I saw Albert Pujols hit a home run."
And if you're at the ballpark, if Pujols gets that home run, you're going nuts if you're a Cardinals fan. But not quite as nuts as you would if Messi scored a goal. Why is that?
Simple: baseball has other ways to score, and more points at stake. Take a baseball game, and keeping everything else the same, make two simple rule changes:
*Home runs are the only way to put runs on the board. Hits are well and good, baserunners are well and good, but you only want to drive them home so they don't get thrown out on the basepaths.
*All home runs score one run, regardless of how many men are on base.
Now the scoring frequency, and scoreline, is brought in line with soccer. Without those additional runs, without those additional ways to score, attention focuses onto the home runs. You're going to be a lot more excited, fanatical even, when one happens. And in addition, if you've ever been to a ballgame, you know how the crowd gets excited over any long fly ball that they don't know yet will end up dying somewhere in the outfield. Imagine how much more they're going to react when they know that ball getting over the wall is the only way to score. Imagine how much more they're going to react when the outfielder goes up the wall and robs a home run. Note how excited you'll get when any powerful batter merely steps up to the plate.
Conversely, note how much you will cease to care about line drives and pitching duels and most of what goes on in the infield.
Welcome to soccer.
Just what IS it about soccer, anyway? Nobody ever scores! Halfback passes to center, back to wing, back to center! Center holds it! Holds it! Holds it!
Here's what is it about soccer.
By purely looking at the scoreline, you're not really watching the right thing. The excitement of a soccer match doesn't so much come from the actual goals- though those make fans go nuts- so much as it comes from scoring chances, which are much more frequent... or so everyone hopes. Those are where matches live or die. Scoring chances equal excitement. The ball remaining in midfield all day, it's true, is boring. You will get no arguments there. Soccer fans think those games boring too. But when the game is moving back and forth, decent shots are being taken, excitement is generated regardless of whether or not the ball actually goes in the net. (The US/England game, for reference, saw 18 shots on goal by England, and 13 by the US. 31 shots, about one every three minutes... it doesn't look like 'center holds it, holds it, holds it' anymore, does it?)
If a team marches down the field, takes a screamer of a shot, and it has a real chance but it ends up going juuuuuust wide of the post, sure, no goal was scored. If the shot is deflected by the goalkeeper's fingertips and ends up volleyed just over the crossbar, sure, no goal was scored.
But wasn't that fun to watch?
Now imagine the ball ricochets off the keeper, or the crossbar, back into play, and a second shot is taken almost immediately afterwards. The goalkeeper, having just sacrificed his body to make the first save, has to get up immediately and save another. And maybe a third, or even a fourth if the offense is bearing down particularly hard. Even if none of these shots go in, the excitement of the original scoring chance hasn't yet worn off, and while the fans are still coming down from that, they see one or more additional shots in quick succession. The excitement builds with each attempt on goal. By the time the assault is over, the fans are delirious.
And because actual goals are so rare, the appreciation for each goal that does occur increases accordingly. Each and every goal has a huge bearing on the match, because you don't know when or if another one is coming, if any are coming at all. So when a goal does get scored, the fans go absolutely crazy.
Compare to basketball. If Lionel Messi scores a goal, it's huge. It's almost a religious experince for some fans. If you're at that match, 30 years later you can tell your kids "I saw Lionel Messi score a goal." Now imagine saying "I saw Kobe Bryant score a basket." Just the one. You're not thrilled. You're disappointed, because you expected, nay demanded him to score 10-15 more just like it. Your reaction to any one basket is likely "(clap clap) All right." And that's it. On to the next possession.
A good analog in 'American' sports comes in baseball. Not runs, of course; those are much more common than goals. Think instead of home runs, which occur at something resembling equivalent frequency: not every day, and when they do, only one or a couple usually. Home runs pass the tell-your-grandkids test- "I saw Albert Pujols hit a home run."
And if you're at the ballpark, if Pujols gets that home run, you're going nuts if you're a Cardinals fan. But not quite as nuts as you would if Messi scored a goal. Why is that?
Simple: baseball has other ways to score, and more points at stake. Take a baseball game, and keeping everything else the same, make two simple rule changes:
*Home runs are the only way to put runs on the board. Hits are well and good, baserunners are well and good, but you only want to drive them home so they don't get thrown out on the basepaths.
*All home runs score one run, regardless of how many men are on base.
Now the scoring frequency, and scoreline, is brought in line with soccer. Without those additional runs, without those additional ways to score, attention focuses onto the home runs. You're going to be a lot more excited, fanatical even, when one happens. And in addition, if you've ever been to a ballgame, you know how the crowd gets excited over any long fly ball that they don't know yet will end up dying somewhere in the outfield. Imagine how much more they're going to react when they know that ball getting over the wall is the only way to score. Imagine how much more they're going to react when the outfielder goes up the wall and robs a home run. Note how excited you'll get when any powerful batter merely steps up to the plate.
Conversely, note how much you will cease to care about line drives and pitching duels and most of what goes on in the infield.
Welcome to soccer.
Sunday, June 13, 2010
Dear Everybody Who's Sick Of The Vuvuzelas
A vuvuzela, for those unaware, is a horn that is ubiquitous in the World Cup this year, with thousands of fans blowing them in a way that entire sames are besieged with a droning wall of sound. Pretty much the only people having a good time with them are the fans at the games. The TV viewers think they're annoying, the players complain that it makes it hard to communicate on the pitch.
I have just one response to all this.
I agree with Sepp Blatter's assessment that "we should not try to Europeanize an African World Cup." This is what South Africa does. This isn't the Super Bowl; we don't play the games in a sterile environment with predictable weather and fans neutral sometimes to the point of disinterest. We have to allow local flavor.
And this is South Africa's local flavor, though admittedly, they're using vuvuzelas here more than they usually do. Usually, when we're not watching, they're used more sparingly, with local power Kaizer Chiefs saving them for the last 15 minutes. As far as the noise... yeah. That's the whole point. There's a local saying, "The baboon is killed by a lot of noise." The idea is to drown out the sound, to hinder the opposition, to give the home side a wake-up call.
And if you're not African, you're the opposition.
I have just one response to all this.
I agree with Sepp Blatter's assessment that "we should not try to Europeanize an African World Cup." This is what South Africa does. This isn't the Super Bowl; we don't play the games in a sterile environment with predictable weather and fans neutral sometimes to the point of disinterest. We have to allow local flavor.
And this is South Africa's local flavor, though admittedly, they're using vuvuzelas here more than they usually do. Usually, when we're not watching, they're used more sparingly, with local power Kaizer Chiefs saving them for the last 15 minutes. As far as the noise... yeah. That's the whole point. There's a local saying, "The baboon is killed by a lot of noise." The idea is to drown out the sound, to hinder the opposition, to give the home side a wake-up call.
And if you're not African, you're the opposition.
Saturday, June 12, 2010
A Fun Fact About England
They were a belligerent in the Boer War. The conflict saw 9,093 fighters from the Orange Free State and South African Republic dead, and 27,927 civilians died in concentration camps, the original use of the term.
This tidbit's timing has absolutely nothing to do with any soccer matches that may occur in the next few hours.
In conclusion, if you hit Wayne Rooney's kneecap juuuust right, he makes funny noises. Try it out!
This tidbit's timing has absolutely nothing to do with any soccer matches that may occur in the next few hours.
In conclusion, if you hit Wayne Rooney's kneecap juuuust right, he makes funny noises. Try it out!
Thursday, June 10, 2010
World Cup 2010: Final Warmup
Tomorrow
Tomorrow
The Cup starts
Tomorrow
It's only a day awaaaaayyyyyyy
...sorry. All we're going to do today is warm up for the World Cup with highlight reels from all 32 countries, past and present, club and national. Pick your favorite and follow the link. We won't host them here, because of huge.
GROUP A
South Africa
Mexico
Uruguay
France
GROUP B
Argentina
Nigeria
South Korea
Greece
GROUP C
England
United States
Algeria
Slovenia
GROUP D
Germany
Australia
Serbia
Ghana
GROUP E
Netherlands
Denmark
Japan
Cameroon
GROUP F
Italy
Paraguay
New Zealand
Slovakia
GROUP G
Brazil
North Korea
Cote d'Ivoire
Portugal
GROUP H
Spain
Switzerland
Honduras
Chile
Tomorrow
The Cup starts
Tomorrow
It's only a day awaaaaayyyyyyy
...sorry. All we're going to do today is warm up for the World Cup with highlight reels from all 32 countries, past and present, club and national. Pick your favorite and follow the link. We won't host them here, because of huge.
GROUP A
South Africa
Mexico
Uruguay
France
GROUP B
Argentina
Nigeria
South Korea
Greece
GROUP C
England
United States
Algeria
Slovenia
GROUP D
Germany
Australia
Serbia
Ghana
GROUP E
Netherlands
Denmark
Japan
Cameroon
GROUP F
Italy
Paraguay
New Zealand
Slovakia
GROUP G
Brazil
North Korea
Cote d'Ivoire
Portugal
GROUP H
Spain
Switzerland
Honduras
Chile
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Random News Generator- Uruguay
My regular RNG list is in the shop, so the FIFA World Rankings stand in as a substitute today... and spit out 18th-ranked Uruguay.
And of course the Uruguay wires are flooded with- what a lucky thing we used the FIFA rankings- World Cup news. But we've already covered Uruguay's biggest World Cup coup in our regular blogging; the 1950 final, a 2-1 victory over Brazil in Rio de Janeiro's Maracana, a win that so demoralized the overconfident Brazilians that fans were jumping from the nose-bleed section.
There's some scattered economic talk, but it's near-impenetrable and in Uruguay it's really just World Cup, World Cup, World Cup right now. Anything Uruguay notices about their economy, they probably won't notice until La Celeste has been eliminated. So let's just go with it.
But Uruguay... you list off names of World Cup winners, and in 18 tournaments, you expect the list to be longer than seven: Brazil, Italy, Argentina, Germany, England, France... and Uruguay. Who now seem unlikely, but when they won, they were still legit contenders. And the first time they won, they were the host.
But the tournament is, for an individual team, just seven games. Anyone that's watched baseball knows that a seven-game set's just not enough to truly determine the best team. So there should be more surprising winners than this, right?
Right?
Here's Uruguay's World Cup hub on ESPN; you should be able to reach the other 31 from there with no trouble.
And of course the Uruguay wires are flooded with- what a lucky thing we used the FIFA rankings- World Cup news. But we've already covered Uruguay's biggest World Cup coup in our regular blogging; the 1950 final, a 2-1 victory over Brazil in Rio de Janeiro's Maracana, a win that so demoralized the overconfident Brazilians that fans were jumping from the nose-bleed section.
There's some scattered economic talk, but it's near-impenetrable and in Uruguay it's really just World Cup, World Cup, World Cup right now. Anything Uruguay notices about their economy, they probably won't notice until La Celeste has been eliminated. So let's just go with it.
But Uruguay... you list off names of World Cup winners, and in 18 tournaments, you expect the list to be longer than seven: Brazil, Italy, Argentina, Germany, England, France... and Uruguay. Who now seem unlikely, but when they won, they were still legit contenders. And the first time they won, they were the host.
But the tournament is, for an individual team, just seven games. Anyone that's watched baseball knows that a seven-game set's just not enough to truly determine the best team. So there should be more surprising winners than this, right?
Right?
Here's Uruguay's World Cup hub on ESPN; you should be able to reach the other 31 from there with no trouble.
Saturday, May 15, 2010
Previewing The World Cup By Displaying The Exact Opposite
Next month, 32 of the greatest soccer nations on Earth will play in the World Cup.
This is not about the World Cup. Or any of those 32 nations. This is about two of the lesser soccer nations on Earth- Barbados and Grenada- and one of the lesser cups- the 1994 Shell Caribbean Cup.
Let's set the stage. It's the end of the group phase. Barbados needs to beat Grenada by two goals to advance. However, in 1994, FIFA had a golden goal rule for international matches-- essentially, sudden death, next goal wins. Most international matches that aren't in a single-elimination round will be allowed to end in a tie, but this particular match needed a winner, and the golden goal rule applied.
So Barbados jumps out to a two-goal lead. How convenient. All is well until, with seven minutes left on the clock, Grenada busts through and makes the score 2-1. That's no good. Now Barbados has seven minutes to score against a now locked-down Grenada.
Except maybe not.
Somewhere along the line, some Caribbean Cup organizer decided that, in case of overtime, a golden goal would count as two goals instead of one. One of the Barbadian players thought fast and noted that, even though a goal on Grenada wouldn't be likely, they could still score on themselves, tie the game, go to overtime, get a golden goal, and still advance as the golden goal, being worth two, would make for the two goals they need.
So the Barbadian player, last name Sealy (soccer's not too big on the first names unless you're a major player) whips right around, takes a second to talk to a fellow defender, Stoute (probably to explain what he was about to do), and scores an own goal. Everybody's shocked for a second, then does the math and figures out the game. Now Grenada is in the situation Barbados just was, except they didn't have the option of scoring the kind of goal they're supposed to be scoring.
Once Grenada figured it out, they made for their own goal... only to find BOTH goals defended by the Barbadians. Regular time ended with the Grenadians trying to score in either goal and the Barbadians not having any of it. In overtime, Barbados sees their quick thinking pay off, as they get the golden goal, sending them through.
Grenada wasn't happy, obviously, and they had a point, but they had clearly demonstrated that they were willing to pull the same stunt. They just got outwitted. (In the next round, also a group stage, Barbados would come in third out of four teams and be eliminated. Trinidad and Tobago would beat Martinique in the final.)
There is video evidence.
This is not about the World Cup. Or any of those 32 nations. This is about two of the lesser soccer nations on Earth- Barbados and Grenada- and one of the lesser cups- the 1994 Shell Caribbean Cup.
Let's set the stage. It's the end of the group phase. Barbados needs to beat Grenada by two goals to advance. However, in 1994, FIFA had a golden goal rule for international matches-- essentially, sudden death, next goal wins. Most international matches that aren't in a single-elimination round will be allowed to end in a tie, but this particular match needed a winner, and the golden goal rule applied.
So Barbados jumps out to a two-goal lead. How convenient. All is well until, with seven minutes left on the clock, Grenada busts through and makes the score 2-1. That's no good. Now Barbados has seven minutes to score against a now locked-down Grenada.
Except maybe not.
Somewhere along the line, some Caribbean Cup organizer decided that, in case of overtime, a golden goal would count as two goals instead of one. One of the Barbadian players thought fast and noted that, even though a goal on Grenada wouldn't be likely, they could still score on themselves, tie the game, go to overtime, get a golden goal, and still advance as the golden goal, being worth two, would make for the two goals they need.
So the Barbadian player, last name Sealy (soccer's not too big on the first names unless you're a major player) whips right around, takes a second to talk to a fellow defender, Stoute (probably to explain what he was about to do), and scores an own goal. Everybody's shocked for a second, then does the math and figures out the game. Now Grenada is in the situation Barbados just was, except they didn't have the option of scoring the kind of goal they're supposed to be scoring.
Once Grenada figured it out, they made for their own goal... only to find BOTH goals defended by the Barbadians. Regular time ended with the Grenadians trying to score in either goal and the Barbadians not having any of it. In overtime, Barbados sees their quick thinking pay off, as they get the golden goal, sending them through.
Grenada wasn't happy, obviously, and they had a point, but they had clearly demonstrated that they were willing to pull the same stunt. They just got outwitted. (In the next round, also a group stage, Barbados would come in third out of four teams and be eliminated. Trinidad and Tobago would beat Martinique in the final.)
There is video evidence.
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Gol do Uruguay! ...gol do Uruguay?!
If, in June, you plan to be watching the World Cup, well, so will I. (I promise I won't do a month straight of soccer stuff.)
But if this is your first World Cup, you should get an idea of just how big this thing is. And there's no better place to start than what is probably the most legendary game in soccer history, the 1950 final between Brazil and Uruguay.
Let's set the stage before throwing it to YouTube: Brazil had not yet won the World Cup, but had a really good feeling about this one, held on home soil. The final phase that year was a four-team group, and as it happened, Brazil and Uruguay were effectively playing a final in the last pairing. Sweden and Spain had already fallen away. Uruguay needed to win, Brazil needed only to tie to get a win on goal differential.
Brazil wanted it. Brazil needed it. Brazil thought they already had it wrapped up. A crowd as estimated as highly as 210,000 people- the most ever to attend a soccer game- crammed into the Maracana in Rio de Janeiro to bear witness to the coronation.
But if this is your first World Cup, you should get an idea of just how big this thing is. And there's no better place to start than what is probably the most legendary game in soccer history, the 1950 final between Brazil and Uruguay.
Let's set the stage before throwing it to YouTube: Brazil had not yet won the World Cup, but had a really good feeling about this one, held on home soil. The final phase that year was a four-team group, and as it happened, Brazil and Uruguay were effectively playing a final in the last pairing. Sweden and Spain had already fallen away. Uruguay needed to win, Brazil needed only to tie to get a win on goal differential.
Brazil wanted it. Brazil needed it. Brazil thought they already had it wrapped up. A crowd as estimated as highly as 210,000 people- the most ever to attend a soccer game- crammed into the Maracana in Rio de Janeiro to bear witness to the coronation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)