Sports: the World Cup

What with the NBA finals, the NHL finals, not to mention beisbol, the Sports thread has gotten crowded, and now the World Cup approaches. So here's a thread dedicated to the beautiful game: fact, speculation, blather, all are welcome.

The first (group) phase, beginning June 11th in South Africa:

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
Ivory Coast
Portugal

Group H

Spain
Switzerland
Honduras
Chile

I start out cheering for Japan, my former home. Then I move to whoever's the biggest underdog. Cote d'Ivoire?

>3 MeditationesMartini: - the Ivory Coast are a good team; most of the squad play in the top leagues of Europe. Japan have a chance to qualify from their group; they are technically good but possibly lack a cutting edge, and may be physically over-powered.

> yeah, the J's have done decently in the last couple of world cups, certainly. It breaks my heart--still--that Nakata is done. (He lacks honour.) Glad to hear that Ivory Coast have a shot at a decent result; they deserve it. What about Algeria? They suck, right?

Also, jargoneer, having just looked at your profile page, let me say that I admire your commitment to biweekly minstrelsy. I just realized it's been six fucking months since I saw a show--luckily LCD Soundsystem is tomorrow.

>5 MeditationesMartini: - it was a surprise that Algeria qualified: they ended up playing Egypt (who are the Champions of Africa) in a sudden-death play-off, which they won 1-0. I know a couple of their players, one plays for Rangers, Scottish champions, but haven't seen them play for a while - typically, they are well organised but lack bite. Group C is interesting: England look strong favourites but they are not as strong as they like people to believe (a few injuries and they could struggle); Slovenia punch well above their weight and they could end up being one of the surprise packages of the tournament; I'm not sure about the US, they look strong in goal and midfield but weak in defence and attack. I think England and Slovenia will qualify for the next round but the US and Algeria do have a chance.

>6 MeditationesMartini: - there is a lot of cheap and free music in Edinburgh at present so it's quite easy to see a lot of live stuff. Also three new venues have opened giving established bands more places to play. It's interesting that the increase in live music has been matched by the decline of CD sales - artists just seem willing to get out there and play now - they just can't sit back and wait for the money to roll in.

For once I have 3 teams in the finals which I can call in all conscience my home team.

NZ, Australia & England.

NZ have no chance of getting through to the next round. Not enough technical skill or guile.

Australia peaked in the last world cup - apart from Cahil their top players are now passed their peak.

And what of England, zeno? You conspicuously didn't comment. After the Premier League teams went down in the Champions League, none of them reaching the semifinals, are the English less optimistic about their WC fortunes than usual?

The pommies will not reach the final Peter. They have a good manager in Capello, and will have a few moments of heroics, enough to give the red top papers here something to shout about, but do not have the beating of the best teams at the tournament.

I would have said that myself, but it's somewhat like criticizing someone's mother or father: you just don't do it.

Can anyone recommend a good site or book that explains (preferably with illustrations) the rules of soccer? It's for an adult who'd like to follow the World Cup this year. Well, it's for me actually.

7: That Egypt/Algeria match was also quite violent and made the news for hooliganism - on both sides. I forget who attacked whose embassy and who attacked businessmen in their country from the other one but it was pretty immature on both sides. I was sorry not to root for Egypt in the WC this year.

I usually root for Nigeria though they are not the team they once were when they won the Olympics. Also the US of course.

Which of these groups is the Group from Hell this year? I think they all look sort of evenly matched but I am not so up on all the various teams.

12: While we are at it can someone explain the term off side? My sons have tried multiple times but I seem to be incapable of getting the concept.

I've posted this before:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ta1KfRX06kA

presently reading the Soccer War by Kapuscinski, great stuff !!!

>12 Thrin: - try the BBC site - Laws of football

>13 anna_in_pdx: - the simplest way to understand offside is to picture the goalkeeper and the defence. An attacker cannot be between the two before the ball is played to him. See the BBC site above for visual representation of the law.

Most of the groups look fairly straightforward for the big teams - the toughest groups look like B, D and G.

#15 jargoneer - Many thanks for that BBC site.

#13 anna - and #15 jargoneer - I've just had a look at the offside rule on the BBC's site and also watched the youtube link. Was Socrates off-side at about 2 minutes into the video? Apparently Marx thought so.

>13 anna_in_pdx:. Thank you, Anna. I was hoping you would reprise that classic football match.

18: Happy to oblige! :)

12: That link that Janepriceestrada posted in another thread is truly terrific. I read the entire blog yesterday to bone up on my World Cup knowledge level. I also loved that the Holland team was compared to the Portland Trail Blazers...
http://theunlikelyfan.blogspot.com/
Great stuff. Lots of Youtube video links. Lots of history. And pretty funny as well.

Looking at Jane's entry (on Sports scores, events, trivia, nostalgia, banter, etc. from which this thread was begat), I had to think twice about rooting for France (not that they have a chance this year, as dysfunctional as they are under Coach Domenech), because how could I root for Duke, after all? But then, I was leaning toward Chile (though I know nothing about the team), and the New Orleans Saints connection makes me lean further that way. Here's the original link:

http://theunlikelyfan.blogspot.com/2010/05/disclaimer-im-new-to-this-site-and-im...

This morning's World Cup news:

Didier Drogba's participation in the World Cup was uncertain after an Ivory Coast official said the captain broke his right arm on Friday. Drogba's fracture was confirmed by doctors after he was taken off 15 minutes into Ivory Coast's 2-0 win against Japan in a friendly.

>21 copyedit52: - that's disappointing but Rio Ferdinand is out of the World Cup due a knee injury caused by a fellow player, Emile Heskey. (Being Scottish, I find this a little amusing; if I was English I'd be fuming, Heskey is very very lucky just being there).

22> I'd be fuming if I were English too: No sex allowed for England's soccer players!

Whud I say about sex, or England, for that matter? I was talking about Didier Drogba, arguably the most potent goal scorer in the world, without whom it's hard to imagine how Ivory Coast can advance to the (one-game-elimination) knockout phase of the World Cup.

In other news, France lost to unheralded China in a friendly today, 1-0. I wonder if they'll even get out of the first round.

Oh, I see. The most potent goal scorer. The first time I read that I thought it said the most potent scorer which made Freeque's comment about sex more meaningful.

Is it good to be a most potent scorer? Or is it better just to score and leave the potency out of it?

Where in message 21 did I say potent? Methinks you two guys got a problem.

But my friend, you've posted more than #21, I was referring to this line in #24, "...arguably the most potent goal scorer in the world". Potent - it's the fourth word along from the start of the quoted piece.

Ah. Excuse me then. Obviously only Henri has a problem.

Ooops. I meant say "22>", not "21>". Fixed it.

Results of recent friendlies between World Cup teams:

Argentina 1, Germany 0
Slovenia 3, New Zealand 1
England 3, Mexico 1
Netherlands 2, Mexico 1
Australia 1, New Zealand 0
Slovakia 1, Cameroon 1
New Zealand 1, Serbia 0
England 2, Japan 1
Paraguay 2, Ivory Coast 2
Australia 1, Denmark 0
Netherlands 4, Ghana 1
Portugal 3, Cameroon 1
Paraguay 2, Greece 0
Spain 1, South Korea 0
Mexico 2, Italy 1
Ivory Coast 2, Japan 0

today's results, so far:

United States 3, Australia 1
South Africa 1, Denmark 0

Drogba is NOT out the tournament yet - if surgery fixes the break he could still play; although with his style of play it would probably inhibit him.

I wouldn't call him the most potent goal scorer in the world, that has been David Villa in the last two years. The difference is that Drogba doesn't have to score to be effective, he is so good at making life difficult for the opposition. (Spain are fortunate in that they have Torres to do that, and Villa to mop everything up).

More significant injuries, to go with Didier Drogba (Ivory Coast), who most likely will play next week, despite a broken arm, and Rio Ferdinand (England) who definitely won't play:

Netherlands winger Arjen Robben limped off the field with a left hamstring injury sustained during a friendly between Netherlands and Hungary (a non-WC team), which the Dutch won, 6-1.

Nigeria midfielder John Obi Mikel was ruled out of the tournament in South Africa because of his ailing knee.

Other friendlies between WC teams today:

Serbia 4, Cameroon 3
Switzerland 1, Italy 1

In other news, David Beckham broke both shins getting out of bed this morning.

World Cup Group Stage

Each team plays the other three in its group (see #2 for complete group listings), with the top two advancing to the sixteen-team (one-game) knockout round. Groups A and B begin play this Friday and Saturday. The approximate odds to advance from the group:

Group A

France 5-2
Mexico 4-1
Uruguay 9-2
South Africa 8-1

Group B

Argentina 3-2
Nigeria 6-1
Greece 9-1
South Korea 12-1

I'm just going to say:

ALLEZ LES BLEUS!

And now I will probably be avoiding this thread starting Friday 'cause I will be recording every game and do not wish to be spoiled. :)

World Cup Group Stage

Each team plays the other three in its group, the top two advancing to the sixteen-team knockout round. Groups C and D begin play this Saturday and Sunday. The approximate odds to advance:

Group C

England 3-2
United States 11-2
Slovenia 13-1
Algeria 23-1

Group D

Germany 2-1
Serbia 9-2
Ghana 6-1
Australia 10-1

World Cup Group Stage

The remaining four groups and their approximate odds to advance to the sixteen-team knockout round:

Group E
plays Monday, June 14

Netherlands 3-2
Denmark 11-2
Cameroon 13-2
Japan 20-1

Group F
plays Monday & Tuesday

Italy 3-2
Paraguay 4-1
Slovakia 17-2
New Zealand 71-0

Group G
plays Tuesday

Brazil 3-2
Portugal 9-2
Ivory Coast 6-1
North Korea 124-1

Group H
plays Wednesday

Spain 3-2
Chile 7-1
Switzerland 16-1
Honduras 62-1

New Zealand at 71-0! I knew things look bleak, but never realised their chances were discounted to that degree....

They must be US odds because most Europeans would back Slovenia - if they can beat Russia to qualify then they should be favourites against the US.

ps....71-0 flatters NZ.

Alas, jargoneer, no. I consulted several websites, all English, to record the approximate odds. Apparently, people are betting like crazy in the UK. Which would mean, zeno, that 71-0 for the Kiwis is probably an underlay (overbet). As for "European" inclinations, they might well be less significant than national pride. In which case, if you're a bettor, Slovenia could be a bargain when they face the U.S.

From what I've been reading, Italy at 3-2 and France, even at 5-2, might well also be underlays: the supposed age factor for the Azzurri, and the offensive confusion of Les Bleus.

>40 copyedit52: - betting is a very big business in the UK. Some of the odds are dependent on the amount of betting - hence the small odds for England. I am surprised about their attitude to Slovenia: I know it's a small country with a small player base but currently they seem to be able to punch well above their weight (the sum of the parts etc). Looking at the US squad I just don't see the quality they had in the past (players like Reyna & McBride spring to mind) but I could say the same about most of the squads at this WC - that's what may make it interesting. (The big exception is Spain who have such depth they would win their group with players they left at home).

Looking beyond the group stage--it seemed wiser not to, since it will reveal a lot, and no doubt alter the odds (and of course which teams will still be playing)--the consensus seems to be Brazil and Spain in the final. No other national teams even come close.

>42 copyedit52: - the BBC did a poll of experts from all round the world and the top 4 were -

1. Spain
2. Brazil
3. Argentina
4. England

First & second look realistic except Spain have a history of collapsing at the WC. Not sure about 3 & 4 though: England lose Rooney and they will struggle, Argentina are managed by Maradona and he's mad - God knows what team he'll put out.

So far, except for Ghana beating Serbia, the odds makers (that is, the bettors) seem to have it right. Today we'll see what Italy is made of.

why is the BBC excluding the Germans ? They were the only one to impress so far.

I dunno, but this British outlet has the best virtual, real-time commentary:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/worldcup2010

>45 Macumbeira: - The standard of football so far has been woeful with the exception of Germany, although Messi showed some class. The reason Germany didn't appear in the BBC poll was that most experts (remember this poll included experts from all over the world) weren't sure what Germany had to offer - they had lost a few important players and their squad was quite inexperienced. Much as I liked what I saw I still have doubts have their defence.

>44 copyedit52: - Italy won't impress tonight; even when they do well they always start badly. I am worried about them (they are the international team, after Scotland, of course, I follow) - the squad looks old and lacking pace and guile. Paraguay are a good team who, if they muster enough self-belief away from home, could win tonight.

Japan! I have a long and ignominious history of cheering for the Japanese against African teams to whom victory would probably mean a lot more and then feeling bad about myself when Japan wins. EAT IT CAMEROON

Longest shot to win so far. Not that anyone here is actually betting ...

A classmate and I have a certain gentleman's wager arranged involving noogies.

Noogies? In Vancouver, BC? And I thought that was a New York thing.

Well, you take your noogies, I, myself, do all my betting with nuggs.

I can't locate that word anywhere. There's NUGS in an online dictionary, which stands for National Union of Ghana Students, but otherwise ... Is it short for nuggets? Is it a southern obscenity? Or are you just fuggen with everyone?

YES! 93RD minute equaliser!!

FYI: the Kiwis of New Zealand (zeno's hometown, so to speak) wrest a tie from Slovakia. Every team in Group F is now on equal footing, with one point each after the first game.

I saw a headline on some US paper in very large print that said USA WINS 1-1. I know what that is supposed to mean, a tie against England is seen as a tremendous upset, but as someone said there are no Upset Victory Ties in soccer.

Well done to NZ, first point in a WC, but Slovakia should be ashamed of themselves: NZ are a poor team and Slovakia just frittered the match away.

I just hope Brazil and Spain play some football over the next 24 hours - the standard of play so far has been shocking.

Do you think that might be because in the group stage so many favored teams are playing so cautiously? Or is WC soccer overrated, compared to club football?

or is it that ball?

it's the bloody vuvuzela's. Like bees buzzing in your head. How can anyone play with that sound ?

Good point. I watched with the sound turned off yesterday.

>59 dchaikin: - no, you have the same problem with the cricket and rugby world cups. I can't comment on the parochial games played in the US ;-D

>58 copyedit52: - there is a fear factor that if you lose your first match then you are really struggling but that still doesn't explain why so much of the football has been technically poor (there has been a lot of criticism of the ball - too light, moves in the air too much. etc). Hopefully, with the second round starting tomorrow, things will improve.
The advantage clubs have over national teams is that the players have months getting used to playing together - most international teams are effectively scratch teams. One of the reasons that Germany may have looked good is that they have promoted so many players from the under-21 team who are now used to playing together.

>57 Jargoneer: true enough on the shocking, but the corollary has been some upset wins (or ties, really), which makes me cheer. And I guess Yun-Nam Ji will be looking forward to retiring to his palace made of sticks.

I thought the N. Koreans were playing for their lives (literally), while Brazil is expected to cruise. I was very surprised by the score though. It reminds me of the '76 Olympics when the American marathoner (Frank Shorter, I think was his name) was supposed to lap the field only to find the East German enter the stadium and nearly finish his victory lap before he even entered the stadium. As I recall that was as big a WTF moment as any in sport (except the guy who broke the long jump record by two feet in '68).

BTW, don't get me wrong, I did not see N. Korea vs. Brazil, I just read the headline for it in the paper.

This just in:

Full time: Spain 0 Switzerland 1

Astonishing. We knew Spain would breathe life into the World Cup, but we didn't expect it to be like this. This is one of the great World Cup shocks.

We've seen a lot of cautious play (and a lot of cautions, it seems to me), I wonder how much that is from teams playing it safe in the opening game, and how much from defensive tactics giving underdogs a chance to capitalise on their one or two quality chances for a score.

I only followed via MatchCast, but it seemed not to have been luck on the part of Switzerland that they defended so well, and took just a few but quality shots.

Spain could have been unlucky, too -- couldn't tell how many of their missed shots were quality from the webcast.

That's just typical Spain - they have turned up at WC after WC with excellent players only to collapse under expectations. That was only their second defeat in 4 years, to a team that are decidedly average. They may struggle to qualify now - they need win both matches well to be certain.

It is slightly disturbing how supposedly good attacking teams have struggled to break down defences - although perhaps we shouldn't be surprised, Inter Milan won the CL using the same tactics.

A new AP report suggests the BBC, after receiving more than 500 complaints about the noise produced by the plastic horns, may introduce an option for viewers to mute it:

"We have already taken steps to minimize the noise and are continuing to monitor the situation. If the vuvuzela continues to impact on audience enjoyment, we will look at what other options we can take to reduce the volume further."

I kind of like the vuvzela myself--it adds a particular patina to the aural aesthetic. Of course, I'm not there. (On another note, there is a table of very vocal South Africans--no vuvuzelas--and a couple tables of voluble I believe that word can only be used to describe Spanish speakers under international law here in Joe's Cafe on Commercial Drive which is owned by a delightful Brazilian man whose cappuccinos are as fluffy as a cloud. Many, many dirty looks are being exchanged, and I would not rule out eventual blood.)

Anyway, I think I will adopt Spain as my go-to team when I have nobody left to cheer for that actually means something to me. They deserve a win.

Prepare your head for some noogies, booksie.

>70 copyedit52: it wuz born prepared.

Adidas, in answering criticisms of the ball, have stated it is not the ball that is at fault, it's the players not practising enough and the effects of altitude. This new ball, they added, is the roundest ball ever.

<72

Hmmn. Bowling balls and soap bubbles also tend to be round, but I'm not sure that characteristic is key to making either a better football.

elenchus: Did you want to say something?

Well! apparently I lost a post.

I've read a bit about the concerns re: the new ball. Legitimate or not, as a player my response to adidas would be to note that both bowling balls and soap bubbles are quite round, but that doesn't make either a better football.

Seems a ridiculous comment from adidas, haven't they any better PR department than that?

Viva Mexico! THAT upset was a decent game, and the winners were deserving. Heartbroken by Argentina-Korea, though. Maradona and his hand of God can suck it, if that's even anatomically possible.

Today's upset:

Serbia 1, Germany 0

Again a lot of cautions, but from the 30 minutes I saw (rather than following via webcast), they seemed deserved.

I like underdogs, I like that matches don't end as they're supposed to. Now what will I be saying at the end of the US-Slovenia match?

Well, at the half it was 2-0 Slovenia. I'm running down to our lobby to check on the game right now. Update in a few...

2-1 as of now. I'll be ducking out to see the end, hopefully (lots of work to do, actually, but you only live once)

Full time: Slovenia 2, United States 2

Slovenia won the first half, the U.S. the second, with what would have been the winning, third goal for the U.S. called back, for reasons that are unclear.

That seemed an entertaining match, once again I only followed by webcast (blog-style, no video).

There was nothing mentioned of the goal called back, I will definitely check video highlights tonight.

That a nation of 2MM fields a team that is obviously at least the equal of a nation of 280MM shows how different are the sport cultures of SVN and USA.

That shitheel ref is a cheat. You could see it in his face. A typical know-it-all ref.

Maybe the same guy who ruined the Lakers-Celtics game last night.

Reasons that are unclear? It was an off side! :)
(remembering our earlier convo)

Not clear on the off side. There were a couple of holdings before the phantom off side.

It couldn't be an off sides call because there were no players off sides on that play. Could only be about a foul in the box but those were 50/50 shoves in the box that are quite typical for free kicks and corners of that nature.

Blasted!

Perhaps of interest to some of you: soccer, sociology, and politics:

http://www.salon.com/news/world_cup/index.html?story=/books/feature/2010/06/18/l...

Group C

Today's results:

Slovenia 2, United States 2
England 0, Algeria 0

Standings after two games
3 points for a win, 1 for a draw
(top two finishers advance)

Slovenia 1 win 1 draw 4 points
U.S. 0 wins 2 draws 2 points
England 0 wins 2 draws 2 points
Algeria 0 wins 1 draw 1 point

Remaining games:
Wednesday, June 23

Slovenia vs. England
U.S. vs. Algeria

>88 copyedit52:

Like the book, I'll add it to my wishlist. It reminds me of The Emperor Has No Clothes though that looks at entertainment media rather than football / soccer.

I am just catching up with this thread.

As a young boy growing up in Bratislava, Czechoslovakia, (now Slovakia) I saw the great Pele and his Santos club play MY team, Slovan Bratislava. I have been a huge soccer fan all my life.

Can you imagine my dismay at that sloppy, sloppy, sloppy goal scored against Slovakia in the dying seconds of extra time by New Zealand. Quite destroyed my week. We now absolutely have to beat Paraguay on Sunday and I am not sure we can. Or perhaps in keeping with the wins by the Swiss and the Serbs we will beat the Azzuri. Wouldn't that just rock the world!

Expectations have not ruled the day in this Cup, and that has proven entertaining. And destroyed the week for a number of us, I think!

I'm particularly looking forward to Ivory Coast-Brazil on Sunday. That's an upset I'd like to see.

Netherlands 1, Japan 0

A goal by Wesley Sneijder. Not an inspired game for the Dutch, who neverthless seem to be the great European hope at the moment (though they won all three groups games in the last WC and then collapsed in the knockout stage).

This, from the Guardian coverage:

The Dutch are well-known fans of Japanese cuisine. "Lots of players eat sushi in our team," said Dirk Kuyt yesterday, "and we hope we will have them for dinner tomorrow."

Wow, I understand the UK press are not known for perspicacious football analysis, but that seems ... well, almost American!

I've had the same feel about the Dutch, and then wonder if I just don't understand the tactical side of things, maybe they're more on their game than I can recognise.

Group D

Yesterday's and today's results:

Serbia 1, Germany 0
Ghana 1, Australia 1
(Socceroos played with 10 men most of the game, after Harry Kewell red-carded for a hand ball in the 24th minute)

Standings after two games
3 points for a win, 1 for a draw
(top two finishers advance)

Ghana 1 win 1 draw 4 points
Germany 1 win 1 loss 3 points
Serbia 1 win 1 loss 3 points
Australia 1 draw 1 loss 1 point

Remaining games:
Wednesday, June 23

Ghana vs. Germany
Australia vs. Serbia

>95 elenchus: - not true; the quality papers provide very good analysis of football. The Kuyt quote was for some light relief.

Re - the USA disallowed goal. Shocking decision - there was no foul by any American player; on the other hand, there was also a stonewall penalty for the US. (The ref in the Germany was as bad - sending off Klose was a joke).

>94 copyedit52: - I think you mean Euro 2008, where the Dutch looked great in their group matches but then were beaten by Russia. They didn't collapse though, the Russians were excellent. (In 2006, the Dutch edged a couple of tight matches, finished second in their group and went out in round of 16).

Right. Thanks for the correction, jargoneer. And you're right too about the Guardian's lighthearted remarks while presenting the virtual, real-time matches.

People should be glad they don't live in the UK - the England team is now getting wall-to-wall coverage - every single aspect of the Algerian match, the players, the set-up, etc, is getting examined in minute detail.

So I wonder how the French are feeling. Is it that Gallic sangfroid? That hauteur? All is well? Aaaah, here is a report:

According to reports in L’Equipe, Anelka took offence to a dressing down from team manager Raymond Domenech during halftime of France’s 2-0 loss to Mexico.

Domenech criticized Anelka, one of the most accomplished forwards in world football, for straying out of France’s strict formation.

Anelka reportedly screamed at his coach: “Go f--- yourself you son of a whore.”

Domenech yanked Anelka from the match. He also preceded his team back out onto the pitch by a good minute.

French officials now apparently plan to ship Anelka home.

C'est amusant, ca, tres amusant!

Yeah, I read all that. (Anelka is in fact gone now.) And that no one likes Gourcuff except his Bordeaux teammate Toulanan, and apparently wouldn't pass him the ball during the game; Ribery, for instance. What a mess. And clearly an indictment of the manager, whose job description in the modern age of athletics (and spoiled athletes) has to include being a psychologist and social worker as well as a technician (which Domenech does not excel at either). I also read that Zidane more or less took over managing the team during the last WC, out of the locker room, and I believe it.

Having said all this, I have to add that I am by no means anti-French. No team in the world has as varied a racial and ethnic mix as Les Bleus, and (arguably) few nations have such superb players (Argentina, Brazil), who generally ply their fortunes outside of France.

see JUH-ness sah-veh see VYAY-esse poo-veh?!

Most mysterious, Mac.

A man of few words, you are.

I am in Marketing. Mystifying is everything !

Group F

Today's results:

Paraguay 2, Slovakia 0
Italy 1, New Zealand 1

Standings after two games
3 points for a win, 1 for a draw
(top two finishers advance)

Paraguay 1 win 1 draw 4 points
Italy 2 draws 2 points
New Zealand 2 draws 2 points
Slovakia 1 draw 1 loss 1 point

Remaining games:
Thursday, June 24

Slovakia vs. Italy
Paraguay vs. New Zealand

So if both Paraguay and New Zealand can manage to draw with Italy, can the Slovaks continue the upsets, beat the Italians, qualify, and eliminate the Italians? I wonder what odds I can get on a Slovak win??

I suspect Italy will come out hungry, so good luck. New Zealand was fun to watch, though.

The simplest(!) way Slovakia would qualify for the knockout round would be if they beat Italy, and New Zealand ties Paraguay. If N.Z. actually beats Paraguay, and Slovakia beats Italy, then N.Z. would qualify and the goal differential between Paraguay and Slovakia would determine which one advances.

I cannot find the odds on Slovakia advancing based upon the above-mentioned this and that, but the odds on the Slovaks simply (!) beating Italy are 5-1 against.

In the spirit of sharing soccer / football-related reading, I recently found the following site and find it very instructive:
http://www.zonalmarking.net/

The author(s) provide interesting breakdowns of most Cup matches within a day or so of the match.

At least three-quarters of what is shared is above my head, but I've never had a primer on tactics so to me, that fact speaks to the quality of the analysis provided. When I played as a kid, either the coaches never broached the topic of tactics, or I never realised it was something to learn, or both. So I'm playing catch up on the sidelines.

Thanks for that, elenchus. Judging by the games I've actually seen, the summations capture the sense of what went on. Seems I shouldn't have I bypassed Denmark-Cameroon. But then, the second round of games has shown more flair from a lot of teams.

From today's New York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/21/sports/soccer/21iht-WCFRANCE.html?ref=sports

>110 elenchus: - that was interesting but I didn't agree with their analysis of the Italy-NZ match. The Italians were more dominant in the first half playing 4-4-2; Lippi's substitutions seemed to knock them off balance allowing NZ to defend more comfortably and even move forward. They forgot to look at the players Italy had available: 4-3-3 works when you have 1 out-and-out striker and two floating creative players (look at Brazil for example); Italy don't have players who can play like that (the days of Zola, Baggio, Totti, etc, now seem a long way off). Lippi is panicking and that's why he trying 4-3-3; if he saw it as a serious option he would have taken players like Cassano or Rossi. Italy would do best to acknowledge their limitations and stick to 4-4-2.

>111 copyedit52: - the clip that is doing the rounds in the UK is the French fitness coach arguing with Evra (the French captain), then throwing his accreditation badge away. It's a shambles but it has happened before - in 2002 France were the red-hot favourites to win the WC: they finished the group stage with 1 point. In the old days the Dutch were masters at this kind of fiasco but they seem quite well balanced now.

The French will likely be put out of their misery today. They'd have to beat South Africa by a ton of goals and hope that Mexico beats Uruguay to get to the knockout stage. And given the team's contentiousness and bad morale, they might not even beat the host nation.

The French are well on their way.

I'm rooting for Mexico and South Africa, though SA would find it easier if Uruguay wins and SA beat Mexico on goal differential.

Go RSA! Go Uruguay!!

I trust the whole world is rooting for SA today, save only the French players' wives.

Group A Final Standings
top two move on

Uruguay 2 wins 1 draw 7 points
Mexico 1 win, 1 draw 4 points
South Africa 1 win, 1 draw 4 points
France 1 draw 1 point

Uruguay and Mexico move to the knockout phase, the latter because of a better goal differential (goals scored vs. goals against) than South Africa.

Concerning France: much has been said and written, and no doubt more will be, but the red card that reduced them to 10 men early in the South Africa game should not be part of the general condemnation: it was overly harsh and all but ended any redemptive possibilities for Les Bleus.

>116 copyedit52:

What's your assessment of the carding in this Cup?

For the most part I've not seen the infractions myself, so I can't judge. I wonder if the consensus is that the refs are overzealous in handing out red cards (or in some cases, a second yellow card in the game: same effect).

The stray comments I've picked up online have made it difficult for me to tell if this is an issue or not. It's sad when an outcome is largely determined by an undeserved refereeing decision.

I haven't seen enough games either to make that assessment, so I don't know if the one I saw this morning was typical or not.

The red cards against Switzerland and Germany (2nd games for both) seemed a bit harsh - from my I'm-American-and-have-no-idea-what's-actually-going-on perspective.

I had the Germany - Switzerland match specifically in mind, too.

The worst sending of the tournament so far was Kaka - he got sent off for someone running into him.

Part of the problem with the refereeing is Fifa, who, every World Cup, start by announcing that they will crack down on foul play - the referees feel under pressure and make poor decisions.

>121 Jargoneer:

I actually saw that match, and it appeared that Kaka cocked his elbow with the specific intention of letting the player pole-axe himself. Seemed to me that Kaka knew what he was doing, making it look accidental.

I was watching on Univision, and they showed from several different angles --clearly, the Univision producers weren't happy and maybe had an axe to grind. (A pole-axe!) But I saw only the video, no audio as I don't understand Spanish, so I wasn't called to look at it from the noise level. Looking up from what I was doing, it seemed clear to me it was a nasty foul.

>122 elenchus: - I think you may be in a minority of one: a BBC panel comprised of a Scotsman, a Frenchman, and a German all thought that Kaka should have the card rescinded, and the IC player should be banned for 2 matches. That seems to be a fair reflection of the general opinion among pundits and fans. There has been too much 'faking' of injuries in this tournament - especially holding the face when the player has barely been touched.

123: I always thought that the injury faking thing was something that set soccer apart from other sports. So many soccer players when they take a fall seem to think it's de rigeur to writhe in pretend agony. It's kind of fun to watch, but it also makes me (as an extremely non-expert spectator) have trouble figuring out if an injury is for real. Soccer players are, in general, like the boy who cries wolf. (Especially Italy.)

I know that soccer is actually a fairly injury prone sport... but like I said it's often really hard to tell what's real.

Group B Final Standings
top two move on

Argentina 3 wins 9 points
South Korea 1 win 1 draw 4 points
Greece 1 win 3 points
Nigeria 1 draw 1 point

Ah, poor Nigeria. I always root for them.

>126 anna_in_pdx: yeah. the fans put on such a good show. but I'm happy about SK advancing. DAEHAN MINGUK! Clap clap clap clap - clap clap!

>123 Jargoneer:

It would not be the first time!

I admit I hadn't thought of that carding incident since watching it live, and hadn't followed up on any comments to see if my take was accepted.

But I share anna_in_pdx's point that faking, if not unique in soccer, certainly is far more evident to the fan than in other sports I follow.* And I agree that the Ivorian player (and several others in the match) made spectacles of themselves. It's a part of the game that prompts an instant and almost visceral negative reaction on my part, no matter whether it's from a team I support or not. Perhaps I let my gut lead my interpretation in this case.

* I suspect it occurs enough in the NFL, and there are versions of it in baseball, but they just aren't apparent to me, esp in a televised game.

And don't forget professional basketball, where flopping is not only endemic but, as anna puts it, de rigueur.

I almost added that, but I don't follow or play the game it so I wasn't confident of my guess.

Big day for Group C:

Slovenia vs. England
U.S. vs. Algeria

The plotline going in:

Slovenia 1 win 1 draw 4 points
U.S. 0 wins 2 draws 2 points
England 0 wins 2 draws 2 points
Algeria 0 wins 1 draw 1 point

Top two finishers advance to the knockout round

Wow, what a great final 4 minutes of that Algeria-US match. US wins group C!

My team could not have put me through more frustrations if they tried with all of their missed attempts -- but way to pull through with a true underdog ending, America.

Gut-wrenching, even when tracked only by blog-posts.

Who do we face in the knockout rounds?

I think my achievable goal is for US to win one more game, can't see them proceeding beyond that given their lack of finishing.

Group C

Today's results

England 1, Slovenia 0
U.S. 1, Algeria 0

Final Standings
top two teams move into knockout round

U.S. 1 win 2 draws 5 points
England 1 wins 2 draws 5 points
Slovenia 1 win 1 draw 4 points
Algeria 0 wins 1 draw 1 point

>133 Phocion: - the US were red-hot favourites to beat Algeria so it wasn't exactly an underdog winning through, it was a favourite scraping through.

>134 elenchus: - no-one knows yet - all depends on what happens in the Germany group tonight. Basically it could be anyone of Germany, Ghana, Serbia & Australia. Most likely is Serbia, then Germany.

I've been playing soccer for 17 years, watching it just as long and have watched pretty much every 2010 World Cup game.

The red cards have been overly harsh this cup. Most of the yellows have been fair but the reds have for the most part come out of the blue. The Kaka call was bogus as the player was really faking his "injury".

Ah. Not sure of US chances against Serbia, but I have very little confidence against Germany, whatever doubts their supporters have had this Cup.

Germany, actually, is another side I tend to support and yet which enrage me with displays of diving and gamesmanship. I only saw one match this Cup so far, and it was fairly tame in that regard. But they do it to me, one time or another, I'm bracing myself.

Group D

Today's results

Germany 1, Ghana 0
Australia 2, Serbia 1

Final standings
top two teams move to knockout stage

Germany 2 wins 6 points
Ghana 1 win 1 draw 4 points
Australia 1 win I draw 4 points
Serbia 1 win 3 points

Ghana moves on because of better goal differential than Australia

Knockout Round
16 teams; one loss and you're eliminated

Between winners and runner-ups of Groups A and B

Uruguay vs. South Korea
Argentina vs. Mexico

Between winners and runner-ups of Groups C and D

Germany vs. England
United States vs. Ghana

Group winners in italics

Some wag in the newspaper today wrote that when Dudu and Kaka were allowed to run, things would get Messi.

So far, that's my favorite moment of the World Cup.

Well, clearly I'll watch Germany v England. (And hope for the early exit of the English.)

Other hopes rest in South Korea, Mexico, Ghana. Underdogs all around! (?)

I'm like you, books, I think: I find an underdog to root for. It was true even during the U.S.-Algeria game this morning, and then, to my surprise, I realized I felt good when Donovan planted that ball in the goal for the stunning victory.

Group F

Today's final games
(top two teams advance)

Slovakia vs. Italy
Paraguay vs. New Zealand

Current standings

Paraguay 1 win, 1 draw 4 points
Italy 2 draws 2 points
New Zealand 2 draws 2 points
Slovakia 1 draw 1 point

Group F

Today's results

Slovakia 3, Italy 2
Paraguay 0, New Zealand 0

Final standings
top two teams move to knockout stage

Paraguay 1 win 2 draws 5points
Slovakia 1 win 1 draw 4 points
New Zealand 3 draws 3 points
Italy 2 draws 2 points

Personal remarks: polutropos must be a happy fellow today, and New Zealander zenomax a sad one; but not too sad, I hope, with the Kiwis drawing three times (going unbeaten) at odds of over 70-1. And then there are the Azzurri, of course, the former champs, gone now.

Agree about Kiwis, what a Cup for the All Whites.

And Italy-Slovakia: 4 goals in the last 15 minutes! Tired of football, they pretended to play basketball: run down the field, score, run down the opposite field, score ...

That is the worst Italian performance for 36 years and thoroughly deserved - Italian football is in the doldrums. (Strange to say when Inter Milan won the CL but they won playing no Italians - which personally I think shouldn't be allowed). They is a lack of talent coming through the clubs and much of it is because the big clubs just buy players (it's the same in England). The difference in Germany and Spain is that the governing bodies put all their efforts into producing more players.

Kind of you to think of me Peter.

If you had told me the All Whites would not lose a game, and would finish ahead of Italy, I would have had trouble believing you. So reasons to be sanguine, if not downright cheerful.

However, in the last few minutes of the game I was willing New Zealand to score. A goal would have put them top of the group and on the way to playing Japan!

BTW, copyedit52: you nailed the group outcome in your post 109 scenario. Perhaps you placed a bet and can treat yourself to a well-deserved Italian ice.

You're too kind. I didn't think they'd do it. Meanwhile:

Netherlands 2, Cameroon 1
Japan 3, Denmark 1

Back in a few minutes with the Group E final standings and the E-F knockout round match-ups.

Group E final standings

Netherlands 3 wins 9 points
Japan 2 wins 6 points
Denmark 1 win 3 points
Cameroon no wins, no ties 0 points

Knockout Round

Groups E and F winners and runner-ups:

Netherlands vs. Slovakia
Paraguay vs. Japan

Group winners in italics

So after talking of placing a ludicrous bet on Slovakia beating Italy I of course did not since after that pathetic performance against Paraguay, I, like every one else, was convinced the Slovaks would get beat up. And I was not able to follow the match at all and did not find out even the result til many hours later. A stunning superlative result! I wonder if there is a way of seeing it after the fact.

Yes, I am most thrilled! And against a pretty arrogant Azzuri team. Incredible!

Things are heating up here in Brazil - probably no one in the country will be working tomorrow during the Brazil/Portugal game, even though Brazil is already through to the Group of 16.

It's interesting how well the Americas (both North and South) are doing in Africa, particularly when compared to Europe. Of the eight teams from the "New World", seven (United States, Mexico, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay, Argentina and Chile) will go on to the next phase. Only lonely Honduras will go home.

Asia/Oceania are performing better than expected as well, but Africa really hasn't lived up to (the admittedly high) pre-Cup expections.

Now it gets fun... Knockout phase! Extra time! Penalties!

>148 zenomax: goddd, wouldn't that have been sweet. but such an inspirational performance regardless

>150 copyedit52: Nippon ganbare! That was a convincing win and I am in their corner, the more so as Slovenia is out

>153 jpyvr: North Korean hiccup aside, Brazil has really looked the best of the big teams, haven't they? I can't hate those lovely people, but I can't in good conscience cheer for 'em either, as the favourites.

>153 jpyvr: - the exception could be Chile - if Spain beat them tonight and Switzerland beat Honduras then Chile will be out (which would be unlucky - they have looked one of the better teams).

African football is going backwards: the old problems are still there and stronger than ever - lack of organisation/corruption in the governing body, player disputes/factions - but now it seems to have been joined by a lack commitment in certain quarters.

The surprises in this WC have been fueled as much by the failures of the established European countries rather than the development of the other countries. I said before the tournament started that I thought they was a lack of talent throughout the squads and I have seen nothing to change that opinion. One of the SFs will be from Uruguay-S Korea & USA-Ghana: none of those 4 teams are particularly talented but they are organised and athletic.
In some ways, football can only win in this tournament is one of Germany, Spain or Argentina (possibly the Dutch) win - assuming that football is a beautiful game. And yet at the same time, football is winning as a global sport already due to the nature of the results so far.

ps...Japan played really nice football yesterday, it's a pity they always end up getting 'bullied' off the pitch.

in light of #155 - Cameroon...OK, I'm not an expert, but I'm curious about what I saw. I was watching their second game, where they were eliminated and I was struck by 1.) how much talent they appear to have 2.) how intense and dedicated they seemed. They looked like a great team that just didn't get the bounces.

The reason this struck me is that when I'm watching a lot of these games I get the impression these are great players, but they're just playing another game. I mean there is something missing in the intensity, or perhaps in the overall team rapport, since these are conglomerations of players that haven't had a chance to really gel.

Since this isn't a game I'm familiar with, I'm curious, is any of this accurate?

ETA a couple typo-fixes.

That's a cogent observation, Daniel (#157). During the year, I watch teams in the English Premier League and the Champions League (every year the best teams in the European leagues have their own competition, with a group stage and a knockout stage), and you see the teamwork, the flow, the intensity that is often missing in WC games. Those of us who watch the EPL and other professional games are familiar with the players who appear in the WC because there are hardly any players who don't compete in England, Germany, Spain, Italy, France, etc. It's also why you'll see the players greet each other after games as if they know them--having played with or against them for most of the year.

Group G

Today's results

Ivory Coast 3, North Korea 0
Brazil 0, Portugal 0

Final standings
top two teams move to knockout round

Brazil 2 wins 1 draw 7 points
Portugal 1 win 2 draws 5 points
Ivory Coast 1 win 1 draw 4 points
North Korea 0 wins, 0 draws 0 points

Viva Espana!

Yes, indeed. But Chile scored a goal and played well while one man down in the second half.

Group H

Today's results

Final standings
top two teams move to knockout round

Spain 2 wins 6 points
Chile 2 wins 6 Points
Switzerland 1 win 1 draw 4 points
Honduras 1 draw 1 point

Knockout round

Groups G and H winners and runner-ups:

Brazil vs. Chile
Spain vs. Portugal

Group winners in italics

Knockout round
Draws broken by extra period and then penalty shootout, if necessary

Saturday, June 26

Uruguay vs. South Korea
United States vs. Ghana

Sunday, June 27

Germany vs. England
Argentina vs. Mexico

Monday, June 28

Holland vs. Slovakia
Brazil vs. Chile

Tuesday, June 29

Paraguay vs. Japan
Spain vs. Portugal

Pfucking drama queens. It doesn't matter the sport, the athletes pay more attention to hairdoos than anything else. You'd think some of those soccer poufs were dying out there when they are involved in a collision Joey Heatherton would sniff at. The NBA players are little better. I'm not really a tuff guy but my own dear dad said to me when I was a little kid that when I was going to hit the deck I better be getting some part of my anatomy skyward even before every part of me hit the ground or he'd know the reason why. That was his favorite saying: 'or I'll know the reason why.', meaning he'd kick my ass up and down the block just before all was said and done. Laying there groaning and moaning was just not an option.

A strange silence here, methinks, following today's monumental, or perhaps merely overhyped, game. So I will risk opprobrium by saying: clearly, the better team won.

The boys from Ghana were quicker to the ball for most if not all of the game. The US had chances but couldn't put it past the Goalkeeper, who played a standout game. I agree with PW, the better team won.

A good summary of the US team: http://g.sports.yahoo.com/soccer/world-cup/news/usa-great-story-just-a-good-team...

The better team did win, but I don't think you guys have anything to be ashamed of. You played hard; no France/Italy-type shenanigans.

The American team has plenty to be proud of; their ability to make glorious come-backs kept more of us glued to the screen (over soccer nonetheless) than when we made the finals at the Confederation Cup. I feel they'll probably be welcomed back with open-arms, even though we lost early and will soon be too distracted by baseball to remember to watch the rest of the World Cup.

>165 dchaikin:. I think that summation captures it, including the penalty that put the U.S. ahead. On the replay, the defender clearly went for the ball, and got it; a clean play.

Porius noted the Ghana goalie: some of those saves were extraordinary. No one would have faulted him if two of the shots he blocked--one with his leg and the other with his hand--had gone in.

I don't agree with Ghana being viewed as the much better side - they dominated the first half but the US dominated the second and had chances to win in normal time. (A lack of a decent striker is a real problem). In extra time Ghana started well and grabbed a goal but even then the US could have scored directly afterwards. I think the Ghanian team is probably more talented but I found myself hoping the US scored because the way Ghana played was quite negative - they seemed to want to protect their lead rather than force home their advantage.

On the other hand, it is probably good for the tournament that an African team is still in the tournament.

So,

how many people are convinced that after Slovakia took care of the Italians, they will defeat Holland???

The betting agencies in Slovakia report that only 5% of the bets in the Slovakia-Italy game were on a Slovak win, so they cleaned up. I suspect it will be even less than that against Holland.

>170 polutropos: I would love to see Slovakia win that so much. But I have been watching games with a Dutch friend, so I admit that my main motivation is cruelty.

I was leaning toward the Dutch, because I like Van Persie, watch him during the year when he plays for Arsenal (he was out much of the season with an injury). But in deference to our Slovak friend (or is he Czech?), I'll remain neutral, or maybe not watch at all: see my next post.

I enjoyed the Germany-England game yesterday, since I didn't care who might win and was just able to watch and appreciate ... mainly the German team's stellar play. And I watched Argentina-Mexico until the first goal was scored--the one that clearly shouldn't have been allowed because of the offsides--and then, fed up, turned the game off and did other things.

How can anyone take a game, in any sport, seriously, if the rules are not enforced? What, then, is the meaning of victory? The English goal that wasn't, was of course absurd too, and might have set up my disgust for the goal that was allowed in the following game. From now on I'll watch this World Cup with a degree of skepticism.

offsides confusion - can someone explain this?

I understand that there must be a ball or a defensive player between a player and the opposing net, or they're offsides.

Does it make any difference whether the player touches the ball? I've heard mention that if a player if offsides, but doesn't factor in the play, then no call should be made. Maybe that's wrong.

In the Argentina play, the player was offsides, but, once he touched the ball he was no longer offsides. So, was the play dead once he was offsides? If not, is it possible for him to re-establish himself onside and hit the ball?

#174 - I'm not an expert at football, but I believe the offside rule is this:

A player is in an offside position if he (or she) is nearer the opposing team's goal than both the ball itself and the second-last defender. It is not an offense to be in an offside position.

It is an offense for a player to be in an offside position at the time the ball is touched or played by a member of his/her team and he/she, in the referee's opinion, involved in active play.

(For me the important thing is that an offside offense is calculated at exact moment the ball is kicked or thrown at the offside player. It doesn't matter if he/she was offside before or after that moment, only where he/she was located in relation to the goal and defending players at the moment of that kick).

So in the Argentina game, the player was offside at the time the ball was kicked to him, and he could not re-establish himself as onside unless he left the offside position and the ball was kicked at him again. Just moving back onside doesn't negate the offside offense by itself.

#175 jpyvr - thanks, that makes sense to me.

Peter, you say, "How can anyone take a game, in any sport, seriously, if the rules are not enforced?" Yet you like basketball, a sport that ignores several rules routinely. When was the last time you saw palming the ball called? Or traveling? I don't think double dribbling gets called that much anymore. does it? These are all rules integral to Dr. Naismith's vision of the game. I will admit if traveling were called as it should be, there would be fewer dunks and layups. The game would go back to the days of the set shot, be slower, and probably not as high scoring. So, the question becomes do you want to enforce the rule, drop the rule or ignore the rule. I think the NBA has chosen the latter. Another sign of the decay of America. The sin is not in the doing, but the getting caught. Ignore the rules if they lose audience share.

You're absolutely right, Gene. I don't disagree, will admit that my connection to basketball--it's the first sport I excelled in, and reaped some needed self-esteem from at the time--influences my continued attachment, rather than the game as it's played today. Might soon come a time when the latter takes precedence over the former and I'll tune out altogether.

Actually, I was tempted to years ago when the Chicago Bulls won the championship on a last second shot by Michael Jordan when the entire world saw him push Bryon Russell of the Utah Jazz aside in order to get him out of the way--it's on posters, for chrissake!--and a moment later he was the hero, rather than merely being whistled for the foul he deserved.

>175 jpyvr: - minor adjustment, it's the last defender (not second last). The player can also be beyond the last defender if his own player is ahead of him and passes the ball backwards to him.

FIFA decided against putting in technology for balls over the line because they stated that fans and pundits loved to debate these points so technology would actually reduce interest in the game. (Note - the goal-line technology would not have ruled out the first Argentinian goal).

I think it is worth noting that football is not really like the major US sports where the play is very broken - the success of football is that at its heart it's a very simple game (you can play it anywhere with - all you need is a ball) and that if flows. For these reasons most football fans have mixed feelings towards introducing technology - they don't want a game where it stops at regular intervals for the officials to debate decisions.

Now, back to the football - the myth of English football was finally put to bed yesterday - all the hype, the success of the Premiership and English clubs in the CL amounted to nothing. The success of the Premiership and English clubs is built on having the best players from the rest of the world playing in it, not on the standard of the home-grown players. One of the pundits yesterday stated before the match that only German would make the England starting line-up; by the end the truth was that no English players would make the German team. And it could get worse - players like Lampard, Gerrard & Terry are all over 30 and there is no-one to replace them because young English players are not getting a chance with their clubs, who keep buying in foreign talent.

I will say one thing - after starting very poorly this round of matches has been very entertaining.

#175 - I think the difference is one of terminology. I took the language from an official set of rules, and I think that when they say "second-last defender" they are counting the goalkeeper too. If that's the case, then the second-last defender makes sense. Otherwise it has to be the last defender. I was always taught the rule as last defender, but that didn't include the goalkeeper.

I agree with your assessment of the great improvement in the eighth-finals (although that word probably doesn't exist in English, perhaps it should. Here in Brazil, the round that is just wrapping up is known as oitava-finais, or just oitavas. I like that.)

Speaking of Brazil, they finally showed some much needed grace and flair on the pitch today, I thought. I'm feeling more optimistic now about upcoming matches, though the Netherlands game will be tough. The atmosphere is electric here - first time I've been in Brazil for a Cup and I'm loving it. Football isn't the big thing this month in Brazil, it's the only thing.

As we get down to the nitty-gritty, the chalk--as they call the favorites at the racetrack--are moving forward: Brazil, Argentina, the Netherlands, Germany, and today we'll see about Spain. The somewhat long shot Portugal has a chance, I think, and then either Paraguay or Japan will join the other outsiders, Uruguay and Ghana. I'm thinking Japan; they looked impressive in their last, though I admit I haven't been paying much attention to Paraguay.

Knockout Round 2
the quarterfinals

Friday, July 2

Netherlands vs. Brazil

Uruguay vs. Ghana

Saturday, July 3

Germany vs. Argentina

Paraguay vs. Spain

Boooo! Every wrong team won today. Paraguay, Spain, Toronto PD. Boooo. Anyway, I am now cheering for Ghana.

Way to go, Soccer Fan.

If you're looking to pull for the underdog-like team, books, consider this (you might be surprised):

Quarterfinal opponents by national population (in millions):

Netherlands (17)
Brazil (193)

Uruguay (3.5)
Ghana (24)

Germany (82)
Argentina (40)

Paraguay (6)
Spain (47)

Freeque - I'm not happy with you for posting that.

Martin - I have to ask, why is Paraguay the wrong team? I mean, who even knows enough about Paraguay to not like them?

I love soccer but a friend showed me this twitter post that I found quite funny that compares soccer and Twilight.

http://twitter.com/bretterlich/status/17345184766

"Twilight's like soccer. They run around for 2 hours, nobody scores, and its billion fans insist you just don't understand."

>186 dchaikin: nothing against Paraguay at all! I sort of think of them as upside-down-walking cowboys with moustaches that just won't quit. No, I phrased that wrong: neither Paraguay nor Spain were the "wrong" teams--it's more that Japan and Portugal were the right teams, the former because I lived there for a couple of years and the latter because a branch of the family hails from there--you know, the usual atavistic soccer tribalism:)

>185 copyedit52: point well taken! My hopes lie with:

Netherlands (Brazil actually appeals to me more, with all their joy. But I can't cheer for them, I just can't)

Ghana (like, totally nothing against Uruguay. But I wanna see an African team do great things this WC)

Argentina/Germany is the hardest; the Argentines leave me underwhelmed--Maradona's a clown, and I see Messi's presence being a reason to cheer against rather than for them, on something like the underdog principle--and I think the Germans kind of got robbed in 2006; and I like their rainbow nation thing they have going on on the team (especially in today's weirdly racialized Europe). It feels weird to cheer for the Germans as an Austrian--kind of like cheering for the USA as a Canadian, which no self-respecting Nuck would ever do; but I think I come down in Germany's corner

And Paraguay. I think Spain played good soccer today, and they are a perennially good team who have never won a cup,and if they get through this game I'd probably be happy to see them win it all. But the underdog story here is just too compelling.

>188 MeditationesMartini: I know there's a natural tendency to root for the underdog, but you shouldn't let that get in the way of rooting for the overdog if it's the right thing to do. If Brazil appeals to you more, then you should cheer for them, you really should. (My living in Brazil has nothing to do with trying to convince you to change your allegiance, honest!) Even though Canada is a powerhouse in international hockey, particularly in the World Juniors, I continue to cheer for any team sporting a maple leaf. It's not Brazil's fault that they have such an impressive track record in international soccer, so I'm not sure why you think you must hold it against them. Embrace the joy, and learn to shout along with the 193 million Brazilians (and countless others worldwide) - Pra Frente, Brasil!

(Added bonus if you're cheering Brazil - when they score you get to scream GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

>188 MeditationesMartini:

I must be channeling your Austrian heritage via my maternal Schweinfurt (Dittelbrunn) stock. Your points articulate my views better than I could have done, even to the point of self-discovery. "What?! I didn't realise I felt that way!"

So keep posting, it saves me time.

My prediction - Argentina over Brazil in the final. Why? Both have controlled all their games, and, geologically speaking it was only about 250 million years ago that Argentina bordered South Africa, so I'm giving them the home field advantage.

Of course, I'm pulling for Ghana, Uruguay and Paraguay in that order.

191: Ditto on the "pulling for".
I however think Brazil. If only because i don't want to imagine Maradona running through the streets naked.

>189 jpyvr: if it comes down to Brazil v Argentina, I will, without reservation

>190 elenchus: ha! de rien. Or um, keine sorge. I wish the Germans luck, sincerely.

Brazil has appeared so efficient, so workmanlike. Spain, yesterday, showed truly impressive ball control. The Netherlands has hardly been inspiring, but in the professional leagues their players are second to none, except for Messi. Germany was awesome in its last, but then, that was against England. Still, I think they can take Argentina, and, like some of you, I've seen and heard more than enough from Maradona. But what can I say: how can I not pull for the nation with a mere 3.5 million people?

The dangers of the WC - quite apart from managers losing their jobs - the French parliament is to investigate what went wrong with their campaign; and the Nigerian govt has dis-banded the national FA and banned any international for 2 years. (This latter approach could be serious - FIFA does not allow political interference and have banned countries from competing in tournaments, including the WC, before).

Wow - at least there are no wars yet, which is a good thing. I'm entertained by the French parliament investigation, I'm sure that will do a lot good. The Nigerian response - that's just wrong.

Some interesting statistics (if you like that kind of thing) involving World Cup teams:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/sports/soccer/2010-world-cup-team-rankings.ht...

Those are interesting: before following the link, I suspected it would bring the ritual description of national teams over the ages, something that is interesting from the standpoint of lore and tradition but in my opinion pretty much useless given that the teams rarely share many players between more than 2 Cups.

These data at least are for the teams actually on the field. The major shortcoming would be the small n: they've each played, what, 5 matches so far? A fair sample, but presumably not terribly reliable. Would be interesting to see what changed if qualifying play were included, perhaps even friendlies.

But in the end, what does it matter? I'm not interested in predicting outcomes so much as supporting teams based on character, as was so elegantly outlined upthread. I imagine many fans are doing the same.

Current odds to win the World Cup

The eight quarter finalists:

Brazil 5-2
Spain 3-1
Argentina 5-1
Germany 7-1
Netherlands 8-1
Uruguay 18-1
Ghana 47-1
Paraguay 52-1

Brazil knocked out!

Netherlands 2, Brazil 1

Brazil, looking smooth and competent, scored the first goal after ten minutes when the Dutch defense shockingly broke down. In control the remainder of the first half, the favorites tensed up after being tied--seemed to me they didn't know how to handle adversity--then lost their composure altogether when the Dutch took the lead. A red card for a malicious spiking reduced Brazil to ten men, and it was all but over after that.

Wow, Brazil's out. I saw the last 10 minutes. I am sort of a Holland fan but I have loved Brazil for years though I am not so familiar with their current side.

Stunner. I don't have that feeling of elation that tells me who I really was for, nor did my heart plummet. Hmmn. Perhaps I should place that bet for Paraguay.

The Dutch totally deserved that, and now I don't have to be conflicted about loving Brazil but hating an overdog. And Ghana is hanging in there!

Uruguay-Ghana: unbelievable ending, and it ain't even over yet. Penalty shootout to come.

Ah darn, Ghana out.

Uruguay 1, Ghana 1

Uruguay wins on penalty shots, 4-2

Game tied 1-1 after regulation. Ghana bombarded the goal in the last seconds of the 30 minute overtime period, a beleagured Uruguayan in the goal mouth throwing up a hand to stop the last of three close-in shots, leading to a Ghana penalty shot with time already expired. When he missed, the two teams went to the penalty shootout phase.

>206 copyedit52: AAAAAAAAAAACK. Although they really didn't put a lot of heart into that shootout. And I guess with Suarez redcarded Uruguay will be having troubles against Holland.

Ghana just about deserved the win - and you can't have a better time to scoring a winning goal than with the last kick of the ball. It would have been great for the tournament as well.

Suarez is out of the SF but for his cynical handling Uruguay would have been out of the SF so, if anything, he's probably an even bigger hero at home now. It is a great achievement that a country of only 3.5m can reach the SF of a (the) sporting tournament. Then again, the Netherlands only has a population of 6.5m. Proof that small countries can achieve. (In Scotland, our FA is always saying that it's difficult to achieve much because of the small population but then our FA is peopled by prats).

I thought Brazil would beat the Dutch but I see it as a good thing they lost. Not because they deserved to - 7 times out of 10 they would have won that match, another 2 would have been a draw - but simply because that team went so much against the Brazilian tradition of skilful attractive football. (What the hell has happened to Brazilian midfielders? They used to produce players like Socrates - a man so talented that he would hold up the game for a few minutes by sublimely controlling the ball in order to finish his cigarette: and he's a medical doctor). Hopefully Brazil will rediscover their flair for the home tournament in 2014.

The other side-effect of Brazil being eliminated is that the tournament now is really wide-open - any team left could win it.

Checking in from a country with a national hangover, Brazil, where just about the only word I overhead on the streets during my early morning walk today was "derrota" - meaning defeat. The papers are full of coverage of yesterday's game, and the analysts are analyzing like mad.

As this is the first World Cup I've lived through in Brazil, I am surprised, though, that people here seem to have accepted the suspension of Brazil's quest for the "hexa" (meaning the sixth WC title) with as much calmness and good spirit as they have done. I had been thinking that if and when Brazil crashed out there would be lots of anger and perhaps violence because people's hope were so high and many Brazilians self-image seems to be molded by the national side. However, the main reaction seems to be more of an "oh well, it's a damn shame, but they fell apart in the second-half" kind of thing.

One thing I found really heartening was watching the game at a bar on the beach (which allowed for a marvelous swim in the 30C ocean at half-time) in a loud and lively crowd consisting of a sea of Brazilians surrounding two tables of visiting Dutch tourists who were all dressed out in Dutch orange. They were applauded when they walked into the bar, were assailed with requests for photos with Brazilian fans, and at the end they stood and graciously accepted once again the crowd's applause on a great victory. I didn't expect the Brazilians to be so magnanimous in defeat, but they were - very gracious losers.

But Brazil's national obsession with football goes on even without the green-and-yellow in South Africa. And the country is still united in their passion - though now the passion seems to be to cheer for any and all opponents and potential opponents of Argentina.

>209 jpyvr:. How civilized. The most passionate fans in the world nevertheless showing respect for their opponents. I admit that I will be rooting against Argentina this morning, not because of the country but Maradona: feigning a German accent when he spoke about them, dismissing Spain's victory over Chile because of this or that reason ... Now there's guy I'd bet won't know how to lose graciously.

The question, as I see it, now is: Who can beat Germany? And how would they do it? Ferocious marking and defending? They bring to mind France in 1998, that golden generation, strong front and back.

>209 jpyvr: I love Brazilians so much.

>212 Porius: Wasn't it, though (heartwarming)? Gotta say, though, the post-game street celebrations when Germany wins appear to be a lot more muted than when anyone else does. For some reason.

Anyway. that 4-0 rout was something a lot more like what I was expecting from Spain-Paraguay. Maybe the upside-down-walking cowboys will pull off an upset?

>208 Jargoneer: 16.5m, I believe, but the point still more or less stands.

Well . . . go Uruguay!

Good couple days for European football, no?

>209 jpyvr:

Beautiful story. Thanks for posting.

>217 dchaikin:

It is, at that! I'm a bit disappointed that there aren't other traditions present at these latter stages, but I'm not upset by any specific team that's made it this far. Well, maybe those missed penalty kicks, there's no easier way but always a bit of a letdown for me when it's decided on PKs.

Come to think of it, it was a good couple days for keepers, eh?

>218 elenchus:
Yep, the Keepers did a really good jobs, only mishap was when Spain made the goal but it didn't count so it was retaken, but other than that it was good :3

>219 Avaliax:

I saw the highlight film but not the game. Am I right in thinking the keeper came off the line early, so they re-took the PK and then Spain missed it? Or why was it retaken?

From the keeper's standpoint, in any case, it turned out alright.

>220 elenchus: I'm relying on memory here, but I don't think that the reason the penalty had to be retaken was because the keeper came off the line early. It was because the Spanish players lined up behind the penalty-taker "invaded" (that's the word the Brazilian commentators used on TV here in Brazil, but I don't know if there's another term in English) the penalty area - in other words they moved forward towards the goal and crossed the line before the penalty kick was actually taken. A bit like an offside in American football, if you know what I mean. Not a very technical explanation but I hope you'll get the idea.

The expression in English is usually that they 'encroached' into the penalty area. It is a law that is often ignored - it is one of those areas where the spirit of the law is usually perferred over the letter.

I'm very disappointed with Spain - they have played wonderful expressive football for 4 years and now they have frozen. The manager has to bite the bullet and drop Torres and Busquets or Alonso.

Semifinal games

Tuesday, July 6

Netherlands vs. Uruguay

Wednesday, July 7

Germany vs. Spain

Is anyone watching this? Diego Forlan tying it 1-1 with a long strike. I underestimated this team representing 3.5 million; for the moment at least. Netherland vs. Uruguay: second half coming up.

Very sticky. Good thing for the Hollanders that Suarez is not on the pitch.

I'm left to the blog descriptions, it does appear an exciting contest. Am I right in remembering that Uruguay just qualified in the 5th slot allotted to the South American teams? And here they are, with a real shot at the Final, while Brazil and Argentina are back home. Pretty special.

Game over:

Netherlands 3, Uruguay 2

A noble effort by the 10-1 underdog.

>226 elenchus: - You're right. Uruguay qualified in fifth place in the South American qualifiers, and had to meet Costa Rica to play off for a spot in the World Cup. South American has 4 places, North America has 3 automatically. The 4th place team from NA and the 5th from SA must play off for the 8th "New World" place.

Great few final minutes! Too bad there'll be no one playing from outside Europe in the final, but that's they way the cookie crumbles.

One interesting point that the TV commentators here in Brazil made during that game was that in the previous 18 World Cups, 9 have been won by teams from Europe and 9 by teams from South America. Now we know Europe will leave this Cup with 10 victories.... but the next Cup is in Brazil!!

Spain 1 - 0 Germany

Totally unexpected result for me, and probably for a more than a few billion other spectators, but it's a great one for the World Cup and for the sport. On Sunday there will be one more nation in that very small group of World Cup winners - neither Spain nor Netherlands has won a final, and Spain's never even been in one. A great moment.

(And somewhat selfishly, I'm happy that Gernamy will still be 2 Cup wins behind Brazil, instead of 1, which would have happened had they gone through and won on Sunday.)

I agree with your conclusion, but it was harder than I thought to root on Spain. I caught myself hoping for a Germany goal, and did a double-take: "Wait a minute! You want Spain in!" Which I did, and do, but clearly my heart was divided.

I'd not realised Netherlands have never won, it's as much of an "underdog" Final as there could be at this point.

I'll root for Germany for third place, since Uruguay have also won 2 Cups (I believe), so despite liking the idea of a small nation beating a larger nation, Uruguay have done well for themselves over the years.

Old news by now, but to make it official:

Spain 1, Germany 0

All that Spanish ball control might not be as exciting as lightning German counterstrikes (which hardly occurred today), but it can't be denied that the winner's passing game was masterful.

I have no idea how to choose a side here.

I concur but ... since Spain played better against Germany than the Netherlands did against Uruguay, I'd give Spain the edge.

Championship game
Sunday, July 11

Netherlands vs. Spain

Anyone know if tradition governs which players exchange jerseys? I saw what appeared to be a Spaniard offering to exchange with Klose, who it seemed graciously declined. Others did exchange. I've always assumed it was players who knew each other, or players exchanging with their counterparts on the other side.

That was a football lesson for Germany - they couldn't play because they couldn't get the ball. It's fine saying that theirs is a team for the future but most of the Spanish are also still in their 20s and they many more players that could step into their squad. The actual match was very similar to Spain's victory in the 2008 EC final, which the German press hailed as "death by a thousand passes".

The final here is being billed as between the best two footballing nations never to win a WC.

>235 elenchus: - the players decide between themselves, often it is between directly opposing players, i.e., a defender swaps with a striker. I saw the same incident and thought that Klose was saying he would swap in the tunnel/dressing room. (Often players will celebrate with their own fans wearing their own shirt and then swap them later),

The oracle " Paul the Octopus" has predicted that Holland will be worldchampion. That damn animal has correctly predicted the last 10 matches

I thought the octopus only predicted Germany matches? Hmmmn. Anyway, heard he was wrong about the 2008 EC final, so maybe he gets nervous when it comes to finals.

Interesting piece on Dutch football, now and then:

http://www.slate.com/id/2259911/

>239 copyedit52:

I read that, too. Slate tends to post articles with slightly contrived ledes ("Why every football lover should hope the Dutch lose"), and that angle sometimes detracts from the article's reception.

Not sure that's relevant in this specific case, but I also found this history of Dutch football quite interesting and am tempted to add the referenced book on "Total Football" to my wishlist. I have a woefully inadequate sense of World Cup history, let alone football generally, and I thought the piece was valuable for filling in some backstory.

The third place game:

Germany 3, Uruguay 2

Mueller (suspended for the match against Spain) scored for Germany (along with Khedira and Jansen), and Forlan scored for Uruguay (along with Cavani), tying them with David Villa for the most WC goals, at five. Villa plays tomorrow when Spain meets the Netherlands in the final.

Pitch conditions really seemed to affect the play in this match. There certainly was some beautiful build up and through balls from both sides, but I thought the quality of play fell off considerably in the second half.

But how about Forlan's free kick ringing the crossbar just seconds before the final whistle!

David Winner, Brilliant Orange: The Neurotic Genius of Dutch Soccer is a recommended title I just came across. So, will the Dutch finally do it? Probably not.

That's Brilliant Orange, by David Winner, for those who check thread bibliography.

>242 elenchus: - some of that was down to tiredness, probably more mental than physical - it must be hard concentrating on a match that doesn't really matter. (No-one ever talks about who finished 3rd or 4th - they talk about the losing semi-finalists).

The Dutch have a chance of winning (with one of the worst Dutch teams I can remember) but they look a lot like Germany (not that the Dutch would like that comparison) and Spain completely dominated that match. Spain deserve to win, simply for only losing 2 matches (Switzerland and the USA) in 4 years and being the best team in the world over that period, but we all know what happened in 1954. (if you don't - Hungary lost the final to West Germany, their only defeat in 5/6 years; and to a team they had beaten 8-3 in the first round. Note - it was an English referee who handled this match, making a terrible decision near the end that meant Germany won).

A piece on the World Cup and soccer formations, from the Guardian:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2010/jul/09/world-cup-2010-tactics-the-ques...

Thanks for that, I'd seen references to The Question but wasn't sure which paper it was in, nor tracked down the author.

Here's to a beautiful match, whatever the outcome.

>246 copyedit52: - it's a good article but everyone who has followed football over a number of years knows that tactics are less important than the players in the team. The best teams have always had players that can alter formations effectively during a match - Spain at home play 4-3-3 (with the same squad) because of the pressure on them by the home crowd to win with style; away they often have played 4-4-2; the reason they have adopted 4-2-3-1 in the WC is because the manager thought some of his key players were struggling with fitness so he drafted in another defensive midfielder.

World Cup Final

Netherlands vs. Spain

See you after the match.

Spain 1, Netherlands 0

Spain wins in overtime.

Personal comment: If the obvious red card had been given to De Jong in the first half, rather than a yellow, this game would probably have ended in Spain's favor in regulation time.

Ah, none of my preferred teams (America, Ghana, Netherlands) ended up doing as well as I'd hoped; but, the best team won. Congratulations, Spain and to all Spaniards here.

Olé!

There certainly were a lot of bookings, some deserved and some not. But in the end, I do think the better team won and am relieved it didn't have to go to PKs.

I wonder how the Netherlands would have fared against Germany. Would've been less ball control, and probably a more open affair.

The match I'd have liked to have seen: Spain v Brazil.

And I find it interesting that apparently Germany and Brazil have never met at a World Cup. Not convinced this was the year for the best matchup, but if both were top of their traditional game it would make for a nice contest.

>255 elenchus: - they have met once - the 2002 final: Brazil won 2-0.

Cruyff criticizes Dutch tactics in World Cup final

MADRID (AP)—Dutch soccer great Johan Cruyff has criticized the Netherlands for its aggressive play during the 1-0 loss to Spain in the World Cup final.

In his column for the Barcelona-based daily El Periodico, Cruyff says the Dutch players coached by Bert van Marwijk "didn’t want the ball. And, lamentably and sadly, they played very dirty."

He added Monday that the Dutch deserved to have been left with nine players early in the game because two tackles were "so ugly and tough they even hurt me." The Dutch had eight yellow cards and a red card.

The 63-year-old Cruyff is a former Ajax and Barcelona player who starred for the Netherlands in the 1970s.

258 Cruyff is right. Two tackles were scandalous