Euro Day 16: A Comedy Of Errors

The football gods have a dark, ironic sense of humor.  The British football media and fans have complained endlessly about Spain’s tiki taka style.  Therefore, those same complainers were forced to watch an England team that could not keep possession, could not pass, and could not score.  And then they lost in that most English of ways.  Penalty kicks.  Again.

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

The first twenty minutes of this match were surprisingly entertaining; the next hundred were unbearable.  Italy were woeful; England were worse.  Neither team could score, and all attempts (particularly those from England) were almost a parody.  But beyond the shooting, at least Italy looked like a football team–albeit a mediocre one.  England’s players are supposed to be elite; instead they looked like a group of toddlers who had never actually seen a ball before.  The passing in particular was horrendous.

Based on all available evidence, one must conclude that the football gods hate England.  Or maybe not hate exactly.  More like they take pleasure in the suffering of England.  The more ironic the punishment, the better.  This is the only conclusion I can draw from the six years I have been watching the sport.  At the 2006 World Cup, England were ignominiously dumped out by Portugal and a winking Cristiano Ronaldo, then one of the rising stars of the Premier League, who got Manchester United teammate Wayne Rooney red carded for stamping on another Portuguese player.  England didn’t even make the 2008 Euro, and had to hear the rest of the world extol the 2008 Euro as the best ever.  In 2010, England finished second in their group to the United States, were booed of the field by their fans after a lackluster draw against Algeria, and then lost 4-1 against hated enemy Germany after a legitimate England goal was disallowed (calling to mind the famously controversial English goal from the 1966 final against West Germany).  The entire Fabio Capello era was a just a big joke at England’s expense, ending in his abrupt resignation just before the Euro.  And in the years before I watched there was the 1-0 loss to the US in 1950, the dog that urinated on Jimmy Greaves in 1962, the World Cups England did not qualify for in 1974, 1978, and 1994, the other Euros England failed to qualify for in 1964, 1972, 1976, and 1984, all the losses to German opposition (especially those in penalties) who barely think of England as a rival, the 1998 loss on penalties to England’s other hated enemy Argentina (after a red card for a petulant David Beckham), all penalty kick losses (5 out of 6), and, of course, the Hand of Diego.

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

The American football fan must at some point come to terms with England.  Given the closeness of the UK and US politically, culturally, and linguistically, it is unsurprising that most Americans fans generally see England as something of a big brother to be emulated.  I tend to see them as the drama queen neighbor with whom I am constantly forced to interact and whom I resent for it.  But there is really no other frame of reference for most monolingual Americans because outside of the UK there is very little in the way of football coverage in English (save for American coverage which varies dramatically in quality).  Additionally, the English Premier League is the richest and glitziest league in the world and the one with the best marketing arm, which means everyone around the world watches it.

Look at any American media outlet that has a section about soccer/football.  If there is a writer from another country, the chances are that said writer is English (even if he or she writes about another country that is not England).  Because of the language barrier, Americans, when they read coverage in the foreign press, are more likely to read the British newspapers.  Likewise, American blogs and newspapers are more likely to follow the lead of British media.  ESPN learned that for international tournaments, it is a good idea to have at least one football announcer with an English accent.  It may seem chauvinistic and insulting, but this comes following the failures of many different American announcers, one of whom had never watched a game of football in his life prior to calling a World Cup.  (As I side note, I was really bothered by the cheerleading and excuse making coming from Ian Darke and Steve McManaman in the booth.  It was not until the absolute end that either would admit that England were awful.  It’s one thing to cheer on the US team for an American audience, but it another to cheer on the English team for an American audience.)

As a result we in America are inundated with the opinions of the British.  Trust me when I say it is claustrophobic, especially for me who sees the English ideal as the enemy of football.

As I mentioned yesterday, I am really tired of hearing the English media drone on and on about how boring Spain are.  Tiki taka is the opposite of the English ideal which holds that technique is suspect, possession is cheating, and short passes are beneath contempt.

So the gods of football delivered their latest ironic punishment to England.  England’s players displayed no technique whatsoever, their passes went wrong more often than right, and Italy routinely stripped them of possession.  (And to rub it in just a little bit more, England took the lead in the penalty shootout only to blow it.)   Sure the result was technically a 0-0 draw, but England were thoroughly outclassed and shown up as utterly awful.  One cannot even blame Roy Hodgson given how little time he had to work with the team.

Perhaps it is time to rethink the bias against tiki taka, no?

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

Italy meanwhile have just come off an emotionally and physically draining match that showed up their weaknesses and pushed them to the physical limits.  Germany, their opponents in the next round, will have had 48 hours longer to rest and were on cruise control against Greece.  Germany also have a far more talented squad.  The odds are incredibly stacked against Italy.

Expect an Italian victory.  Germany never beat Italy.

The England Manager

Fabio Capello is out, and the British media anointed Harry Redknapp as his successor a long time ago.  If I were Redknapp though (if fact, if I were any manager) I would be asking myself “Why would I want this job?”  If ever there was a poisoned chalice, it is the job of English manager.  The England National Team is doomed to perpetual failure, but unlike almost every other nation doomed to perpetual failure (including the United States), the English fans and the English media expect success.  Oh sure, they hide behind a veneer of cynicism and resignation, but that doesn’t fool anyone, especially as the tournaments start.

England fans see themselves as preordained winners, all evidence to the contrary, and react very badly when the inevitable happens.  In fact, they react badly before the inevitable happens.  Prior to the World Cup, England had a near perfect qualification record, but after qualification was assured and the team’s performance dipped slightly in the meaningless qualifiers that remained, the knives came out–particularly from the media–and the brief honeymoon Capello had enjoyed ended spectacularly.  Not that Capello did himself many favors, mind you, but the media, he was instantly transformed into an ignorant, talentless boob.

Capello, one of the most successful coaches of the past few decades, flamed out spectacularly.  It’s pretty obvious that he had been looking for an out for the past few months at least, and the (latest) John Terry flap gave him the excuse he needed.  Sven-Goren Eriksson and Steve McClaren were well-respected coaches before they took the England job, and now they are national punch lines (especially Eriksson–my God, did Special 1 TV do a good parody of him).  England fans even have ambivalence toward Alf Ramsey.

There is no other country where being named national manager is more punishment than reward save for Brazil, but Brazil fans have reason to expect that they will win every tournament they enter.  So I wonder, why would Redknapp even want this job, and if he gets it, what sins has he committed to deserve such a fate?

On Beckham

David Beckham is leaving the Los Angeles Galaxy to go to Paris Saint-Germain.  Apparently.  This is not news; in fact, I’ve been hearing this for months.  Technically it is all still a rumor given that neither Beckham nor his people have confirmed that he is leaving Los Angeles, but the entire world has taken it as a given that he is headed back to Europe.  Ergo, the Beckham tour, which began in Manchester and then moved to Madrid and Los Angeles (with two stopovers in Milan) is now headed for Paris.  No lesser cities will do for Beckham in the post-United stage of his career–no Dallas, no Lille, certainly no Seville.  Only the most glamorous cities in the world, with art, music, movie stars, fashion, and culture, will do for the Beckham family.  Beckham will fit right in too; no footballer ever branded himself as successfully as David Beckham.

Beckham’s best days are long behind him.  Any team that employs him really just wants to sell shirts, and this has been the case since his late Madrid days.  Ironically, even though his shirts are top sellers, the dirty little secret is that his fame is disproportionate to his abilities.  One cannot deny that he was (and is) talented, but no one ever considered him one of the game’s greatest players either.  Beckham was never even the best player on any of his teams.  At Manchester United he played next to Eric Cantona, Roy Keane, Ryan Giggs, and Paul Scholes.  At Madrid he played alongside Ronaldo, Zinedine Zidane, Raúl, and Luis Figo.  Even at Los Angeles, there was Landon Donovan, who is not better than Manchester United-era Beckham, but is certainly better than Beckham the Galaxy teammate.*

~*~*~*~*~*~

When players retire, there are many familiar career paths.  Some leave football entirely for other fields.  Some go into coaching or become a part of their club’s hierarchy.  A rare few players get involved in politics (Romario for example).  Michel Platini got involved in a different type of politics; he is the head of UEFA with designs on the FIFA presidency.  Some players gracefully disappear from the spotlight leaving only the memory of their brilliance (get well soon, Eusebio!), while other desperately seek to keep themselves in the spotlight with ridiculous attention-seeking behavior (I’d hate to name names, but we all know this describes Maradona).  One figure completely transcended the game, and that was Pele.  Pele became football’s unofficial ambassador to the world, quite possibly a unique position in sport.**

Pele, for his considerable faults, is arguably the greatest player in the game’s history, therefore it is natural he should have such worldwide renown.  In contrast, it is odd from an objective perspective to see Beckham, who was nowhere near Pele’s level as a player, following Pele’s path.  Yet as an active player Beckham has become football’s second ambassador to the world.  He is among the world’s most recognizable athletes.  More than that, Beckham has taken on a celebrity that even Pele did not have.  Pele was a footballer; Beckham is a star.

~*~*~*~*~*~

Getting objective opinions about Beckham is near impossible.  The British absolutely adore him, and the rest of the world pretty much follows the British lead.  For all the digs that the British take at Americans, they cannot say a word about our celebrity-worshipping culture without looking like major hypocrites.***  Celebrity worship is a mainstay of British culture.  Why keep a royal family?  For tradition and tabloid fodder?

Beckham, despite his most decidedly non-aristocratic origins, is as much a royal as any Windsor.  He’s the handsome prince, who married the beautiful Princess Posh.  (Like the Royal Family, the Beckhams are a fascinating mixture of class and classlessness.)  When England made its failed 2018 World Cup bid, three men went to the ExCo on behalf of England: Prime Minister David Cameron, Prince William, and Beckham.

When Beckham was injured, and could not go to the 2010 World Cup as a player, he was made an assistant of some kind.  Ostensibly his job was to be a mediator between the coaching staff and the players (given the way the tournament went for England and its aftermath, he failed miserably), but in reality his role was to look good in a suit on the sideline and be caught on television cameras.  His raised eyebrow during England’s woeful group stage performances featured prominently in every major newspaper in Britain and the United States

Yet Beckham worship was not always the case.  In 1998, Beckham was loathed by the English.  In the World Cup second round, he foolishly kicked the Argentinian player Diego Simeone (who had been trying to goad Beckham), and got sent off.  Argentina eliminated England in the ensuing penalty shoot-out and Beckham became the scapegoat for England’s failure, and his family even received death threats.  In a weird way, this only adds to the Beckham legend because of what followed.  The next season he helped United win the Treble, and then won his way back into the hearts of England fans everywhere, culminating in the 2002 World Cup, where Beckham (now England captain) scored the winning goal against Argentina in the group stage, eliminating the Albiceleste. A fairy tale redemption (so long as you forget that England lost to eventual champions Brazil in the quarterfinals.)

~*~*~*~*~*~

Beckham’s career can be divided into the pre-Posh and post-Posh eras.  Before he got involved with Victoria Adams, the singer once known as Posh Spice, he was a talented footballer of some renown.  Together “Becks and Posh” became the ultimate celebrity couple, at the expense of his relationship with his manager/secondary father figure Alex Ferguson who despised Beckham’s newfound stardom (and Posh.)  Beckham was no longer just a professional athlete, he was “Golden Balls.”

The Beckham marriage reminds me of Bill and Hillary Clinton’s marriage.  Whatever the personal dynamic is between the spouses (to which I am not privy), the marriage is a mutually beneficial arrangement that benefits and advances both parties in the public arena.  Alone they may succeed, but together they are an irresistible force.  Victoria may no longer have a singing career, but she is no has-been or tabloid-fodder WAG; she is a fashion icon with major media exposure.  Similarly, had Beckham never met Posh, he could very well still be playing for United like Ryan Giggs or, more likely, for some mid-table Premier League side.  He would not be the brand he is today (or the gay icon that he is so proud of being.)  There would certainly not have been a movie called Bend It Like Beckham.

~*~*~*~*~*~

Beckham has transcended the sport, for better or for worse.  Because he is so much larger than life, the British media, which called for his head following the 1998 World Cup, gives him a free pass for basically everything.  Criticism of Beckham is simply not allowed.  This applies to both tabloids and serious sports journalists.  When Fabio Capello, quite correctly, said after the 2010 World Cup that Beckham should be thanked for his service to his country but that there was no longer a place for him on the England National Team, the media went crazy and called for Capello’s head for disrespecting Beckham (a frenzy fomented in part by Beckham’s people.)  Anyone who thinks about this logically for a moment would come to the same conclusion as Capello.  Beckham will be 37 at the next Euro and 39 at the next World Cup.  Is there no one younger and healthier in English football who can play in midfield?  Again, he is not one of the game’s all-time greats.

It is true that Beckham gave MLS real cachet.  But he also majorly disrespected the league and his fellow professionals, particularly with his loan spells to Milan.  On the World Football Phone-In, Sean Wheelock has ranted many times about how awful it was that Beckham abandoned his team training to attend Prince William’s marriage earlier this year  Neither of these actions would have been tolerated by a major European club.

The media (both British and American if we are honest) has completely whitewashed Beckham’s unspectacular career at Los Angeles.  On one hand, Beckham was the first major European star to come to MLS to play, which forced the world to take MLS seriously.  He trailblazed a path for other past-their-prime players (“Come to MLS, they pay big money for names.”)  None of these have been a smashing successes, including Beckham.  This too is part of Beckham’s legacy, and the part of his legacy that Team Beckham, MLS, and the media try to sweep under the rug.

It is easy to forget that Beckham’s MLS career was less than a smashing success given that the Galaxy won the MLS championship this year, and were clearly the best team.  Certain segments of the media have gone so far as to call this year’s Galaxy the best MLS team ever.  The truth though is that if anything the Galaxy have dramatically underachieved.  No one will remember them fondly in 40 years, the way that Pele’s Cosmos (the inevitable if faulty comparison) are remembered.  Given all the money and talent pumped into the Galaxy, Los Angeles should have won the last three titles and possibly four.  MLS has been pushing for a Galaxy championship (or New York Red Bull, who actually play in New Jersey) pretty blatantly.  Major media markets at all that.  No one will watch if Sporting Kansas City wins except for the Kansas City faithful.

A New York/Los Angeles duopoly (if New York can ever get its act together, which is doubtful) would also be a part of Beckham’s legacy, and one that I find particularly galling.  The so-called Beckham Rule (the Designated Player Rule) allows MLS teams compete on the international market for players, but it also creates a potentially major disparity in the league.  The top stars, the ones who had a major impact in their European careers, will only go to two places: New York and Los Angeles.  (Yes, Freddy Ljungberg went to Seattle and then Chicago, but that is the exception.)  Teams from unglamorous locations will be left out in the cold.  Beckham would never have moved to MLS if he had to join the Columbus Crew.  Those in the American soccer media who castigate La Liga for being a two-horse league hypocritically advocate for a league dominated by Los Angeles and New York–or more specifically the Galaxy and the improbable resurrection of the Cosmos, to which Beckham is constantly being connected.

~*~*~*~*~*~

 So Beckham is probably off to Paris.  No doubt the British media and public will viciously attack the French for not appreciating Beckham when he inevitably fails there and is criticized for it.  It is amazing that one man is highly regarded.  Nevertheless, in a strange way it makes sense why Beckham is so beloved in Britain (and to British expats; World Football Daily’s current British hosts absolutely fawn over him).  Beckham is the embodiment of what the English want in their national team players–loyalty, dedication, and heart, limited skill, a famous WAG, and worldwide superstardom.  The English know they cannot win anything anymore.  Beckham is a consolation prize.  As long as there is a Beckham, the English game cannot be forgotten.

 

Footnotes: 

* The question of whether or not Donovan squandered his career by remaining in the MLS will have to be put aside for another time.

**  Mia Hamm is an official ambassador on behalf of FC Barcelona, although what that entails in beyond me.  Tennis players such as Arthur Ashe, Billie Jean King, and Andre Agassi have all taken on an ambassadorial roles at various points, but not so much for the sport as a whole as for their own (worthy) causes.

*** Not that looking like hypocrites matter to the British press.

The Future Of The International Game

After surviving an earthquake (which was not a very big deal) and now awaiting a hurricane (which is), I have some time to think about the future of international soccer, and that future does not look bright.  By now it is cliché to talk about how much less interesting the international game is than the club game, how the tactics are less sophisticated, and how it is less entertaining from an objective view.  And the international game has the added disadvantage of the bloated, corrupt entities that are FIFA, the continental confederations, and the national FAs.

I have been wondering what the international game will look like after the 2014 World Cup.  The vile, evil, kleptocrat Ricardo Teixiera, the President of the CBF and, according to one reputable (if hyperbolic) source, the worst person in the entire world, is probably going to take on Michel Platini for FIFA President after Sepp Blatter steps down.  Platini is no white knight, but there are very few who would be worse than Teixiera.  Regardless of what happens, but especially if Teixiera wins, football will be the biggest loser.

In his most recent blog post, Bill Archer wrote the following (see the link above for the full column):

[T]he European federations, who represent the financial, developmental and media engines which have made football what it is, believe that the biggest problem the sport faces is the fact that the vast majority of federations within FIFA don’t understand where all that lovely money actually comes from, namely the big clubs who create the big stars that everyone is willing to shell out all that big money to watch.

In fact of course, the problem isn’t that the, shall we say, “less prominent” footballing countries don’t know where the money comes from: they know perfectly well.

The problem is that they don’t care. They have the votes, and thus the power, to keep things exactly as they are and they have no intention of giving up all those mounds of money and power just because it might be the right thing to do, and if a bunch of prominent players break down while playing in yet another meaningless “friendly” staged solely for the purpose of fattening up the Presidential office budgets of a bunch of two mule federations, well, as they say in the Arctic: tough titties.

Archer is absolutely correct.  However, this is another element to this story which he does not write about (unsurprisingly, given that it is outside of the scope of his column.)  Around the world, devotion to local football clubs has been on the decline and loyalty has shifted to the top teams of the top leagues.  The best football in the world is played by a very small but very prominent number of clubs spread throughout Spain, England, Germany, and Italy.  The top clubs of these four nations have the most money, the most visibility, and have hoarded the world’s top players.  The best club in the world will always be on of their number, FIFA World Club Cup be damned.  Around the world, including the United States, local league suffers in comparison because it is remarkably easy to watch the top European teams and players on television, and more people would rather watch a top league on television than go watch their own local team, which can be distant, expensive, or dangerous.*

The European clubs realize this, even if, as Archer points out, the European national federations do not.  The super clubs cannot wait to pull away.  Right now they have agreed to a peace of sorts with FIFA and UEFA, mostly around the Champions League, but the clubs make the Champions League, not the other way around.  If Barcelona, Real Madrid, Manchester United, Bayern Munich, Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool, Manchester City, AC Milan, Inter Milan, and Juventus decide to hold their own tournament, the Champions League will fall apart, especially if those teams invite some historical powers (Porto, Ajax, Benfica, Marseilles, Lyon), the Qatar-owned, powers-to-be Malaga and Paris St. Germaine, and a few others.  No club would refuse that kind of visibility or money (which would be shared among the clubs only, cutting out UEFA entirely.)

I have talked about all this before, and I regret boring (all four of) my readers by repeating it, but I am interested in what the international teams will look like when the clubs no longer comply with FIFA and UEFA.  No nation will suffer more than England.  The EPL hates the FA, and the clubs only release players for international duty grudgingly.  For non-calendar events, like youth World Cups, the top English clubs don’t release their English players at all (they do however release foreign players as per contract agreement.)  One wonders if English players (or non-English EPL players) will be released when FIFA coercion no longer exists.  I suspect no.  I also suspect that the top English players, despite their lip service to the cause, will secretly be relieved.  One gets the sense they don’t actually want to play for England, a suspicion confirmed in the past few months by Paul Scholes and Gary Neville.  Both recent retirees have blasted international duty and their fellow England players.  Not coincidentally, both were also career players under Alex Ferguson, who has made no secret of his hatred for the international game.

I suspect this is the trickle before the flood, and within two decades at most the international game will be completely unrecognizable.

Footnotes: 

On the BBC’s World Football Phone-In, North American correspondent Sean Wheelock ranted about American fans who don’t support their local teams.  I strongly disagree with Wheelock’s assessment.  Fans have no duty to support a local team.  Sport is a business and a past time–in that order–not a cause, as any fan of women’s football knows all too well (and I would ask Wheelock why he doesn’t have the same passion and sanctimony about the WPS.)  Around the world, fans prefer European leagues to their local ones.  Leagues around the world, including MLS cannot compete with the money, talent, or history.  In a world and era as closely networked as here and now, the tradition of supporting your local club no long holds the same meaning.  Especially if you did not grow up supporting that club.

Tasteless

(The other day, I said I thought it would be really funny if someone sped up video footage of the London riots and played Yakety Sax over it.  It turns out I was right.  This is not to take away from the tragedy or horror of the problem.  It’s gallows humor.)

Favorite News Story of the Day

England’s Rugby Union team’s, whose traditional colors are red and white as I understand it, have ditched tradition to go for an all-black change strip.  An all-black kit is the calling card of rugby superpower New Zealand, hence the name “All Blacks.”  New Zealand is not amused, with even the Prime Minister taking a swipe at England.

The English players are not at all bothered by the claims that they are trying to be like New Zealand.  The players told the press that it wasn’t true, and they had to run so that they could practice their traditional pre-match haka.

Straight From The Horse’s Ass

The cancer that is Ricardo Teixeira, the head of the CBF (the Brazilian football association) has said that he will not speak to the English media because it is corrupt.

Pot, meet Kettle.

Women’s World Cup Day 11: Heroes’ Exits

Otherwise known as the day that shot my nerves.

The first day of Women’s World Cup quarterfinals saw England meet France and falter to their national nemesis.  Not Les Blues, penalty kicks. And Japan scored the biggest upset in Women’s World Cup history.  Ever.

France v. England

Penalty kicks are the worse way to end a match.  It’s not that there is a better way (God forbid we go back to replays like they still do in the FA Cup), but penalty kicks are largely based on chance and nerve rather than skill.  Penalty kicks are the antithesis of football.  A football match is all about the flow of the game, and the ensuing tension arises naturally.  The beauty of a goal is that it releases that tension (Galeano compared the goal to an orgasm.)  Penalty kicks are the opposite.  Tension doesn’t build because the penalty kicks are stop and start and not a flow.  The successful penalty kick is not a release because it is a false goal in a game of counting.  The successful penalty kick prolongs the crowd’s agony, the missed one enhances it.

Since the beginning of international play, we have been told that one of the primary virtues of English (male) players is their “heart”.  In recent decades, heart has become a substitute for un-English virtues such as skill, technique, and intelligence.  As expected by all but the English, tournament after tournament the Three Lions go out with a whimper and an angry English media on their backs.

But the English women are different.  First of all, their players do have skill, technique, and intelligence.  But unlike, the men, they have heart.  England were completely outplayed by the French in the first half.  Time after time it looked as though England would suffer the same humiliation that Canada suffered at the hands of the French.  Yet England never gave up.

There is a tendency, particularly when talking about English football to use war metaphors.  There is good reason for that; football, particularly international football, is ersatz war.  For some reason the language of war especially suits England, probably because the English game is so physical.  And sure enough, I was thinking about famous English wars with the French throughout history.  The truth is that England were besieged in that first half.

Despite the bombardment, England scored the first goal, and it was midfielder Jill Scott, possible her squad’s best performer.  On a day when England’s other heroes, particularly Kelly Smith, were largely ineffective, it was Scott who gave her nation reason to hope.  But that was not enough.  In the 88th minute, so close to a victory, France finally got the equalizer it was threatening thanks to Élise Bussaglia.  The goal was inevitable, but it was still painful.  By the end of regulation time, Smith and Fay White were hobbled, and coach Hope Powell had unwisely used up her substitutions well before the end of regulation time.

And yet England soldiered on.  I am no fan of English football, but I have much affection for the Three Lionesses, all the more so after today.  Yes, they have the technique and skill, but their heart, their courage, and their doggedness in the face of a far superior opponent won me over.  I wanted Kelly Smith to get her win, to go to her first semifinals ever.

But then it came to penalties, and England’s destiny was written.  England have a horrible record on penalty kicks.  It is one of those leitmotifs of English men’s football–England fight until the very end of extra time and then blow it on penalty kicks.  (Compare that to Germany who almost never lose on penalty kicks.)

The penalty kicks today were a microcosm of every English tournament in history excluding the 1966 World Cup.  First there is hope, then a good start, then someone blows it, then disaster and devastation.  France’s Camille Abily kicked the first shot directly into the arms of keeper Karen Bardsley, and Kelly Smith rockets her shot to the back of the net.  Hopes all around England rose sky-high, just waiting to be extinguished.  France recovered and the next four players all made their shots, England players made the next tow, and then Claire Rafferty missed the goal entirely.  The score was tied.  France converted their final kick, Fay White missed hers.

I feel awful for England.  Despite an initial slow start to the tournament and some wobbles against New Zealand, they played extremely well.  It would have been nice for Kelly Smith to be able to take a triumphant final bow, but alas it was not to be.  Football is a cruel game and “deserves” rarely figures into wins, although it must be said that France were the better team.  For the sake of good football, the better team should move on, but I feel the pain of the English women.  Like every team here they too are fighting for their reputation and their league.  England should be proud of them; they have brought far more honor to English football than their male counterparts have done in years.

Japan v. Germany

To say that no one saw this coming is somewhat of an understatement.  To say that this is the most shocking result ever and that no would have predicted it never, ever, never is closer to the scope of the upset.  Germany were the prohibitive favorites to win their third straight World Cup title.  Not only is the squad teeming with talent, the players all ply their trade in one of the world’s most competitive leagues, they were playing in front of the home crowd, and (probably most importantly) they were playing to get their countrymen to take their sport seriously and support their league.  The German women too were playing to justify themselves and their game.  Throughout the tournament it looked like they were succeeding.  God only knows if that will continue.  If not, the German women’s team is being disproportionately punished for their loss.

Compare that to Japan who are playing to give hope and joy to a nation recovering from unimaginable agony.  In the past the Japanese women have consistently come up short on the big occasions.  They had never beaten European opposition at a World Cup, a point drilled home when they lost to England 2-0 in the final group stage match.  No one gave them a chance against Germany.

And yet despite the predictions that this would be the least competitive of all the quarterfinals, there was a nagging feeling that Germany were faltering under the pressure.  None of their group stage wins had looked convincing, and there was the distraction of the Prinz Saga.  Nevertheless, Germany’s path to the finals looked set, all the more so when the United States lost to Sweden and landed on the other side of the bracket.

Watching this match, it I had the sense that Japan targeted Germany.  Not so much that they merely developed a successful game plan for the match, but rather all their training and preparation for the past three years centered solely around beating Germany.  Every plan, every strategy, every pass up until now was informed by how Germany would respond.  This hypothesis explains perfectly why Japan lost to England in the group stage.  Germany are a very technical adept team and England, for all their skills, are not.  England are far more improvisational (and physical) than the methodical Germans.  In preparing for Germany, Japan were not ready for England.

But today was the real test.  Three previous matches showed Germany’s weaknesses, slight as they were.  Germany lacked the killer instinct of the 2003 and 2007 teams (and even those teams were not impervious, as demonstrated in the 2004 and 2008 Olympics.)  This year though, the cracks showed under the media spotlight.  When Nigeria got physical, Germany withdrew.  More importantly, Nigeria also showed that Germany had trouble breaking down organized defenses.  Germany were susceptible to set pieces.  And the most glaring problem (although I feel like I am alone in saying this) was that coach Silvia Neid had been there too long, and her guidance had gone stale.  She bought into the hype about Germany and allowed her team to buy into it too.  For me, there was a moment on ESPN’s commentary that revealed the extent of Neid’s complacency.  Tony DiCicco pointed out that the signs of Birgit Prinz’s decline was apparent for months, and Neid should never have played her.  DiCicco’s co-commentator, the former German international Viola Odebrecht, said that she did not believe Neid knew that Prinz was past her prime.  Odebrecht was defending Neid (her former coach), but to me there was no more damning indictment.  What Odebrecht unintentionally said was that Neid had not been paying attention to her players’ standard of play over the past few months.  Any national coach who does not watch her potentials should be fired on the spot for gross negligence.

No doubt journalists, pundits, coaches, players, experts, fans, and armchair commentators like myself will question Neid’s tactical decisions in the match against Japan, particularly her substitutions.  That is true I suppose, but it misses the (Black) forest for the trees.  Perhaps she could have done more, although a very early injury to Kim Kulig was not Neid’s fault, and she had to make due and waste a substitution.  And perhaps she could rightfully be called out for not putting in Lira Bajramaj (which, I correctly predicted).  But her real fault was not for this one match; it was for letting her team lose focus.  Germany could not cope with the combination of the pressure of expectations (which they had never faced before), trouble in the locker room, an extremely organized opponent who knew how to play them, and the absence of a Plan B.  Losses happen, but in retrospect this one was coming.  Neid may not be culpable for this loss, but it is her fault that her team had been imploding since the match against Canada.  Perhaps we were just to dazzled by the hype to see it.

But in all of this, I am not giving the proper credit to Japan.  As much as I had found the Barcelona comparisons to be overblown, Japan have come the closest of any non-Spanish team to understanding tiki-taka and Pep Guardiola’s vision.  Germany did not lose this match, Japan beat them in spectacular and heart pounding fashion.  If the tournament were to end tomorrow Homare “Grandma” Sawa should win the Golden Ball.  It’s not just that she assisted Karina Maruyama’s brilliant goal or her own hat trick against Mexico.  It was her leadership throughout the tournament.  If Japan pulled off the biggest upset in Women’s World Cup history, then it is because Sawa led them to it.

As important as Sawa was, she was not the most important player of the night.  That distinction goes to goalkeeper Ayumi Kaihori who made save after stunning save.  It was a masterclass of goalkeeping.  Japan knew they created history–the upset that will be talked about for as long as there is a Women’s World Cup.  An upset so comprehensive the only comparable match in men’s history that I can think of is West Germany’s defeat of Hungary’s Golden Team in 1954.  Japan understood that, and that is why Japanese players were also in tears at the end of the 120 minutes.

I said it before, and I feel confident repeating it now.  Europe’s reign at the top is ending, and Asia’s is on the horizon.  Regardless of the outcome of her next two matches (and win or lost, Japan play two more), Homare Sawa has taken Japan to a place it has never been before.  The five-time World Cup veteran has left quite a legacy in her last tournament.  Today she is Japan’s hero.

Spare a few thoughts for that other five-time World Cup hero whose career ended tonight.  It is sad that the incomparable Birgit Prinz’s career ended with the whimper that it did–sitting helplessly and miserably on the substitute’s bench for her final two matches, watching Marta making an assault on her World Cup goals record, and all the while becoming a lightning rod for controversy (partially of her own making) rather than an icon in front of her countrymen.  It was not a graceful exit.  To add insult to injury, if Sweden win tomorrow, Germany will be eliminated from the Olympics, the one tournament Prinz has never won.

And spare a thought for those other heroes who played their last match of the tournament today, particularly Kelly Smith, one of the game’s all-time legends.  Football is a very unfair game, and that unfairness should not diminish these players’ skills, talents, or legacies.  Nor should it allow us to forget the gift they have given to us, especially since they (unlike their top male counterparts) have fought so hard for so little.  It is a labor of love, and we must love them in return.

Women’s World Cup: Quarterfinal Predictions

Well, it’s that time.  I’ve been a little afraid to make any definitive predictions.  It’s not that this World Cup has been so unpredictable; it’s hasn’t been.  It’s not that there have been so many draws (only 3), but the remaining teams are so close in quality that I am waffling.  With that in mind, here goes nothing.

Germany v. Japan:  This is the only match I really comfortable about predicting.  Germany are going to be too good for Japan.  Japan’s pretty passing is going to do absolutely nothing against the speed, strength, and organization of the Germans.

Sweden v. Australia:   Sweden are on a high having beaten the (probably overrated) US, but the truth is that Sweden are not that good.  Australia are very good, but has some clear weaknesses, particularly at center back.  I am going to predict that Australia’s coach will make the necessary changes, and the Matildas will eke out a win.

England v. France:  Unlike against Japan against Germany, France’s pretty passing will make a difference against England.  England did a good job in beating Japan to win the group, and they are improving, but Kelly Smith is still not at her best.  France lost badly to Germany and were heavily exposed, but I think that is going to galvanize the French who have talent to spare.  I am calling this match for France.

Brazil v. United States:  This is the big one; the one that no one wanted to see in the quarterfinals.  Both teams have their defensive frailties, but only the US’s frailties have been exposed.  Brazil also have Marta who could be the X-Factor.  So many US fans keep talking about revenge for 2007, conveniently forgetting that the US already got revenge at the Olympics in 2008, robbing the Samba Queens of a chance to get their first world title.  They want revenge just as much if not more than the US.  The difference between the teams may very well be that whereas Brazil’s offense is incredibly potent (if not always consistent), the US’s offense has really only capitalized on mistakes of Colombia and North Korea, the two worst teams in the tournament.  I am afraid that an early exit for the US means the end of the WPS (although a win may not save it), and I sure that an early exit would be the end of Pia Sundhage’s tenure.  Nevertheless, I think this time the match is going to Brazil.

Women’s World Cup Day 9: Contenders and Pretenders

Day Nine of the Women’s World Cup saw England and Germany win their groups in convincing fashion.  In doing so, they demonstrates why all the Barcelona comparison that France and Japan received were completely wrong.  In the quarterfinals, England plays France, Germany plays Japan, and mercifully nobody will mention the War (or Fawlty Towers).

First, an apology. 

At the World Cup, the final two matches of every group are played at the same time.*  As a result, I could only watch one match per group.  As much as I wanted to see New Zealand play Mexico and Canada play Nigeria, both of those games were for pride only.  Therefore I chose the matches that had bearing on the quarterfinals, and regretted it.  I want to congratulate New Zealand for heroically coming back from a 2-0 deficit to drawn Mexico and get the nation’s first point ever at a Women’s World Cup. Like the All Whites at last year’s World Cup, the Football Ferns won fans worldwide with their heart and grit.  I can only reiterate that I hope this is a fruitful beginning for the Ferns and not aberration.  I am hopeful, as the national media has already written proudly about the Ferns’ achievement.  I am sad however, that I missed the haka.  (Watch it here.)  The haka is one of those traditions I absolutely love about New Zealand sports, although admittedly the Ferns’ haka doesn’t have quite the fear factor as when the All Blacks do it.

While New Zealand had its best showing ever, Canada had its worst.  A 1-0 loss to Nigeria means that Canada is going home without points for the first time ever.  I have given loads of credit to Carolina Morace for taking Canada to sixth in the world, but likewise, this results reflects very poorly on her.  To an extent the life of a coach is unfair: the players get the credit for a win, and the coach gets the blame for a loss.  (Unless you are Jose Mourinho; then it is the other way around.)  Fair or not though, someone must be answerable, and that someone is the coach.

England v. Japan

Remember when I said yesterday that history is not destiny?  Well, this is exactly what I was talking about.  Despite England’s mediocre first two matches, despite Japan’s pretty passing and demolition of Mexico, England took apart Japan with stunning ease.  First Ellen White lobbed a honey of a goal over the Japanese goalkeeper and then Rachel Yankey scored a nice second.

I don’t have too much to say, because the match was not particularly interesting.  England deserved the win and England got the win.  Most importantly, England played smart; England avoided giving Japan set pieces in the final third and lo and behold, Japan became a paper tiger.  For all the passing ability, Japan are really strongest when there is a dead ball.  England robbed Japan of its strength, and like a shorn Samson, Japan were powerless.  Japan did have some nice play, but someone who only saw this match would think that England were the skill team.  And this is without Kelly Smith playing her best.

Germany v. France

This was quite a match, but that is not necessarily a compliment.  On a very basic level Germany beat France 4-2.  Germany never trailed, and each time France pulled to within one goal, Germany scored another.  In actual performance though, this match was far more complicated than that.

At this tournament, Germany have been a strange mixture of invulnerability and fragility.  Sure they beat opponents 2-1, 1-0, and 4-2.  Nor have they trailed.  The German bench is extremely deep (some key players were rested today.)  The German attack is like wave after wave of white hitting opponents.  The Germans have a winning mentality.  They know they are the best and never doubt it.

Yet in these group stage matches, opponents scored three goals on Nadine Angerer, which is just one fewer than she has given up in the past two World Cups combined (2007 being a perfect shut out.)  France scored two goals today.  The last time Germany let two goals in during a World Cup match was 1999.  Both goals today came in exactly the same way, poor marking on corner kicks allowed French players (Marie-Laure Delie and Laura Georges) to head the ball in.  Despite Germany’s dominance, I have the nagging suspicion that France lost the match rather than Germany winning it.  Had France been a little less intimidated, a little more aggressive from the beginning, then perhaps the match would not have been so one-sided.

And then there is the Prinz factor. I want to give Birgit Prinz the benefit of the doubt, but I fear she has become a poison to her team.  She sulked on the sidelines rather than give encouragement, and looked miserable when Germany did well.  Prinz is in an odd situation that few female athletes have faced before, although this is not unusual in men’s sport.  On one hand we want our athletes to have a competitive fire and confidence that borders on self-absorption.  On the other hand, that same confidence can be repellent, especially when the player is doing poorly or not on your team.  Prinz is well off her best form, and now open to attack for having a star athlete’s demeanor. It is sad though because Prinz is a star athlete, one of the great players in the history of women’s football.  This is an awful way for her legacy to end.

Despite the fall of Prinz, Germany has stars to spare.  Today Inka Grings scored a brace, Kerstin Garefrekes led the team quite capably (and opened the scoring), and Celia Okoyino da Mbabi put the game completely out of reach.  Then there is the curious case of Fatmire (Lira) Bajramaj who played today in front of her home crowd Mönchengladbach.  Bajramaj, now with Frankfurt, was an integral part of Turbine Potsdam’s Champions League title last year and second place finish this year.  Because of her talent and her background (her family fled from Kosovo to Germany when she was young), she has become the face of the German National Team.  She placed third in last year’s FIFA Player of the Year award (take that with a grain of salt given that the runner-up to Marta was Prinz and the Women’s Coach of the Year was Silvia Neid.)  Yet she seemed to have fallen out of favor with Neid, as today was her first start all tournament.  Supposedly this is because her finishing ability leaves something to be desired.  Today she displayed her dazzling dribbling abilities, her keen intelligence, and her lovely passes, but again, she could not finish.  This was not completely her fault.  She was robbed of what would have been a brilliant a goal by French goalkeeper Berangere Sapowicz (see below), although she could have done a better job.  Despite her good play, I am guessing she did not win back Neid’s favor.  Marta’s  position as the world’s best is not in jeopardy.

I have no idea what to make of France.  Unlike Germany which fights for everything, France approached this match with classic Gallic ennui.  Camille Abily and Sonia Bompastor, France’s two best players, started the match on the bench.  To top that off coach Bruno Bini told reporters beforehand that this match was not that important.  Who knows if France even wanted to win this match.  Gallic ennui.

What a blunder.  Sure enough, in the second half Abily and Bompastor were substituted in.  There is no guarantee that France would have won or drawn had Abily and Bompastor played from the beginning, but France guaranteed that they would lose before they stepped on to the pitch.  They fell victim to their own hubris and the hype of being called the female version of Barcelona.  As a result France was overwhelmed and now has a confidence-sapping loss to show for it.

And then there was the goalkeeper issue.  Bajramaj was in the box, and the goalkeeper Sapowicz fouled her.  Sapowicz was red carded, and Germany won the penalty which Grings converted.  This was the first red card of the tournament.  It was deserved, although the referee was a little too card-happy throughout the match.  (Since Germany v. Nigeria, the refereeing has not been fantastic.)  It is fairly shocking to see a goalkeeper red carded, and it is amazing that the keeper would have been so foolhardy.  Now the backup keeper will play the quarterfinal against England.  Julie Foudy and Ian Darke mentioned that Lyon’s goalkeeper was kept out of the international squad because of “personality issues.”  One wonders what those issues are, but one also wonders if that should be enough to keep a champion goalkeeper out of the squad.  If Pia Sundhage could bring back Hope Solo, why would Lyon’s goalkeeper be left behind.

Or it could be that France are just not ready for the big time yet.  Perhaps France’s pretty passing simply have fooled us all.

Not that Germany is ready yet.  Unlike in 2003 and 2007 Germany’s faults are very clear.  Whether they can be exploited by a stronger team than France is an entirely different question, but Germany are no longer the all-conquering juggernaut that they once were.

And this too is progress.

Footnotes:

*  Both matches in the group are played at the same time because of what happened in the 1982 World Cup.  Austria and West Germany controversially colluded in the final match of the group to ensure that they would both move on, and Algeria would be eliminated.  At that time, Algeria had already played its final match, so both Austria and West Germany knew that for both nations to advance, West Germany had to beat Austria 1-0.  West Germany got the goal early in the match and then for the remaining time, the two nations just kicked the ball around the pitch.  Even the Austrian and West German fans deplored the obvious fix.