Round of 16 predictions (part 1)

...aaaaand we have the first four R16 games cut out for us, and boy are they good. Here's some predictions and observations on each.

Uruguay-South Korea

Should be quite interesting. Uruguay has played some of the best football in the group stage. South Korea has also pleasantly surprised, despite an embarrassing and undeserved loss to Argentina. This one is interesting mostly because the two teams play surprisingly similar brands of football. Uruguay is one of the least technical South American teams, which isn't to say they're poorly skilled (quite the opposite) but that they also have a strong midfield and an expert defense. This is not surprising, given the well-known Italian roots of the Uruguayan people and traditions. South Korea also play a highly cautious game, but they're less technical and less physical. Their strength is in the amazing (and typically Asian) precision of teamwork, which, when joined with still-respectable skill, makes them one of the World Cup's strongest defensive teams when in possession. It should be a low-scoring, tactical game of chess--unless Uruguay gets an early lead thanks to a set piece, which if Cavani and Forlan both play could very well happen: then it will be an all-out war. Prediction: 2-0.

Argentina-Mexico

The one I look forward to the most, honestly. The Albiceleste has dominated its group and not one player has disappointed--not even Messi, who may not have scored but got assists right and left and gave horrible nightmares to those poor Greek, Nigerian, and South Korean defenders. So long as Veron plays, no problem at midfield (not even without Cambiasso... but Diego, what were you thinking?!), and unbeknown to most, Argentina has a very strong defense this year. They're going to need it, because Mexico's game has been sparkling and extremely physical since day one. Manchester United's newest star-boy Hernandez and old-glory Blanco have proven decisive in more than one occasion. On paper, this one is for Argentina, and if Diego's boys play like they can, Mexico stands no chance. But football is beautiful precisely because "on paper" doesn't mean crap! Prediction: 3-1.

Germany-England

This should have been the final. I hate this game and it will be painful to watch. As an AS Roma fan, I love Capello: we owe him the 2001 Serie A title and he's been a friend and teacher as well as a great coach. So rooting for England should be a no-brainer. I've always loved them anyway, and one of my all-time favorite players, Chelsea FC's Frankie Lampard, plays there. But this Germany has won me over, too. I started out hating their coach Loew (whose nose-picking, balls-scratching, armpit-sniffing habits in the 2006 World Cup had been the laughingstock of Italy) and ridiculing such a young and inexperienced team... but their great group and surprisingly skilled individuals can go very far. It's a well-balanced team that's fun to watch, with great fresh talents like Ozil and Khadira as well as the "old" guard of Klose, Lahm, and Podolski. Yes, the 4-0 over Australia doesn't say much, nor does the loss against Serbia--but Germany has played consistently well and I think they can come out on top. Prediction: 1-0.

Ghana-USA

These two had been in the same group in 2006, along with Italy and the Czech Republic. Ghana had won in a tough match then, but things are different now. The great new wonder of African football is not impressing anyone this time. Only two goals in the group stage, both penalties, and so many missed chances it's not even funny. They ditched their most repulsive habit from 2006, that of tackling so hard as to break legs, and that's good; but their football has also lost much of its spark. Au contraire, I've never seen the US play this well. They've been on a constant grow and have played well in all three games of the group stage, dodging some unfortunate ref calls and (most of all) their own lack of cynicism in the box. Unlike Ghana, they're a strong and well-organized team which lacks any seriously skilled individual (Dempsey and Donovan are merely okay: get over it)... but they have no major weak spots, either, and they are very well coached, and both can go a long way. Prediction: 0-1.

Looking forward to what R16 games Groups E through H will give us in the coming two days!

North Korean players go missing...?

The European press is abuzz with the news that four North Korean players have gone missing before the game with Brazil and haven't been seen since. It's difficult not to jump to conclusions. Korea DPR has a totalitarian regime and it's quite possible that the four might have fled and/or sought political asylum somewhere.

For days now I had read unconfirmed rumors on forums that N-Korean players would be sent back to the coal mines if they didn't do well in the World Cup, though that sounds much like the usual propaganda to make enemy dictatorships look bad (plus, it's just internet hearsay).

Two print sources report on virtually the same news. The most "reputable" are the UK's Daily Telegraph and the Italian La Stampa. The latter was supposedly was the first mainstream source to report the news. As for sports websites, Chilean La Tercera and Spanish AS also chime in on it, and the former claims that the news started on a South Korean web site... where exactly, though, is nowhere to be found. Finally, there's some discussion at this forum centered on a Romanian TV news source. (Remember that you can instantly translate entire pages in foreign languages with the Google Translate toolbar here).

What matters is that FIFA is silent on the whole thing on its web site, despite nearly all of the above sources claiming some sort of official confirmation from FIFA. The fact itself that the news came out nearly three days after the fact means either that something's brooding and press coverage is undesirable or that the whole thing is entirely made up or misunderstood. Hopefully we'll know more soon!

Three days in and yet no great games, but...

If you're new to international football, you ought to know that this is typical for the first round of games at the group stage in pretty much any World Cup. The venue is huge, teams are afraid, and they haven't played together at high level in months, maybe years. So it's normal that the first match be reserved for "studying" one's own game as well as the opponent's.

Surely enough, we've seen a lot of fine individual plays and even a few exciting minutes of football here and there... but by and large we're far from how World Cup games can (and will) be like.

Below is my quick, down-and-dirty assessment of the fourteen teams who've played so far in the first three days of the South African mundial.

South Africa

Typical home-team syndrome: want everything, want it now, think they can actually win. If they get lucky, like South Korea in 2002, they may just do something important. Otherwise, they're a rather forgettable team as seen against Mexico.

Mexico

Its first half against SA has been by far the best football seen so far, but they didn't close a game they should have dominated and in the distance they lost both skill and focus. A potential big-time outsider if they get their game straight.

Uruguay

The ghost of the highly technical, strongly physical team that nearly upset Italy in 1990. An uninspired, uninteresting formation that needed no more than its moderate technical means to stop an equally dumbfounded France.

France

The team that shouldn't be here (after Henry's handball against Ireland in the last qualifying match) confirms that it really shouldn't be here. Italian sports newspaper Gazzetta puts it best by wondering "who's supposed to score in this team?" More than that--who's supposed to do anything?

South Korea

Along with Mexico, the most convincing team so far. Their strength is teamwork, like in 2002, but what they have learned since is some skill and a more refined sense of tactics (as also witnessed by the fact that they're the only Asian team to have an Asian coach). They even have the star player in Manchester UTD's Park Ji-Sung. My money is on them to pass in group B with Argentina.

Greece

Might it just have been a bad game? One hopes so, or this team isn't going anywhere. They too are like the ghosts of the tough, skilled, and lucky players who brought home the controversial 2004 European Cup. Maybe their German coach Rehhagel really has exhausted his good luck.

Nigeria

Hard to judge. When they played, they played well; but they were dominated by Argentina for most of the game. Still, with the exception perhaps of Martins, they're light-years from the Eagles who knocked out Spain and (almost) Italy in 1994. But that's only natural.

Argentina

An offensive wonder who... wanders. Against the clunky Nigerian defense they should have scored six. Yes, the Nigerian keeper was in a state of grace, but Messi and (most of all) a horrid Higuain were simply imprecise. None the less, Veron and Messi are inspired and even the defense is kind-of holding, so with more cynicism in the box their ticket to the semis is already printed.

England

A Capello team, for better and worse. By far the most mature and Cup-ready team so far, and yet not quite as concrete as they should be. Never mind Green's mishap: they didn't kill the game when they could (and boy, could they!) and the American goal was in the air anyway.

United States

A game of surprising strength against an all-around better prepared England. They kept playing their game and seriously endangered Green's goal in more than a few occasions. Given as the MLS is currently in session, their physical condition might just be their best weapon (yes, only five play in the MLS, but they're also five key players).

Algeria, Slovenia, Ghana, Serbia

By far the two most utterly boring games seen so far, so not much to say about these. In the case of Ghana and Serbia, we know this isn't their best. Ghana got plain lucky in a game that shouldn't have awarded more than one point each. Hoping to see better/more next time.

Australia withdraw 2018 World Cup bid

About time. Australia can't host a World Cup--can you imagine getting up at 6 in the morning (or waiting until 11 at night) to watch games? Simply out of the question. Sorry, Aussies. Read the news here.

The pool of candidates now is down to England (wow, first the Olympics, now this... they're on a roll); USA (not again... please, not again...); Spain/Portugal (interesting indeed!); Belgium/Holland (didn't we just have a horrible European Cup here?); and Russia (my favorite, for no other reason they haven't hosted a significant international football event yet).

But of course, it's far too early to tell. Meanwhile, a reminder: Brazil 2014 will be the best World Cup ever, and if it isn't, I renounce football!

Paraguayan witches curse Italy

Now it's official: Italy will lose to Paraguay. Screw the bookmakers; the clairvoyants say so, and you just don't fuck with that kind of prediction!

The "news" is being reported all over the Italian media (see here, for example), but I haven't been able to find it anywhere else. I'm wondering if it's even true or--which is more likely--if it's a small and insignificant event that's being blown way out of proportion.

Who cares. It's funny as hell. It'll be ten times funnier when we beat Paraguay. Of course, if we don't... well, then............

Interactive WC calendar

Not really much to talk about today (so far), but check out Spanish sports daily Marca's ultra-sweet, interactive World Cup calendar!

Should North Korea play in the World Cup?

Do you believe that North Korea should be allowed to play in the World Cup? This question had been on the plate for a while now, but it resurfaced last night after incidents at the Nigeria-North Korea warm-up friendly. (Notice that the incidents were unrelated to the game and to either team, and were instead the result of poor safety and security standards by the South Africans.... even if FIFA disagrees with the latter assessment; also see here).

To most people, that's a non-issue; North Korea are regular, fee-paying FIFA members, just as they are UN members. And unlike the UN, FIFA is not even a government or political body. Others claim, though, that the alleged human-rights violations of the North Korean dictatorships ought to rule out its national team from international competition.

What's your opinion?

First ref designations...

FIFA has designated the referees for the first 16 games of the World Cup. Here is the link to the related PDF document.

Only two of the "big names" will start. One is Benito Archundia (MEX), who'll ref Paraguay-Italy. He had also ref'd Italy in the 2006 semifinal against Germany, doing a fairly good job. That year, he shares the record for most games refereed with the Argentine Helizondo. The latter, now retired, had ref'd the final among much controversy for ejecting Zidane, supposedly after being told by an assistant who had seen the replay on live TV (if you didn't know, any form of instant replay is strictly forbidden in football, a rule itself under much scrutiny).

The other big name is Howard Webb (ENG), who just excellently refereed the Champions League final. He will be in charge of Spain-Switzerland, a fairly easy game. Finally, Carlos Simon (BRA) will take England-USA, easily the most anticipated game of the group stage... well, at least by the Americans.

More later on the latest injuries and what the press has begun to call the "captains' curse"... since after Ferdinand, Pirlo, Drogba, Ballack, and Essien, now also Robben and Mikel have added themselves to an ever-longer injury list!

Edit: for a full list of all the WC referees and their assistants, see this document.

Luck of the draw?

In one of today's friendlies, Italy and Switzerland tied it 1-1. That's good omen, if one believes in such things. A similar pre-Mundial friendly in 1982 also ended 1-1, and one more such friendly before Germany 2006 had the very same score. All three games were played in Geneva, and in '82 and '06 Italy went on to win the World Cup. I don't believe in such mumbo-jumbo, but the reptilian part of my brain does and it was seriously rooting for there not to be any more goals after the first two!

Superstition aside, Italy played a much more aggressive game than against Mexico just two days ago. Of course, it was a different team... literally: Lippi picked 11 different starters each time, so as to give everybody the chance to play and (importantly) himself the chance to experiment two radically different squads and tactics. Azzurri, of course, are still far from top shape and light-years away from 2006 shape, but we all know how pre-WC games don't really say anything if not to the coach and players.

More to say tomorrow on FIFA's referee designation for the first 16 games, even though Drogba's tentative recovery is still (in my opinion) the hottest discussion topic right now. More coming up on that too...

Injury time, literally

Trouble ahead for three of the most anticipated teams: England, Italy, and Ivory Coast.

Yesterday, England's centre back Rio Ferdinand suffered a knee injury during training. Capello's staff are not optimistic: Ferdinand's World Cup is "almost certainly over." If true, England loses its star defender and (according to Football365.com) one of their "few world-class footballers."

Even more shockingly, Didier Drogba injured his elbow during an Ivory Coast friendly against Japan. Some are optimistic right now about his chances to make it to South Africa, while others remain sceptical. The Associated Press reports that Drogba himself isn't very hopeful.

And to top off a disastrous day, Italy's Andrea Pirlo's (a significant contributor to Italy's 2006 win) old calf problems seem to be bothering him again. This could be disastrous for the team's game and morale, especially after the Camoranesi scare last week. Italy just lost a seemingly easy friendly to Mexico which evidenced some ugly teamwork and worrisome physical condition. Most of the Italian press suspends judgment: this article reports that Pirlo has left the team for now and that initial medical reports speak of a 15-20 day prognosis... which would put him out of injury list just before Italy's second game against New Zealand. Again, it doesn't look good.

Meanwhile, the usual "summer dance" of coaches doesn't stop just because it's World Cup time; and, if anything, it's even more hectic right now. As everybody knows now, Benitez left Liverpool after a (mostly losing) 6-year streak. As for Capello, after being tempted by FC Inter owner Massimo Moratti to return to Italy, he seems intentioned to see England through to Euro 2012. And of course, Cesare Prandelli signed to be Italy's next coach after the World Cup. Prandelli should have gotten this job two years ago, after Donadoni was rightfully kicked out the door and before Lippi was dragged out of retirement like a Hollywood action-movie hero, as if there were no other talented coaches around.....

North Korean FAIL

Apparently, North Korea tried to smuggle an extra striker in its squad by listing him as a goalie... and now that FIFA found out, the guy is only allowed to play in goal. HAHAHA! Are all dictatorships this stupid or is North Korea a special case?

Read the news here... or, really, anywhere on the 'net. Oh my lol.

Goalie problems for England, as always

Football 365 reports on England goalie's David James, who says:

"I don't want to look at this World Cup as a personal mission. I look at it as a team mission. Yes, you want to be No. 1, you want to play every game and lift the World Cup, but if that doesn't happen it will be a case of: 'If I'm there, my contribution will have aided whatever success we have.'

That's mighty fine, but the problem goes far beyond James himself. England is, in many respects, a team specular to Italy, in that it's got everything right but the goalkeeper (unlike Italy where, so far, everything needs work but that human wall Gigi Buffon, a certainty as much as a bare necessity for Lippi's weathered defense). Mind, I do think England has its best shot at winning a World Cup since 1990. That time they assembled a killer but tremendously unlucky team. This time around they've got all their ducks in a row, especially without whiny Becks, and Capello is a winner and a closer.

Still, the goalkeeper department is a problem. For one, all four of England's top teams have foreign goalies, and have had them for quite a while: Van der Saar for Man-Utd, Cech for Chelsea, Almunia for Arsenal, and Reina for Liverpool. Even more importantly, there isn't a significant new, young generation of English goalies elsewhere. This isn't merely a problem with England. Italy's top four teams in this year's Serie A also had foreign goalies, and if it weren't for Buffon we too would be in trouble. But a problem it is, and a pretty serious one.

To conclude, it's not like the goalie--whoever it is--needs to worry all that much against the uninspired and uninspiring U.S. forwards. England will get through the group stage just fine. But if they have any higher aspirations, they will need a good man for the job, and right now they just don't seem to have it.

Europe, Brazil, and...?

The leading European sports betting web site, bwin, gives the following predictions concerning final victory of this World Cup (hereafter "WC"). According to their bookies, the top 4 teams most likely to win are Spain, Brazil, England, and Argentina, in that order. The least likely instead are Japan, Honduras, North Korea, and New Zealand, whose chances of winning the WC (or, really, any game) is just a tad better than my chances of dating Ellen Page. The reigning world champions, Italy, are quoted at just below Argentina and at just a notch above Germany, France, the Netherlands, and Portugal, which round up the "usual suspects." The number-one outsider to watch out for is certainly Ivory Coast, this year's highest-ranked African team (aside from Egypt, who however didn't make it to the WC).

First impression: nothing new under the sun. One cliche especially seems vindicated, viz. that the World Cup is almost always a European cup. Four years ago, in Germany, all four semifinalists were European. The first semifinal, Germany-Italy, had been a historic semifinal in 1970 (the best WC game of all) and a one-sided final in 1982. The final, Italy-France, had been a key quarterfinal in 1998 and the thrilling 2000 European Cup final, both decided by nerve and luck more than talent (as in 2006, after all). Rivalries are deeply rooted, there are hard feelings, and the World Cup--much like the so-called World Wars--is often an intra-European incestuous affair.

There are, of course, two very notable exceptions, Brazil and Argentina. They won five and two WCs respectively, over a third of those played so far (the remaining 11 are divided among just five teams, four of which European: Italy 4, Germany 3, France and England 1 each; the other is Uruguay 2, who however hasn't been any good since the 1950s). That widens the field a bit and keeps things interesting, especially given the other well-known cliche in football: "Brazil can lose only to itself," which is to say they're so good that if they don't sweep it, something odd must have happened. When my Dad was young, Italian sports editor Gianni Brera often said that Brazil's only obstacle to absolute dominion was the unwavering belief in its own supremacy, which resulted in sloppy defending on the pitch and wild partying and sexual habits behind the scenes. Well, the former issue is no more, thanks to a great defensive lineup including the likes of Lucio, Alves, Maicon, Juan, and Julio Cesar, all the world's best or near-best in their respective roles. The latter problem, "thankfully," still plagues them, so we might just see some actual competition!

But what of the rest? Where's the "world" in the World Cup? It seems sorely lacking. FIFA must have noticed this, given its choice of WC locations lately. Prior to 1994, the WC had always been played either in a major European or South American country, where by "major" I mean countries with prevailing and long-enduring football traditions and whose national teams were by and large successful on the international scene. Then we had USA 1994, Japan-South Korea 2002, and now South Africa 2010. This is not a complete trend change: we still did have France 1998 and Germany 2006, and it will be back to Brazil in 2014 (oh how momentous will that one be!) But the outreach program seems to be working. While the Asian WC was a failure by almost any standard, the American one was quite a success and greatly strengthened the rise of football/soccer in that country.

This brings me to my main point: the World Cup, much like the Olympics, has an important cultural component that is often overlooked. Football is by far the world's most popular and most widely played game. This means it's deeply ingrained in the culture of very many countries, almost regardless of their teams' international proficiency. It follows, then, that with every WC follows a clash and meeting of cultures, and the venue becomes extremely relevant. The choice to have minor countries (in the same sense as above) like Japan, USA, and South Africa host three of the last five WCs is only partially an attempt to bring football where it's least popular. It's also and primarily an attempt to bring cultural exchange where it's least popular. Korea/Japan and South Africa are about as exotic to us Westerners as anything else, and of course the whole world is exotic to Americans, whose isolationism has deprived them of much more than just football. If any country needs to know and be known by us all, it's the post-apartheid South Africa, with its fascinating blend of African and European lifestyle (and, of course, with all the work that still needs to be done).

Needless to say, this sports-based attempt at cultural exchange has nothing to do with game scores and winners, nor must it. Chances are that South Africa and all minor teams will go out early on and that the round of eight will again be an affair between Europe and South America. Sure would be nice if it were otherwise, but only if it were deserved. In 1990, Cameroon got to the quarterfinals thanks to their sparkling game (and some luck) and nearly knocked England out, losing only to their own inexperience. In 1994, Nigeria was arguably the tourney's best team, again only losing in the quarters against an Italian team barely balanced on Baggio's strong little shoulders (such bittersweet irony that he, of all players, would miss the decisive penalty against Brazil in the final not ten days later). But then, in 2002, the home team of South Korea got as far as the semifinals quite undeservedly and with much help from referees and a very complacent organization committee. That's not the way to promote football, cultural exchange, or anything else. This isn't politics. In the Beautiful Game there are no "rights" or "dues." The ball is round and goes where it's kicked, so if a team deserves to lose, it's fair if it loses and unfair if it wins. Therefore, I hope to see a fair WC this year. African football hardly needs any help to rise, after all, since in fifteen/twenty years' time it will easily come sleep in the big bed along with Europe and South America, and on its own merits.

To conclude, I (and I think everybody else) hope to see a World Cup that's fair and fun, filled with all the usual folklore and drama on and off the pitch. We don't expect to see great football; the world's most important tourney is a showcase of nerve and strength much more than of skill, especially coming as it does at the end of a long football season for many of the players involved. But there will be plenty of sensation to make up for it, and the purpose of this blog is to discuss all that--and if you've seen WCs before, you know there will be A LOT to talk about in the coming month!

This blog is now about the World Cup

Philosophy, while awesome, isn't nearly as interesting as football during a World Cup. Therefore, this blog is now about South Africa 2010. Some pre-tournament impressions to get me started coming up......