No way that just happened...

 

In cinematic history, there have been few scenes quite like the one where a comatose deer awakens in the back of Richard's car in "Tommy Boy." 

In metaphorical terms, this is what Germany did to Brasil.

The scene is going in what one would think is a predictable direction, with no hint that the deer is about to wake up and destroy a vintage auto.  It takes a matter of seconds, and when it's over, all Richard can do is stare in shock and say "No way that just happened." 

Oh but it did, Richard. It did. 

I've seen a lot of football in my life. I've seen Arsenal take it up the proverbial hole to the tune of 8-2 at Old Trafford. I don't think in all that time I've ever seen anything quite like that I saw today.

What can you say after the host nation receives an anal pounding like the one that Brasil took today?  You don't offer perspective. You don't recount what happened. What's the point?

The deer woke up and destroyed the car. I suppose that Germany awoke as well. Or something.

Could Brasil be that bad? Awful? Horrendous? Wretched?  Pathetic? Useless? 

The story must be about Brasil, not about Germany. The shower that was Brasil's defence had nothing at all to do with poor Neymar. I don't even know how you explain what happened.  Barry Glendenning didn't know how to explain it. Baz's Guardian minute-by-minute recounting of that thing that happened.

Remember, this was a World Cup semifinal match, played by Brasil, who hadn't lost on home soil since 1975. 1975! Do you even understand how long that has been?  This was supposed to be the tournament that coronated Brasil and justified the somewhat troubling expense of staging this event there. This was supposed to be a reward.  

Instead, it was the most amazing, horrible, unthinkable bottom-spearing of a football contest that one could ever see. Arsenal's capitulation at Stamford Bridge on Wenger's 1000th match wasn't nearly this stunning. It was shite, but it wasn't this stunning. This was...

No way that just happened.

I'm nobody. Who are you?

Summer football, had me a blast. England were great--whoops! That's in the past!

Before the tournament, I picked the Argies to beat Brasil in the Maracana. After yesterday, I have to say that the Peronistas now look like the team most likely. The only blight on their possibilities is the injury to di Maria, one of my favourite players on the planet and other than Messi one of the engines of a side that are solid if unspectacular. They seem organised, disciplined, and talented enough to overcome whatever is set before them.

You feel watching the Argies that they're a bit of Italy light ca. 2006.  They defend with a purpose and players like Mascherano go out to interfere with the opposing attack and have the ability to accomplish that. They're so good that the shower that is Demichelis is completely disguised as a competent defender.

As much as I don't believe that a completely corrupt body such as FIFA would "allow" Brasil to lose this Cup, I think a Germany v. Argentina final ought to be on order. Imagine how conflicted former Nazis would feel! (Are there any left?  I hope not, but I won't let that stand in the way of a good nationalistic slur.)

This is how I feel about Holland: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJ882QYzr-M


As for this blog, and the Arsenal, and all that, I just wanted to give a salute (I give salutes, not shoutouts, because I'm too old to give shoutouts) to the ITK bloggers during this transfer summer. Now, I'm not talking about "self-styled" ITK bloggers. No, I'm talking about the REAL ITK bloggers; those fellows who have been enlisted by the club to distribute the official line about goings on within the marble halls. Wink! You know who you are!

These people are the ones who all trotted out simultaneous columns and posts last year after the FA Cup semifinal that Podolski "couldn't play" because he's a lazy passenger who doesn't put in a real shift and only strikers who defend (Please. I don't understand it either.) can start at Arsenal. Then he scored 4 goals in the next two matches and they all had to backtrack and say, "Er, hmm, well, he did it against shit teams" as though scoring against ANYBODY is somehow not valuable (see "Giroud, Olivier: 27 league goals over the course of two seasons").

I knew that some of these people had close ties to the club and I don't slate them for that. If Ivan called me up and said he'd fly me to London and give me a tour of the training facilities, I'd probably be a complete whore for their drips and drabs of spin myself. That's no judgment, or judgement, against them.

Rather, I simply point out that where Arsenal are concerned, I'm nobody. I'm grateful that Georgina Turner reads my posts, but beyond that I'm literally less than a blip on the Arsenal radar. So nothing I write has been sanctioned or influenced by the club. Therefore I can say "I wish Arsene weren't managing Arsenal anymore" and you can be sure that it wasn't a story planted by the publicity staff.

So what do the hints from the ITK bloggers tell us? Since we know that they're essentially mouthpieces for the club, we can predict that Debuchy is definitely coming to Ashburton Grove, and that Sanchez is most likely not. When one of these insiders tells us "sounds like Higuain rumours" or "don't get your hopes up," it's coming from the club, not their intuition. Because that would be some more intuition.

One of them is the most widely read Arsenal blogger and he's never wrong. The other is "Mr. Rational Statistical Analysis Man" and he's never wrong, either. And one thing you notice about each of them is that they don't ever openly impugn Arsene Wenger. I'm sorry that I do that, because it means no matter the quality of my musings, I'll never be an ITK insider.

So there you have it. Expect Debuchy and some injured teenagers available on Bosman frees to show up this season. Don't believe me?  No problem. Accept the word of those who are truly "in the know."

NOT the most important football match in USMNT history

Quick thoughts before what idiots are calling "the most important match in US soccer history:"

1) Before this tournament, expectations were VERY low that the USA would advance out of this group. Why is it suddenly an imperative that they do so?  This is senseless. The entire mission of this World Cup finals experience for Klinzi was to put together a team with quite a few youngsters who would then be ready for Russia in four years. No Donovan, no Eddie Johnson--this was essentially the "developmental" World Cup for the Yanks.

2) Klinzi is going nowhere. He is on a long-term mission, so his job is NOT on the line.  I am well and truly sick of Eric Wynalda and his senseless pronouncements, and what he said yesterday about Klinzi being fired after today if the USA does not advance proves just how ridiculous he has become--as if the idiocy he spewed during the FA Cup final wasn't convincing enough.  The point is that there is no pressure on the manager to take this team beyond the group stages, so very little hangs in the balance.

3) The fanciful notion by the non-footballing world in the USA that losing today will somehow kill off the growth of the sport here proves once again that football writing should be left to people who know about football. They (these people raised on the tedium of baseball and gridiron) are once again marveling at the packed sports bars and plazas and parks where tens of thousands of football supporters are gathering to watch USA matches, conveniently forgetting the scenes of madness 4 years ago when Donovan scored the last-second winner versus Algeria. All the same tired stories feigning shock at the crowds following the matches have been trotted out again, seemingly with a simple "find and replace" done to change "South Africa" to "Brazil."  This narrative is BORING, OLD, and NEEDS TO BE RETIRED. The establishment has to simply accept the fact that the sport is now popular here. It is the second-most popular sport in the USA among people under the age of 35. Can we start writing something new about football support in the States?

4) I saved this one for last on purpose. From strictly a footballing perspective, the most important match in USA history was the round of 16 match versus arch-rival Mexico in 2002. It's not up for debate. This was the match that made the rest of the world finally take notice of the burgeoning football culture in the States. There has never been a bigger, more pressure-packed match than USA against its most bitter enemy for a chance to advance to the quarterfinals. It proved that the USA could win a big match on a big stage, and it validated a youth programme that had produced Donovan, Beasley, Mathis, Wolff--all of whom contributed to the team's success that tournament. How could anyone with even a passing interest in the sport and a connection to the interwebs not know how big that match was in the growth of the game in the USA?  I'll go on to say that in the 1990-present period of the USA matches, today's match is not even in the top 10 in terms of importance. Ending Spain's unbeaten streak, drawing with England in 2010, beating Mexico to win the Gold Cup, winning at the Azteca (finally), being cheated by Germany and a Uefa official out of a trip to the semifinals in 2002, simply qualifying for Italia '90--how can these idiots elevate a "Group of Death" match where the team has already miraculously taken 4 points above all of those? 

So there you have it. Wretched sports "journalists" in the USA, you should just admit that you don't know anything about the game of football and stop trying to frame it in your Cold War perspective that doesn't work anymore.  The outcome of today's match doesn't matter at all in the overall growth of the sport. I'm assuming you haven't bothered to see the crowded stadiums in Seattle or Portland or the sold out matches any time a big European club tours the States, so perhaps you just write another boring column about Lebron James or the New York Yankees. Your career, like your newspaper, will soon be a thing of the past.

Copa!

About this FIFA 2010 World Cup: I love the game, and I love the tournament, but I am weary of having to watch poor match officiating. I think we all are. I think the limitations that most of the officials have displayed come down to one thing: pressure. Officials feel it just like players and managers do. As much of a cock-up as Howard Webb was through much of the Premier League season, he performed admirably in the tournament and I think his composure was due to the fact that he has been in big games and handled the pressure before. Sometimes it just seems to me that officials from small confederations go mad in big matches, brandishing cards like party favours and missing big calls. I'm not implying that referees from big nations are immune from making game-changing blunders, but I think it's easier to find quality officials from those nations. Does this kind of social democracy belong in the World Cup? I ask you this, man from Mali.

About Team USA: It's true that we don't have much of a defence. It's true that our forwards don't score much. We're limited, certainly. But...think of this: Most of this squad weren't even 10 years old when the USA returned to the World Cup in 1990. That team was made up of a bunch of college players, journeymen, part-timers--21-year old keeper Tony Meola was given the captaincy, the most senior players were three players aged 27. Their clubs? Three players were based in Europe, playing for the giants Győri, Volendam, and Meppen. All the rest played in what passed for domestic clubs in the USA. It was three-and-out for the Yanks that summer.

So in one generation, the USA went from THAT mess to this squad that was one disallowed goal away from two victories and a draw in the group stage and extra time against a fine Ghana side away from the quarterfinals. Not quite as good as the 2002 side, but then again not quite as experienced as that side either. I don't want my point to get lost by bringing up 2002, however. I'm stunned that in 20 years, the USA went from being a minnow to being expected to move out of the group stage and possibly even make the last 8. And more importantly, I didn't see one minute of the 1990 Cup until the advent of youtube. Italia '90 was a myth. I had seen some of Mexico 1986 due to the fact that I was on holiday and the hotel happened to have Univision (or whatever Spanish-language channel existed back then), but my friends thought I was insane for watching it.

We're becoming much more aware of how great the sport is in this country.

This is one generation removed from ignorance that the Cup was even taking place. I can't imagine how the sport will continue to grow. The advent of web-based content has made it simple to follow leagues all over the world. I truly believe that this has been one of the most important factors in growing interest in the game here--if we can watch it played at the highest levels, if we can see Lio Messi and Wesley Sneijder ply their skills every weekend and in the Uefa Champions League, we'll appreciate it so much more. The appetite for the game is such that Fox has added a second football-based channel. Now people in America can watch league football from England, Germany, Spain, Italy, even France (if that's your thing).

When all that was available 15 years ago was MLS--with its poor play, empty stadiums, whacko rules, ridiculous nicknames and matching uniforms--it was only natural that people might be turned off from "soccer." I couldn't stand MLS. What was with the attempt to copy gridiron? People who really love the game will love it because it's different. Earl the Cleveland Browns fan wasn't going to suddenly start following Columbus because MLS had divisions and a dumb playoff system. The sport should simply try to appeal to people by making it look more like a European league. It's slowly getting there, the quality of play is getting better, but the popularity of the sport in America is directly due to the availability of coverage of the top leagues in the world.

The USMNT is missing a top quality manager. That's the next ingredient. I'm not going to say anything about Bob Bradley as a tactician--I think he's adequate in that department. But he doesn't have the ability to organise the team tightly and they still have trouble killing off games. The early lapses in concentration or lack of defensive preparation in the World Cup cost the USA 3 victories. I sincerely believe that England, Slovenia, and Ghana were winnable matches. If the USA didn't concede early, their athleticism and attacking style would eventually wear down their opponents (Ghana is a different story, I know, but they don't have a Michael Bradley or Clint Dempsey, either). I don't have a problem with Jozy Altidore not scoring when we have three midfielders who score regularly--Jozy's ability to knock the ball down and get it to the wide players and his link-up play are excellent.

The USA's attack doesn't worry me at all; it's the back line that needs much, much work. It's fair to say that Bocanegra, DeMerit, and Cherundolo won't be back in four years. Tim Howard likely won't be around to save their bacon 4 or 5 times each match, either. The priority for US Soccer must be to identify and develop a deeper talent pool of defenders--or else continue to suffer. They also need a coach who can get the team organised and play a little bit tighter when needed. I like to see more players in Europe--I think the nerves that Bornstein eventually overcame could be helped by slugging it out across the Atlantic. If not Europe, then I hope more of our players will consider Latin America. Yes, they get beaten up on the pitch, but that's going to happen wherever we go, so they might as well toughen up now. I thought Gomez might be part of the future but damn, he's already 28. This should have been his World Cup prime--think Brian McBride in 2002.

Ultimately, this World Cup ended for the USA because Bradley couldn't get his starting XI right--and his early subs led to tired legs at the end of the match. If Edu and Feilhaber were the best options in midfield (pushing Dempsey up top in a sort-of free form 4-3-3 in attack and 4-5-1 in defence), then he should have simply started them and junked the rather rigid 4-4-2, thus keeping his subs for late when fatigue clearly became a factor in the 2nd Ghana goal. The transition from attack to defence is what separates the best teams in the world from the rest--what I've seen in this tournament is that Spain, Germany, and Holland do it best. Traditional formations seem to blur with them--Robben and Sneijder aren't strikers but are getting the goals. Podolski and Muller support Klose as forwards in attack but go back to win the ball in defence. Spain--well, Spain are different.

The USA needs a manager who can use that kind of flexibility to support a defence that has yet to come together for our national team. There are promising players in this squad that I expect will come back better in 4 years time--Michael Bradley will only be 26, Stu Holden 28, Bornstein 29, Torres 26, Jozy 24, Edu 28, and Feilhaber 29. That, along with Brad Guzan (he'll be 29) is the nucleus of a strong team. Use it well, along with a few newcomers that we probably don't even know yet, and the expectations for the team could be even higher than this year. Does Jürgen Klinsmann finally get the call?