This isn't how this was supposed to work out. But it probably shouldn't be a surprise.
It costs real money to go to a World Cup. Especially one outside your country.
Turns out, the Johannesburg Sunday Times writes, Africans aren't buying many World Cup tickets, according to 2010 World Cup organizers. Most of the tickets being bought from out of the country, so far, are going to Europe and to the United States. To places where people have money, that is.
Which makes sense, considering Africa is the poorest continent on the planet ... that it has several countries with a per capita income of about $200. (That's $200 per year.) ... Considering that air travel within the African continent is dangerous and sketchy, often involving flights out of Africa, and back to Europe, to get to Johannesburg.
(Imagine living in New York and having to fly to Mexico to get a plane to take you to Washington. Pretty much the same thing.)
Anyway, yes, it's a shame that so few Africans will be at SA 2010. Or so it seems.
Organizers hold out hope that sales will go up when the five other African teams that will play in South Africa 2010 are identified, in the next few months.
But when the options are "World Cup tickets" and "eating this month" ... well, sensible people all over the globe are going to make the sane decision.
Read more!
Friday, July 31, 2009
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Urban Unrest Convulses South Africa
Does this look like a country ready to host a World Cup?
I would imagine that even the poorest of South Africa's legion of impoverished people are pleased the World Cup is coming to their country in 2010.
But in the meantime, lots of people living in the nation's infamous shantytowns are ticked off by a government that continues to promise much and deliver little.
In this Los Angeles Times story today, it is clear that the issue involves tens of thousands of demonstrators and as many as 20 "townships" -- as the shantytowns are generically known.
Here is another look at what is going on there, a 14-part slide show of photographs of demonstrators. (Note that demonstrators are carrying vuvuzelas in several photos.)
Here is a link to a photo gallery appearing on the (Johannesburg) Sunday Times Web site. The newspaper, which I am coming to believe is the best in South Africa, has coverage of the upheaval, but it isn't particularly well-placed. Which indicates to me that 1) this sort of disorder happens fairly often and, thus, is only second-tier news or 2) they are trying not to make too big an issue out of it, 300-plus days before the World Cup is scheduled to begin.
If that kind of civil disobedience were racking any Western government, we would call them "riots." In Europe, under the parliamentary system, a government might fall over this kind of unrest.
Anyway, the World Cup:
Should the event even be allowed in a country which admits to 23.6 percent unemployment, has an unequally distributed per capita income of $10,000 -- and now has daily riots in the streets that South African experts suggest will only intensify?
Attention, FIFA boss Sepp Blatter: Better have that Plan B for the 2010 World Cup in the top drawer of your desk. And make sure potential organizers in England or Germany or the United States are on "speed-dial."
You gambled on taking the World Cup to Africa ... and at the moment, that gamble seems like a bad one. Read more!
I would imagine that even the poorest of South Africa's legion of impoverished people are pleased the World Cup is coming to their country in 2010.
But in the meantime, lots of people living in the nation's infamous shantytowns are ticked off by a government that continues to promise much and deliver little.
In this Los Angeles Times story today, it is clear that the issue involves tens of thousands of demonstrators and as many as 20 "townships" -- as the shantytowns are generically known.
Here is another look at what is going on there, a 14-part slide show of photographs of demonstrators. (Note that demonstrators are carrying vuvuzelas in several photos.)
Here is a link to a photo gallery appearing on the (Johannesburg) Sunday Times Web site. The newspaper, which I am coming to believe is the best in South Africa, has coverage of the upheaval, but it isn't particularly well-placed. Which indicates to me that 1) this sort of disorder happens fairly often and, thus, is only second-tier news or 2) they are trying not to make too big an issue out of it, 300-plus days before the World Cup is scheduled to begin.
If that kind of civil disobedience were racking any Western government, we would call them "riots." In Europe, under the parliamentary system, a government might fall over this kind of unrest.
Anyway, the World Cup:
Should the event even be allowed in a country which admits to 23.6 percent unemployment, has an unequally distributed per capita income of $10,000 -- and now has daily riots in the streets that South African experts suggest will only intensify?
Attention, FIFA boss Sepp Blatter: Better have that Plan B for the 2010 World Cup in the top drawer of your desk. And make sure potential organizers in England or Germany or the United States are on "speed-dial."
You gambled on taking the World Cup to Africa ... and at the moment, that gamble seems like a bad one. Read more!
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
FIFA Signs Off on Controversial Horns for 2010
They are called vuvuzelas, and they are the audio cockroaches of stadium sports.
If you watched any of the Confederations Cup, played in South Africa last month, you couldn't escape them. Unless you had the audio on "mute."
The vuvuzela is a plastic horn that South African soccer fans apparently love. They're cheap (actually, they were given away free during the Confederations Cup), and disposable, and they make quite a racket when someone blows into the mouthpiece.
Get enough of them together, and a whole stadium sounds like it has been infested with hornets. A vuvuzela produces a sort of buzzing drone, rather than some trumpet-like bray.
Some people hate them. European broadcasters and players, in particular ... who said, during the Confederations Cup, that vuvuzelas were a sort of aural pollution that screwed up TV broadcasts and made it hard for players to communicate on the field.
There was hope, in some quarters, that vuvuzelas would be banned at the 2010 World Cup, but FIFA has signed off on vuvuzela sales and usage in stadiums. And that means that endless drone will be the official background "music" to the 2010 World Cup.
I don't have a major problem with this. I can't tell you exactly which American venues use these (or used to), but I am almost certain there are some baseball or football stadiums in this country that have had variations of the same one-note instrument blaring at us.
Eventually, it becomes a sort of white noise ... something you don't really hear unless someone mentions it.
As a FIFA spokesman put it, banning the vuvuzela would be something like banning cowbells at Switzerland games or singing at England games. The vuvuzela is what South Africans do.
The teams that succeed will be those who make a point of not spending any mental energy worrying about this. Read more!
If you watched any of the Confederations Cup, played in South Africa last month, you couldn't escape them. Unless you had the audio on "mute."
The vuvuzela is a plastic horn that South African soccer fans apparently love. They're cheap (actually, they were given away free during the Confederations Cup), and disposable, and they make quite a racket when someone blows into the mouthpiece.
Get enough of them together, and a whole stadium sounds like it has been infested with hornets. A vuvuzela produces a sort of buzzing drone, rather than some trumpet-like bray.
Some people hate them. European broadcasters and players, in particular ... who said, during the Confederations Cup, that vuvuzelas were a sort of aural pollution that screwed up TV broadcasts and made it hard for players to communicate on the field.
There was hope, in some quarters, that vuvuzelas would be banned at the 2010 World Cup, but FIFA has signed off on vuvuzela sales and usage in stadiums. And that means that endless drone will be the official background "music" to the 2010 World Cup.
I don't have a major problem with this. I can't tell you exactly which American venues use these (or used to), but I am almost certain there are some baseball or football stadiums in this country that have had variations of the same one-note instrument blaring at us.
Eventually, it becomes a sort of white noise ... something you don't really hear unless someone mentions it.
As a FIFA spokesman put it, banning the vuvuzela would be something like banning cowbells at Switzerland games or singing at England games. The vuvuzela is what South Africans do.
The teams that succeed will be those who make a point of not spending any mental energy worrying about this. Read more!
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Cruise Ships as Floating Hotels?
Apparently, South Africa organizers are short of the number of hotel rooms the country needs to handle visitors arriving for the World Cup ...
To the tune of 15,000 rooms.
That's quite a shortfall. That's a lot of tourists roaming the streets, or sleeping in train stations, or ending up in third-rate accommodations.
Anyway, the ever-helpful Sepp Blatter, FIFA president, has suggested cruise ships could help solve the problem.
And yes, cruise ships sometimes do help. They were used to augment hotel rooms at Super Bowl XXXIX in Jacksonville, in 2005; and for the Barcelona Olympics, in 1992.
The biggest drawback for South Africa 2010 is that only two of the 10 World Cup venues -- Durban and Port Elizabeth -- have the sort of docking facilities a cruise ship would need to be of any help to tourists.
So, if you want to see a game in Johannesburg, or Rustenburg, Pretoria, Bloemfontain -- and even Cape Town, apparently -- it doesn't do you much good to be docked in Port Elizabeth or Durban, hundreds of miles away from where you need to be.
It would be rather like docking in San Francisco and planning to see a match in Phoenix later in the day. You'd still have lots of logistics ahead of you. Read more!
To the tune of 15,000 rooms.
That's quite a shortfall. That's a lot of tourists roaming the streets, or sleeping in train stations, or ending up in third-rate accommodations.
Anyway, the ever-helpful Sepp Blatter, FIFA president, has suggested cruise ships could help solve the problem.
And yes, cruise ships sometimes do help. They were used to augment hotel rooms at Super Bowl XXXIX in Jacksonville, in 2005; and for the Barcelona Olympics, in 1992.
The biggest drawback for South Africa 2010 is that only two of the 10 World Cup venues -- Durban and Port Elizabeth -- have the sort of docking facilities a cruise ship would need to be of any help to tourists.
So, if you want to see a game in Johannesburg, or Rustenburg, Pretoria, Bloemfontain -- and even Cape Town, apparently -- it doesn't do you much good to be docked in Port Elizabeth or Durban, hundreds of miles away from where you need to be.
It would be rather like docking in San Francisco and planning to see a match in Phoenix later in the day. You'd still have lots of logistics ahead of you. Read more!
Monday, July 27, 2009
President Obama and the World Cup
FIFA president Sepp Blatter visited the White House today, and the talk was of World Cups. Both current and future.
(Here is a link to the news story.)
Both the 2010 edition, to which American president Barack Obama has, again, been invited ...
And for the 2018 or 2022 editions, for which Obama did a bit of lobbying for the U.S. as host country.
First, the 2010 WC in South Africa. It is the first World Cup in Africa, and it seems somehow incumbent on the first black U.S. president to make an appearance. We suspect he will, unless some serious international craziness is going down.
Obama's connection to Africa is quite direct. Unlike most African-Americans, whose African heritage includes ancestors who came to the United States, as slaves, 100, 200, even 300 years ago, Obama's father was born in Kenya.
So, yes, he will go to South Africa, if at all possible.
Now, about the 2018 or 2022 World Cup.
2014 is already decided; it is going to Brazil, and South America deserves it. Considering South American sides have won nine of the 18 World Cups played so far, yet haven't hosted one since 1978 (Argentina).
But after that ...
It would make sense for FIFA to bring the event back to the States. The 1994 World Cup was here, and it was an enormous success. It remains the World Cup record-holder for attendance, and by a wide margin, because the U.S. has so many enormous venues. And filled them. Repeatedly. The U.S. also has significant immigrant populations from just about any country you can name, so even if fans don't travel from the other side of the world ... they would have plenty of fans already in the States.
The 1994 World Cup also served as a jumpstart for the American domestic league that has done much to advance the game here.
It's hard to imagine a World Cup here being a bad idea. The infrastructure is pretty much here (though it's hard to travel from one end of the country to the other, unlike a compact Euro country) ... the experience is here ... the communications and technology are here ... and the U.S. remains a quite-not-tapped market. Maybe soccer never catches American football, baseball and basketball as one of the Big Three sports ... but it could get closer, and a World Cup on these shores could go a long way toward making that happen.
We shall see. In theory, it should be time, in 2018, for a return to North America. it will have been 24 years since 1994. But it appears as if FIFA is planning to go back to Europe in 2018, probably to England.
So, 2022. Shall we pencil it into our datebook? Read more!
(Here is a link to the news story.)
Both the 2010 edition, to which American president Barack Obama has, again, been invited ...
And for the 2018 or 2022 editions, for which Obama did a bit of lobbying for the U.S. as host country.
First, the 2010 WC in South Africa. It is the first World Cup in Africa, and it seems somehow incumbent on the first black U.S. president to make an appearance. We suspect he will, unless some serious international craziness is going down.
Obama's connection to Africa is quite direct. Unlike most African-Americans, whose African heritage includes ancestors who came to the United States, as slaves, 100, 200, even 300 years ago, Obama's father was born in Kenya.
So, yes, he will go to South Africa, if at all possible.
Now, about the 2018 or 2022 World Cup.
2014 is already decided; it is going to Brazil, and South America deserves it. Considering South American sides have won nine of the 18 World Cups played so far, yet haven't hosted one since 1978 (Argentina).
But after that ...
It would make sense for FIFA to bring the event back to the States. The 1994 World Cup was here, and it was an enormous success. It remains the World Cup record-holder for attendance, and by a wide margin, because the U.S. has so many enormous venues. And filled them. Repeatedly. The U.S. also has significant immigrant populations from just about any country you can name, so even if fans don't travel from the other side of the world ... they would have plenty of fans already in the States.
The 1994 World Cup also served as a jumpstart for the American domestic league that has done much to advance the game here.
It's hard to imagine a World Cup here being a bad idea. The infrastructure is pretty much here (though it's hard to travel from one end of the country to the other, unlike a compact Euro country) ... the experience is here ... the communications and technology are here ... and the U.S. remains a quite-not-tapped market. Maybe soccer never catches American football, baseball and basketball as one of the Big Three sports ... but it could get closer, and a World Cup on these shores could go a long way toward making that happen.
We shall see. In theory, it should be time, in 2018, for a return to North America. it will have been 24 years since 1994. But it appears as if FIFA is planning to go back to Europe in 2018, probably to England.
So, 2022. Shall we pencil it into our datebook? Read more!
Sunday, July 26, 2009
'Slaughter a Cow for the Workers'
OK, this South Africa World Cup is going to be a bit different.
In this story from The Sunday Times, of Johannesburg, we have the country's president, Jacob Zuma, insisting the country is ready for the 2010 World Cup.
He boasts that many world leaders have congratulated him on just how well things are going. Including Barack Obama.
Even though, clearly, several stadiums are not yet complete. Including the one in Durban that Zuma was visiting.
And, at the end, to give you an idea of the culture gap between South Africa and, say, the First World ... Zuma is paraphrased as asking the mayor of the city of Durban to "slaughter a cow for the workers when they finish building the Moses Mabhida stadium."
Hmm. This is not going to be like any World Cup before it. As if we hadn't already figured that out. Read more!
In this story from The Sunday Times, of Johannesburg, we have the country's president, Jacob Zuma, insisting the country is ready for the 2010 World Cup.
He boasts that many world leaders have congratulated him on just how well things are going. Including Barack Obama.
Even though, clearly, several stadiums are not yet complete. Including the one in Durban that Zuma was visiting.
And, at the end, to give you an idea of the culture gap between South Africa and, say, the First World ... Zuma is paraphrased as asking the mayor of the city of Durban to "slaughter a cow for the workers when they finish building the Moses Mabhida stadium."
Hmm. This is not going to be like any World Cup before it. As if we hadn't already figured that out. Read more!
Saturday, July 25, 2009
Upcoming Qualifiers: Marking Your Calendar
We're not far off from another batch of World Cup qualifying matches.
Some dates to circle on your calendar:
Aug. 12, eight matches: Including three in Concacaf, the biggest of which is the United States at Mexico. The U.S. could come very close to clinching a berth in the 2010 World Cup with a victory, but it has never won at Estadio Azteca. Mexico, meanwhile, badly needs a victory over its arch-rival to get moving back into the top three in the Concacaf standings. Also this day, Honduras is home to group leader Costa Rica; the Hondurans pretty much need a victory to nourish hopes of a top-three finish in the group (and a guaranteed spot in South Africa). Also, this day, Germany vs. Azerbaijan in Baku. Germany needs three points against a puny Azeri squad to keep clear of second-place of Russia in Group 4 standings, but winning on the road is always a chore; finishing second in the group means a home-and-home playoff for the World Cup.
Sept. 5, 35 matches: A huge day. Some countries can clinch, many can get close and others will be buried before this day is out. All of South America is playing, as is all of Concacaf's final six, and most of Europe and Africa. Brazil at Argentina is bigger than usual, with Argentina at risk of not qualifying; upstart Gabon is home against Cameroon and can put some distance between itself and its Group A rivals; Mexico at Costa Rica could possibly clinch a World Cup spot for the Ticos; and in Europe, Portugal at Denmark is crucial for both teams, and Greece and Switzerland, as well as Latvia at Israel hold extra meaning. This is the date, too, of the first half of the Saudi Arabia-Bahrain home-and-home for the No. 5 spot in Asia and a playoff with New Zealand for a guaranteed berth. Again, a huge day.
Sept. 6, five matches: The African contenders that didn't play on Sept. 5 are in action. Ghana should pretty much wrap up a berth in a match at home against Sudan; and Nigeria faces a win-or-else match at home against Group D leader Tunisia, which has seven points to Nigeria's 5 with two matches left after this one.
Sept. 8, five matches: South America's 10 contenders go at it again. Argentina at Paraguay is important, as is Chile at Brazil. At the end of the day, only two qualifiers remain for the South American crews.
Sept. 9, 30 matches: More finalists should be determined in another huge day. I'm thinking the U.S. clinches at Trinidad & Tobago, for example. Other big matches: Honduras at Mexico, in a game that may decide the 3-4 spots in Concacaf, 3 being a guaranteed berth, 4 being a playoffs with the No. 5 team out of South America; England home vs. Croatia with a chance to clinch Europe Group 6; Russia at Wales, France at Serbia, with the lead in Group 7 possibly at stake; and Bahrain at Saudi Arabia in the second half of the Asia fifth-place playoffs.
Then we have a month to digest all that before qualifying picks up on Oct. 10. Read more!
Some dates to circle on your calendar:
Aug. 12, eight matches: Including three in Concacaf, the biggest of which is the United States at Mexico. The U.S. could come very close to clinching a berth in the 2010 World Cup with a victory, but it has never won at Estadio Azteca. Mexico, meanwhile, badly needs a victory over its arch-rival to get moving back into the top three in the Concacaf standings. Also this day, Honduras is home to group leader Costa Rica; the Hondurans pretty much need a victory to nourish hopes of a top-three finish in the group (and a guaranteed spot in South Africa). Also, this day, Germany vs. Azerbaijan in Baku. Germany needs three points against a puny Azeri squad to keep clear of second-place of Russia in Group 4 standings, but winning on the road is always a chore; finishing second in the group means a home-and-home playoff for the World Cup.
Sept. 5, 35 matches: A huge day. Some countries can clinch, many can get close and others will be buried before this day is out. All of South America is playing, as is all of Concacaf's final six, and most of Europe and Africa. Brazil at Argentina is bigger than usual, with Argentina at risk of not qualifying; upstart Gabon is home against Cameroon and can put some distance between itself and its Group A rivals; Mexico at Costa Rica could possibly clinch a World Cup spot for the Ticos; and in Europe, Portugal at Denmark is crucial for both teams, and Greece and Switzerland, as well as Latvia at Israel hold extra meaning. This is the date, too, of the first half of the Saudi Arabia-Bahrain home-and-home for the No. 5 spot in Asia and a playoff with New Zealand for a guaranteed berth. Again, a huge day.
Sept. 6, five matches: The African contenders that didn't play on Sept. 5 are in action. Ghana should pretty much wrap up a berth in a match at home against Sudan; and Nigeria faces a win-or-else match at home against Group D leader Tunisia, which has seven points to Nigeria's 5 with two matches left after this one.
Sept. 8, five matches: South America's 10 contenders go at it again. Argentina at Paraguay is important, as is Chile at Brazil. At the end of the day, only two qualifiers remain for the South American crews.
Sept. 9, 30 matches: More finalists should be determined in another huge day. I'm thinking the U.S. clinches at Trinidad & Tobago, for example. Other big matches: Honduras at Mexico, in a game that may decide the 3-4 spots in Concacaf, 3 being a guaranteed berth, 4 being a playoffs with the No. 5 team out of South America; England home vs. Croatia with a chance to clinch Europe Group 6; Russia at Wales, France at Serbia, with the lead in Group 7 possibly at stake; and Bahrain at Saudi Arabia in the second half of the Asia fifth-place playoffs.
Then we have a month to digest all that before qualifying picks up on Oct. 10. Read more!
Friday, July 24, 2009
Fears of Illegal Immigrant Wave for World Cup
Part of the writing process, on this blog, will be getting familiar with South Africa on a sort of daily basis. And to do that I have begun looking at the Web sites of some of its leading newspapers.
It was from that poking around that I found the item on this blog, below, about the search for World Cup volunteers.
And here is something else that seems to be a big issue. And we can relate to it. Illegal immigration, and South African fears that illegal immigration will rise during the World Cup, as illustrated in this Johannesburg Times news story.
To Americans, South Africa seems a poor and sick country. And, well, it is. South Africa has an annual per capita income of $10,000 -- compared to the U.S. figure of $47,000 (according to the CIA's 2008 statistics). South Africa also has an extremely high rate of HIV and AIDS cases, with one site suggesting as many as one-in-five South African adults has HIV.
But a per capita income of $10,000 is serious money, in Africa; enough to make would-be immigrants ignore those AIDS/HIV statistics.
The only sub-Saharan nations on the African continent with higher per capita incomes than South Africa are tiny, oil-soaked Equatorial Guinea ($31,400), Gabon ($14,400) and Botswana ($13,300).
As the Times story indicates, South Africa already has as many as 5 million illegal immigrants in a population of 47 million, and there has been violence directed at the foreigners by native South Africans who believe the newcomers are taking jobs and depressing the wage scale. (Sound familiar?) Africa is home to 15 of the 16 poorest nations on Earth, and two of them (Zimbabwe and Mozambique) have long borders with South Africa.
South Africa is, apparently, easy to sneak into under any conditions, but it is feared it will be particularly open before and during the World Cup, and that poor/desperate/starving Africans will slip into South Africa, in even greater numbers than usual, looking for work and hoping to take advantage of the economic stimulus of a World Cup.
Which could make for more violence and destabilize the government and the economy.
An event as big as the World Cup ... it highlights deep and complex issues we might not normally consider. And has ramifications we can guess at but not predict with accuracy. Read more!
It was from that poking around that I found the item on this blog, below, about the search for World Cup volunteers.
And here is something else that seems to be a big issue. And we can relate to it. Illegal immigration, and South African fears that illegal immigration will rise during the World Cup, as illustrated in this Johannesburg Times news story.
To Americans, South Africa seems a poor and sick country. And, well, it is. South Africa has an annual per capita income of $10,000 -- compared to the U.S. figure of $47,000 (according to the CIA's 2008 statistics). South Africa also has an extremely high rate of HIV and AIDS cases, with one site suggesting as many as one-in-five South African adults has HIV.
But a per capita income of $10,000 is serious money, in Africa; enough to make would-be immigrants ignore those AIDS/HIV statistics.
The only sub-Saharan nations on the African continent with higher per capita incomes than South Africa are tiny, oil-soaked Equatorial Guinea ($31,400), Gabon ($14,400) and Botswana ($13,300).
As the Times story indicates, South Africa already has as many as 5 million illegal immigrants in a population of 47 million, and there has been violence directed at the foreigners by native South Africans who believe the newcomers are taking jobs and depressing the wage scale. (Sound familiar?) Africa is home to 15 of the 16 poorest nations on Earth, and two of them (Zimbabwe and Mozambique) have long borders with South Africa.
South Africa is, apparently, easy to sneak into under any conditions, but it is feared it will be particularly open before and during the World Cup, and that poor/desperate/starving Africans will slip into South Africa, in even greater numbers than usual, looking for work and hoping to take advantage of the economic stimulus of a World Cup.
Which could make for more violence and destabilize the government and the economy.
An event as big as the World Cup ... it highlights deep and complex issues we might not normally consider. And has ramifications we can guess at but not predict with accuracy. Read more!
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Want to Be a Volunteer at the 2010 World Cup?
Here is your chance, if you want to be part of it all.
According to the Johannesburg Times, organizers are looking for 15,000 volunteers.
You don't have to be from South Africa. Actually, the only right-up-front requirement we see here is fluency in English, which you've already got if you're reading this. That is, you are qualified right now! How exciting. Oh, wait. You have to be at least 18 years old, too. Can't imagine many kids read me ...
A lot of these probably are semi-drudge jobs. (I wonder if any will be like those poor saps I saw at the Beijing Olympics ... whose every-day-for-three-weeks job was to be restroom attendants in the media center.) And I doubt there is much pay, if any. So be prepared to go over on your own dime, and work for free. Or maybe they will give you a ticket to this or that lesser match, or let you stand in the back. Maybe.
Deadline for getting in your application is Aug. 31.
Anyway, it apparently is an option, and we thought you ought to know. Read more!
According to the Johannesburg Times, organizers are looking for 15,000 volunteers.
You don't have to be from South Africa. Actually, the only right-up-front requirement we see here is fluency in English, which you've already got if you're reading this. That is, you are qualified right now! How exciting. Oh, wait. You have to be at least 18 years old, too. Can't imagine many kids read me ...
A lot of these probably are semi-drudge jobs. (I wonder if any will be like those poor saps I saw at the Beijing Olympics ... whose every-day-for-three-weeks job was to be restroom attendants in the media center.) And I doubt there is much pay, if any. So be prepared to go over on your own dime, and work for free. Or maybe they will give you a ticket to this or that lesser match, or let you stand in the back. Maybe.
Deadline for getting in your application is Aug. 31.
Anyway, it apparently is an option, and we thought you ought to know. Read more!
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
If I Got to Choose the World Cup Teams, Part 2
The final half (or 13/32nds, to get the fraction correct) of my look at the nations likely to make the 2010 World Cup, and those I prefer actually did make it.
Yesterday we handled the whole world, aside from Europe.
Today, we take on Europe. The home of soccer and of its most successful professional leagues.
EUROPE (13 places, 53 countries)
Qualified: Netherlands.
Likely qualifiers: Denmark, Greece, Slovakia, Germany, Spain, England, Serbia, Italy, France, Russia, Hungary, Croatia.
Preferred qualifiers: Denmark, England, France, Germany, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Russia, Spain, Serbia, Turkey.
Comments: This is a very fluid situation because Europe is qualifying 13 nations from nine groups. How does that work, you ask. (Here are the standings, if you care to look.) The nine group winners get in, and the best eight of the nine second-place teams conduct four home-and-home playoffs to win the final four slots. The "best eight" are determined by points earned in group qualifying. ... So, for "likely qualifiers," above, we went with the eight group leaders (Netherlands has clinched Group 9) and the four teams that have the best prospects for 1) finishing second and 2) winning a home-and-home. ... For starters, no World Cup seems complete without these six: England, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands and Spain. They have the history, or the great professional leagues, or both, and soccer fans would miss any of them. Luckily, Netherlands is in, England and Spain are in great shape to win their groups, and Germany and Italy lead their groups, albeit narrowly. France trails Serbia in its group, 18-12, and even with two games in hand against the Faroe Islands, France seems unlikely to finish ahead of the Serbs, and will need to win that home-and-home with whomever. Hope they do, because the French are fun to have around thinking their deep soccer thoughts. ... After those six, we go for teams that are fun or represent interesting socio-political situations. Denmark leads its group and gives the World Cup one Scandinavian team. Always need one Scandinavian team, if for nothing else than shots of the blonde girls in the stands. ... Ireland isn't really very good, but it is so much fun to have tens of thousands hard-partying Ireland fans following around their team and drunkenly slurring the words to "Danny Boy," or whatever, in the stands, so we want them to get in, too, as a second-place team (unless Ireland beats out Italy, which is unlikely). ... Israel would be fun because we are looking for provocative story lines, and Israel always is one of those. Israel has been in only one World Cup, in 1970, and is considered a "European" side because its Arab neighbors (in the Asia group, where Israel belongs, really) won't play the Israelis. They probably are not going to make it; they sit fourth in Group 2 with four matches left, but they have a shot: Three of their final four matches are in Israel; two matches are quite winnable (home vs. Moldova and Luxembourg); and the other two are against nations just ahead of them in the standings (Latvia, at Switzerland). Since I have neither Greece of Switzerland listed among my "preferred," that means Israel needs to win the group. Weirder things have happened. ... I want Portugal to make it, though its chances are slim, as well, because the Portuguese can play quite entertaining soccer and because they have Cristiano Ronaldo, probably the best player in the world at the moment. What's a World Cup without the world's best player? However, Portugal has to make up four points, in four matches, to catch second-place Hungary, so don't hold your breath. ... Russia? Want them just because the once (and future?) Evil Empire is a good story, too, and actually a pretty solid soccer nation. Russia could win Group 4, actually, by defeating Germany at home, Oct. 14. Vladimir Putin would be proud. ... We "want" Serbia only barely, because Serbia leads its group, so what the heck, and because the Balkans has at least three pretty good soccer sides (Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina being the others), and one of them needs to get in -- even if the other Balkans folks absolutely will not root for them. ... Turkey makes our list because of that generic "bring a shaky nation to the World Cup" thing. It is teetering with religious fundamentalism again, and a secular global success would be good for the secularists. Also, Turkey can play, and has a nice domestic league. Turkey trails Bosnia-Herzegovina by four points with four matches, but has a shot of catching BH because it gets them head to head (in BH) and because BH still has to play Spain, while the Turks are finished with the Spaniards. (And have been, since Lepanto. Random historical reference.) Besides, if the Turks can't get up to second, that puts BH in one of the four home-and-home playoffs for a slot, and if they and Serbia get in, that's one too many Balkan teams.
Finally: European teams will be top-seeded in at least five of the eight World Cup groups and as many as seven, if Argentina doesn't qualify and France does. What will be supremely interesting to see is how well the Euros do in South Africa. Keep in mind this remarkable World Cup stat: No Euro side has won the World Cup when it was played outside Europe. None. Europe is 9-for-10 in European-staged World Cups, but 0-for-8, outside Europe. That's four in South America, two in Mexico, one in the U.S. and one in Japan/South Korea. ... Will Africa prove any more hospitable to the Euros? The time difference isn't as pronounced; there's that. Only an hour or two. It will be mid-winter in South Africa, and a cool and rainy climate should remind the Euros of home. But South Africa is a big country, and moving around will seem like a big deal for the Euros, who usually can take a train or a bus to all their club matches. And Africa is going to seem particularly exotic to the Euros. Moreso than the teams from Asia or the Americas, I think. ... I am going to predict, now, that even with the benefit of all those seeded teams, Europe isn't going to win this non-Euro World Cup, either. Read more!
Yesterday we handled the whole world, aside from Europe.
Today, we take on Europe. The home of soccer and of its most successful professional leagues.
EUROPE (13 places, 53 countries)
Qualified: Netherlands.
Likely qualifiers: Denmark, Greece, Slovakia, Germany, Spain, England, Serbia, Italy, France, Russia, Hungary, Croatia.
Preferred qualifiers: Denmark, England, France, Germany, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Russia, Spain, Serbia, Turkey.
Comments: This is a very fluid situation because Europe is qualifying 13 nations from nine groups. How does that work, you ask. (Here are the standings, if you care to look.) The nine group winners get in, and the best eight of the nine second-place teams conduct four home-and-home playoffs to win the final four slots. The "best eight" are determined by points earned in group qualifying. ... So, for "likely qualifiers," above, we went with the eight group leaders (Netherlands has clinched Group 9) and the four teams that have the best prospects for 1) finishing second and 2) winning a home-and-home. ... For starters, no World Cup seems complete without these six: England, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands and Spain. They have the history, or the great professional leagues, or both, and soccer fans would miss any of them. Luckily, Netherlands is in, England and Spain are in great shape to win their groups, and Germany and Italy lead their groups, albeit narrowly. France trails Serbia in its group, 18-12, and even with two games in hand against the Faroe Islands, France seems unlikely to finish ahead of the Serbs, and will need to win that home-and-home with whomever. Hope they do, because the French are fun to have around thinking their deep soccer thoughts. ... After those six, we go for teams that are fun or represent interesting socio-political situations. Denmark leads its group and gives the World Cup one Scandinavian team. Always need one Scandinavian team, if for nothing else than shots of the blonde girls in the stands. ... Ireland isn't really very good, but it is so much fun to have tens of thousands hard-partying Ireland fans following around their team and drunkenly slurring the words to "Danny Boy," or whatever, in the stands, so we want them to get in, too, as a second-place team (unless Ireland beats out Italy, which is unlikely). ... Israel would be fun because we are looking for provocative story lines, and Israel always is one of those. Israel has been in only one World Cup, in 1970, and is considered a "European" side because its Arab neighbors (in the Asia group, where Israel belongs, really) won't play the Israelis. They probably are not going to make it; they sit fourth in Group 2 with four matches left, but they have a shot: Three of their final four matches are in Israel; two matches are quite winnable (home vs. Moldova and Luxembourg); and the other two are against nations just ahead of them in the standings (Latvia, at Switzerland). Since I have neither Greece of Switzerland listed among my "preferred," that means Israel needs to win the group. Weirder things have happened. ... I want Portugal to make it, though its chances are slim, as well, because the Portuguese can play quite entertaining soccer and because they have Cristiano Ronaldo, probably the best player in the world at the moment. What's a World Cup without the world's best player? However, Portugal has to make up four points, in four matches, to catch second-place Hungary, so don't hold your breath. ... Russia? Want them just because the once (and future?) Evil Empire is a good story, too, and actually a pretty solid soccer nation. Russia could win Group 4, actually, by defeating Germany at home, Oct. 14. Vladimir Putin would be proud. ... We "want" Serbia only barely, because Serbia leads its group, so what the heck, and because the Balkans has at least three pretty good soccer sides (Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina being the others), and one of them needs to get in -- even if the other Balkans folks absolutely will not root for them. ... Turkey makes our list because of that generic "bring a shaky nation to the World Cup" thing. It is teetering with religious fundamentalism again, and a secular global success would be good for the secularists. Also, Turkey can play, and has a nice domestic league. Turkey trails Bosnia-Herzegovina by four points with four matches, but has a shot of catching BH because it gets them head to head (in BH) and because BH still has to play Spain, while the Turks are finished with the Spaniards. (And have been, since Lepanto. Random historical reference.) Besides, if the Turks can't get up to second, that puts BH in one of the four home-and-home playoffs for a slot, and if they and Serbia get in, that's one too many Balkan teams.
Finally: European teams will be top-seeded in at least five of the eight World Cup groups and as many as seven, if Argentina doesn't qualify and France does. What will be supremely interesting to see is how well the Euros do in South Africa. Keep in mind this remarkable World Cup stat: No Euro side has won the World Cup when it was played outside Europe. None. Europe is 9-for-10 in European-staged World Cups, but 0-for-8, outside Europe. That's four in South America, two in Mexico, one in the U.S. and one in Japan/South Korea. ... Will Africa prove any more hospitable to the Euros? The time difference isn't as pronounced; there's that. Only an hour or two. It will be mid-winter in South Africa, and a cool and rainy climate should remind the Euros of home. But South Africa is a big country, and moving around will seem like a big deal for the Euros, who usually can take a train or a bus to all their club matches. And Africa is going to seem particularly exotic to the Euros. Moreso than the teams from Asia or the Americas, I think. ... I am going to predict, now, that even with the benefit of all those seeded teams, Europe isn't going to win this non-Euro World Cup, either. Read more!
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
If I Got to Choose the World Cup Teams, Part 1
We get the World Cup ... and then we think about the World Cup we could have gotten.
Every four years, several fun or entertaining or tradition-rich soccer nations don't make the Big Event. Bad luck, a bad draw, one or two bad days ... and there they go, put on hold for four years while some less interesting team/country gets in ... and the rest of the world shrugs in disinterest.
I'm going to go over the nations I would like to see in the World Cup. Some already are out. Others are in trouble, in qualifying. Some will make it. A few already are in.
Keep in mind these are the nations I would like to see in the 2010 World Cup. The list will not be the same as it would have been four years ago -- and won't be the same four years hence. This is my favorite 32 right now.
Since 32 is a fairly unwieldy number, I'm going to divide my wish list into two posts.
Part 1, today: Africa, Asia, North America, Oceania, South America.
Part 2, tomorrow: Europe.
AFRICA (5 places, 55 nations)
Likely qualifiers: Cote d'Ivoire, Gabon, Ghana, Tunisia, Algeria.
Preferred qualifiers: Cote d'Ivoire, Egypt, Gabon, Ghana, Nigeria.
Comments: Remember, Africa will have six entrants in the World Cup; host South Africa is guaranteed a berth. And I like having South Africa around, anyway. The only sub-Saharan country with a significant European population, and a supremely interesting ongoing social experiment. ... The likely qualifiers I listed are those currently leading the standings in the five African qualifying groups. Winner of each group advances. The preferred qualifiers are based on reality; that is, none of those five are in the same group with each other. ... Cote d'Ivoire (a.k.a. Ivory Coast) is a real African giant, at the moment. Its stars include Didier Drogba (Chelsea), Salomon Kalou (Chelsea) and Kolo Toure (Arsenal). The Elephants (what a perverse name for a soccer team) got to the 2006 World Cup and made some noise before being beaten in group play by The Netherlands and Argentina. ... With three matches to play, Egypt trails Algeria 7-4 in Group C. The good news is that North Africa is going to get a team into the tournament; the bad news is it isn't Egypt, which has a far bigger population, is the two-time defending African champion and showed great spirit in playing Brazil to a 3-3 standstill for 90 minutes in the Confederations Cup. ... Gabon is the Official Darkhorse of African qualifying, and the World Cup needs a few Out of Nowhere stories. Gabon may as well be it, and it definitely fits the definition. Gabon never has played in the World Cup, never has finished even in the top four of the African championship and has a team made up of guys playing mostly for second-tier clubs in Europe. Goalkeeper Didier Ovone, who plays for Ligue 1 also-ran LeMans in France appears to be the most prominent guy on the roster. Togo has a real star in Emmanuel Adebayor, the Manchester City forward and reigning African Footballer of the Year, and is in second place in the group and still could win it. But I prefer Gabon's Nobodies, thank you. ... Ghana is another serious African side; the U.S. could tell you about it, having lost to the big and physical Black Stars, 2-1, in the 2006 World Cup. Stephen Appiah, Michael Essien (Chelsea) and Sulley Ali Muntari (Inter Milan) are the big-name players here, and we say "bring them on." ... Nigeria is a personal preference I have based on memories of their reckless commitment to the attack at the 1994 and 1998 World Cups -- and the country's status as the most populous in Africa. (When in doubt, why not make the most fans happy?) Their best-known player is veteran forward Nwankwo Kanu (Portsmouth), African Footballer of the Year in 1999.
Finally: African soccer slays me. It is the most random, lures perhaps the most passionate fans, seems to be the most unpredictable and, by far, the most exotic. One of my unrealized dreams is to cover an African Nations Cup tournament and watch as many matches as possible in, like, Gabon. ... Consider these names: Abuja, Bamako, Blantyre, Blida, Chililibombwe, Conakry, Cotonou, Kumasi, Rades. Know what they are? Cities that have played host to World Cup qualifiers, in Africa, this year. And I'd never heard of most of them. As opposed to these other "well-known" sites: Accra, Kigali, Libreville, Maputo, Rabat and Yaounde. ... 2010 is a great year for an African team to make the World Cup, since it's on their continent for the first time. I'm going to predict right here and now that one of them makes the quarterfinals.
ASIA (4.5 places, 43 nations)
Qualifiers: Australia, Japan, North Korea, South Korea.
Likely qualifier: Saudi Arabia.
Preferred qualifiers: Australia, Bahrain, Iran, Japan, North Korea.
Comments: This section is pretty much moot, because Asian qualifying is over, aside from a home-and-home between Bahrain and Saudi Arabia to determine who finishes fifth -- and does another home-and-home (with Oceania champion New Zealand) to advance to South Africa. I prefer Bahrain over the Saudis just for the sake of adding a new minnow to the World Cup mix; Bahrain, with 700,000 people, would become the smallest nation ever to appear in the World Cup. Not that it's likely, considering that Saudi Arabia generally handles Bahrain. I'm a little tired of the Saudis, who tend to show up and do nothing. But I prefer both of them over New Zealand (sorry, Kiwis) -- because The Gulf needs a team to back. ... I like Australia here, and I applaud their gutsy decision to jump from Oceania to Asia, where the competition is far tougher (but berths in the World Cup are more numerous, yes). The Aussies are coming on. Good that they will be in South Africa, and we wonder if being from the Southern Hemisphere will help them in any way, shape or form. Can't hurt, can it? ... Japan? Sure. Bring 'em on. The best pro league in Asia, sophisticated citizens, becoming a good soccer country. The Japanese won't last, but they will play hard. ... North Korea? You bet. This is a geopolitical preference because anything that engages these freaks on the international stage has to crack a window into sanity for a nuclear-armed, xenophobic country run for 50 years by a couple of mad men. South Korea? They're in, as usual, but somebody has to go to give space to North Korea and Iran, and I'm picking on South Korea because their players wouldn't be tortured or starved for not being there. ... I'd prefer Iran because, again, the international exposure would be good for a country that appears to have a chance to be a solid world citizen, but could go either way ... and being in the World Cup would help. ... Where are China and India, you ask? If I like countries with big populations getting in, why not them? Well, India can't play soccer. The End. It's not like they ever had a ghost of a slim shot of a chance. As for China, it has managed to screw up its soccer situation so royally (the federation is shot through with corruption and incompetence) that it didn't even reach the final phase of qualifying, which included Qatar, Uzbekistan and the United Arab Emirates. That's pathetic. When you get your stuff together, China, then we'll talk, and maybe you can get on our 2014 wish list.
Finally: Asia remains the underachiever of world soccer. So many people, so few competent teams. I think South Africa is going to be hard on them; I predict none of their five teams survives the first round.
NORTH AMERICA (3.5 places, 35 countries)
Likely qualifiers: Costa Rica, Mexico, United States.
Preferred qualifiers: Costa Rica, Mexico, United States, Honduras.
Comment: Probably the feeblest region, in terms of Serious Soccer Nations vs. Places Available. At the moment, the Yanks, Mexicans, Ticos and Hondurans are the only sides in Concacaf (Confederation of North, Central American, and Caribbean Association Football) that could play a middling team from Europe, Africa or South America -- at a neutral site -- and not get blown out. Maybe Canada will join the group some day, and maybe Jamaica can get back, but for now .. Costa Rica and the U.S. are all but in, halfway through qualifying. Mexico is in a spot of trouble, sitting fourth in final qualifying behind Honduras, but Mexico has three of its final five qualifiers in Estadio Azteca, where it practically never loses, and nine points from those three would give them 15 points and probably lift them over Honduras and into third place and a guaranteed berth. But if Mexico ties or loses to the hated Yanqis on Aug. 12, look out. ... Honduras also has three of its final five at home, but "home" is something of a mess right now, with political turmoil and the threat of violence ... so it may lose some of those matches to neutral sites, which is too bad. One potential break for Honduras is that its gets the U.S. in its second-to-last game, and there is a fairly strong chance the Americans already will have qualified and might send a "B" team to Tegucigalpa (or wherever). If Honduras can win its final three at home (vs. Costa Rica, Trinidad & Tobago and the U.S.), it has a shot to finish third. ... Actually, Honduras finishing third would be best for Concacaf because its fourth-place team goes into a home-and-home playoff with the fifth-place team from South America, and Mexico would have a better chance of coming out of that. Either way, as annoying as El Tri is, it isn't quite a World Cup without Mexico running around, overachieving into the final 16.
Finally: I expect no more than one Concacaf squad will make it out of the first round. It probably will be the U.S., which has had a chance to spend a month in the country, during the Confederations Cup last month. But it could be Mexico. All depends on the draw. It won't be the Ticos; they can't really hang on the international stage.
OCEANIA (.5 places, 10 countries)
Likely qualifiers: None.
Preferred qualifiers: None.
Comment: Since Australia bolted the confederation for the Asian group, Oceania is something of a joke. New Zealand and nine coral reefs, basically. The Kiwis aren't truly awful, but they would bring nothing interesting to the World Cup aside from one more team that speaks English (for those of us who think about interviewing them).
Finally: I wouldn't mind the Kiwis beating Asia No. 5 (presumably Saudi Arabia) in the home-and-home for the World Cup slot, but Australia represents the region well enough, and the tournament needs a Gulf team.
SOUTH AMERICA (4.5 places, 10 countries)
Likely qualifiers: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Paraguay, Ecuador.
Preferred qualifiers: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Uruguay.
Comment: South America has the coolest qualifying system of all -- one gigantic, 10-nation tournament with 18 matches, one that inevitably turns into a Pier 6 brawl for the final 2-3 spots. Here are the standings, with 14 of 18 matches in the books, and the permutations are almost endless, as usual. ... Whatever the format, we have to have Brazil and Argentina in the World Cup. It's the law. End of story. I already have awarded the fifth-place playoff berth to Mexico or Honduras (continental solidarity, you see) ... so that leaves us looking at who finishes third and fourth. Paraguay and Argentina sit in those spots now, but I expect Argentina to move up -- despite being led by that idiot Diego Maradona and despite a fairly tough final four matches (Brazil, at Paraguay, Peru, at Uruguay). Chile actually is second, and I'm OK with them advancing because, well, they love their poets in Chile and they send us all our winter fruit. (Though a guy from Colombia told me recently that Chile is an extraordinarily dull place. Hmm. Compared to Colombia, anywhere else might seem dull, of course.) ... So now we have three teams in, and my choice for the fourth, Uruguay, is fairly random, I admit. It rests on two notions: Wanting the winner of two of the first three World Cups in the tournament ... and because Uruguay is known for some spectacularly dirty soccer. The world's cheapshot artists, historically. Not good sports, but good to have as the official Black Hat Team at South Africa. Uruguay also has a fairly tough final four (at Peru, Colombia, at Ecuador, Argentina), so making up six points on (currently third-place) Paraguay is probably not feasible. Actually, there could be a supremely interesting match on the final day of qualifying, when Argentina plays at Uruguay in what could be a Loser Stays Home sort of thing.
Finally: What makes South America particularly interesting (aside from lots of good soccer) is the immense diversity of playing sites. From the sea-level tropics (Recife, Brazil; Puerto Ordaz, Venezuela; Lima, Peru) to the oxygen-deprived elevations of La Paz, Bolivia (12,000 feet); Quito, Ecuador (9,900 feet); and Bogota, Colombia (8,660 feet). And the fact that everyone gets a fair shot. ... My greatest worry is that Maradona will somehow screw this up, and Argentina doesn't qualify. ... Also, South America is likely to get five teams, even though I don't want it to happen, because No. 5 likely will get Honduras in the home-and-home -- and probably will overpower the Hondurans. Read more!
Every four years, several fun or entertaining or tradition-rich soccer nations don't make the Big Event. Bad luck, a bad draw, one or two bad days ... and there they go, put on hold for four years while some less interesting team/country gets in ... and the rest of the world shrugs in disinterest.
I'm going to go over the nations I would like to see in the World Cup. Some already are out. Others are in trouble, in qualifying. Some will make it. A few already are in.
Keep in mind these are the nations I would like to see in the 2010 World Cup. The list will not be the same as it would have been four years ago -- and won't be the same four years hence. This is my favorite 32 right now.
Since 32 is a fairly unwieldy number, I'm going to divide my wish list into two posts.
Part 1, today: Africa, Asia, North America, Oceania, South America.
Part 2, tomorrow: Europe.
AFRICA (5 places, 55 nations)
Likely qualifiers: Cote d'Ivoire, Gabon, Ghana, Tunisia, Algeria.
Preferred qualifiers: Cote d'Ivoire, Egypt, Gabon, Ghana, Nigeria.
Comments: Remember, Africa will have six entrants in the World Cup; host South Africa is guaranteed a berth. And I like having South Africa around, anyway. The only sub-Saharan country with a significant European population, and a supremely interesting ongoing social experiment. ... The likely qualifiers I listed are those currently leading the standings in the five African qualifying groups. Winner of each group advances. The preferred qualifiers are based on reality; that is, none of those five are in the same group with each other. ... Cote d'Ivoire (a.k.a. Ivory Coast) is a real African giant, at the moment. Its stars include Didier Drogba (Chelsea), Salomon Kalou (Chelsea) and Kolo Toure (Arsenal). The Elephants (what a perverse name for a soccer team) got to the 2006 World Cup and made some noise before being beaten in group play by The Netherlands and Argentina. ... With three matches to play, Egypt trails Algeria 7-4 in Group C. The good news is that North Africa is going to get a team into the tournament; the bad news is it isn't Egypt, which has a far bigger population, is the two-time defending African champion and showed great spirit in playing Brazil to a 3-3 standstill for 90 minutes in the Confederations Cup. ... Gabon is the Official Darkhorse of African qualifying, and the World Cup needs a few Out of Nowhere stories. Gabon may as well be it, and it definitely fits the definition. Gabon never has played in the World Cup, never has finished even in the top four of the African championship and has a team made up of guys playing mostly for second-tier clubs in Europe. Goalkeeper Didier Ovone, who plays for Ligue 1 also-ran LeMans in France appears to be the most prominent guy on the roster. Togo has a real star in Emmanuel Adebayor, the Manchester City forward and reigning African Footballer of the Year, and is in second place in the group and still could win it. But I prefer Gabon's Nobodies, thank you. ... Ghana is another serious African side; the U.S. could tell you about it, having lost to the big and physical Black Stars, 2-1, in the 2006 World Cup. Stephen Appiah, Michael Essien (Chelsea) and Sulley Ali Muntari (Inter Milan) are the big-name players here, and we say "bring them on." ... Nigeria is a personal preference I have based on memories of their reckless commitment to the attack at the 1994 and 1998 World Cups -- and the country's status as the most populous in Africa. (When in doubt, why not make the most fans happy?) Their best-known player is veteran forward Nwankwo Kanu (Portsmouth), African Footballer of the Year in 1999.
Finally: African soccer slays me. It is the most random, lures perhaps the most passionate fans, seems to be the most unpredictable and, by far, the most exotic. One of my unrealized dreams is to cover an African Nations Cup tournament and watch as many matches as possible in, like, Gabon. ... Consider these names: Abuja, Bamako, Blantyre, Blida, Chililibombwe, Conakry, Cotonou, Kumasi, Rades. Know what they are? Cities that have played host to World Cup qualifiers, in Africa, this year. And I'd never heard of most of them. As opposed to these other "well-known" sites: Accra, Kigali, Libreville, Maputo, Rabat and Yaounde. ... 2010 is a great year for an African team to make the World Cup, since it's on their continent for the first time. I'm going to predict right here and now that one of them makes the quarterfinals.
ASIA (4.5 places, 43 nations)
Qualifiers: Australia, Japan, North Korea, South Korea.
Likely qualifier: Saudi Arabia.
Preferred qualifiers: Australia, Bahrain, Iran, Japan, North Korea.
Comments: This section is pretty much moot, because Asian qualifying is over, aside from a home-and-home between Bahrain and Saudi Arabia to determine who finishes fifth -- and does another home-and-home (with Oceania champion New Zealand) to advance to South Africa. I prefer Bahrain over the Saudis just for the sake of adding a new minnow to the World Cup mix; Bahrain, with 700,000 people, would become the smallest nation ever to appear in the World Cup. Not that it's likely, considering that Saudi Arabia generally handles Bahrain. I'm a little tired of the Saudis, who tend to show up and do nothing. But I prefer both of them over New Zealand (sorry, Kiwis) -- because The Gulf needs a team to back. ... I like Australia here, and I applaud their gutsy decision to jump from Oceania to Asia, where the competition is far tougher (but berths in the World Cup are more numerous, yes). The Aussies are coming on. Good that they will be in South Africa, and we wonder if being from the Southern Hemisphere will help them in any way, shape or form. Can't hurt, can it? ... Japan? Sure. Bring 'em on. The best pro league in Asia, sophisticated citizens, becoming a good soccer country. The Japanese won't last, but they will play hard. ... North Korea? You bet. This is a geopolitical preference because anything that engages these freaks on the international stage has to crack a window into sanity for a nuclear-armed, xenophobic country run for 50 years by a couple of mad men. South Korea? They're in, as usual, but somebody has to go to give space to North Korea and Iran, and I'm picking on South Korea because their players wouldn't be tortured or starved for not being there. ... I'd prefer Iran because, again, the international exposure would be good for a country that appears to have a chance to be a solid world citizen, but could go either way ... and being in the World Cup would help. ... Where are China and India, you ask? If I like countries with big populations getting in, why not them? Well, India can't play soccer. The End. It's not like they ever had a ghost of a slim shot of a chance. As for China, it has managed to screw up its soccer situation so royally (the federation is shot through with corruption and incompetence) that it didn't even reach the final phase of qualifying, which included Qatar, Uzbekistan and the United Arab Emirates. That's pathetic. When you get your stuff together, China, then we'll talk, and maybe you can get on our 2014 wish list.
Finally: Asia remains the underachiever of world soccer. So many people, so few competent teams. I think South Africa is going to be hard on them; I predict none of their five teams survives the first round.
NORTH AMERICA (3.5 places, 35 countries)
Likely qualifiers: Costa Rica, Mexico, United States.
Preferred qualifiers: Costa Rica, Mexico, United States, Honduras.
Comment: Probably the feeblest region, in terms of Serious Soccer Nations vs. Places Available. At the moment, the Yanks, Mexicans, Ticos and Hondurans are the only sides in Concacaf (Confederation of North, Central American, and Caribbean Association Football) that could play a middling team from Europe, Africa or South America -- at a neutral site -- and not get blown out. Maybe Canada will join the group some day, and maybe Jamaica can get back, but for now .. Costa Rica and the U.S. are all but in, halfway through qualifying. Mexico is in a spot of trouble, sitting fourth in final qualifying behind Honduras, but Mexico has three of its final five qualifiers in Estadio Azteca, where it practically never loses, and nine points from those three would give them 15 points and probably lift them over Honduras and into third place and a guaranteed berth. But if Mexico ties or loses to the hated Yanqis on Aug. 12, look out. ... Honduras also has three of its final five at home, but "home" is something of a mess right now, with political turmoil and the threat of violence ... so it may lose some of those matches to neutral sites, which is too bad. One potential break for Honduras is that its gets the U.S. in its second-to-last game, and there is a fairly strong chance the Americans already will have qualified and might send a "B" team to Tegucigalpa (or wherever). If Honduras can win its final three at home (vs. Costa Rica, Trinidad & Tobago and the U.S.), it has a shot to finish third. ... Actually, Honduras finishing third would be best for Concacaf because its fourth-place team goes into a home-and-home playoff with the fifth-place team from South America, and Mexico would have a better chance of coming out of that. Either way, as annoying as El Tri is, it isn't quite a World Cup without Mexico running around, overachieving into the final 16.
Finally: I expect no more than one Concacaf squad will make it out of the first round. It probably will be the U.S., which has had a chance to spend a month in the country, during the Confederations Cup last month. But it could be Mexico. All depends on the draw. It won't be the Ticos; they can't really hang on the international stage.
OCEANIA (.5 places, 10 countries)
Likely qualifiers: None.
Preferred qualifiers: None.
Comment: Since Australia bolted the confederation for the Asian group, Oceania is something of a joke. New Zealand and nine coral reefs, basically. The Kiwis aren't truly awful, but they would bring nothing interesting to the World Cup aside from one more team that speaks English (for those of us who think about interviewing them).
Finally: I wouldn't mind the Kiwis beating Asia No. 5 (presumably Saudi Arabia) in the home-and-home for the World Cup slot, but Australia represents the region well enough, and the tournament needs a Gulf team.
SOUTH AMERICA (4.5 places, 10 countries)
Likely qualifiers: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Paraguay, Ecuador.
Preferred qualifiers: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Uruguay.
Comment: South America has the coolest qualifying system of all -- one gigantic, 10-nation tournament with 18 matches, one that inevitably turns into a Pier 6 brawl for the final 2-3 spots. Here are the standings, with 14 of 18 matches in the books, and the permutations are almost endless, as usual. ... Whatever the format, we have to have Brazil and Argentina in the World Cup. It's the law. End of story. I already have awarded the fifth-place playoff berth to Mexico or Honduras (continental solidarity, you see) ... so that leaves us looking at who finishes third and fourth. Paraguay and Argentina sit in those spots now, but I expect Argentina to move up -- despite being led by that idiot Diego Maradona and despite a fairly tough final four matches (Brazil, at Paraguay, Peru, at Uruguay). Chile actually is second, and I'm OK with them advancing because, well, they love their poets in Chile and they send us all our winter fruit. (Though a guy from Colombia told me recently that Chile is an extraordinarily dull place. Hmm. Compared to Colombia, anywhere else might seem dull, of course.) ... So now we have three teams in, and my choice for the fourth, Uruguay, is fairly random, I admit. It rests on two notions: Wanting the winner of two of the first three World Cups in the tournament ... and because Uruguay is known for some spectacularly dirty soccer. The world's cheapshot artists, historically. Not good sports, but good to have as the official Black Hat Team at South Africa. Uruguay also has a fairly tough final four (at Peru, Colombia, at Ecuador, Argentina), so making up six points on (currently third-place) Paraguay is probably not feasible. Actually, there could be a supremely interesting match on the final day of qualifying, when Argentina plays at Uruguay in what could be a Loser Stays Home sort of thing.
Finally: What makes South America particularly interesting (aside from lots of good soccer) is the immense diversity of playing sites. From the sea-level tropics (Recife, Brazil; Puerto Ordaz, Venezuela; Lima, Peru) to the oxygen-deprived elevations of La Paz, Bolivia (12,000 feet); Quito, Ecuador (9,900 feet); and Bogota, Colombia (8,660 feet). And the fact that everyone gets a fair shot. ... My greatest worry is that Maradona will somehow screw this up, and Argentina doesn't qualify. ... Also, South America is likely to get five teams, even though I don't want it to happen, because No. 5 likely will get Honduras in the home-and-home -- and probably will overpower the Hondurans. Read more!
Monday, July 20, 2009
Here We Go: Post No. 1
This is Day 1, post No. 1 of this blog, which is intended to convey to the reading public at least one entry per day about the 2010 World Cup in South Africa, from now until the kickoff of Game 1.
That is why we are calling it a countdown. Because we will mark each day between now and June 11 with at least one post. Well, that's the intent. We shall see if we can make it.
This blog will be about any and all things pertaining to the tournament. For the next few months, it will focus rather heavily on qualifying, which is ongoing.
Six nations already are in: Australia, Japan, both Koreas (North and South, or Democratic People's Republic of Korea and Republic of Korea), The Netherlands and the hosts, South Africa. Twenty-six more are to be determined.
After the qualifying tournaments, or in addition to them, we shall take closer looks at specific teams and players, monitor the news coming out of the host country, perhaps get into how to get there and what to do while you are there ... and speculate, analyze, dissect, ponder ... all those things that we hope will make this readable and fun.
I have some history with this topic.
As a print journalist, I covered the 1990, 1994 and 1998 World Cups from beginning to end, and I covered the 2002 World Cup through the first round. My entire professional life has been devoted to writing about sports, and of all the places I've been and events I have covered, the 1990 World Cup in Italy and the 1998 World Cup in France are in my Favorite Five. And I'm not even sure, right this minute, what the other three would be.
The World Cup is an intoxicating experience. Even if you're not a fan, and I certainly wasn't for at least the first two. I was a guy who loved the event -- but not the sport. The event is just an overpowering thing, focus of global attentions, crossroads of the world's cultures and peoples and hopes and aspirations. Inside the host country it is even more intense, and I have seen the length to which people will go be part of the event.
The World Cup is worthy of discussion because it means so much to so many people. At the least, it's great entertainment. At its most sublime, it is perhaps the one event that brings together all 6 billion people on the planet. It is the one topic that seems to transcend politics and war and daily petty conflicts. It is a sort of global water cooler we all gather around. At times, when world soccer is at its best, it can even be uplifting. Inspirational. Something that appeals to the better angels of our natures.
So, yes, a mere 325 days to go before the first match. Unless you live in South Africa, where it already is July 21, and the World Cup is 324 days away.
We are going to stick with Pacific Time for purposes of this blog.
Game 1 will pit the host country, South Africa, against the No. 2 team in Group A -- which figures to be someone pretty strong. It will be a key match for the hosts, because if they can "get a result," as they say in soccer, their chances of advancing to the second round shoot up. Because teams now designated A3 and A4 figure to be weaker than A2.
Kickoff for Game 1, June 11, will be at 4 p.m. in Johannesburg, which will be 7 a.m. on the West Coast, 10 a.m. EDT.
The championship match also will be played in Johannesburg, on July 11. Counting those two matches, the tournament will be made up of 64 matches, played over a span of 31 days.
I believe this could be fun, for me, the blogger. It could also be a lot of work. Let's see how it goes. I have no idea how it will turn out, and what directions I may go before I get to the other side. My first thought it to get started. Now I see where it goes.
Feel free to check in daily to see if I'm making any headway ... or have sunk with all hands. Read more!
That is why we are calling it a countdown. Because we will mark each day between now and June 11 with at least one post. Well, that's the intent. We shall see if we can make it.
This blog will be about any and all things pertaining to the tournament. For the next few months, it will focus rather heavily on qualifying, which is ongoing.
Six nations already are in: Australia, Japan, both Koreas (North and South, or Democratic People's Republic of Korea and Republic of Korea), The Netherlands and the hosts, South Africa. Twenty-six more are to be determined.
After the qualifying tournaments, or in addition to them, we shall take closer looks at specific teams and players, monitor the news coming out of the host country, perhaps get into how to get there and what to do while you are there ... and speculate, analyze, dissect, ponder ... all those things that we hope will make this readable and fun.
I have some history with this topic.
As a print journalist, I covered the 1990, 1994 and 1998 World Cups from beginning to end, and I covered the 2002 World Cup through the first round. My entire professional life has been devoted to writing about sports, and of all the places I've been and events I have covered, the 1990 World Cup in Italy and the 1998 World Cup in France are in my Favorite Five. And I'm not even sure, right this minute, what the other three would be.
The World Cup is an intoxicating experience. Even if you're not a fan, and I certainly wasn't for at least the first two. I was a guy who loved the event -- but not the sport. The event is just an overpowering thing, focus of global attentions, crossroads of the world's cultures and peoples and hopes and aspirations. Inside the host country it is even more intense, and I have seen the length to which people will go be part of the event.
The World Cup is worthy of discussion because it means so much to so many people. At the least, it's great entertainment. At its most sublime, it is perhaps the one event that brings together all 6 billion people on the planet. It is the one topic that seems to transcend politics and war and daily petty conflicts. It is a sort of global water cooler we all gather around. At times, when world soccer is at its best, it can even be uplifting. Inspirational. Something that appeals to the better angels of our natures.
So, yes, a mere 325 days to go before the first match. Unless you live in South Africa, where it already is July 21, and the World Cup is 324 days away.
We are going to stick with Pacific Time for purposes of this blog.
Game 1 will pit the host country, South Africa, against the No. 2 team in Group A -- which figures to be someone pretty strong. It will be a key match for the hosts, because if they can "get a result," as they say in soccer, their chances of advancing to the second round shoot up. Because teams now designated A3 and A4 figure to be weaker than A2.
Kickoff for Game 1, June 11, will be at 4 p.m. in Johannesburg, which will be 7 a.m. on the West Coast, 10 a.m. EDT.
The championship match also will be played in Johannesburg, on July 11. Counting those two matches, the tournament will be made up of 64 matches, played over a span of 31 days.
I believe this could be fun, for me, the blogger. It could also be a lot of work. Let's see how it goes. I have no idea how it will turn out, and what directions I may go before I get to the other side. My first thought it to get started. Now I see where it goes.
Feel free to check in daily to see if I'm making any headway ... or have sunk with all hands. Read more!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
