South Africa plays a friendly against Germany next Saturday.
South Africa is host to the 2010 World Cup, and doesn't really have to worry about results. We suspect Germany will handle the Bafana Bafana fairly easily ... but a writer for the Johannesburg Sunday Times suggests that a win over South Africa won't eliminate the angst surrounding the Mannschaft.
Germany's biggest problem is Russia. Well, and not winning more impressively during the European qualifying phase.
Germany has won six matches and tied one, but it hasn't quite shaken Russia, which has won five and lost one and plays Liechtenstein in what amounts to a sure victory on Sept. 5.
Why are the Germans nervous?
The author of the Times piece is a bit purple in his description, and a bit relentless in his fondness for wordplay, but the story seems to be a fairly accurate assessment of the mood in the Germany soccer community.
The sense is that their team is still pretty good, but more out of habit than talent, and that there is a festering fear that Russia will win Europe's Group 4 by winning the head-to-head in Moscow next month ... and Germany's 3-3 tie at Finland will come home to haunt it.
Germany gets Azerbaijan at home on Sept. 9, which ought to be an easy victory, but it won't do the Germans any good unless Wales helps them out by defeating (or at least tying) the Russians at Cardiff, on the same day.
A nice roundup on the Germany situation.
Read more!
Saturday, August 29, 2009
Friday, August 28, 2009
World Cup Staple: Qualifier Roster Debates
This concept is a bit difficult for someone from the United States to grasp, but it is a staple of the World Cup qualifying process.
The national team roster debates.
Why is this guy on the team? Why isn't that guy?
This is madness! No, it makes perfect sense!
This is the stuff of endless discussion among fans and journalists in the serious soccer countries, and the debates are heating up right this minute, as more and more federations announce their training rosters ahead of the qualifiers coming up Sept. 5-0. A critical period for teams in Europe, Africa and the Americas ... because the end of the qualifying process is in sight.
France is a good example of the angst surrounding the process.
France coach Raymond Domenech has announced a roster that includes veteran forward Thierry Henry -- some say aging, past-his-prime Thierry Henry -- ahead of France's key qualifying matches against Romania (Sept. 5) and at Serbia (Sept. 9).
However, another veteran some like and some detest -- Patrick Vieira -- has not been called in.
And the vitriol is flowing.
Not that this is a key moment, or anything, for France and its campaign, but it sits second in the European Group 7 standings with four matches to play. If it wins its next two matches, it could lead the group -- and winning a group means direct qualification to South Africa 2010. Or a pair of defeats could leave it hopeless of winning the group and worried about just hanging on to second place and getting into the home-and-home playoff with some other second-place team.
Around the planet, journalists are putting the national team selections in prominent places in newspapers and giving their own opinions. These are genuine national debates rivaling almost anything going on in politics or business in any given country.
This is a bit difficult to grasp in a country such as the United States, which has some world-class talent, but not a whole lot of it.
That is, you could put a dozen U.S. fans, coaches and journalists in a room, ask them to pick, independently, the 23-25 guys they want to call in for training ahead of a qualifier, and everyone in the room would have essentially the same list.
But in a country like France, which has hundreds of players on major club rosters and has thousands more who believe they ought to be ... the team selection is a contentious business.
This is part of what makes South Africa 2010 -- or any World Cup -- fun. The passionate debate. The fervor of it all. The absolute certainty in the mind of the Man in the Street that the national coach has botched it all again.
Let the arguments begin!
And here is the rest of it. Read more!
The national team roster debates.
Why is this guy on the team? Why isn't that guy?
This is madness! No, it makes perfect sense!
This is the stuff of endless discussion among fans and journalists in the serious soccer countries, and the debates are heating up right this minute, as more and more federations announce their training rosters ahead of the qualifiers coming up Sept. 5-0. A critical period for teams in Europe, Africa and the Americas ... because the end of the qualifying process is in sight.
France is a good example of the angst surrounding the process.
France coach Raymond Domenech has announced a roster that includes veteran forward Thierry Henry -- some say aging, past-his-prime Thierry Henry -- ahead of France's key qualifying matches against Romania (Sept. 5) and at Serbia (Sept. 9).
However, another veteran some like and some detest -- Patrick Vieira -- has not been called in.
And the vitriol is flowing.
Not that this is a key moment, or anything, for France and its campaign, but it sits second in the European Group 7 standings with four matches to play. If it wins its next two matches, it could lead the group -- and winning a group means direct qualification to South Africa 2010. Or a pair of defeats could leave it hopeless of winning the group and worried about just hanging on to second place and getting into the home-and-home playoff with some other second-place team.
Around the planet, journalists are putting the national team selections in prominent places in newspapers and giving their own opinions. These are genuine national debates rivaling almost anything going on in politics or business in any given country.
This is a bit difficult to grasp in a country such as the United States, which has some world-class talent, but not a whole lot of it.
That is, you could put a dozen U.S. fans, coaches and journalists in a room, ask them to pick, independently, the 23-25 guys they want to call in for training ahead of a qualifier, and everyone in the room would have essentially the same list.
But in a country like France, which has hundreds of players on major club rosters and has thousands more who believe they ought to be ... the team selection is a contentious business.
This is part of what makes South Africa 2010 -- or any World Cup -- fun. The passionate debate. The fervor of it all. The absolute certainty in the mind of the Man in the Street that the national coach has botched it all again.
Let the arguments begin!
And here is the rest of it. Read more!
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Preview of South American Qualifiers
This is Post No. 1 in what will be several posts, over the next 10 days, taking a closer look at several important South Africa 2010 qualifying matches coming up on Sept. 5.
In this post, we turn to the expertise of a colleague from South America, Armando Varela.
Armando writes for Futbolmls.com and for Record, Semanario de Futbol, from México, as its Los Angeles correspondent.
A native of Medellin, Armando lived and worked as a journalist in Colombia until 1998, when he moved to the U.S., first to New York City and then to California, and he is very familiar with the thrills and spills of the grand South America qualifying experience.
Armando's outlook on the five South America (Conmebol) qualifiers being played Sept. 5:
--Brazil at Argentina (Rosario): With forward Adriano recently announced as part of the roster, Conmebol table-leading (and world top-ranked) Brazil (27 points) is set up to face Diego Maradona’s Argentina in the match of the day. The “Albicelestes” have been slow in getting their mojo working, with constant back-and-forth between their famous (and outspoken) coach and his star, Leo Messi, arguably the best player of the world these days. The Argentines stand only fourth in the Conmebol standings, and a home defeat could put at risk the two-time champs' chances of getting to South Africa. At all.
Brazil has been on a tear of late, crushing Argentina 3-0 in the Copa America final in 2007, and winning the Confederations Cup in June with victories over Italy, Egypt, host South Africa and the United States (twice). But Brazil was held to a 0-0 draw with Argentina in their first qualifying meeting, a year ago in Bela Horizonte.
Carlos Dunga, a non-celebrity-oriented coach in command of the Brazilian side, will have to conquer over a proud Argentinean team that has historically grown with the challenges and that claims to be a better team, man for man. Even if they don’t play in River Plate’s stadium, but 300 miles away, in Rosario.
--Venezuela at Chile (Santiago): Non-traditional power Venezuela -- up until a few years ago baseball was the country’s only passion -- travels to meet the previous breakthrough power in South American soccer, Chile. Chile is led by the Argentinian Marcelo Bielsa, a former player and now a coach and so popular in Chile that he is considered a possible presidential candidate. His team faces a not-so-consistent but sometimes surprising Venezuela that still has a small chance to get to its first World Cup.
--Ecuador at Colombia (Medellin): Beautiful-with-a-past Medellin serves as host city for a key game in which Colombia (17 points) will play for its survival against recently erected regional power Ecuador. With rumors of not getting the best elements out of the national pool of players and a rivalry with the fifth-placed Ecuadorians (20 points) that now is political as well as sporting, the Colombians will have to win this game if they want to remain alive in the competition.
--Uruguay at Peru (Lima): With Peru’s good times now just a memory, Uruguay has the perfect scenario to show up and regain some of the recently lost shine. Uruguay, still a South American powerhouse with a soccer tradition similar to Argentina’s and Brazil’s, faces a disoriented team that sits last in the group and has no chance to win a place to the World Cup, even if they play as hosts in colonial and mysterious Lima. Uruguay will do whatever it takes to get visitors points and compete for the fifth spot against Concacaf’s fourth. And probably will get them.
--Bolivia at Paraguay (Asuncion): Paraguay is third in the group (24 points) with a recent path that began in Copa America 2007 with a mix of spectacular wins and deep losses. The Paraguayans remain veterans of the World Cup with potential to surprise. Bolivia, the adversary (12 points), doesn’t look nearly as dangerous when playing at sea-level Asuncion -- that is, away from its 11,900-foot altitude aerie back at home, in La Paz. Read more!
In this post, we turn to the expertise of a colleague from South America, Armando Varela.
Armando writes for Futbolmls.com and for Record, Semanario de Futbol, from México, as its Los Angeles correspondent.
A native of Medellin, Armando lived and worked as a journalist in Colombia until 1998, when he moved to the U.S., first to New York City and then to California, and he is very familiar with the thrills and spills of the grand South America qualifying experience.
Armando's outlook on the five South America (Conmebol) qualifiers being played Sept. 5:
--Brazil at Argentina (Rosario): With forward Adriano recently announced as part of the roster, Conmebol table-leading (and world top-ranked) Brazil (27 points) is set up to face Diego Maradona’s Argentina in the match of the day. The “Albicelestes” have been slow in getting their mojo working, with constant back-and-forth between their famous (and outspoken) coach and his star, Leo Messi, arguably the best player of the world these days. The Argentines stand only fourth in the Conmebol standings, and a home defeat could put at risk the two-time champs' chances of getting to South Africa. At all.
Brazil has been on a tear of late, crushing Argentina 3-0 in the Copa America final in 2007, and winning the Confederations Cup in June with victories over Italy, Egypt, host South Africa and the United States (twice). But Brazil was held to a 0-0 draw with Argentina in their first qualifying meeting, a year ago in Bela Horizonte.
Carlos Dunga, a non-celebrity-oriented coach in command of the Brazilian side, will have to conquer over a proud Argentinean team that has historically grown with the challenges and that claims to be a better team, man for man. Even if they don’t play in River Plate’s stadium, but 300 miles away, in Rosario.
--Venezuela at Chile (Santiago): Non-traditional power Venezuela -- up until a few years ago baseball was the country’s only passion -- travels to meet the previous breakthrough power in South American soccer, Chile. Chile is led by the Argentinian Marcelo Bielsa, a former player and now a coach and so popular in Chile that he is considered a possible presidential candidate. His team faces a not-so-consistent but sometimes surprising Venezuela that still has a small chance to get to its first World Cup.
--Ecuador at Colombia (Medellin): Beautiful-with-a-past Medellin serves as host city for a key game in which Colombia (17 points) will play for its survival against recently erected regional power Ecuador. With rumors of not getting the best elements out of the national pool of players and a rivalry with the fifth-placed Ecuadorians (20 points) that now is political as well as sporting, the Colombians will have to win this game if they want to remain alive in the competition.
--Uruguay at Peru (Lima): With Peru’s good times now just a memory, Uruguay has the perfect scenario to show up and regain some of the recently lost shine. Uruguay, still a South American powerhouse with a soccer tradition similar to Argentina’s and Brazil’s, faces a disoriented team that sits last in the group and has no chance to win a place to the World Cup, even if they play as hosts in colonial and mysterious Lima. Uruguay will do whatever it takes to get visitors points and compete for the fifth spot against Concacaf’s fourth. And probably will get them.
--Bolivia at Paraguay (Asuncion): Paraguay is third in the group (24 points) with a recent path that began in Copa America 2007 with a mix of spectacular wins and deep losses. The Paraguayans remain veterans of the World Cup with potential to surprise. Bolivia, the adversary (12 points), doesn’t look nearly as dangerous when playing at sea-level Asuncion -- that is, away from its 11,900-foot altitude aerie back at home, in La Paz. Read more!
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
40,000 Tickets for 2010 to Construction Workers
Remember those 120,000 tickets that World Cup 2010 organizers said would be set aside for distribution, at no charge, to poor South Africans?
Turns out that 40,000 of them are going to construction workers involved in preparations for the World Cup, organizers said today.
Given that strikes by workers seeking better pay have at times delayed construction, you have to wonder if this is a sort of gesture designed to win the cooperation of labor and its unions.
What is a more attractive concept to a construction worker, in South Africa, than the concept of free tickets to see a match in a stadium you helped build?
Clever move, on the part of organizers.
But those 120,000 free tickets for the poor ... are now down to 80,000. Maybe poor people should go on strike, or hold mass demonstrations. See if that frees up some more tickets. Read more!
Turns out that 40,000 of them are going to construction workers involved in preparations for the World Cup, organizers said today.
Given that strikes by workers seeking better pay have at times delayed construction, you have to wonder if this is a sort of gesture designed to win the cooperation of labor and its unions.
What is a more attractive concept to a construction worker, in South Africa, than the concept of free tickets to see a match in a stadium you helped build?
Clever move, on the part of organizers.
But those 120,000 free tickets for the poor ... are now down to 80,000. Maybe poor people should go on strike, or hold mass demonstrations. See if that frees up some more tickets. Read more!
Bid Countries Get FIFA Advice in Zurich
Even more information on 2018 and 2022 ... eight-plus months ahead of South Africa 2010. Not to mention four-plus years ahead of Brazil 2014.
All 11 bid teams are in Zurich so that FIFA can remind them today how to better prepare in their pursuit of the 2018 or 2022 World Cups.
Conversation about those events isn't as remote as it sounds because FIFA will choose hosts for 2018 and 2022 in a December meeting next year. That is, 16 months hence. So it is getting fairly late for the would-be hosts.
The World Cup has become such a big business that FIFA can summon the bidders almost like servants to sit and listen to what, exactly, FIFA expects of them. Even bidders as sophisticated and experienced in putting on big soccer events as England, Japan, Russia and the United States.
What does FIFA demand of its hosts?
Let's see ...
--World-class stadiums, with at least one stadium of 80,000 capacity for the opening and closing matches.
--First-class hotels, and lots of them.
--Easily accessed transportation.
--Modern communications technology.
--Environmental awareness.
--Corporate and social responsibility.
And we could be cynical and suggest it wouldn't hurt to massage the egos and perhaps fatten the wallets of the FIFA electorate, but these things are on the up and up, I'm sure. (Wink wink nudge nudge.)
To recap, bidders for both 2018 and 2022 include Australia, England, Japan, Mexico, Russia and the United States, plus joint bids from Belgium-Netherlands and Spain-Portugal. Indonesia, Qatar and South Korea have applied only for the 2022 finals.
The thinking is that England is the favorite for the 2018 World Cup; the "masters of the game" have hosted only one World Cup, and that was in 1966. After that, FIFA probably will want to go to North America, which hasn't hosted since 1994, which might put the U.S. in good stead.
Anyway, yes, the way bidders are at the beck and call of FIFA shows just how much value bidders now attach to hosting a World Cup. They will jump through hoops.
Read more!
All 11 bid teams are in Zurich so that FIFA can remind them today how to better prepare in their pursuit of the 2018 or 2022 World Cups.
Conversation about those events isn't as remote as it sounds because FIFA will choose hosts for 2018 and 2022 in a December meeting next year. That is, 16 months hence. So it is getting fairly late for the would-be hosts.
The World Cup has become such a big business that FIFA can summon the bidders almost like servants to sit and listen to what, exactly, FIFA expects of them. Even bidders as sophisticated and experienced in putting on big soccer events as England, Japan, Russia and the United States.
What does FIFA demand of its hosts?
Let's see ...
--World-class stadiums, with at least one stadium of 80,000 capacity for the opening and closing matches.
--First-class hotels, and lots of them.
--Easily accessed transportation.
--Modern communications technology.
--Environmental awareness.
--Corporate and social responsibility.
And we could be cynical and suggest it wouldn't hurt to massage the egos and perhaps fatten the wallets of the FIFA electorate, but these things are on the up and up, I'm sure. (Wink wink nudge nudge.)
To recap, bidders for both 2018 and 2022 include Australia, England, Japan, Mexico, Russia and the United States, plus joint bids from Belgium-Netherlands and Spain-Portugal. Indonesia, Qatar and South Korea have applied only for the 2022 finals.
The thinking is that England is the favorite for the 2018 World Cup; the "masters of the game" have hosted only one World Cup, and that was in 1966. After that, FIFA probably will want to go to North America, which hasn't hosted since 1994, which might put the U.S. in good stead.
Anyway, yes, the way bidders are at the beck and call of FIFA shows just how much value bidders now attach to hosting a World Cup. They will jump through hoops.
Read more!
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Media Censorship in South Africa?
South Africa seems to have a fairly free and independent news media. But the president of the ruling party's Youth League would like to see that changed.
In most of Africa -- well, in most of the world -- media don't have the freedom to go after the government. But in South Africa, they pretty much do.
Consider the lead story in the Aug. 23 edition of the Johannesburg Sunday Times: "The report Mbeki and Zuma hid from you"
Mbeki and Zuma would be the former and current presidents of South Africa. And the headline clearly indicates the Sunday Times is going right after them.
The story is a pretty intense and important examination of "shady oil deals" between South Africa and Saddam Hussein's Iraq. It is good, aggressive journalism of the sort that is rarely seen in the Third World.
But the aforementioned leader of the ruling party's Youth League, name of Julius Malema, would like to see the independent media brought to heel, and he is blunt about it.
According to The Times, in a story dated Saturday, Malema said "this media needs to be controlled somehow. They are even trying to set an agenda for the ANC. We cannot allow just a few editors to dictate what is wrong and what is right."
Malema apparently is convinced much of South Africa media is hostile to the African National Congress, the ruling party, nonstop, since the end of the apartheid government, in 1994. Maybe it's because the government more than occasionally is corrupt? Like most governments?
Malema said "some sort of control" needs to be exercised over the media. Which is the sort of thing you might expect from a man who has identified Fidel Castro as the politician he most admires.
Malema seems to be fairly often pilloried as a left-wing nut job. One blogger said Malema is "a sandwich short a picnic" ... but he still is in a high-level and high-visibility position, and it is a bit chilling to hear him calling for controlled media.
It reminds us that political and social freedoms in South Africa remain tenuous and fragile. Imagine a major U.S. or British or French or Australian politician calling for censorship. It wouldn't happen.
But it does, in South Africa. And we fear it may, again.
It would be nice to be able to go to a World Cup in a country where both successes and failures are duly reported. South Africa seems like such a place. For now. Read more!
In most of Africa -- well, in most of the world -- media don't have the freedom to go after the government. But in South Africa, they pretty much do.
Consider the lead story in the Aug. 23 edition of the Johannesburg Sunday Times: "The report Mbeki and Zuma hid from you"
Mbeki and Zuma would be the former and current presidents of South Africa. And the headline clearly indicates the Sunday Times is going right after them.
The story is a pretty intense and important examination of "shady oil deals" between South Africa and Saddam Hussein's Iraq. It is good, aggressive journalism of the sort that is rarely seen in the Third World.
But the aforementioned leader of the ruling party's Youth League, name of Julius Malema, would like to see the independent media brought to heel, and he is blunt about it.
According to The Times, in a story dated Saturday, Malema said "this media needs to be controlled somehow. They are even trying to set an agenda for the ANC. We cannot allow just a few editors to dictate what is wrong and what is right."
Malema apparently is convinced much of South Africa media is hostile to the African National Congress, the ruling party, nonstop, since the end of the apartheid government, in 1994. Maybe it's because the government more than occasionally is corrupt? Like most governments?
Malema said "some sort of control" needs to be exercised over the media. Which is the sort of thing you might expect from a man who has identified Fidel Castro as the politician he most admires.
Malema seems to be fairly often pilloried as a left-wing nut job. One blogger said Malema is "a sandwich short a picnic" ... but he still is in a high-level and high-visibility position, and it is a bit chilling to hear him calling for controlled media.
It reminds us that political and social freedoms in South Africa remain tenuous and fragile. Imagine a major U.S. or British or French or Australian politician calling for censorship. It wouldn't happen.
But it does, in South Africa. And we fear it may, again.
It would be nice to be able to go to a World Cup in a country where both successes and failures are duly reported. South Africa seems like such a place. For now. Read more!
Monday, August 24, 2009
Cape Town Worried about Selling Itself
Cape Town is near the the southern tip of South Africa (and, hence, Africa) and is rivaled only by Johannesburg in global recognition among South African cities.
Cape Town is second in population, with 3.5 million residents, only to Johannesburg. It also is the No.1 tourist destination in Africa, having overtaken Cairo, according to this post at Wikipedia (which isn't the Encylopedia Brittannica, but generally is more right than wrong).
Cape Town also has a long history as the entre pot of European entry and expansion in the area and the focal point of the country for centuries, and sometimes is known as the country's Mother City.
Understandably, then, Cape Town is a host city (one of nine) for the 2010 World Cup. It also will be the site of the World Cup draw, on Dec. 4.
But some of those in Cape Town are worrying that the city is missing a chance to broaden and enhance its global image.
A local newspaper, the Cape Argus, today has a story on a local business leader suggesting Cape Town is botching its shot to re-brand itself on the international stage.
The leader is displeased that Cape Town began its World Cup campaign by calling itself "Africa's Party Capital."
The thinking seems to be that Cape Town already is known for its benign climate and recreational opportunities and is limiting itself by reinforcing its "good times" image when some business could get done.
The new slogan for Cape Town? "Ready to welcome the world." The critic prefers "Where the world meets." But he likes the new one better than the old, which he dismissed as trite, making Cape Town sound like some Southern Hemisphere version of Ibiza.
Having been through these things a time or three, I've noticed that it's natural for leaders in World Cup host cities to be nervous and easily agitated at the way their city is being promoted. If we called up people in Johannesburg, Durban, Pretoria, Rustenburg -- other World Cup cities, that is -- we certainly wouldn't have trouble finding someone with a title who is unhappy with how the promotional side of things is going down.
Those of us who focus on the sports side of things sometimes lose sight of these things. The civic boosterism that is part and parcel of the whole hosting process. The cities want something tangible to come out of all the effort.
It appears Cape Town is having a particularly nervous moment. "OK, foreigners know we're a nice place to visit. But how about letting them know this is a place where they can come do some business with us, as well?"
It's always something.
Read more!
Cape Town is second in population, with 3.5 million residents, only to Johannesburg. It also is the No.1 tourist destination in Africa, having overtaken Cairo, according to this post at Wikipedia (which isn't the Encylopedia Brittannica, but generally is more right than wrong).
Cape Town also has a long history as the entre pot of European entry and expansion in the area and the focal point of the country for centuries, and sometimes is known as the country's Mother City.
Understandably, then, Cape Town is a host city (one of nine) for the 2010 World Cup. It also will be the site of the World Cup draw, on Dec. 4.
But some of those in Cape Town are worrying that the city is missing a chance to broaden and enhance its global image.
A local newspaper, the Cape Argus, today has a story on a local business leader suggesting Cape Town is botching its shot to re-brand itself on the international stage.
The leader is displeased that Cape Town began its World Cup campaign by calling itself "Africa's Party Capital."
The thinking seems to be that Cape Town already is known for its benign climate and recreational opportunities and is limiting itself by reinforcing its "good times" image when some business could get done.
The new slogan for Cape Town? "Ready to welcome the world." The critic prefers "Where the world meets." But he likes the new one better than the old, which he dismissed as trite, making Cape Town sound like some Southern Hemisphere version of Ibiza.
Having been through these things a time or three, I've noticed that it's natural for leaders in World Cup host cities to be nervous and easily agitated at the way their city is being promoted. If we called up people in Johannesburg, Durban, Pretoria, Rustenburg -- other World Cup cities, that is -- we certainly wouldn't have trouble finding someone with a title who is unhappy with how the promotional side of things is going down.
Those of us who focus on the sports side of things sometimes lose sight of these things. The civic boosterism that is part and parcel of the whole hosting process. The cities want something tangible to come out of all the effort.
It appears Cape Town is having a particularly nervous moment. "OK, foreigners know we're a nice place to visit. But how about letting them know this is a place where they can come do some business with us, as well?"
It's always something.
Read more!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
