More Ticket Fraud

Have to be careful when buying tickets to South Africa 2010. The cyberspace cockroaches have hit upon internet sales of non-existent World Cup tickets as a gold mine for scamming.

The latest? Australia has uncovered at least one bogus ticket operation, as this story outlines.

The story notes that Australian watchdogs found the site, which offers tickets in bad English -- which ought to be your first warning sign. If your site doesn't do grammar, it probably does do fraud.

All that's missing is a simulated Nigerian businessman named Prince Innocent asking you to hold a couple of million dollars for him after you send $10,000 to him in Lagos, via cashier's check, to demonstrate your good will.

This really is a very simple process. If you are not on the FIFA.com site, you're taking a risk.

Yes, there will be an after-market for tickets. But consumers need to be very careful and follow all the common sense warnings. Be very stingy with your credit card information. If it seems too good to be true, it certainly is.

Fraudulent predators take advantage of enthusiastic consumers. And who is more enthusiastic than soccer fans who want to be in South Africa for the big event? Read more!

When Players Go Off on Coaches

Don't you wonder what a player gains by trashing his national team coach for not including him on a team?

Take, for example, France midfielder Patrick Vieira, who verbally slapped around Raymond Domenech for not being called up for the two-game playoff with Ireland for a 2010 South Africa berth.

Here is that story. It's out there now, and soccer fans around the planet have seen it. But what did Vieira gain?

Perhaps he gained some momentary mental relief from blasting Domenech. "Ah, that felt good, mon ami!"

But how does this work for Vieira in the long term?

Is Domenech likely to change his mind here at the last moment and call in a 32-year-old who hasn't been a regular for Inter? The one who just pilloried him in L'Equipe?

If France qualifies, and Domenech continues to South Africa as coach (which seems a near-certainty), is the coach more likely to feel all warm and fuzzy about Patrick Vieira, upon further reflection, and call him in next year?

However long Raymond Domenech survives ... it now seems quite unlikely Vieira is going to appear with les bleus.

It takes some mental gymnastics to see how this helps Vieira. OK, let's try ...

If France qualifies, but looks awful doing so, like perhaps an Ireland own goal puts the French through ... maybe the French federation fires Domenech now, and hires someone for 2010, and Vieira has contributed his own bit of criticism against the guy who just got dumped, pointing out the horrible mistake he made by not calling in Patrick Vieira ... and maybe he is more likely to be seen as a positive "change" that the new coach can embrace.

Well, probably not. If anything, Vieira probably just identified himself as a crabby old guy looking for one last shot at la gloire before shuffling into the golden years of his career. It's more likely that France's next coach will say, "That Patrick Vieira is a whiny guy who will rip me if I decide he can't play anymore, so I'm not even gonna bother with him."

I guess the main idea here is ... be really careful before you trash a coach. If you're at the end of the career, and you are sure you have nothing to lose ... well, then, go for it.

If there is the slightest chance you might be called in at some later date, or that you might pop up again on the roster after a regime chance ... just keep quiet.

Save the really tart stuff for when you're a TV commentator, or having columns ghost-written for you in the press. Discretion, valor, all that. Read more!

The Ireland-France TV Tiff, in English

We knew something was up, two days ago, when we saw the story, in French, about TV negotiations between Irish and French TV stations about televising the two matches in the upcoming European playoff. When we wrote about it on this blog and tried to puzzle out what the French story was telling us.

Now we have an English version of it, thanks to the Irish Independent newspaper's Web site.

This is about the France vs. Ireland home-and-home playoff, one of four two-match playoffs pitting second-place finishers from European group competition -- for the final quartet of South Africa 2010 matches.

The issue seems to be ... that France is annoyed that Ireland sold the broadcast rights for the Dublin match on Nov. 14 to an independent outlet ... and now France is asking for far more money (about $3 million) than Ireland expects to pay (about $1.2 million) for the Paris match on Nov. 18.

Television problems are not unusual in qualifying matches, unfortunately.

The story mentions how Ireland was unable to see the 2000 Euro Cup qualifier when the Irish played at Turkey.

Just last month, the critical United States-Honduras match, in Honduras, was sold to a Spanish firm that decided to show the match via closed-circuit TV -- an archaic distribution system that limits exposure to individual outlets that pay high rates for a hookup.

A tiny fraction of American soccer fans saw the match, and many of the rest were outraged that the game was, effectively, blacked out in Anno Domini 2009.

And now ... if the French and Irish don't get this figured out, fans in Ireland (and the rest of Britain, it appears) won't be able to see the match at Stade de France. With a World Cup berth on the line.

That would be awful.

The way FIFA handles this? The home country controls television rights. Usually it works out. Reasonable people get together and make reasonable deals. But then there are times ...

FIFA ought to consider making rules that establish basic over-the-air TV access for all qualifying matches. It only hurts the sport, frustrating and angering fans, when critical matches go unseen.
Read more!

Ronaldo, and Country vs. Club

I don't think it was always like this. Ten years ago, certainly 20, players were eager to play for their country, and clubs let them. Or so it seems in the warm, fuzzy, sepia-toned images of my memory.

In recent years, it has been less of an obvious connection. Clubs have begun to come ahead of country.

In Germany 2006, a leading Brazilian analyst suggested the country's players didn't even want to be in the World Cup. They wanted to rest. They feared injury. It didn't make economic sense. They were too good to be messing around at the World Cup.

And that is why Brazil went out in the quarterfinals, according to the author of the piece. A collective lack of interest in playing hard enough to win.

Now we have another brouhaha developing. Involving Cristiano Ronaldo, Portugal and Real Madrid.

Ronaldo is the reigning FIFA world player of the year. And he just arrived at Real Madrid, from Manchester United, at a cost of about $120 million. So, yeah, Real has a serious investment in the guy.

Real's issues are two-fold. The last time Portugal had a big qualifying match to play, Oct. 10, Ronaldo showed up and lasted 26minutes before he aggravated the ankle injury Real already had said he had. That's beef No. 1.

Now, Portugal is in one of the two-game playoffs for the final four European berths into South Africa 2010. A fairly big deal, that is. In the World Cup or out of it, determined in matches Nov. 14 and 18. Portugal vs. Bosnia-Herzegovina, which is a very solid side.

Beef No. 2 for Real is ... it says Ronaldo is still hurt. And doesn't want Portugal to take their investment and mess him up some more.

Portugal's coach, Carlos Queiroz, insists he is going to call in Ronaldo, no matter what Real says. Queiroz wants national team doctors to look at the kid. Real is unhappy. Ronaldo probably is torn between trying to please both club and country.

This sort of thing no longer is unusual. Clubs suggesting their expensive players skip this or that national match. Because countries don't pay the sort of money the clubs do.

This is bad for the World Cup because it means some of the best teams may not advance because some of their best players won't want to play -- or their clubs won't want them to.

This will get worse before it gets better as long as clubs are throwing around enormous sums at players ... and country's can answer with only pin money and the gratitude of a country -- unless their teams fall short of expectations.
Read more!

Lost in Translation: France-Ireland TV Issues

Ireland and France are paired in one of the four European playoffs for a 2010 World Cup berth.

I'm keen to find out what's going on, so I've been poking around the Web sites of Ireland's leading newspapers, looking for what they have ... and not seeing much.

So, I then went to France's well-known sports newspaper, "L'Equipe." And it has some news about the upcoming matches -- at Ireland on Nov. 14, in Paris on Nov. 18.

The problem being ... it's in French. Which I don't actually speak.

Anyway, there appears to be issues about TV rights for showing these matches. Which will create a lot of consternation on both sides of the English Channel ... if it doesn't work out. It may not be shown, is what I take. And the issue appears to be the second leg. Showing it back to England and Ireland, that is.

Anyway, some of you might find it amusing to see the French text ... and then the English translation through "translate.google.com

Here are the two versions.

"Décidément, rien n'est simple pour la diffusion du barrage entre la France et l'Irlande des 14 et 18 novembre. Pour le match aller en Irlande, M6 avait acquis les droits de retransmission au nez et à la barbe de TF1 en négociant en direct avec une petite agence outre-Manche pour 5 millions d'euros. Selon Le Parisien, mercredi, c'est au tour de la FFF de faire monter les enchères pour la diffusion en Grande-Bretagne du match retour.

"Selon le journal, la Fédération, propriétaire des droits de diffusion des Bleus à domicile, a mis à prix la rencontre du Stade de France à 1,5 millions d'euros. Problème, les offres cumulées du bouquet payant Sky et de la chaîne nationale irlandaise RTE atteignent pour l'instant à peine 600.000 euros. Si la FFF n'assouplit pas sa position, les Britanniques seront privés du match retour... et la Fédération d'une rentrée d'argent non négligeable."

OK, and now the "translate.google.com" translation.

"Really, nothing is simple for the dissemination of the dam between France and Ireland on 14 and 18 November. For the first leg in Ireland, M6 had acquired the broadcasting rights to the nose and beard of TF1 by negotiating directly with a small agency for the Channel 5 million euros. According to Le Parisien on Wednesday, it was the turn of the FFF to raise the stakes for distribution in Britain's second leg.

"The newspaper said the Federation, which owns the broadcasting rights of the Blues at home, put a price on the encounter at the Stade de France 1.5 million. Problem, offers the combined Sky pay-TV bouquet and the Irish national broadcaster RTE reach for now just 600,000 euros. If the FFF does not relax its position, the British will be deprived of leg ... and the Federation of money coming significant."

Clearly, that "nose and beard" thing is a French idiom. It seems to have to do with somebody stealing the rights from under the nose of somebody else.

Anyway, the point of this whole exercise is to demonstrate how difficult it is to gather information on a global sport when it is reported in so many languages. In this case, only French and English.

One of the four playoffs is between Greece and Ukraine. I don't even want to go there. Yes, it would all be Greek to me. Except for the part that would be Russian. Read more!

Kiwis Find Soccer Lesson in Rugby History

Only in New Zealand.

Well, maybe in South Africa or Australia, too.

We have a professional sports journalist here, at the New Zealand Herald, writing (in all seriousness) a story about how the All Whites -- meaning New Zealand's soccer team -- can "learn from the mistakes" of the All Blacks -- meaning the Kiwis' rugby team -- that were made during the 2007 Rugby World Cup.

Now that soccer/rugby connection/comparison would not have occurred to me.

Here is the link to that story.

The gist of this is ... a former coach of the New Zealand national soccer side says it would be a bad idea for the current coach of the national side to rest players ahead of the Nov. 14 showdown, in Wellington, with Bahrain.

The match that has a 2010 South Africa berth at stake.

Yeah. That match.

New Zealand is the champion of Oceania (Australia the Fair having bolted for Asia), and that got the Kiwis a home-and-home playoff with Bahrain, the No. 5 team out of Asia.

The first leg of the playoff was a scoreless match in Manama, Bahrain, back on Oct. 14.

It's a very straightforward thing, now. If the Kiwis win, they're in. A scoreless tie goes to overtime and then to a shootout.

But any tie in which Bahrain scores ... means Bahrain goes forward on the basis of "away goals." And New Zealand is out. Again. Same as every World Cup since 1982.

And back to the Herald story. New Zealand's soccer talent is so thin (it has one professional club in the country, and it plays in the Australian league) ... that some suggest the Kiwis should make bloody sure no one gets hurt here in the last 10 days before the match.

But the former coach is saying, "No, you have to play matches to be ready for a big match."

And then we have the 2007 rugby World Cup squad invoked. Apparently, that team rested or sat many of its key players before some key matches, and when they finally got back to playing, they were rusty or unfit, or both ... and the Kiwis crashed out.

So. Play the soccer guys ... because we learned our lessons from rugby. Sports which have as little to do with each other as team handball and basketball. But never mind. It's New Zealand, and over there, I'm sure it all makes perfect sense. Read more!

Another World Cup without Bora?

Bora. As in Bora Milutinovic.

For five consecutive World Cups (1986-2002), our favorite Serbian/Mexican/citizen of the world coached somebody in the finals. And never the same somebody.

And four of those times (Mexico in 1986, Costa Rica in 1990, the U.S. in 1994, Nigeria in 1998), he got his team into the knockout round of the World Cup. Which is no small feat. Well, actually, it's an unparalleled feat. No one has taken three different sides to the knockout rounds, let alone four.

So, here we have the man with the best track record of wringing something out of teams (including two quarterfinal appearances) in environments as vastly different as the U.S., Nigeria and Mexico ... and seven months ahead of the World Cup ... he doesn't have a job.

I don't get this. Why isn't Bora Milutinovic getting somebody ready to spring a 2010 South Africa surprise?

I dealt with him, a lot, back in the early 1990s. I was covering the national team during the run-up to the 1994 World Cup, which meant I saw a lot of Bora and heard a lot of his fractured English. English being, to be fair, no more than his fourth-best language (behind Serbian, Spanish and Italian).

I remember interviewing him for a story in 1991, shortly after he had taken over the U.S. team. He let me drive him from practice at Denver's Mile High Stadium to the team hotel, a day or so before a friendly with Uruguay, and we talked ... though it was hard to take notes while driving.

This is a guy who should, absolutely, write an autobiograpy. The things he has seen and the places he has been ... from the day of his birth (during World War II Yugoslavia, a very rough place) to his stints running this, that and the other national team.

I have a sneaking suspicions a bunch of his relatives died at the hands of other Balkan ethnic groups, during World War II. Maybe both of his parents, actually. In that Denver conversation, I asked him about his languages. And I mentioned "Serbo-Croation" -- which was what the tongue was commonly called, before Yugoslavia completely fell apart. And Bora said, "No. Serb." So, yes, I think he may have some issues with Croats ... though 99.9 percent of the time he alleges to love all mankind, and maybe he pretty much does.

Ok, he was a bit of a phony, in what struck me as more of a Mexican than Serbian way. (But it could be Serbian, too; I don't know Serbia like I know Mexico.) A backslapper and a guy who tossed around a far from convincing (but still emphatic) "hello my friend!" when he couldn't come up with your name, which was often. There were times, more than a few, when I wondered why the United States had a coach who could barely communicate with his players, never mind journalists.

But the man could coach. He seems to have an ability to almost immediately size up a team's strengths and weaknesses, and go about emphasizing the former and hiding the latter.

He has been described as being a defense-first kind of guy, and a bit stodgy and, perhaps, now a bit old-fashioned, at age 65 ... but anyone who saw him with his last three World Cup teams (the Americans, Nigerians and Chinese) recognized that he did what he had to do to give those teams a chance to win.

The fact that he got the U.S. to the second round, in 1994, with players from a country with no professional league worthy of the name and only a handful of guys who had played overseas, was nearly miraculous. (The own goal by Colombia in the 2-1 victory at the Rose Bowl helped.) Nigeria had some players, but that was the first and only time it has been in the final 16. And then China ... OK, the Chinese didn't win a game ... or tie a game ... or score a goal ... at Japan/Korea 2002 ... but getting that motley crew into the 2002 World Cup was a feat that hasn't been managed since.

Anyway, this is a guy who can adapt to anything. Who can coach anywhere. We most recently saw him leading Iraq at the Confederations Cup. Where he actually had Iraq with a shot at advancing up till the final match of group play.

But now ... he does nothing. (Unless he's somehow still on Iraq's payroll, and I don't think he is.)

He was mentioned as a candidate for the South Africa job, the moment there it was open. Indeed, two of his four second-round jobs came with host teams -- Mexico in 1986, and the U.S> in 1994. Maybe he has some special talent for whipping together teams that don't "enjoy" the rigors of qualifying.

I think the guy has something left. He always has been lean and active and seemingly full of joie de vivre (he remains me of USC football coach Pete Carroll, actually) ... but he can't get at South Africa?

It's not too late. Someone who hires Bora in the next month can get six solid months of him before South Africa 2010, and have more than a decent shot of advancing. And I don't care if you're Honduras or either of the Koreas. Bora could take you as far as you could go.

He absolutely would make Argentina better than Diego Maradona will manage. I would rather have Bora than Carlos Alberta Parreira, actually. And, well, fill in the blanks.

Bora is being left behind, it seems. Which is too bad. I think he had another couple of World Cup shockers left in him. Read more!