THE DEFENSE
Now, it’s the defense’s turn. The good news is that Osi Umenyiora really returned to form this year. Between him and Justin Tuck the Giants obviously have a formidable pair of pass rushers. If the two of them aren’t the best tandem in the league they’re certainly on the very short list. Between them they had 23 sacks and 16 forced fumbles. It’s no surprise that the Giants performed best when they had the lead and the two of them could just go get the passer. The defensive line has long been a strength of the Giants and this year was no different. In addition to the two big time players, rookie Jason Pierre-Paul started to find his footing late in the year and despite playing very little early on in the season contributed 4.5 sacks on his own.
The problems with the Giants defense though begin to materialize as you move further away from the line of scrimmage. To call the linebacking corps mediocre would be vastly over stating your case. The combination of Goff, Boley and Bullock nominally the three starting LBs was woefully overmatched all season. While adequate at stopping the run , the trio proved so weak in pass coverage that often the Giants would bring in Deon Grant, their third safety, to play linebacker in passing downs. While the strategy proved reasonably in pass defense (Grant had 3 interceptions) it allowed savvy teams to exploit the Giants small personnel package and gouge them for chunks of yardage underneath, with screen passes and even running plays in passing downs. The best example is what Payton Manning did to them in week two, with Grant on the field for most of the game, Payton decided to stop throwing the ball, and just start handing off. The Colts averaged over four yards a play on the ground and ran for 160 yards while cruising to a 38-14 victory.
The bottom line is that the Giants just don’t have enough talent on the field at the linebacking position to get the job done. Ever since Antonio Pierce got hurt late in 2009 and was forced to retire it’s been a problem. It was a problem going into the draft last year and the Giants only attempt to address was to draft a guy named Phillip Dillard in the fourth round. This year, Dillard had fewer tackles than Mario Manningham. It’s hard to lay the blame for the lack of production this year at anybody’s feet other than GM Jerry Reese, and along with a couple of special teams needs we’ll get to shortly must be his number one off season priority.
Next up, is the secondary. Again, I’ll start with the good. Terrell Thomas has turned into an excellent pro-bowl caliber player. In his third year in the league he had a breakout season leading the team in both interceptions and tackles (although a cornerback leading the league in tackles is more of an indictment of the linebackers than anything else). After a couple of years of seasoning he developed the football intelligence to go with the physical skills that got him drafted in the second round out of USC. Which is important because the Giants other corner, Corey Webster, seems to have lost a step. During the Giants title run in 2007, and then during the 2008 season Webster quietly developed into an absolutely top notch shut down defensive back, consistently covering other teams’ best players and taking them out of the game. But in 2010 Webster was often exploited deep down the field when the Giants line gave the QB time to throw the ball downfield. Combine that with the fact that nickel cornerback Aaron Ross’s hamstrings are pretty much shot sapping him of the speed that was by far his greatest weapon and you have a team that has trouble covering if the QB has time to throw.
The only position left to talk about then is safety. And boy does safety Antrelle Rolle love to talk. The Giants big off season acquisition is clearly an upgrade over the dreck they had playing out there last season, but while the Giants tried to use him in all sorts of creative ways the results were clearly a mixed bag. His versatility is supposed to let him rush the passer with abandon, as well as ball hawk, but he only had half a sack and one interception. Sure his presence both in the pass rush and in coverage helped other players get home, but he also made some costly mistakes. In their critical week 16 loss to Green Bay, he was out of position faking a blitz, and unable to get back in time to stop a simple slant route from turning into an 80 yard TD for the Packers first score. And in week 17 he got burned over the top for a late Redskin TD. Still though, he’s more good than bad, and while he isn’t as good as he thinks he is, he’s still good enough to play the position on a winning team.
His partner back there, Kenny Phillips, is an interesting case as well. When Phillips went down at the start of the 09 season it left a gaping hole at the back of the Giants defense, one that was largely blamed for their awful performance down the stretch. This year, with Phillips back the Giants were undeniably better, but at the same time it’s hard to say it was because of him. Once hailed as a dynamic athlete and playmaker, I’m hard pressed to remember his name being called a single time this year. It’s hard to know whether that has to do with his abilities or whether the defensive scheme was geared towards leaving him deep down the field to allow Rolle (and Grant when he was in the game) to be the more active playmakers. Here’s what I do know though, if Phillips is the dynamic playmaker the Giants claim then he needs to have more than one interception and one tackle for a loss over the course of a season.
So, having broken it down position by position, the Giants defense is the polar opposite of their offense. The defense does one thing very well, and that one thing covers up for a multitude of sins. Put Tuck and Umenyiora in a position to go get a quarterback who has to throw the ball, and an opposing offense will have a very long day (at one point this season the Giants knocked out a quarterback in four consecutive weeks). On the other hand a team with a balanced attack that doesn’t need to come from behind will consistently exploit the weak linebacking corps, and a team with a mobile quarterback who can buy time (paging Mike Vick and Aaron Rodgers) will exploit the weaknesses in the secondary. It’s a defense that is dangerous but exploitable, but one that certainly plays up to its talent level, but it’s a talent level that is clearly uneven.
SPECIAL TEAMS
They stink. The punter needs to go. They don’t have anybody that can return a kick worth a damn. And their coverage was average if I’m being kind. But hey, at least Lawrence Tynes can kick a field goal. So they’ve got that going for them, which is nice.
LOOKING FORWARD
The bottom line is that much as some fans might want to blame Coughlin for missing the Giants were a good but not great team this year, and more or less leveraged their talent as well as could be expected. They had several significant holes they needed to scheme around and those have to be addressed in the off-season. They need a punter, a middle linebacker, and probably a speedy cornerback. Offensively the road to improvement is less clear cut. They are the proverbial jack of all trades, which has served them well for the most part, but in order to become dominant they cannot be a master of none. Either by changing personnel or philosophy the Giants need to develop one thing they are dominant at. One trait where they can line up over the ball, everybody knows what’s coming, and the defense can’t stop it.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Monday, January 3, 2011
A Not So Happy Giant New Year
Well, it’s a new year and the blog is back. To kick it off an excruciatingly long look at the now dearly departed New York Football Giants.
OVERVIEW
After winning their final game, to go 10-6, but missing the play-offs anyway (due to Green Bay beating a Chicago team that despite having nothing to play for ran out all their starters for the entire game) Giants ownership immediately announced that Tom Coughlin would not be fired. It’s an interesting decision since after a devastating finish to last year’s season (starting 5-0 only to finish 8-8 and miss the playoffs) this was widely considered a proverbial make or break year for the head coach. And one does not generally make it by missing the play-offs.
On the other hand, a 10-6 record is usually good enough to get the job done. It’s hard to look at that record and not view the season as a success, especially when considering that the team that achieved it was largely the same as the one that collapsed last season, other than a new defensive coordinator (and regrettably a new punter…but we’ll get to that). So, the question then is what was actually different year over year? Did the players play better? Did the coaches coach better? And, is the two game improvement enough to definitively say that Coughlin deserves to be back (when taking into account that before 09 Tom Coughlin had by everybody’s estimation been an extremely successful coach with the New York Giants making the playoffs every year since 2005).
The easiest explanation is that the Giant had a much easier schedule this season than last. If you look at the Giants ten wins, only two of them came against playoff teams (Chicago, and Seattle). And obviously Seattle doesn’t count. Don’t believe me, ask Nate Silver (insert link). Of the other eight wins only Jacksonville finished with a better record than 6-10 (they finished at 8-8). Now let’s look at the Giants six losses this year. Two of them were “bad” losses, losing to the 6-10 Cowboys and the 6-10 Titans. The other four were against Green Bay, Indianapolis, and twice against Philadelphia (once in historically, painfully, brutal fashion). So, looking back on the 2010 season it seems accurate to say they beat one team that was better than them in the Chicago Bears, and lost to two teams that were worse than them in the Tennessee Titans and Dallas Cowboys. That one game differential ends up being the difference between making the playoffs and not.
Now let’s compare that with 2009. The Giants won eight games, of which five were against teams with five wins or less (Wash twice, KC, Oak, TB), two were against a playoff team in Dallas, and one was against the 9-7 Falcons. Now, the eight losses: Six of them were against playoff teams with at least ten wins (Philadelphia twice, New Orleans, Arizona, San Diego, and Minnesota). The other two were against 8-8 Denver, and 8-8 Carolina. So, in 2009 the Giants lost to precisely zero teams that ended up with a worse record than them and beat three teams that had a better record. While in 2010 the Giants beat one team that ended up above them in the standings, and lost to two that they were by all accounts demonstrably better than. Even if we count Denver and Carolina as teams the Giants should have beaten in 2009 we would then have to count Atlanta as a team they should have beaten (which given the way the season played out is probably fair) then in 2009 they lost two games they should have won, and won two they should have lost, which is still a better job than they did in 2010. Oops.
Obviously the comparatively easier schedule can’t tell the whole story. After-all when the Giants lost to the Titans in week three this season it seemed like Tennessee was going to be a contending team, and the same was true when they beat Houston in week five. And in 2009, when they lost to Denver it was a much worse loss than just losing to an 8-8 team when considering the Giants were one of only two teams that Denver beat in the second half of the season. It can be incredibly misleading to judge end of year records as final arbiters of anything in the NFL (other than who makes the playoffs). So, next up we (and by we, I mean me, and maybe if I’m lucky my immediate family members who are still reading this) will attempt to determine if the Giants players are actually any good, and thus whether or not they achieved the coaches holy grail and…drum roll please…..over achieved.
THE OFFENSE
Is the offense any good? It’s a fair question to ask. All that anybody could talk about this season was how often the Giants turned the ball over, and with good reason. Eli led the league in picks with 25 (although in the true Jekyll and Hyde fashion of this offense he was also fourth in TD passes with 31). Ahmad Bradshaw, despite being a top ten running back in the league and rushing for over 1,000 yards lost more fumbles than any other running back in the league except Peyton Hillis. And the offensive line, long the Giants pillar of stability started six different combinations of players over the course of the season as they dealt with injuries. So, with that is the back drop…were they any good?
I should put a disclaimer on the following paragraphs. I am an unabashed Eli Manning apologist. So, while leading the league in interceptions is not a good thing, I am now going to spend god knows how many words telling you why it’s not his fault. Although I will concede that frequently Eli just tries to do too much. He has visions of David Tyree and the helmet catch dancing around in his head like the Sugar Plum Fairies. For a line that at times was a patchwork of second and third stringers Eli just didn’t get sacked enough, only 16 times which tied with the other Manning for the league lead. It seems like an odd thing so say, but as a QB who spends the vast majority of his time in the pocket he needs to stop making desperate left hand flips to avoid sacks and just take the medicine.
Ok, now onto why it’s everybody else’s fault. First, the Giant’s wide receivers are not nearly as good as everybody wants to believe. Physical ability which Hakeem Nicks and Mario Manningham have in spades is only one part of what it takes to be a good receiver. Running routes, recognizing blitzes, and when and how to cut off what was called that’s equally as important. And Steve Smith who missed most of the last third of the season is the only Giant receiver who gets that right. That leaves Manning consistently hung out to dry. Second, the Giants are a big play offense. Running or passing they thrive on getting large chunks of yards. But, they aren’t a big play team like say Philadelphia or Green Bay is a big play team. They don’t have the physical superiority to just run by you or make 17 guys miss and take a little slant 80 yards to the house. The Giants rely on matchups. They want to make you try and cover three wide receivers and a run possibility and then when you can’t, pick the option that you’ve left open and exploit it. And as the 31 touchdowns, and 1000 yard rusher show, it works most of the time. Here’s when it doesn’t work. When you are in third and 11 and everybody and their cousin know you’re throwing the ball. That’s when you need precision routes, and route combinations. That’s when you need excellent timing, that’s when you need an offensive line that can stop a defense dedicated to rushing the passer. That’s when you need a whole bunch of things the Giants don’t have.
That brings me to the Giants offensive line-- It’s always tempting to focus on what professional athletes can’t do, so let’s start with the positive. Despite injuries the line played well. They gave up 16 sacks all season, blocked for a 1,000 yard rusher in Bradshaw, and an 800 yard rusher in Jacobs. By all accounts that’s a successful season. In addition lots of credit has to go to offensive line coach Pat Flaherty who has consistently coached up a deep group of versatile athletic playmakers since he got here in 2004. Now, here’s what the line couldn’t do this year. They couldn’t physically dominate. In a situation where the defense knew the Giants were passing, they couldn’t stop the pass rush. On obvious running downs, they couldn’t get a push up front. Versatility is good, but it only gets you so far. The Giants consistently failed to kill off games because they couldn’t run the ball, and when you have running backs as talented as the Giants do the fault falls squarely on the o-lines shoulders.
Those running backs, though, talented as they may be, also deserve a heavy dose of the credit/blame split, as do the coordinators for how they were used. There seems to be this belief that Brandon Jacobs needs to run inside the tackles because he is bigger than two of Ahmad Bradshaw put together. Where this came from I’m not sure, and it’s just about the stupidest thing on the planet. Here’s an idea, Jacobs is bigger than nine of the eleven guys on the defensive side of the ball, let’s run him right into the other two. It makes no sense. Jacobs is an excellent runner outside the tackles. He has nimble feet, and he just destroys defensive backs at the point of attack. It lets him fully leverage his size and get a head of steam going downfield. Bradshaw conversely is a great runner inside. He has much better body control than Jacobs and flits through all sorts of cracks and crevices that Jacobs couldn’t get his left thigh through. The Giants don’t use them that way enough. Of course, none of that matters for either of them if they don’t learn to hold onto the damn ball.
So, what’s the moral of the offensive story? The offensive scheme is built on being in manageable down and distances to make the defense have to cover everything, thus making them easier to exploit for a big play. This puts pressure on Eli in two fairly obvious ways. The first, he can’t take sacks because they don’t have the personnel for a drive to recover. The second, if you think you have a big play, take it. Throw the ball downfield to the matchup you like and depend on you receiver to make a play. The problem? Both of those edicts create high likelihoods of interceptions if you make a mistake. How do you fix it? Steve Smith helps a lot, in that when he’s healthy Eli has a good safe target to go to, but even when he was there the Giants turned the ball over way too much. Philosophically if they can’t stop making mistakes they need to become more conservative, but in order to do that effectively you need a more physically dominant offensive line which again depends on health. And while the current crew has been great over the past five years, they certainly aren’t getting any younger. So, surprise surprise, there are no easy answers. To me, that indicates that the coaching staff is doing a pretty good job of maximizing a physically talented, but not necessarily great personnel group.
Up next, defense and special teams.
OVERVIEW
After winning their final game, to go 10-6, but missing the play-offs anyway (due to Green Bay beating a Chicago team that despite having nothing to play for ran out all their starters for the entire game) Giants ownership immediately announced that Tom Coughlin would not be fired. It’s an interesting decision since after a devastating finish to last year’s season (starting 5-0 only to finish 8-8 and miss the playoffs) this was widely considered a proverbial make or break year for the head coach. And one does not generally make it by missing the play-offs.
On the other hand, a 10-6 record is usually good enough to get the job done. It’s hard to look at that record and not view the season as a success, especially when considering that the team that achieved it was largely the same as the one that collapsed last season, other than a new defensive coordinator (and regrettably a new punter…but we’ll get to that). So, the question then is what was actually different year over year? Did the players play better? Did the coaches coach better? And, is the two game improvement enough to definitively say that Coughlin deserves to be back (when taking into account that before 09 Tom Coughlin had by everybody’s estimation been an extremely successful coach with the New York Giants making the playoffs every year since 2005).
The easiest explanation is that the Giant had a much easier schedule this season than last. If you look at the Giants ten wins, only two of them came against playoff teams (Chicago, and Seattle). And obviously Seattle doesn’t count. Don’t believe me, ask Nate Silver (insert link). Of the other eight wins only Jacksonville finished with a better record than 6-10 (they finished at 8-8). Now let’s look at the Giants six losses this year. Two of them were “bad” losses, losing to the 6-10 Cowboys and the 6-10 Titans. The other four were against Green Bay, Indianapolis, and twice against Philadelphia (once in historically, painfully, brutal fashion). So, looking back on the 2010 season it seems accurate to say they beat one team that was better than them in the Chicago Bears, and lost to two teams that were worse than them in the Tennessee Titans and Dallas Cowboys. That one game differential ends up being the difference between making the playoffs and not.
Now let’s compare that with 2009. The Giants won eight games, of which five were against teams with five wins or less (Wash twice, KC, Oak, TB), two were against a playoff team in Dallas, and one was against the 9-7 Falcons. Now, the eight losses: Six of them were against playoff teams with at least ten wins (Philadelphia twice, New Orleans, Arizona, San Diego, and Minnesota). The other two were against 8-8 Denver, and 8-8 Carolina. So, in 2009 the Giants lost to precisely zero teams that ended up with a worse record than them and beat three teams that had a better record. While in 2010 the Giants beat one team that ended up above them in the standings, and lost to two that they were by all accounts demonstrably better than. Even if we count Denver and Carolina as teams the Giants should have beaten in 2009 we would then have to count Atlanta as a team they should have beaten (which given the way the season played out is probably fair) then in 2009 they lost two games they should have won, and won two they should have lost, which is still a better job than they did in 2010. Oops.
Obviously the comparatively easier schedule can’t tell the whole story. After-all when the Giants lost to the Titans in week three this season it seemed like Tennessee was going to be a contending team, and the same was true when they beat Houston in week five. And in 2009, when they lost to Denver it was a much worse loss than just losing to an 8-8 team when considering the Giants were one of only two teams that Denver beat in the second half of the season. It can be incredibly misleading to judge end of year records as final arbiters of anything in the NFL (other than who makes the playoffs). So, next up we (and by we, I mean me, and maybe if I’m lucky my immediate family members who are still reading this) will attempt to determine if the Giants players are actually any good, and thus whether or not they achieved the coaches holy grail and…drum roll please…..over achieved.
THE OFFENSE
Is the offense any good? It’s a fair question to ask. All that anybody could talk about this season was how often the Giants turned the ball over, and with good reason. Eli led the league in picks with 25 (although in the true Jekyll and Hyde fashion of this offense he was also fourth in TD passes with 31). Ahmad Bradshaw, despite being a top ten running back in the league and rushing for over 1,000 yards lost more fumbles than any other running back in the league except Peyton Hillis. And the offensive line, long the Giants pillar of stability started six different combinations of players over the course of the season as they dealt with injuries. So, with that is the back drop…were they any good?
I should put a disclaimer on the following paragraphs. I am an unabashed Eli Manning apologist. So, while leading the league in interceptions is not a good thing, I am now going to spend god knows how many words telling you why it’s not his fault. Although I will concede that frequently Eli just tries to do too much. He has visions of David Tyree and the helmet catch dancing around in his head like the Sugar Plum Fairies. For a line that at times was a patchwork of second and third stringers Eli just didn’t get sacked enough, only 16 times which tied with the other Manning for the league lead. It seems like an odd thing so say, but as a QB who spends the vast majority of his time in the pocket he needs to stop making desperate left hand flips to avoid sacks and just take the medicine.
Ok, now onto why it’s everybody else’s fault. First, the Giant’s wide receivers are not nearly as good as everybody wants to believe. Physical ability which Hakeem Nicks and Mario Manningham have in spades is only one part of what it takes to be a good receiver. Running routes, recognizing blitzes, and when and how to cut off what was called that’s equally as important. And Steve Smith who missed most of the last third of the season is the only Giant receiver who gets that right. That leaves Manning consistently hung out to dry. Second, the Giants are a big play offense. Running or passing they thrive on getting large chunks of yards. But, they aren’t a big play team like say Philadelphia or Green Bay is a big play team. They don’t have the physical superiority to just run by you or make 17 guys miss and take a little slant 80 yards to the house. The Giants rely on matchups. They want to make you try and cover three wide receivers and a run possibility and then when you can’t, pick the option that you’ve left open and exploit it. And as the 31 touchdowns, and 1000 yard rusher show, it works most of the time. Here’s when it doesn’t work. When you are in third and 11 and everybody and their cousin know you’re throwing the ball. That’s when you need precision routes, and route combinations. That’s when you need excellent timing, that’s when you need an offensive line that can stop a defense dedicated to rushing the passer. That’s when you need a whole bunch of things the Giants don’t have.
That brings me to the Giants offensive line-- It’s always tempting to focus on what professional athletes can’t do, so let’s start with the positive. Despite injuries the line played well. They gave up 16 sacks all season, blocked for a 1,000 yard rusher in Bradshaw, and an 800 yard rusher in Jacobs. By all accounts that’s a successful season. In addition lots of credit has to go to offensive line coach Pat Flaherty who has consistently coached up a deep group of versatile athletic playmakers since he got here in 2004. Now, here’s what the line couldn’t do this year. They couldn’t physically dominate. In a situation where the defense knew the Giants were passing, they couldn’t stop the pass rush. On obvious running downs, they couldn’t get a push up front. Versatility is good, but it only gets you so far. The Giants consistently failed to kill off games because they couldn’t run the ball, and when you have running backs as talented as the Giants do the fault falls squarely on the o-lines shoulders.
Those running backs, though, talented as they may be, also deserve a heavy dose of the credit/blame split, as do the coordinators for how they were used. There seems to be this belief that Brandon Jacobs needs to run inside the tackles because he is bigger than two of Ahmad Bradshaw put together. Where this came from I’m not sure, and it’s just about the stupidest thing on the planet. Here’s an idea, Jacobs is bigger than nine of the eleven guys on the defensive side of the ball, let’s run him right into the other two. It makes no sense. Jacobs is an excellent runner outside the tackles. He has nimble feet, and he just destroys defensive backs at the point of attack. It lets him fully leverage his size and get a head of steam going downfield. Bradshaw conversely is a great runner inside. He has much better body control than Jacobs and flits through all sorts of cracks and crevices that Jacobs couldn’t get his left thigh through. The Giants don’t use them that way enough. Of course, none of that matters for either of them if they don’t learn to hold onto the damn ball.
So, what’s the moral of the offensive story? The offensive scheme is built on being in manageable down and distances to make the defense have to cover everything, thus making them easier to exploit for a big play. This puts pressure on Eli in two fairly obvious ways. The first, he can’t take sacks because they don’t have the personnel for a drive to recover. The second, if you think you have a big play, take it. Throw the ball downfield to the matchup you like and depend on you receiver to make a play. The problem? Both of those edicts create high likelihoods of interceptions if you make a mistake. How do you fix it? Steve Smith helps a lot, in that when he’s healthy Eli has a good safe target to go to, but even when he was there the Giants turned the ball over way too much. Philosophically if they can’t stop making mistakes they need to become more conservative, but in order to do that effectively you need a more physically dominant offensive line which again depends on health. And while the current crew has been great over the past five years, they certainly aren’t getting any younger. So, surprise surprise, there are no easy answers. To me, that indicates that the coaching staff is doing a pretty good job of maximizing a physically talented, but not necessarily great personnel group.
Up next, defense and special teams.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
And Now For Something Old
So the World Cup has come and gone, and it is once again time for a little housekeeping. First of all I apologize in advance for any misplaced commas, misspellings and other forms of tpyos. My sister, who is my wonderful (and wonderfully free) editor, is on vacation. You can read about her road trip across the country over at daphneseesamerica.blogspot.com. It’s kind of like my blog, only she goes places and sees things, and I sit on my couch and watch TV.
Which brings me to my next point; what will occupy the 4 hours in my day that I spent watching soccer last month? I’d have a tough time selling the LR on the fact that I should just sit on my ass at home all day and watch movies on Netflix streaming. On the other hand, if I tell the LR that I’m starting a feature on my blog called “Reviews of Movies You’ve Already Seen,” well that’s a different kettle of fish entirely. (And now for an extended kettle of fish bird walk because the animal idiom store was having a two for one sale. I find eating fish in the middle of the desert fairly unsettling. There’s no freaking water anywhere, and while I know that when you go to a restaurant and order fish, it’s never ever ever actually from the water in the area, it still somehow seems easier to swallow than when the closest body of water with living things in it is tens of hours away. Although in San Diego, which obviously is right on the water, I found it no less unsettling that they advertised Maine lobster on the menu. You are on the freaking Pacific Ocean, I didn’t come to San Diego for a little taste of Maine. Yes these are in fact the things I think about).
So starting somewhere between immediately and eventually I will be debuting my new blog series. The movies I will pick will be exclusively from Netflix streaming, and other than that will basically have nothing in common. Expect wild veering around, from summer blockbuster, to documentary to tiny indie film and back again. Don’t expect the movies to necessarily have anything to do with Mexico, drugs, gangs, or the desert. Some might, but it will be purely coincidental. I get enough border life as it is, I don’t need to go on a drug mule’s holiday (which would be like a busman’s holiday if the busman was driving drugs illegally into the US from Mexico). It’s possible I will even develop some consistent formula like, having neat little questions in bold face type, or a listy type thing complete with bullet points. Probably though I’ll just drone on and on in paragraph form.
Also, don’t expect me to have any particular expertise on the subject. I like movies, and I like TV, and I know a lot about both, but that’s about as far as it goes. My only credential is that, almost ten years ago when I was a Senior in High School I made a list of movies I wanted to watch and then watched them with friends. Then I went to college, wanted to sound pretentious and told people that I had run a film series. The real point of the list though was to force myself to sit down and watch Gone With the Wind. I still haven’t seen Gone With the Wind. At this point there is only one way on God’s green earth that anybody will make me watch that movie and it involves a certain somebody eating a pizza and another certain somebody reading all 7 Harry Potter novels. I live a complicated existence.
To recap--There is no more World Cup. I’m bored. I’m going to watch movies. I’m going to write about those movies to disguise the fact that I will in fact be doing nothing. One of those movies will not be Gone With the Wind. This will all start sometime.
Which brings me to my next point; what will occupy the 4 hours in my day that I spent watching soccer last month? I’d have a tough time selling the LR on the fact that I should just sit on my ass at home all day and watch movies on Netflix streaming. On the other hand, if I tell the LR that I’m starting a feature on my blog called “Reviews of Movies You’ve Already Seen,” well that’s a different kettle of fish entirely. (And now for an extended kettle of fish bird walk because the animal idiom store was having a two for one sale. I find eating fish in the middle of the desert fairly unsettling. There’s no freaking water anywhere, and while I know that when you go to a restaurant and order fish, it’s never ever ever actually from the water in the area, it still somehow seems easier to swallow than when the closest body of water with living things in it is tens of hours away. Although in San Diego, which obviously is right on the water, I found it no less unsettling that they advertised Maine lobster on the menu. You are on the freaking Pacific Ocean, I didn’t come to San Diego for a little taste of Maine. Yes these are in fact the things I think about).
So starting somewhere between immediately and eventually I will be debuting my new blog series. The movies I will pick will be exclusively from Netflix streaming, and other than that will basically have nothing in common. Expect wild veering around, from summer blockbuster, to documentary to tiny indie film and back again. Don’t expect the movies to necessarily have anything to do with Mexico, drugs, gangs, or the desert. Some might, but it will be purely coincidental. I get enough border life as it is, I don’t need to go on a drug mule’s holiday (which would be like a busman’s holiday if the busman was driving drugs illegally into the US from Mexico). It’s possible I will even develop some consistent formula like, having neat little questions in bold face type, or a listy type thing complete with bullet points. Probably though I’ll just drone on and on in paragraph form.
Also, don’t expect me to have any particular expertise on the subject. I like movies, and I like TV, and I know a lot about both, but that’s about as far as it goes. My only credential is that, almost ten years ago when I was a Senior in High School I made a list of movies I wanted to watch and then watched them with friends. Then I went to college, wanted to sound pretentious and told people that I had run a film series. The real point of the list though was to force myself to sit down and watch Gone With the Wind. I still haven’t seen Gone With the Wind. At this point there is only one way on God’s green earth that anybody will make me watch that movie and it involves a certain somebody eating a pizza and another certain somebody reading all 7 Harry Potter novels. I live a complicated existence.
To recap--There is no more World Cup. I’m bored. I’m going to watch movies. I’m going to write about those movies to disguise the fact that I will in fact be doing nothing. One of those movies will not be Gone With the Wind. This will all start sometime.
Friday, June 25, 2010
16 Down 15 To Go
The group stages are over so it seems like a good time to do a little looking back and a little looking forward. So that’s what I’m going to do, about everything and anything World Cup (except for the U.S. team. I am way way way too emotionally invested in the Yanks to write coherently about them. Besides, by the time you read this they will have either beaten or lost to Ghana, and I will be either elated or crushed. When their run is over I’ll attempt to sum it all up). For now though, let’s look at some story lines.
The Big Four
England, France, Germany and Italy are the only four European nations who have won the World Cup. Half of them are already out, with France imploding in spectacular fashion and Italy giving up more than twice as many goals as it did during its run to the title 4 years ago. But, I suppose that’s bound to happen when you mail in the first 260 of the 270 minutes you play in the group stage. What a last ten minutes it was though, with Italy almost erasing a 2-0, and then 3-1 deficit, only to lose 3-2 when a last second shot dribble harmlessly wide. England and Germany meanwhile play each other in the round of 16. And while before the tournament big things were expected of England, and Germany was thought to be young and untested, that has not held true in the first three matches. Das Boots look much livelier and more dangerous than the lads. But, as always, past performance is no guarantee yadda yadda.
The Other Four
There are four other European teams still alive, and as luck would have it, they play each other as well, with Spain facing off against Portugal, and the Netherlands facing Slovakia. Despite being perennial World Cup under achievers, Spain, Portugal and the Netherlands are all dominant world sides. The Dutch have cruised so far, winning each game in their group in comfortable if not spectacular form, and as their reward they get Slovakia. And while Slovakia did beat Italy, that may say more about the sorry state of the Azzurri than anything else.
And then there's Spain and Portugal. After starting slowly, Spain has looked every inch the potential champion side its last two matches, easily handling Honduras and Chile. Although to be fair Chile played most of the match down to ten men. Portugal meanwhile hasn’t allowed a goal yet. That’s impressive until you consider that they haven’t scored a goal against anybody who doesn’t believe that Kim Jong Ill communicates with little invisible cell phones either. In the best of worlds this will be one of the best match ups of the round of 16 with the unstoppable force of Spain throwing itself against the immovable object of Portugal. In the worst of worlds Spain will kick the ball around for two hours for a 0-0 draw, and then hope to win in penalty kicks.
No, The Other South A.
Somewhere the sporting powers that be apparently made a typo. While South Africa is the host nation, who traditionally doesn’t lose in the group stages, it is actually all of South America that remains uneliminated. While Brazil and Argentina are no surprise, Paraguay, Uruguay and Chile all advanced as well. Not only did TOSA (the other South A) go 5 for 5, but Chile was the only one of the teams to not win its group. As such, they’re penalty is playing Brazil, probably the most dominant looking team in the tournament so far. The other three teams are scattered to the far corners of the bracket though, which allows for the possibility of an all TOSA semi-finals. And while Paraguay is a long shot, first facing a surprisingly game Japan team, and then having to face the winner of the Iberian rumble, Argentina and Uruguay both have every reason to believe they’ll be standing with two matches to go.
The Rest of the Best
I ran out of fingers somewhere in the last section, but my best guess is that I still have five teams I haven’t mentioned. Despite not scoring from the field, Ghana’s two converted penalty kicks were enough to net them a win and a draw and move them on into the knock out stage against the good old U.S. of A. On the Asian front Japan and South Korea both advanced, despite being viewed as also rans when the first ball dropped. They are both technically solid hard working teams and while they are underdogs against Paraguay and Uruguay respectively their draws are about as good as could be hoped for. Then there is Mexico, who has looked pretty good, but has the draw from hell playing first Argentina, and if they upset them, the winner of the Germany-England match. Which leaves the U.S. who I’m not talking about.
A Little Math
Of the 16 teams, 11 have never won the World Cup before. At first glance that seems like a recipe for a wide open result. At second glance though, in 18 previous world cups only 7 teams have ever won the whole thing, and 5 of them are still left. That’s more than in either of the last 2 World Cups, and those ended up with finals consisting of France v Italy and Germany v Brazil, all former winners. Moral of the story, expect the same old teams to emerge as the tournament goes deeper and deeper. It’s entirely possible that half of the final 8 and 3 of the final 4 will be previous winners. The only corner of the bracket that doesn’t have a past champion, has Spain and Portugal, two powerhouses waiting for their first breakthrough.
O.K. I Lied
After its last second heroics the U.S.A. has as good a draw as you could possibly hope for. With Ghana up first, and then the winner of the Uruguay-South Korea match the semi-finals and a possible match up with Brazil is not beyond the realm of possibility. Of course, Ghana comes first and the lone standing Africans are clearly the home team. They are a physically gifted defensive minded team, who look to counter attack in much the same way the Yanks do. The Black Stars are a better team than either Algeria or Slovenia and will not give the U.S. nearly as many scoring chances as those two teams did.
Also, my heart can’t take another ninety minutes of last second heroics.
The Big Four
England, France, Germany and Italy are the only four European nations who have won the World Cup. Half of them are already out, with France imploding in spectacular fashion and Italy giving up more than twice as many goals as it did during its run to the title 4 years ago. But, I suppose that’s bound to happen when you mail in the first 260 of the 270 minutes you play in the group stage. What a last ten minutes it was though, with Italy almost erasing a 2-0, and then 3-1 deficit, only to lose 3-2 when a last second shot dribble harmlessly wide. England and Germany meanwhile play each other in the round of 16. And while before the tournament big things were expected of England, and Germany was thought to be young and untested, that has not held true in the first three matches. Das Boots look much livelier and more dangerous than the lads. But, as always, past performance is no guarantee yadda yadda.
The Other Four
There are four other European teams still alive, and as luck would have it, they play each other as well, with Spain facing off against Portugal, and the Netherlands facing Slovakia. Despite being perennial World Cup under achievers, Spain, Portugal and the Netherlands are all dominant world sides. The Dutch have cruised so far, winning each game in their group in comfortable if not spectacular form, and as their reward they get Slovakia. And while Slovakia did beat Italy, that may say more about the sorry state of the Azzurri than anything else.
And then there's Spain and Portugal. After starting slowly, Spain has looked every inch the potential champion side its last two matches, easily handling Honduras and Chile. Although to be fair Chile played most of the match down to ten men. Portugal meanwhile hasn’t allowed a goal yet. That’s impressive until you consider that they haven’t scored a goal against anybody who doesn’t believe that Kim Jong Ill communicates with little invisible cell phones either. In the best of worlds this will be one of the best match ups of the round of 16 with the unstoppable force of Spain throwing itself against the immovable object of Portugal. In the worst of worlds Spain will kick the ball around for two hours for a 0-0 draw, and then hope to win in penalty kicks.
No, The Other South A.
Somewhere the sporting powers that be apparently made a typo. While South Africa is the host nation, who traditionally doesn’t lose in the group stages, it is actually all of South America that remains uneliminated. While Brazil and Argentina are no surprise, Paraguay, Uruguay and Chile all advanced as well. Not only did TOSA (the other South A) go 5 for 5, but Chile was the only one of the teams to not win its group. As such, they’re penalty is playing Brazil, probably the most dominant looking team in the tournament so far. The other three teams are scattered to the far corners of the bracket though, which allows for the possibility of an all TOSA semi-finals. And while Paraguay is a long shot, first facing a surprisingly game Japan team, and then having to face the winner of the Iberian rumble, Argentina and Uruguay both have every reason to believe they’ll be standing with two matches to go.
The Rest of the Best
I ran out of fingers somewhere in the last section, but my best guess is that I still have five teams I haven’t mentioned. Despite not scoring from the field, Ghana’s two converted penalty kicks were enough to net them a win and a draw and move them on into the knock out stage against the good old U.S. of A. On the Asian front Japan and South Korea both advanced, despite being viewed as also rans when the first ball dropped. They are both technically solid hard working teams and while they are underdogs against Paraguay and Uruguay respectively their draws are about as good as could be hoped for. Then there is Mexico, who has looked pretty good, but has the draw from hell playing first Argentina, and if they upset them, the winner of the Germany-England match. Which leaves the U.S. who I’m not talking about.
A Little Math
Of the 16 teams, 11 have never won the World Cup before. At first glance that seems like a recipe for a wide open result. At second glance though, in 18 previous world cups only 7 teams have ever won the whole thing, and 5 of them are still left. That’s more than in either of the last 2 World Cups, and those ended up with finals consisting of France v Italy and Germany v Brazil, all former winners. Moral of the story, expect the same old teams to emerge as the tournament goes deeper and deeper. It’s entirely possible that half of the final 8 and 3 of the final 4 will be previous winners. The only corner of the bracket that doesn’t have a past champion, has Spain and Portugal, two powerhouses waiting for their first breakthrough.
O.K. I Lied
After its last second heroics the U.S.A. has as good a draw as you could possibly hope for. With Ghana up first, and then the winner of the Uruguay-South Korea match the semi-finals and a possible match up with Brazil is not beyond the realm of possibility. Of course, Ghana comes first and the lone standing Africans are clearly the home team. They are a physically gifted defensive minded team, who look to counter attack in much the same way the Yanks do. The Black Stars are a better team than either Algeria or Slovenia and will not give the U.S. nearly as many scoring chances as those two teams did.
Also, my heart can’t take another ninety minutes of last second heroics.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Watching (More) Soccer So You Don't Have To
We are now two thirds of the way through the group stages of the world cup. Seems like a good time for a little bit of, what have we learned.
The Ball
Jabalani, the ball “invented” for this World Cup was initially decried by goal keepers the world over as, in U.S. Goalie Tim Howard’s words, “tragic.” And there certainly have been some dreadful goalie mistakes so far, none worse than England’s Robert Green against the U.S. But, as it turns out, the ball has been equally as effective at causing attacking players pain. More frequently than the goalie mistakes are the long strikes, and crosses, many times from some of the best players in the world, flying hither thither and yon. So far Jabalani seems to have prevented more goals than it caused.
The Refs
Obviously the blown call that disallowed the U.S.’s third goal against Slovenia has made headlines, but quite frankly that’s been the least of their problems. Bad calls happen from time to time, and those calls swing games. If the goal had been disallowed in a game between say Serbia and Ghana, it would have been talked about for ten minutes and then the world would have moved on. The bigger problem though has been the refs consistently being unable to maintain control of their games without issuing yellow and red cards with abandon. This leads to players picking up cheap second yellow cards and being sent off early, like Martin Klose for Germany against Serbia. In other cases cheap straight red cards are being given forcing teams to play extended periods of time down a man. Just ask Australia or Switzerland what that’s like. There has been a consistent inability by the referees to differentiate between real contact, and flopping. Its like penalty card roulette whenever two players run into each other (aided by the fact that both that both players hit the ground like they’ve had a leg chopped off). After starting off the tournament strong the refs have had an absolute nightmare run in the second matches of the group stage.
The Continents
Africa:
Ick. A World Cup that was supposed to be a coming out party for the home sides has turned into a giant step backwards. It is distinctly possible that for the first time in over 20 years an African team will not advance past the group stages. Ghana and Nigeria have a shot at keeping that from happening, but Ghana will need to get a result against Germany, and Nigeria will need to win and get help.
Asia:
A surprisingly good performance from the region, with both South Korea, and Japan seeming poised to advance, and even Australia (yes geographically challenged FIFA considers Australia, but not New Zealand a part of Asia), with a shot of moving through. North Korea on the other hand, gave the Brazilians a game effort, falling 2-1, before rolling studs up for Portugal. But on the bright side I’m sure the headlines in North Korea will praise Dear Leader for his dramatic last second hat trick in winning the World Cup (actually apparently the drubbing was broadcast live in the People’s Repub. I wonder how Kim Jong will spin that. And if I ever own a bar, I’m naming it the People’s Repub).
Europe:
France, England and Italy are all dramatic disappointments to date, although the latter 2 are good bets to advance despite their form. Portugal submitted the drubbing of the tournament, crushing North Korea 7-0, and all but locking up advancing to the knock out stage. Spain and Germany have both blown hot and cold, dropping a game but still being well poised to advance. When your continent makes up more than a third of the field it’s a good bet that somebody will figure out a way to contend, even if it isn’t who you expect (Ahem Netherlands).
N. America:
Mexico is through, and if the U.S. takes care of business against Algeria they’ll be through too. Now the question is can either of them make some noise in knock out stage.
S. America:
Oh my. If things break as expected all 5 teams will advance to the knock out stage, without a weak team among them. After playing conservative first matches, Paraguay and Uruguay both took care of business in their second matches against weak opponents. Brazil and Argentina are Brazil and Argentina and Chile has looked lively and dangerous in sitting atop its group as well (although they have yet to play Spain).
And Finally New Zealand:
The little team that could. Qualifying for the World Cup by
beating powerhouses like New Caledonia, Vanuatu and Bahrain, New Zealand would have been considered lucky to score a goal, or get a draw entering the tournament. But after two games, they have tied first Slovakia and then mighty Italy. If they can get a result against Paraguay they have every chance to move onto the knockout stages. That would be one of the biggest upsets of all time. Think of it like a 16 beating a 1 seed.
And I’ll be back with more pithy summing up before the knock out stage begins this weekend.
The Ball
Jabalani, the ball “invented” for this World Cup was initially decried by goal keepers the world over as, in U.S. Goalie Tim Howard’s words, “tragic.” And there certainly have been some dreadful goalie mistakes so far, none worse than England’s Robert Green against the U.S. But, as it turns out, the ball has been equally as effective at causing attacking players pain. More frequently than the goalie mistakes are the long strikes, and crosses, many times from some of the best players in the world, flying hither thither and yon. So far Jabalani seems to have prevented more goals than it caused.
The Refs
Obviously the blown call that disallowed the U.S.’s third goal against Slovenia has made headlines, but quite frankly that’s been the least of their problems. Bad calls happen from time to time, and those calls swing games. If the goal had been disallowed in a game between say Serbia and Ghana, it would have been talked about for ten minutes and then the world would have moved on. The bigger problem though has been the refs consistently being unable to maintain control of their games without issuing yellow and red cards with abandon. This leads to players picking up cheap second yellow cards and being sent off early, like Martin Klose for Germany against Serbia. In other cases cheap straight red cards are being given forcing teams to play extended periods of time down a man. Just ask Australia or Switzerland what that’s like. There has been a consistent inability by the referees to differentiate between real contact, and flopping. Its like penalty card roulette whenever two players run into each other (aided by the fact that both that both players hit the ground like they’ve had a leg chopped off). After starting off the tournament strong the refs have had an absolute nightmare run in the second matches of the group stage.
The Continents
Africa:
Ick. A World Cup that was supposed to be a coming out party for the home sides has turned into a giant step backwards. It is distinctly possible that for the first time in over 20 years an African team will not advance past the group stages. Ghana and Nigeria have a shot at keeping that from happening, but Ghana will need to get a result against Germany, and Nigeria will need to win and get help.
Asia:
A surprisingly good performance from the region, with both South Korea, and Japan seeming poised to advance, and even Australia (yes geographically challenged FIFA considers Australia, but not New Zealand a part of Asia), with a shot of moving through. North Korea on the other hand, gave the Brazilians a game effort, falling 2-1, before rolling studs up for Portugal. But on the bright side I’m sure the headlines in North Korea will praise Dear Leader for his dramatic last second hat trick in winning the World Cup (actually apparently the drubbing was broadcast live in the People’s Repub. I wonder how Kim Jong will spin that. And if I ever own a bar, I’m naming it the People’s Repub).
Europe:
France, England and Italy are all dramatic disappointments to date, although the latter 2 are good bets to advance despite their form. Portugal submitted the drubbing of the tournament, crushing North Korea 7-0, and all but locking up advancing to the knock out stage. Spain and Germany have both blown hot and cold, dropping a game but still being well poised to advance. When your continent makes up more than a third of the field it’s a good bet that somebody will figure out a way to contend, even if it isn’t who you expect (Ahem Netherlands).
N. America:
Mexico is through, and if the U.S. takes care of business against Algeria they’ll be through too. Now the question is can either of them make some noise in knock out stage.
S. America:
Oh my. If things break as expected all 5 teams will advance to the knock out stage, without a weak team among them. After playing conservative first matches, Paraguay and Uruguay both took care of business in their second matches against weak opponents. Brazil and Argentina are Brazil and Argentina and Chile has looked lively and dangerous in sitting atop its group as well (although they have yet to play Spain).
And Finally New Zealand:
The little team that could. Qualifying for the World Cup by
beating powerhouses like New Caledonia, Vanuatu and Bahrain, New Zealand would have been considered lucky to score a goal, or get a draw entering the tournament. But after two games, they have tied first Slovakia and then mighty Italy. If they can get a result against Paraguay they have every chance to move onto the knockout stages. That would be one of the biggest upsets of all time. Think of it like a 16 beating a 1 seed.
And I’ll be back with more pithy summing up before the knock out stage begins this weekend.
Monday, June 14, 2010
Watching Soccer So You Don't Have To
One weekend and 8 games done. Here, game by game is a brief review for all you non soccer fans out there.
Friday
South Africa 1 – Mexico 1
My mother, who only knew the World Cup was starting because the Mexican workers fixing her basement asked if they could hook up the TV, summed it up best. “It was a good score. South Aftica avoided the ignomininiy…ignomity…ingno…embarrassment of being the first host team to lose its first match, and I didn’t have a bunch of angry Mexicans in my basement.” Mom always has a way of getting to what’s important.
France 0 – Uruguay 0
This game was awful. It was everything that American people who don’t like soccer think soccer is. To make an American football comparison; Uruguay’s offense was as if a team decided to punt on first down every time they got the ball, so that their defense could stop France. Then when France punted Uruguay could attempt to return it for a touchdown. So for those of you keeping score at home, Uruguay are the Chicago Bears of the World Cup.
Saturday
South Korea 2 – Greece 0
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Literally. The game started at 5:30 in the morning our time. South Korea scored in the first ten minutes, and Greece didn’t get a shot on goal for over an hour. This was not a game you woul call competitive, or interesting. It got a lot of fast forward treatment on the DVR.
Argentina 1 – Nigeria 0
Lionel Messi is the best player in the world. He had more shots on goal for Argentina in the first half than any other team in the tournament up to that point. The fact that none of them went in is because the Nigerian goalie by his own admission had the game of his life. Of course you don’t get extra points for game of your life when you still lose. On the flip side Argentina tried really hard to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in the second half. With Argentine hero, and certified madman Maradona on the bench (think of him like “the most interesting man in the world” if the most interesting man in the world were a raving egotistical psychopath) Argentina has the delicate mix of talent and insanity to make them a prime rubbernecking candidate.
England 1 – USA 1
The main event of the day. Soccer really can be a cruel sport. American fans had been waiting six months for the match, ever since the World Cup schedules were made. And after six months and five minutes it seemed that it would all be for nothing as England ruthlessly cut out American hearts with a goal before you could blink. For the next 85 minutes though the US was every bit the equal of one of the legitimate contenders for the World Cup crown. And when you add to that England’s goalie pulling his very own Bill Buckner and letting a beyond routine save bounce off his hands and in and you have a well earned draw for the U.S. Americans often have a problem with the idea of a tie, so let’s adopt the New York Post’s stance. As the back page headline read “U.S. beats England 1-1.” Amen.
Sunday
Slovenia 1 – Algeria 0
The smallest country in the tournament pitted against the weakest of the six African sides in the tournament. Unsurprisingly this led to a real snoozefest of a game. It did, however, begin Sunday’s trend of players getting red carded and sent off. Algeria began playing a man down with about twenty minutes left, and their goalie apparently thought he was from England as he also let in a routine save to give the LFYTC (that would be the Little Former Yugolsavian Team that Could…I may need to work on my anagramming skills a little) the victory.
Ghana 1 – Serbia 0
On their fourth try a team from Africa finally comes up with a victory. The Black Stars (I’m not being racist, that’s really Ghana’s nickname. Luckily they will probably not play the All Whites of New Zealand this tournament. The All Whites versus the Black Stars in formerly apartheid South Africa would probably make everybody just a bit squeamish) looked like the better ream from the start. But it took a red card to Serbia, and then a penalty shot with ten minutes left, thanks to an idiotic Serbian handball to give them the win.
Germany 4 – Australia 0
The first truly dominant performance of the tournament. Germany rolled through Australia like they were Poland (WWII joke, too soon?). It was 2-0 at halftime, and the surprisingly not all that blonde and blue Germans could have been up 3 or 4 at that point. And in the 2nd half when Australia’s best player Tim Cahill got sent off with a red card (in what was the first questionable refereeing decision of the tournament) the rout was officially on. Germany has been in 4 of the last 7 World Cup finals, so they are always contenders, but this was supposed to be a down year for them. Right. And they were going to stop at Czechoslovakia too.
Friday
South Africa 1 – Mexico 1
My mother, who only knew the World Cup was starting because the Mexican workers fixing her basement asked if they could hook up the TV, summed it up best. “It was a good score. South Aftica avoided the ignomininiy…ignomity…ingno…embarrassment of being the first host team to lose its first match, and I didn’t have a bunch of angry Mexicans in my basement.” Mom always has a way of getting to what’s important.
France 0 – Uruguay 0
This game was awful. It was everything that American people who don’t like soccer think soccer is. To make an American football comparison; Uruguay’s offense was as if a team decided to punt on first down every time they got the ball, so that their defense could stop France. Then when France punted Uruguay could attempt to return it for a touchdown. So for those of you keeping score at home, Uruguay are the Chicago Bears of the World Cup.
Saturday
South Korea 2 – Greece 0
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Literally. The game started at 5:30 in the morning our time. South Korea scored in the first ten minutes, and Greece didn’t get a shot on goal for over an hour. This was not a game you woul call competitive, or interesting. It got a lot of fast forward treatment on the DVR.
Argentina 1 – Nigeria 0
Lionel Messi is the best player in the world. He had more shots on goal for Argentina in the first half than any other team in the tournament up to that point. The fact that none of them went in is because the Nigerian goalie by his own admission had the game of his life. Of course you don’t get extra points for game of your life when you still lose. On the flip side Argentina tried really hard to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in the second half. With Argentine hero, and certified madman Maradona on the bench (think of him like “the most interesting man in the world” if the most interesting man in the world were a raving egotistical psychopath) Argentina has the delicate mix of talent and insanity to make them a prime rubbernecking candidate.
England 1 – USA 1
The main event of the day. Soccer really can be a cruel sport. American fans had been waiting six months for the match, ever since the World Cup schedules were made. And after six months and five minutes it seemed that it would all be for nothing as England ruthlessly cut out American hearts with a goal before you could blink. For the next 85 minutes though the US was every bit the equal of one of the legitimate contenders for the World Cup crown. And when you add to that England’s goalie pulling his very own Bill Buckner and letting a beyond routine save bounce off his hands and in and you have a well earned draw for the U.S. Americans often have a problem with the idea of a tie, so let’s adopt the New York Post’s stance. As the back page headline read “U.S. beats England 1-1.” Amen.
Sunday
Slovenia 1 – Algeria 0
The smallest country in the tournament pitted against the weakest of the six African sides in the tournament. Unsurprisingly this led to a real snoozefest of a game. It did, however, begin Sunday’s trend of players getting red carded and sent off. Algeria began playing a man down with about twenty minutes left, and their goalie apparently thought he was from England as he also let in a routine save to give the LFYTC (that would be the Little Former Yugolsavian Team that Could…I may need to work on my anagramming skills a little) the victory.
Ghana 1 – Serbia 0
On their fourth try a team from Africa finally comes up with a victory. The Black Stars (I’m not being racist, that’s really Ghana’s nickname. Luckily they will probably not play the All Whites of New Zealand this tournament. The All Whites versus the Black Stars in formerly apartheid South Africa would probably make everybody just a bit squeamish) looked like the better ream from the start. But it took a red card to Serbia, and then a penalty shot with ten minutes left, thanks to an idiotic Serbian handball to give them the win.
Germany 4 – Australia 0
The first truly dominant performance of the tournament. Germany rolled through Australia like they were Poland (WWII joke, too soon?). It was 2-0 at halftime, and the surprisingly not all that blonde and blue Germans could have been up 3 or 4 at that point. And in the 2nd half when Australia’s best player Tim Cahill got sent off with a red card (in what was the first questionable refereeing decision of the tournament) the rout was officially on. Germany has been in 4 of the last 7 World Cup finals, so they are always contenders, but this was supposed to be a down year for them. Right. And they were going to stop at Czechoslovakia too.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Look Ma No Hands
It’s World Cup time. This excites me to no end for two reasons. The first is that it’s over one hundred degrees pretty much every day here. So now in addition to getting shot, I risk melting like the Wicked Witch of the West every time I go outside. And no, the fact that it’s a dry heat is not any consolation; in fact I can practically feel the greedy air sucking the water out of my skin every time I step outside the house. Being able to sit inside and watch lots of soccer in HD every day for over a month seems ever more appealing.
The second reason I’m excited is that, and I know this might make me a pariah in my home country; I’m actually a really big soccer fan. Four years ago I started watching the last World Cup, and despite a pitiful performance from the U.S.I got hooked. At the time I was living on a block in Manhattan that had a French café on one corner, and on the opposite side of the street an Italian bar. These were the kinds of places that did not have TVs 1460 out of 1461 days (that would be 365 times 4 and don’t forget to add the leap day), and didn’t have customers much more frequently than that. Except for the weekend when their respective countries were in the final match of the World Cup. All of a sudden, both establishments had TVs, balloons and lots and lots of people. So many that the intersection became an impromptu street fair, and perish the car that tried to get through. It was like the Super Bowl and the Olympics smushed together and translated into a language I didn’t speak. So, I spent the next four years learning it.
Surprisingly I found soccer similar to baseball in a whole bunch of ways. There are lots of players on the field at the same time, but only two or three of them are actively involved with the ball at once. Also, there are large stretches of both games with no scoring. To the casual watcher this makes them boring, while to a fan it offers a wider variety of factors to pay attention to. It’s the subtlety that makes both sports great, what goes on away from the ball and between the scoring. How is the defense positioned? Who’s getting tired? Who will react well to building pressure? Who is gaining the advantage in the individual mental battles that can prove so pivotal? And it doesn’t hurt soccer, that unlike baseball, there are no commercials or stoppages in play (other than halftime) and the game is over in under two hours.
So starting today I will be living all soccer all the time. Obviously the U.S. team is my first love, and a group I’ve followed religiously for the last four years. After them, I’m firmly in the Dutch camp (its either because I love Orange, or I have some monetary incentive you can decide) and then for sentimental (and maybe a little monetary also) reasons all the African teams. And since I’m a sucker for lost causes I’ll be sure to watch North Korea and New Zealand play as well.
I’ll be writing about it all (or at least some of it when I feel like it) here, because after all what else do I have to do.
The second reason I’m excited is that, and I know this might make me a pariah in my home country; I’m actually a really big soccer fan. Four years ago I started watching the last World Cup, and despite a pitiful performance from the U.S.I got hooked. At the time I was living on a block in Manhattan that had a French café on one corner, and on the opposite side of the street an Italian bar. These were the kinds of places that did not have TVs 1460 out of 1461 days (that would be 365 times 4 and don’t forget to add the leap day), and didn’t have customers much more frequently than that. Except for the weekend when their respective countries were in the final match of the World Cup. All of a sudden, both establishments had TVs, balloons and lots and lots of people. So many that the intersection became an impromptu street fair, and perish the car that tried to get through. It was like the Super Bowl and the Olympics smushed together and translated into a language I didn’t speak. So, I spent the next four years learning it.
Surprisingly I found soccer similar to baseball in a whole bunch of ways. There are lots of players on the field at the same time, but only two or three of them are actively involved with the ball at once. Also, there are large stretches of both games with no scoring. To the casual watcher this makes them boring, while to a fan it offers a wider variety of factors to pay attention to. It’s the subtlety that makes both sports great, what goes on away from the ball and between the scoring. How is the defense positioned? Who’s getting tired? Who will react well to building pressure? Who is gaining the advantage in the individual mental battles that can prove so pivotal? And it doesn’t hurt soccer, that unlike baseball, there are no commercials or stoppages in play (other than halftime) and the game is over in under two hours.
So starting today I will be living all soccer all the time. Obviously the U.S. team is my first love, and a group I’ve followed religiously for the last four years. After them, I’m firmly in the Dutch camp (its either because I love Orange, or I have some monetary incentive you can decide) and then for sentimental (and maybe a little monetary also) reasons all the African teams. And since I’m a sucker for lost causes I’ll be sure to watch North Korea and New Zealand play as well.
I’ll be writing about it all (or at least some of it when I feel like it) here, because after all what else do I have to do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
