2014 FIFA World Cup Thread

[RJH999]

This Nigeria goalkeeper is having just an awful game

[FarawayFairways]

because the nutball American stations cut away during the action for commercial breaks.

They did what!!!!

That would probably be the surest way of ensuring a consumer boycott against any product daft enough to take out advertising space under these circumstances in Europe (they do something similar in Peru where animations run across the screen during play) but again, it would be commercial suicide if anyone tried that over here

FWIW, I give America a very serious chance of going deep in this. Organisation and fitness can go a long way to negating superior teams and they looked to have the better of things to me against Portugal. I'm not sure they're that far away from joining that tier below the apex (you could argue they're already on it, albeit towards the bottom of it)

No European team has ever won in South America, and only Brazil has ever won a WC in Europe (Sweden 1962)

They'll likely face Belgium in the last 16 who I don't believe they necessarily need fear. Despite all the talk of an emerging Belgium team, they look a little bit overwhelmed with expectation to me and aren't playing with any fluency. If they were in a more taxing group they could easily have gone the same way as England, Italy and Spain by now. In fact the eclipse of the European teams has been something of a feature, and especially those of southern Europe with only Greece (and they were lucky) left standing (albeit Portugal hang by a thread still)

I think America would be scheduled to meet Argentina in the quarters and to be honest, they're exactly the sort of team who could give the Argies something to worry about. I could easily see that game going into extra time

[Golfingdad]

They did what!!!!

That would probably be the surest way of ensuring a consumer boycott against any product daft enough to take out advertising space under these circumstances in Europe (they do something similar in Peru where animations run across the screen during play) but again, it would be commercial suicide if anyone tried that over here

FWIW, I give America a very serious chance of going deep in this. Organisation and fitness can go a long way to negating superior teams and they looked to have the better of things to me against Portugal. I'm not sure they're that far away from joining that tier below the apex (you could argue they're already on it, albeit towards the bottom of it)

No European team has ever won in South America, and only Brazil has ever won a WC in Europe (Sweden 1962)

They'll likely face Belgium in the last 16 who I don't believe they necessarily need fear. Despite all the talk of an emerging Belgium team, they look a little bit overwhelmed with expectation to me and aren't playing with any fluency. If they were in a more taxing group they could easily have gone the same way as England, Italy and Spain by now. In fact the eclipse of the European teams has been something of a feature, and especially those of southern Europe with only Greece (and they were lucky) left standing (albeit Portugal hang by a thread still)

I think America would be scheduled to meet Argentina in the quarters and to be honest, they're exactly the sort of team who could give the Argies something to worry about. I could easily see that game going into extra time

I like the vote of confidence!!

Yeah, we'd likely get Belgium and then Argentina, unless we win tomorrow, in which case we'll start with Algeria (depending) and then France.

Gotta take care of business tomorrow first!

[RJH999]

I like the vote of confidence!! Yeah, we'd likely get Belgium and then Argentina, unless we win tomorrow, in which case we'll start with Algeria (depending) and then France. Gotta take care of business tomorrow first!

Algeria in the round of 16!!! That would just be amazing.

[FarawayFairways]

There's a bit symmetry to Algeria's progression

In 1982 they would have got out the group had two teams not conspired with each other to rig a 1-0 that ensured they both went through instead by virtue of that particular scoreline. The identity of the two teutonic cheats. Well Austria was one, and the then West Germany were the other!!! In fact come to think of it, West Germany threw a game in 1974 against East Germany in order to avoid a draw that would have put them into a path that meant playing in the same half as Brazil and the emerging Dutch.

Zee Jarmens have form at zis,

albeit I can't think of too many recent incidences of blatant rigging. If ever there was a match crying out for it, then it came a few days ago when Colombia could have thrown a game against Japan to ensure they played Costa Rica

It's often been said that an African team will win the WC one day (they've been saying it since the late 70's) but I'm not sure they're significantly any nearer, and alot of African associations are rifen with other governance issues. I'm actually of the view that America will win it before an African nation does. Who knows, America might win the football world cup before they ever win the Ryder Cup!!!

The conventional wisdom is that a strong USA would be good for football, but there is an emerging view that the last thing that world football needs is any American interest. Unlike so many sports, one thing football doesn't lack for is money, awareness, or participation. I've been half way up the Amazon jungle before now only to be accosted by supposed 'lost tribesmen' (actors obviously - even if the jungle was real) desparate to talk to me about football history and various formations rather than their lost civilisation which they were pretending to be. Football is already consuming itself through commercial greed, but if the American's ever took an interest in it, then it would become terminal.

We'd probably end up with games played over four quarters of 25 minutes, with two tactical time-outs for adverts each quarter. The concept of a drawn match would be abandoned, and pay per view spectators would be encouraged to phone a premium rate number to choose which player they wanted to vote off/ substitute.

[Abu3baid]

There's a bit symmetry to Algeria's progression

In 1982 they would have got out the group had two teams not conspired with each other to rig a 1-0 that ensured they both went through instead by virtue of that particular scoreline. The identity of the two teutonic cheats. Well Austria was one, and the then West Germany were the other!!! In fact come to think of it, West Germany threw a game in 1974 against East Germany in order to avoid a draw that would have put them into a path that meant playing in the same half as Brazil and the emerging Dutch.

Zee Jarmens have form at zis,

albeit I can't think of too many recent incidences of blatant rigging. If ever there was a match crying out for it, then it came a few days ago when Colombia could have thrown a game against Japan to ensure they played Costa Rica

It's often been said that an African team will win the WC one day (they've been saying it since the late 70's) but I'm not sure they're significantly any nearer, and alot of African associations are rifen with other governance issues. I'm actually of the view that America will win it before an African nation does. Who knows, America might win the football world cup before they ever win the Ryder Cup!!!

The conventional wisdom is that a strong USA would be good for football, but there is an emerging view that the last thing that world football needs is any American interest. Unlike so many sports, one thing football doesn't lack for is money, awareness, or participation. I've been half way up the Amazon jungle before now only to be accosted by supposed 'lost tribesmen' (actors obviously - even if the jungle was real) desparate to talk to me about football history and various formations rather than their lost civilisation which they were pretending to be. Football is already consuming itself through commercial greed, but if the American's ever took an interest in it, then it would become terminal.

We'd probably end up with games played over four quarters of 25 minutes, with two tactical time-outs for adverts each quarter. The concept of a drawn match would be abandoned, and pay per view spectators would be encouraged to phone a premium rate number to choose which player they wanted to vote off/ substitute.

Great post!  There must be a way for them to detect and punish rigging.. setting the criteria would be touch, but when it is obvious they need to take action (even though it might still be hard to prove unless someone confesses)!

[FarawayFairways]

Technically, it isn't illegal, albeit it does leave a sour taste. Two teams who rig a result for mutual benefit have normally earned the right to be in a position to do so. It was the Austria Germany game of 1982 that proved the touchstone for simultaneous kick offs in the final group stage match, as previous to this the matches kicked off at separate times. In this case the Germans and Austrians had a good old fashioned Hapsburg get together in the knowledge of how the Alergerian game which had kicked off earlier, had finished.

There was another incident from 1978 come to think of it, when the hosts, Argentina, allegedly threw a game to get them away from the pressure cooker of Buneos Aires and regroup out at Cordoba (or somewhere). The Argies hadn't been playing well however. In those days the second stage followed a three team group format rather than straight knock out and going into the final game the Argentinians needed to beat Peru by 6 clear goals to progress. Argentina was run by a particularly nasty right wing junta in 1978 (until 1982 when they lost the Falklands island war to ourselves) anyway, it is alleged that the Generals of the Casa Rosada, got onto their counterparts in Peru (they couldn't progress) and suggested it might be good if Peru lost 6-0. Suffice to say, Peru did lose 6-0, Argentina progressed, and ultimately went onto win it

There have been other instances at club level. I have recollection of a two-legged cup game that after having built up a first leg lead, Barcelona were instructed to lose by the Spanish junta (Franco) to Real Madrid. Real Madrid were a showpiece for Fascist Spain with huge amounts of money being lavished on them buying in South America's greatest, and then written off by the government. Barcelona by contrast became the rallying point for Catalan independence and were staunchly Republican (Madrid was a republican city through the war 1936-39 it has to be acknowledged) but Franco adopted them and them used them to promote his political philosophy. Anyway, Barcelona built a 3-1 lead in this match before meekly surrednering and losing 7-3 in such a way as to make it look blindingly obvious what had happened.

I seem to think there was another instance from the second world war when an occupied Soviet team (or similar, Ukraine?) refused to lose to a showpiece nazi team and duly got executed for their sporting gesture

[Chilli Dipper]

The good news for the Americans right now is that, even if they lose, [URL=http://screamer.deadspin.com/two-key-ghana-players-kicked-off-team-hours-before-port-1596352621/+GregHoward1]Ghana appears to be in no shape to win today.[/URL] Protests about team pay, multiple starters being sent home...that makes the danger of the USA losing out on goal difference appear less threatening.

[nevets88]

[cipher]

The conventional wisdom is that a strong USA would be good for football, but there is an emerging view that the last thing that world football needs is any American interest. Unlike so many sports, one thing football doesn't lack for is money, awareness, or participation. I've been half way up the Amazon jungle before now only to be accosted by supposed 'lost tribesmen' (actors obviously - even if the jungle was real) desparate to talk to me about football history and various formations rather than their lost civilisation which they were pretending to be. Football is already consuming itself through commercial greed, but if the American's ever took an interest in it, then it would become terminal.

Seriously, a sport where advertisements are everywhere on the field and has advertisements on the jerseys is concerned about succumbing to American commercialism and greed.  Please.

[Chilli Dipper]

Suarez receives his punishment: he's out of the game for four months, including club matches, plus nine international matches. I would have to look at Uruguay's schedule to figure out how long that would be.

[nevets88]

Ouch. That's harsh. But it is his 3rd offense and it's the World Cup.

[FarawayFairways]

Seriously, a sport where advertisements are everywhere on the field and has advertisements on the jerseys is concerned about succumbing to American commercialism and greed.  Please.

I assume you don't watch that much football? There are no advertisements on the pitch (not painted on grass like you see in cricket or rugby). You have perimeter adverts certainly, but that's been going on for as long as I can remember, so I wouldn't point the finger at America for that.

Find me a national team in this world cup that has a shirt sponsor emblazoned across it too. Good luck, but I'll save you the time. There isn't one. The best you'll come up with is a shirt manufacturers logo.

The first shirt sponsor I can recall was circa 1981 and was Hitachi sponsoring Liverpool. The most recent thing we've seen however, is stadium sponsors and this is most certainly an American import. There was a time when club grounds had traditional Victorian names that were part of the social fabric of the communities which hosted them and we grew fond of them as they became synonymous with the club identity. Gradually however great names have been lost (actually it has been gradual, its been pretty quick) and replaced with corporate giants. Highbury became 'the Emirates', Maine Road 'The Ethiad', Burden Park became 'The Reebok' Boothferry Park became the 'KC Stadium'. Football is more than capable of consuming itself (as I made clear) but I have little doubt that were America to embrace it, that process would be accelerated and reach new levels

[FarawayFairways]

Ouch. That's harsh. But it is his 3rd offense and it's the World Cup.

If it were a third offence for something similar in rugby like eye gouching, he'd be banned for life

[cipher]

I assume you don't watch that much football? There are no advertisements on the pitch (not painted on grass like you see in cricket or rugby). You have perimeter adverts certainly, but that's been going on for as long as I can remember, so I wouldn't point the finger at America for that.

Find me a national team in this world cup that has a shirt sponsor emblazoned across it too. Good luck, but I'll save you the time. There isn't one. The best you'll come up with is a shirt manufacturers logo.

The first shirt sponsor I can recall was circa 1981 and was Hitachi sponsoring Liverpool. The most recent thing we've seen however, is stadium sponsors and this is most certainly an American import. There was a time when club grounds had traditional Victorian names that were part of the social fabric of the communities which hosted them and we grew fond of them as they became synonymous with the club identity. Gradually however great names have been lost (actually it has been gradual, its been pretty quick) and replaced with corporate giants. Highbury became 'the Emirates', Maine Road 'The Ethiad', Burden Park became 'The Reebok' Boothferry Park became the 'KC Stadium'. Football is more than capable of consuming itself (as I made clear) but I have little doubt that were America to embrace it, that process would be accelerated and reach new levels

Yep I "don't" watch much football...  I also "don't" see the sideline advertisements constantly displayed on TV and the shirt sponsors on virtually every club team.  Yes that is great that a tournament that comes around once every four years does not have logos on the shirt, I agree.  Thanks for saving me the time I was not sure about that.  However, that may not be a complete representation of the sport in between those four years...??? You think?  The idea that American interest will over commercialize the sport is ridiculous.  I get that there really are not commercial breaks.  The idea though that the purity of the game is somehow still in tact and is in danger of being corrupted by Americans is just typical of parts of the world and silly to be honest.

[RJH999]

Why is Brad Davis starting??

[Chilli Dipper]

Yep I "don't" watch much football...  I also "don't" see the sideline advertisements constantly displayed on TV and the shirt sponsors on virtually every club team.  Yes that is great that a tournament that comes around once every four years does not have logos on the shirt, I agree.  Thanks for saving me the time I was not sure about that.  However, that may not be a complete representation of the sport in between those four years...??? You think?  The idea that American interest will over commercialize the sport is ridiculous.  I get that there really are not commercial breaks.  The idea though that the purity of the game is somehow still in tact and is in danger of being corrupted by Americans is just typical of parts of the world and silly to be honest.

That worldview also fails to consider that the base of American soccer fans are as much purists (and possibly more so) as the fan base in European countries. Outside of the Premier League, the Bundesliga, Serie A, and La Liga, MLS' per-match attendance figures hold up against any domestic league in the world.

[nevets88]

Oh dear that poor German fan with the scarf in the middle of Dupont Circle.