World Cup Try Hards

Parent Cafe
1

<p>Well done to FIFA for building up the US hype. They must have been wetting themselves dreaming about that elusive US market jackpot. Meanwhile, the team is terrible. </p>

<p>How can we be that bad when so many US kids play soccer? We can’t find the talent in 300 million people? </p>

<p>DH pinned it on cultural differences until I pointed out that Australia has a population of 20 million–and soccer as a sport in Oz is behind rugby, rugby league, cricket and swimming. </p>

<p>Of course, they have that amazing soccer coach. We appear to have a lump on a log.</p>

2

<p>My kids are watching the matches when they are on and they are home. I consider that a great victory for the sport.</p>

3

<p>As an announcer said during Brazil’s game today, Soccer is a religion is Brazil. How can’t you find talent in a pool where everyone lives and breathes soccer, compared to…well us, America.</p>

4

<p>My house has been filled with boys this weekend and yesterday (no school) watching the World Cup/playing soccer in the yard. They’ve taken out a porch light and I feel lucky the windows are intact. I didn’t know my DS was interested in soccer until this last year. He and his friends also attend the local team Galaxy games - only about $8 for an excellent seat. I attribute it in part to the popular FIFA XBox video game.</p>

5

<p>While the USA did not play a good game, one has to remember against whom they played. Their opponent has been near the top of the rankings for several years. The game unfolded in the most negative way: the USA team yielded a goal almost instantly, and a second one at a time they seemed to get into the game. For the record, had Reyna’s ball rolled in instead of out the goal, the game would have been very different.</p>

<p>The USA is STILL a very good team, albeit not as high as its FIFA ranking might indicate. As a result of an overwhelming amount of games against medciocre opponents, the rankings of the USA and Mexico are easily ten to fifteen spots too high. Further, one has to understand the strength of the World Cup: next to the 32 teams that DO participate, there might be another 32 that did not qualify but could have been 1/4 finalists. Examples? France did not make it in the 94 World Cup held in the US. Guess who was the next World Champion in 1998. In the same vein, great teams can have bad, very bad performances during the WC. Again think France in 2002 … or Portugal. France results? The reigning World Champion lost against Senegal 0:1, tied Uruguay 0-0, and finally lost 2-0 to Denmark. They did not even score a single goal. </p>

<p>In the end, we should still applaud the USA for having reached a lofty level in the most competitive sport in the world, and this against many odds. The US will continue to lose its best athletes to other sports where the financial rewards are easier to obtain. </p>

<p>As spectators, in the US, we are simply too spoiled in sports, and often expects to dominate every event no matter how hard the competition is. That is simply impossible.</p>

6

<p>Ah, xiggi, you expressed many of the thoughts I was going to post. :slight_smile: I simply wanted to say that I agree with you.</p>

7

<p>Oh c’mon. We don’t have to applaud terrible performances. That is ridiculous. The Czechs aren’t the Brazilians. I watched the second half live and the US could hardly control the ball, let alone dominate on either half.</p>

<p>Besides, all the argument about ‘Poor us! We’re trying SOOOO hard! Aren’t we wonderful for trying!’ falls down when you compare us to Australia (pop 20 million)–or Korea or Japan.</p>

<p>It shouldn’t be ‘impossbile’ for us to play at a higher level given our wealth, population size, student interest and immigrant population. Other countries are playing above their weight. Why should we let our soccer programs off the hook?</p>

8

<p>Cheers:

  1. “The Czechs aren’t the Brazilians:” </p>

<p>Not be very close I think the Czech Republic will make the semifinals and lose to Germany…</p>

<ol>
<li>“It shouldn’t be ‘impossbile’ for us to play at a higher level given our wealth, population size, student interest and immigrant population:”</li>
</ol>

<p>It definitely surprises me that the U.S. isn’t at a higher level. When I moved to the states about 7 years ago I joined a competitive football team and was impressed by the sheer level of organization and infrastructure the U.S. has for youth football. When I lived outside the U.S. my trainers were good, most had played maybe 2nd division European football or maybe some had played 1st but in general they were good. Here in the U.S. the 2 trainers I had were national team players for England and Romania. They had both participated in 2 world cups, one was a national hero because his goal allowed England to qualify in for WC’82…no country has this kind of intrastructure. In addition the country was well organized with state,regional, and national tournaments as well as special programs (ODP-olympic development program) for extremely gifted players, national team pools at every age level, and even national rankings for youth teams. The only difference I see, which I think is key, is that other countries have much more passion for the sport. If the national team loses the whole nation is in mourning for a few days…here the country could care less, I’d venture to guess that more people watched the NBA final than the U.S. vs. Czech Rep. match. This lack of passion/support I think is detrimental to the national team and essentially drops their motivation.</p>

9

<p>Outch. That US v Czech game was simply abyssmal. I don’t think an American team can do worse in any other game…wait, cricket…</p>

10

<p>“The Czechs aren’t the Brazilians.”</p>

<p>When the games are played on European soil, the difference might be minimal. Historically, South American teams do not perform that well in the WC organized in Europe. In this case, the Czech are a formidable opponent, and truly worthy of their ranking of SECOND in the world. Without a streak of poor luck, they should have been the European Champions in 2004 (like their Under 21 team.) The players on the roster of that team may be more unknown to Joe Average, but they are as much of a star as the Ronaldos of this world. And for what is worth, they represent a better TEAM than Brazil who might suffer from an aging defense. If history repeats itself, Brazil won’t win this cup, despite being favorites. </p>

<p>My point still remains the same: it’s too early to draw far reaching conclusions about the state of the United States after one game. After all, this team is loaded with the same talent that allowed them to be competitive at the last WC, or amazed the world when they were competing in the U17 WC. </p>

<p>Does anyone really believe that the US is an awful team and that the pompous Mexico played well against the pedestrian Iran? Let’s see what happens in the next two games, and how the US fares in this most difficult group.</p>

11

<p>The youth soccer scene is huge in my suburban community. Literally thousands of participants - including all three of my kids at one time or another. One of my sons played on a couple of select teams when he was young. But by the time he was in high school, the top players from his former teams were almost all playing baseball, football, basketball, track, lacrosse or video games instead. (At least two were recruited for college teams in other sports.) There were literally just three of those kids still playing soccer - and none of them was a standout player. The select teams in the older groups were composed of boys who were less athletic when the were younger (and probably still were) but kept with the sport. There are lots of outstanding athletes playing soccer in America, but the argument that our national soccer teams should excel simply because of the size of your population ignores the social dynamics of youth sports. That “student interest” just doesn’t seem to stick for most American kids. Our “soccer population” is probably smaller than Australia’s.</p>

12

<p>Just returned from S’s orientation. Did not factor WC into travel plans.</p>

<p>Wasted big $ on lovely hotel close to many attractions for night b4 ckin; S preferred not to leave room unless it was to go to bar with flatscreen tv. All attractions closed by the time afternoon game ended.</p>

<p>Chkin deadline 2 p.m. – we checked in at 1:54, after catching as much of Mexico game as possible.</p>

<p>S in deep denial re: US game – refused to read US Today Articles I had saved when I picked him up from orientation.</p>

<p>Barely made it to airport this a.m. Spain was on, you know. </p>

<p>Should have looked for cheap lodging with good cable. </p>

<p>Yes, there are some die-hard fans, even in the good old US of A.</p>

13

<p>xigs, you big dreamer you. From the flat-footed game I watched, I’d say we’re going to get creamed by Ghana and Italy. But you stay in your bubble as long as possible, hon. </p>

<p>It’s true the Ozzies are sports mad. Look what they accomplish in Olympic sports with a population of 20 million. They could care LESS about soccer. Their main sports are rugby, versions of rugby and cricket. They probably are more interested in basketball than soccer. Their best athletes gravitate to those sports.</p>

<p>I’d wager, there are 10 times the number of soccer players in the US vs Oz.</p>

<p>AS for passion, it does waiver with lack of success. The current US team is hard to support–even though there are glimpses of phenomenal talent (being wasted)…</p>

<p>What about this theory? US soccer has a stink coach and stink management. Anyway, how did Russia get Hiddink? Imagine the passion for the sport if the US team played like Oz or Korea…</p>

<p>*Guus Hiddink, who guided 150-1 outsider South Korea to the 2002 World Cup semifinals, began his latest campaign with an underdog by masterminding Australia’s first win at soccer’s showpiece. </p>

<p>The 59-year-old coach, who’ll take over the Russian team after the World Cup in Germany, made second-half changes that spurred the Socceroos to rally from 1-0 down against Japan with six minutes left and win 3-1 in Kaiserslautern yesterday. </p>

<p>Hiddink, who also steered his native Netherlands to a World Cup semifinal eight years ago, saw his substitutions pay off as Tim Cahill scored twice and John Aloisi completed the win with Australia’s first World Cup goals. Bookmaker William Hill cut Australia’s odds of winning the title to 66-1 from 80-1. </p>

<p><code>The boss has to get a lot of credit because he put on the two scorers,‘’ Aloisi told reporters.</code>When we scored the equalizer I went over to the bench and asked if he wanted one of the strikers to drop back into midfield. He said `no, let’s keep on going for it, let’s keep on going for the win.‘’’ </p>

<p>Australia, which made its only previous World Cup appearance 32 years ago, is the latest stop for a coach who has won the European Cup and league titles in the Netherlands, and had the pick of the sport’s biggest jobs. </p>

<p>Since he got Australia to the World Cup in November, Hiddink has been linked to almost every major coaching post going, including England and Real Madrid. </p>

<p>The Dutchman instead chose to become Russia’s first foreign-born manager on a two-year contract worth at least 2 million euros a year ($2.5 million). Russia last won a trophy in 1960 and failed to reach the 2006 World Cup. *</p>

<p>Cute story amdg.</p>

14

<p>What sample size are you using to make these deep, fundamental criticisms? One game? Bruce Arena is the same guy who coached the US to the quarterfinals in 2002. But I guess he was a terrible hire because of a 3-0 loss to the Czech Republic. Come on. I’m very wary of postgame analysis in any sport that cites some deep-rooted flaws as the cause for a loss. There’s no real downside to this World Cup for the US, in my mind. Even if you lose all 3 games, there’s still plenty of talent coming up through the youth systems. They’ll end up with an easier draw in South Africa and have a better chance.</p>

<p>Going from just qualifying in 1990 to expecting great results in 2006 is a large jump.</p>

15

<p>Post-game analysis of your home country’s deep rooted flaws is the heart and soul of the fan’s experience at the World Cup.</p>

<p>Look at the Brits tear their hair out over their WIN, LOL.</p>

<p>*Why can’t England pass the ball like everyone else at the World Cup?
After all the hype, what was billed as the best England team to travel to a World Cup for more than 30 years ended up playing much like most of their predecessors in their first game: embarrassingly lacking in basic skills. As the nation hopes for better today, Glenn Moore examines why it is that English footballers so often appear technically lacking at international level </p>

<p>Juggle, juggle. Juggle, juggle. Juggle, juggle. “Have it!” Lamenting the quality of England’s passing has become the biennial complaint, raising its head every two years when England take part in an international tournament - when our native superstars are suddenly exposed as being from the same stock as Peter Kay’s iconic pub footballer. </p>

<p>“It was the same when I was captain of England,” said Gerry Francis, looking back 30 years.</p>

<p>Ray Wilkins, recalling his time at Milan a decade later, said: “I never thought I was bad on the ball, but at Milan I was made to look really bad on occasions. We did a drill where two players went in a circle and the guys on the perimeter passed the ball until one of the guys in the middle intercepted it. When Mark Hateley and me were in the circle it would only end when Mark kicked someone.”</p>

<p>At some stage in this tournament, probably not today, although the likes of Dwight Yorke and Russell Latapy can keep the ball as well as most, Frank Lampard and Steven Gerrard are going to know exactly how Wilkins felt. Why is this? There is general acceptance, not just in these shores, that England have an excellent midfield packed with technically good players. Yet against Paraguay, England consistently squandered possession, surrendering the initiative to the South Americans and inviting further pressure on to the defence.</p>

<p>“It was embarrassing,” said John Giles, the former Leeds midfielder and Republic of Ireland manager, one of the finest passers of his generation, in Germany for Irish television channel RTE.</p>

<p>“It is the most basic thing in football and the most neglected one in the English game. You cannot win without possession of the ball and to see the way England gave the ball away as they did in Euro 2004, and on Saturday, was terrible.”</p>

<p>The expert view is that there are two causes, one specific to the tactics used against Paraguay, and one endemic to the English game. The latter is more worrying and it is a product both of the way young players are schooled, and the style of football they play as professionals.</p>

<p>“The wind ruins everything. It forces you to either work on speed or continuous movement. It’s very rare that you get the chance to sit and work on technique or tactics. You have to keep the players moving, otherwise they get cold. And this is something which begins way back when they are children.”</p>

<p>This, Wilkins confirmed. “Almost all my memories of training as a boy are associated with intense cold and a fierce wind.” When those players, their technique already deficient, reach the Premiership, they are encouraged to play the pinball game we all know and love.</p>

<p>“We play in a league which is exciting to watch, with electric pace, in which people are always looking to get the ball into the box,” said Francis. "Even Chelsea are not afraid to bomb the ball forward for Didier Drogba, or to get it wide quickly.</p>

<p>“In South America and parts of Europe, they play a much slower game with more emphasis on keeping the ball. That will never change. We have our strengths, others have theirs, we should play to them but in the heat of the day keeping the ball is an absolutely vital element.”</p>

<p>*</p>

<p>At least England had possession to squander. The US possession was laughable. I grew up in a soccer town. My brothers played. After three decades of throwing money and talent at the sport, I expect better from the US.</p>

16

<p>“xigs, you big dreamer you. From the flat-footed game I watched, I’d say we’re going to get creamed by Ghana and Italy. But you stay in your bubble as long as possible, hon.”</p>

<p>Cheers, for starters, you know that discussions about sports are inherently subjective. We all pick and choose the elements we want to discuss. I may be a dreamer, but I simply do not like the feast and famine attitude we tend to have when it comes to our soccer team. As I said earlier, the US is not the 5th best team in the world. However, let us compare it to its main competition, namely Mexico. For the past years, the US has dominated, if not embarassed, our southern neighbors to their great dismay, including a 2-0 demonstration in the past WC. In the Concacaf elimination for the WC, we ended up with 22 points -after throwing a game away-… and so did they. What more do we exactly expect from our national soccer team(s) simply eludes me! </p>

<p>Speaking about the past WC, Gus Hidding did deserve accolades, but let’s not forget that the US has an even better WC. For the record, the US did not deserve to lose against Germany. Are we upset because the US cannot reproduce the same game -or effort- they had against Portugal in 2002? But is it fair to be SOOOOO critical for losing against one of the two best teams in the world? Had we received the draw we DESERVED, we would probably not have been in the situation to explain a poor showing against one of the super-favorites. In a cynical way, the amount of criticisms hurled at the US soccer team for the MANNER in which they played is a testament to how high they did reach in a few generations. </p>

<p>Oh well, it is fun to exchange opinions. </p>

<p>PS Having a lower record would not HELP in South Africa. The best recordholders are seeded. This is why having the US meeting Italy, the Czechs, and Ghana is so unfortunate -and highly questionable.</p>

17

<p>

</p>

<p>But it’s NOT the Brits as a whole. They play as 4 separate countries (hence they are barred from Olympic soccer because there is no team GB) and only England made it. This has caused a massive diplomatic row with
[Scotland](<a href=“http://newsbox.msn.co.uk/article.aspx?as=adimarticle&ae=windows-1252&f=uk_-_olgbtopnews&t=4023&id=3010767&d=20060615&do=http://newsbox.msn.co.uk&i=http://newsbox.msn.co.uk/mediaexportlive&ks=0&mc=5&ml=ma&lc=en”>http://newsbox.msn.co.uk/article.aspx?as=adimarticle&ae=windows-1252&f=uk_-_olgbtopnews&t=4023&id=3010767&d=20060615&do=http://newsbox.msn.co.uk&i=http://newsbox.msn.co.uk/mediaexportlive&ks=0&mc=5&ml=ma&lc=en&lt;/a&gt;)</p>

<p>The England game is at 5pm today so Oxford university is pretty much shutting down at 4.30. In my department we are going to watch it live on a big screen in a lecture theatre. They expect an audience of 30 million, which is a lot considering the population of England is 50 million. The mass switch on of TVs and kettles (for a post-match cup of tea to calm the shattered nerves of a nation) sometimes causes a [power</a> surge](<a href=“http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5059904.stm]power”>BBC NEWS | UK | England game drives power surge)followed by a blackout! Now that is taking the world cup seriously.</p>

18

<p>Cupcake:
LOL!</p>

<p>H works in a small firm with people from all over the globe. No one is staying home, but no one is getting much work done as they watch the WC on their computers at work (including the boss).</p>

19

<p>We’ve been barred from watching the world cup on our computers because a couple of days ago this crashed the uni network (and one of the viewers was my boss, a professor)! Every college is showing it in their common room too. It is a major national event. Some shops offer discount to (usually female) customers for the duration of the match, especially online, as their sales take a slump.</p>

20

<p>Well, I’m a brand-new fan who’s been catching the action and loving it. This is like watching the NBA on steroids or the NFL without the brutality. How can anything be more exciting than that finish to the Germany-Poland match?</p>

<p>So the US lost. Hey. The Czech Republic has a great team. On to Italy!</p>

<p>I saw that ESPN2 recorded its largest audience <em>ever</em> for the US match. :)</p>