Jun 20, 2011
Auf Wiedersehen Herr Ballack
(I was cleaning out my garage and I found this old blog under some of the deck furniture)
A sad week for one of my favorite all-time German players: Michael Ballack. The German National Team (DFB) coach Joachim Löw officially announced that Ballack’s involvement with the National Team is over: am Ende, Schluß, Fertig, Kaput…
The reason, which we all knew was coming, has to do with his aging legs and, more significantly, the crop of younger players that have established themselves on the team – There just wasn’t room for him any longer as the Euro 2012 tournament approaches. Good for Germany, bad for Ballack.
What makes this story a little worse is that according to the coach, he and Michael had been in open and honest conversations on the topic the whole time, but only this weekend Ballack came out and said no such conversations had occurred, that this announcement was a surprise and an insult to him.
An ugly situation for sure and not a fitting ending to a national career that included second place at a World Cup, third place at a World Cup and second place at a European Championship (as the captain)…most players can only dream of anything even close to those accomplishments. He’s also got 42 goals from 98 international games (aka: caps) and he’s a midfielder! Most out-and-out strikers don’t have that many goals. Two games shy of getting 100 caps is also a disappointment (Beckham’s international career saw him make somewhat of comeback to vault him into the elite 100+ club with 115 caps…and Beckham, a midfielder, only has 17 international goals).
But mixed in with his decade long career, there is a glass half empty story too:
- In 2002 he found himself in the Champions League final with Leverkusen only to get second place (due to a Zinedine Zidane game winner in the hall of fame for insane goals…YouTube it)
- In the 2002 World Cup semi-final with Germany needing a win to advance into the final, Ballack gets a yellow card meaning that should they actually make it to the final, he must miss it… His response: he scores the winning goal. And sadly had to watch the World Cup final on the bench (Germany lost 0:2 to Brazil but without their best field player. Had Ballack played, who knows what would have happened,? I like to think I know)
- In 2008 he again found himself in a Champions League final, this time with Chelsea in a PK extra time shootout. He of course nailed his PK but John Terry tragically miss-hit his and Michael was again in second place.
- In the 2008 European final, as noted above he finished on the runners-up stand (nothing particular to be ashamed about in this, only the second place again).
- In the lead up to the 2010 World Cup, in the last club game of the season, the English FA Cup Final with Chelsea, his ankle is broken from a harsh slide tackle from one Kevin Prince Boateng. His World Cup is over as he was again forced to watch from the sidelines as this new young and fast German team sprinted to third place. Many argued they were better off without him, Der Capitano.
- After the World Cup as Euro 2012 qualifications commenced, his return to form is hampered with yet another injury, this one proving to be too much as the team continued to solidify without him.
But as I said, that’s the bad stuff. In the meantime he’s won plenty of league and cup trophies, was German player of the year a bunch of times and will go down as one of the greats. And not least important, he made a pretty spectacular memory one night in Seattle for a dad and his son.
Vielen dank Michael: we’ll see you next season on the field for Leverkusen.
Aug 24, 2010
'Footy on the Telly' Trouble Ahead
First and foremost I want to acknowledge and apologize to my half a dozen readers for violating Rule One in blogging: Keep the content coming. Yes, I hit a little wall after the World Cup and there was some vacation time in there too (inclduing a trip to Germany and Spain…home of the team that should have won the World Cup and home of the team that actually won it).
With the World Cup hangover gone, we’re already beginning the new club seasons. And with it, some changes at home: Namely, the newly acquired channel GolTV. Yes, I finally bit the bullet and subscribed to Comcast’s digital cable package that includes GolTV – a dual language, soccer only channel that happens to own the US TV rights to airing the German Bundesliga (as well as Spain’s La Liga, among other offerings). And with this addition, I also get the delightful bonus of ESPN Deportes, ESPN’s Spanish language sports channel that happens to lean heavily in favor of Futbol (including even more Bundesliga matches…and I can get used to the Spanish commentary, even the overdone “GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAL”).
So how does all this mean trouble?
US soccer television coverage has been so limited (especially compared to...let's see...EVERY other sport on the planet) that I could always justify the minimal TV time needed. A game's on? Case closed: I’m watching it (Euro and World Cups being the exception). There was never really any major viewing conflicts and, when needed, I could always use the rationale of “be glad I’m not a baseball fan, there’s, like, 8 games on every day…” just in case soccer viewing was encroaching on other domestic activities.
But now, with FoxSoccer Channel, ESPN2, ESPN3 and now GolTV, ESPN Deportes and don’t forget to layer in the DVR, I’ve got some serious options, some big choices to make. Last week alone there were 3 Bundesliga games on within a 24 hour spell. I’m not used to that!
Yes, despite the fact that I now receive a whole host of other Spanish language channels in my Primero Latino package that I’ll never watch in order to get GolTV, we’ve come a long way. A little acknowledged fact: ESPN’s coverage of the 2008 European Championships was the first time in US history that the Euro’s were available here on semi-mainstream TV. Before that it was the awful Setanta Sports' $170 per-per-view package (where there was no halftime commentary and games would get cut-off if they extended into PKs, and we’re talking 2004 here!). And before that there was nothing. Today, we’ve got World Cup games not featuring the US still getting on ABC. The EPL is on both FSC as well as ESPN2. We’ve got more and more Champions League games on each season. So I’m afraid the days of saying “I HAVE to watch this game, how often do I get to see Bayern Munich play Werder Bremen?!” are nearing an end. I’m entering the phase of having choices and having to prioritize my footy on the telly time.
But before I get too far ahead of myself and expect to see the German Cup Final aired on MTV any time soon or that Bastian Schweinsteiger will host the ESPYs, I need only to have a glance at any bookstore’s magazine rack:
Hunting/fishing/gun/knife/ammo magazines: 32. Soccer Magazines: Zero.
With the World Cup hangover gone, we’re already beginning the new club seasons. And with it, some changes at home: Namely, the newly acquired channel GolTV. Yes, I finally bit the bullet and subscribed to Comcast’s digital cable package that includes GolTV – a dual language, soccer only channel that happens to own the US TV rights to airing the German Bundesliga (as well as Spain’s La Liga, among other offerings). And with this addition, I also get the delightful bonus of ESPN Deportes, ESPN’s Spanish language sports channel that happens to lean heavily in favor of Futbol (including even more Bundesliga matches…and I can get used to the Spanish commentary, even the overdone “GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAL”).
So how does all this mean trouble?
US soccer television coverage has been so limited (especially compared to...let's see...EVERY other sport on the planet) that I could always justify the minimal TV time needed. A game's on? Case closed: I’m watching it (Euro and World Cups being the exception). There was never really any major viewing conflicts and, when needed, I could always use the rationale of “be glad I’m not a baseball fan, there’s, like, 8 games on every day…” just in case soccer viewing was encroaching on other domestic activities.
But now, with FoxSoccer Channel, ESPN2, ESPN3 and now GolTV, ESPN Deportes and don’t forget to layer in the DVR, I’ve got some serious options, some big choices to make. Last week alone there were 3 Bundesliga games on within a 24 hour spell. I’m not used to that!
Yes, despite the fact that I now receive a whole host of other Spanish language channels in my Primero Latino package that I’ll never watch in order to get GolTV, we’ve come a long way. A little acknowledged fact: ESPN’s coverage of the 2008 European Championships was the first time in US history that the Euro’s were available here on semi-mainstream TV. Before that it was the awful Setanta Sports' $170 per-per-view package (where there was no halftime commentary and games would get cut-off if they extended into PKs, and we’re talking 2004 here!). And before that there was nothing. Today, we’ve got World Cup games not featuring the US still getting on ABC. The EPL is on both FSC as well as ESPN2. We’ve got more and more Champions League games on each season. So I’m afraid the days of saying “I HAVE to watch this game, how often do I get to see Bayern Munich play Werder Bremen?!” are nearing an end. I’m entering the phase of having choices and having to prioritize my footy on the telly time.
But before I get too far ahead of myself and expect to see the German Cup Final aired on MTV any time soon or that Bastian Schweinsteiger will host the ESPYs, I need only to have a glance at any bookstore’s magazine rack:
Hunting/fishing/gun/knife/ammo magazines: 32. Soccer Magazines: Zero.
Jul 9, 2010
Why Holland Will Win the World Cup 2:0
The reason the Dutch will win? Some Mojo. That extra bit of luck. The soccer Gods smiling on them…whatever you want to call it, they have that extra “thing” going for them. You can see it and sense it.
While there’s little doubt Spain are the best team in this World Cup (they beat Germany after all!), they really only have one game. And yes, while it happens to be an absolutely superb game, it won’t be enough to win it all. You need just that extra bit of what I described above. Spain have had pretty much all their success based on nothing but their pure collective team talent – there’s been little luck involved at all, neither good nor bad. They wear the opponent down with their possession game and then get the one goal for the win. That’s all they need.
Holland on the other hand have been playing with just enough to win and they’ve been playing with that extra bit of something…they’ve gotten that extra deflection for the goal, the van Bronckhorst screamer goal (are you kidding me with that one!), no deal-breaker calls against them (thinking about how many cards van Bommel could have had), etc. Now clearly I’m not saying the Dutch don’t have the raw talent as well. Of course they do -- I think Sneijder may just take FIFA player of the year come December. And Robben has been hot all year. That’s all a given when you’re in the final.
As we’ve seen before, if you can get a goal against Spain, their game isn’t quite as effective (which is why I’m still not over Germany’s defeat…if they could have just gotten that one goal…if, if, if? A cruel game but that’s a different post). Holland will get that goal somehow: it may just be the best goal in the history of the World via Wesley or Robben or Van Persie or it may be deflected off of Puyol's shin for an own-goal. And then they’ll get one more very late in the game and they’ll win the World Cup 2:0.
Unless of course that f***ing octopus says otherwise, then forget everything I’ve said here.
While there’s little doubt Spain are the best team in this World Cup (they beat Germany after all!), they really only have one game. And yes, while it happens to be an absolutely superb game, it won’t be enough to win it all. You need just that extra bit of what I described above. Spain have had pretty much all their success based on nothing but their pure collective team talent – there’s been little luck involved at all, neither good nor bad. They wear the opponent down with their possession game and then get the one goal for the win. That’s all they need.
Holland on the other hand have been playing with just enough to win and they’ve been playing with that extra bit of something…they’ve gotten that extra deflection for the goal, the van Bronckhorst screamer goal (are you kidding me with that one!), no deal-breaker calls against them (thinking about how many cards van Bommel could have had), etc. Now clearly I’m not saying the Dutch don’t have the raw talent as well. Of course they do -- I think Sneijder may just take FIFA player of the year come December. And Robben has been hot all year. That’s all a given when you’re in the final.
As we’ve seen before, if you can get a goal against Spain, their game isn’t quite as effective (which is why I’m still not over Germany’s defeat…if they could have just gotten that one goal…if, if, if? A cruel game but that’s a different post). Holland will get that goal somehow: it may just be the best goal in the history of the World via Wesley or Robben or Van Persie or it may be deflected off of Puyol's shin for an own-goal. And then they’ll get one more very late in the game and they’ll win the World Cup 2:0.
Unless of course that f***ing octopus says otherwise, then forget everything I’ve said here.
Jun 30, 2010
Stats, Facts and Huge Global Shifts (not really)
Here they come…
We’ve got four South American countries in the quarter finals of the World Cup, at the expense of the traditional European teams, and here come the theories to explain this dramatic storyline: The decline of European domination! The rest of the world is catching up! Europe needs to reevaluate everything! Too many foreign players playing in the Premiership and the Serie A and so on.
So what conclusions can we draw? What does this mean? For the most part, nothing. True, the gap between the traditional soccer powers and the rest of the world is not as big as it once was. It’s no longer a stroll through the park for the big guns.
But as far as themes, in Germany 2006, the four semi-finalists were all from Europe. Has it all gone down the toilet for them in just four years? Of course not. You throw Italy, England or France back into the mix and we’re back to “normal”. And each of those countries had their own unique and, statistically speaking, random circumstances that caused their collective premature exits. Nothing more. There really isn't a big story here in 2010.
But in general, they like to run with any stats and facts in the World Cup…
“No South American team has ever been beaten by an Asian team on a Tuesday” or "Brazil wins 75% of their games when leading by a goal after half time when the scorer's name begins with the letter R" or “No team has ever won the World Cup when they’ve lost an opening round game.” OK, so those aren’t all actual quotes, but they’re close. Just wait should Brazil or Argentina win this year in Africa, we'll be hearing all about how no European team can win outside of Europe once again and hear all kinds of reasons (the secret with this: Brazil and Argentina were the best teams).
Perhaps I'll buy into the historical significance of the stats a little later in the century when we have more history to draw from and when the results are truly more predictable and the stats more meaningful (or until some statistician writes a book proving otherwise). For now, congrats to South America for doing well so far.
I’ll leave you with one last stat…
Do you know how many times Brazil and Germany had played each other in a World Cup before they met in the 2002 final? And keep in mind, these two teams had been in 13 of the previous 18 FINAL matches. The answer: Zero. That was their first meeting.
So should they meet again this time, Germany’s in big trouble: Brazil has beaten them 100% of the time in World Cup play (on Sundays).
We’ve got four South American countries in the quarter finals of the World Cup, at the expense of the traditional European teams, and here come the theories to explain this dramatic storyline: The decline of European domination! The rest of the world is catching up! Europe needs to reevaluate everything! Too many foreign players playing in the Premiership and the Serie A and so on.
So what conclusions can we draw? What does this mean? For the most part, nothing. True, the gap between the traditional soccer powers and the rest of the world is not as big as it once was. It’s no longer a stroll through the park for the big guns.
But as far as themes, in Germany 2006, the four semi-finalists were all from Europe. Has it all gone down the toilet for them in just four years? Of course not. You throw Italy, England or France back into the mix and we’re back to “normal”. And each of those countries had their own unique and, statistically speaking, random circumstances that caused their collective premature exits. Nothing more. There really isn't a big story here in 2010.
But in general, they like to run with any stats and facts in the World Cup…
“No South American team has ever been beaten by an Asian team on a Tuesday” or "Brazil wins 75% of their games when leading by a goal after half time when the scorer's name begins with the letter R" or “No team has ever won the World Cup when they’ve lost an opening round game.” OK, so those aren’t all actual quotes, but they’re close. Just wait should Brazil or Argentina win this year in Africa, we'll be hearing all about how no European team can win outside of Europe once again and hear all kinds of reasons (the secret with this: Brazil and Argentina were the best teams).
Perhaps I'll buy into the historical significance of the stats a little later in the century when we have more history to draw from and when the results are truly more predictable and the stats more meaningful (or until some statistician writes a book proving otherwise). For now, congrats to South America for doing well so far.
I’ll leave you with one last stat…
Do you know how many times Brazil and Germany had played each other in a World Cup before they met in the 2002 final? And keep in mind, these two teams had been in 13 of the previous 18 FINAL matches. The answer: Zero. That was their first meeting.
So should they meet again this time, Germany’s in big trouble: Brazil has beaten them 100% of the time in World Cup play (on Sundays).
Jun 28, 2010
The No-call Goal Spares England
The good news for England in light of the dreadful decision to not count Frank Lampard's goal is that they are actually being spared from receiving the full brunt of criticism on their performance. Instead, we're talking about goal-line technology and FIFA’s stubbornness as well. For sure, there’s still a ton of blame placed on the players, the FA, Capello, etc -- but they're getting a decent diversion nonetheless.
While there can be no doubt England were robbed of a goal and that a single goal certainly has a big impact on the game, I’m falling into the camp that believes Germany were on their game and that England would have still lost under any circumstances.
Based on what I saw (for all 4 games), I'm just not seeing any chance that England would have miraculously found some new, higher level of play had the game been tied. They came out in the second half as flat, disorganized and uninspired as they had in the three previous games. And I ‘m sorry, a 1 nil win over Slovenia with the only goal coming off DeFoe’s shin does not equate to the “The Lion’s have roared!” proclamation and the belief that all of their problems are solved as the England coach and press were going on about afterward.
Part of what’ driving this rant against England is when I saw David James’ post game comment of: “Germany would have crumbled had the goal counted…” I beg your pardon? This was a totally lame comment coming from a very average keeper who personally should have dealt with three of Germany’s goals had he been playing better. Talk about a state of denial. Or how about: “we would have come out full throttle after the half…” from the absent Rio Ferdinand? So Rio, are you saying that at one goal down in a World Cup knock out game, England wasn’t already motivated enough to come out at “full throttle”? Was half-throttle all that was needed?
In fact, I’m almost ready to say enough to this much hyped England-Germany rivalry. I’m getting a little tired of the English press, fans and players talking this thing up every time. Yes, it’s a big game. So is Germany-Argentina, Holland-Brazil, but enough with the ’66 Final references, the PK history, the WW2 stuff (“Two World Wars and One World Cup, doo-dah, doo-dah” …don’t Germany’s three World Cups and three European titles, and the fact that they qualify for every tournament sort of make that a moot point?)…
But notice I said “almost” – with German victories like this 4:1, I’m perfectly happy to keep up the hype a bit longer.
Forget Technology, Just Do Away with Audience Replays...
While I don't have the energy or interest to restart this discussion again (with Lamp's disallowed goal yesterday, the coverage is in full swing), I just can't resist this one...
By George, FIFA's got it!
Hey, forget all this senseless debate about how to prevent these devastatingly bad calls we're seeing in the World Cup -- FIFA's just decided to apply a touch of short-term censorship: they're going to ban replays of controversial calls in the stadiums. Brilliant! Perhaps it was a suggestion from the North Koreans as they were boarding their plane home.
I say we take it a step further and ban all replays everywhere: TV, stadiums, even YouTube. That should do the trick. Next...
By George, FIFA's got it!
Hey, forget all this senseless debate about how to prevent these devastatingly bad calls we're seeing in the World Cup -- FIFA's just decided to apply a touch of short-term censorship: they're going to ban replays of controversial calls in the stadiums. Brilliant! Perhaps it was a suggestion from the North Koreans as they were boarding their plane home.
I say we take it a step further and ban all replays everywhere: TV, stadiums, even YouTube. That should do the trick. Next...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
