papsrus

Of course.

Link to Trib story. Hopefully that works. Thanks, ejp626. .

Couldn't an attacker just remove it first? And rape is an act of violence. Not sure this device would do anything to lessen that. More likely, just the opposite. The infomercials should be lovely.

Can I get an AMEN from the congregation?! That foldout, enlarged a little, looks kind of nice for framing.

Well said. All valid points. I'm not sure replay could even be used on whatever it is we think subjective calls are. (Is determining whether defenders wrapped their arms around attacking players in the goal area subjective?) But I would guess replay is not really appropriate for soccer. And we already know there are those who oppose its expansion in baseball. They prefer to live with the bad calls. So .... I am not familiar with the details of the review process for officials in the four major U.S. sports, but I do know there is one, and that the evaluation process is used to advance officials to playoff rounds. Maybe it's not sufficient. And maybe there is corruption/bias despite it (certainly there has been). So, yeah, could be better. Your points are all well-taken. My initial comments weren't so much centered on officiating as they were the overall cultural differences in U.S. sports vs. world soccer. Officiating plays into that, but it's only a part. And everyone at some point has a beef with the officials. I think you're right that errors of a benign nature tend to even out over time. Anyways, I'm enjoying the games. And I'm switching my pick from Mexico to Portugal. I realize the opposition wasn't up to it, but Portugal scored some beautiful goals. EDIT: for typo

Now this is some seriously outrageous music. (Young Tuxedo Brass Band) Gave it a first listen tonight. Absolutely wailin' stuff.

Cycling officials have gone after more than just Lance Armstrong. In fact, I don't think cycling officials have really gone after Armstrong at all, have they? It's been the press, hasn't it? He's never been accused by any cycling officials of anything, has he? The U.S. no-goal has not been the only bad call in this World Cup, nor certainly the history of the World Cup. You'll have to be more specific about the "going back to Josef Stalin" thing, but that seems to fall outside the scope of the World Cup.

It's not an anti-American thing. It's an officiating thing. I'm sure every country has a legitimate beef. (see "hand of God" goal -- anti-English?)

But we have replay review in the four major sports in the U.S. now. (Limited in the NBA, but the referees will at certain times consult the video monitors to see if a shot beat the game clock, etc.) The whole point of video review is to raise the level of fairness in officiating. To get the call right, despite the human error factor that is inevitable in officiating. And I disagree on the NFL. Officials are obligated to review a range of calls at the request of either coach during games. It's limited, but it's there. Exactly. What American sport offers this level of transparency and accountability? Even if we only know about this rating because of an unauthorized leak from FIFA, that's still more than you get from the NFL/MLB/NBA. The only American official I can think of who faced public discipline was Tim Donaghy, and he was guilty of federal crimes. I disagree here as well. All four major U.S. sports review and grade their officiating. Only the top-graded officials make it to the playoffs. This is true in football, baseball, basketball and hockey. And I'm not sure what the union rules are for each sport, but I know baseball umpires whose umpiring is judged inadequate can be, and have been, let go. I assume there are similar provisions in the labor agreements for the other major sports. Game officials make mistakes. That's a given. But I think the effort to correct bad calls during games (through the use of replay review) coupled with the performance review process for game officials through the course of a season in the four major U.S. sports, is genuine. That the referee in the U.S. game was judged to be 'poor' is pretty much the minimum action they could have taken there, and hardly qualifies as "transparency." There's still no explanation of why the call was made, and likely never will be, as far as I can tell. Why? Because of the rules that say the referee doesn't have to explain himself. Not transparent at all, in my view. Not trying to be argumentative, but I think officiating in particular is worth a critical look -- in all sports. How could it be improved, made more fair? Clearly there's room for improvement in soccer. .

Yes. I'm sure I'm overstating things to an extent, but getting back to the 'hand of God' goal, even the name of the goal suggests divine intervention, and, therefore, that it was somehow a 'just' goal and correct goal. But it wasn't divine intervention, it was simply a bad goal. Matthew: On the Jeter home run, the comments from Pettitte in particular, and the kid as well, seem to acknowledge that it wouldn't have been a home run. But perhaps Yankee fans should be excused from this notion of fair play. (Kidding! ... a little) In any case, we now have replay in baseball to address this very thing. So in a way, the fairness or unfairness of situations like that Jeter home run have been addressed in baseball. And to an extent, remedied.

Oh, it would be a stunning upset if the U.S. by some miracle won this tournament. I have no illusions there. And that's kind of the point. I don't really care who wins, as long as it's good, clean, fair futbol. -- No more diving, no more feigned expressions of excruciating pain by a nicked player who is magically up and running at full speed minutes later. No more players wrapping their arms around opponents inside the penalty box on a free kick. And no more unaccountable referees. Agreed? Fair sportsmanship, in other words. That might help the game's image here. I still say the 'bashing' has more to do with the cultural peculiarities of the game outlined above than any result. Here's an example: I think the game of rugby is respected in the United States, even though we're no good at it, because it seems to be a sport that is played honestly and ruggedly, without the sort of theatrics that are all too common in soccer. Remember Argentina's "hand of God" goal vs. England in 1986? (Who doesn't?). That goal, I'm sure, was celebrated in Argentina, along with the 2-1 victory over England. And I'm pretty sure that if the United States scored a similar goal, and went on to win the game, it would be viewed with embarrassment. An unfair goal; a game not won honestly. But the result is accepted in Argentina as a proud victory. Seems to be something not right, not just, about that, doesn't there? That's the sort of difference in attitude that I'm getting at which Americans kind of scratch their collective heads over. Does Argentina really want to be proud of a game unfairly won?

I would add that people in the United States are generally -- if not universally -- proud of the performance of the U.S. team, regardless of how far they make it. Will there be questions if they don't make it out of the group? Sure. But this business of it being a national disgrace seems a bit over the top. The lads are playing well. We like it, I think! (despite what some above have claimed).

There may be some truth to that, but I don't think it's the whole banana by any means. For instance, there is tremendous interest in the United States during the Olympics in sports where the United States is certainly not the dominant power -- gymnastics in the summer and figure skating in the winter. I would bet these two events are by a wide margin the two most-widely viewed events in the United States during summer and winter Olympic Games. But the United States is not the preeminent power in either. Sometimes success is achieved. Sometimes not. And congratulations and admiration are generally offered (corrupt officiating notwithstanding) for the superior performance of whichever country wins. So, no. It's not entirely due to the fact that the United States isn't a power in soccer. And btw, we're ranked 14th in the world (out of 202), so that ain't too shabby. .

I was forced to watch it at work. The most commonly heard observation: "I can't believe a professional pitcher is incapable of throwing a strike!" Maddon called Johnson the best pitcher in the game nobody talks about. (Present company excluded, of course.)

I wrote down something last night about the "culture" of soccer being foreign in some significant ways to Americans, but given the tone of the comments posted above, I decided not to post it. It basically revolves around the notions of sportsmanship, fair play and sacrifice for your team, or giving your maximum effort no matter the circumstances. Obviously these are not uniquely American qualities, but they do seem sometimes to be lacking in soccer, particularly World Cup soccer where national pride is on the line. Sacrifice/Giving your maximum effort: The implosion of the French team would be unthinkable for an American team on the world stage, or in any of the major North American professional sports during a championship tournament. There have been similar, though less disfunctional displays by other "world powers" during this World Cup. Everybody jumps overboard at the first sign of adversity, starts wagging their fingers at one another about whose fault it is. I'm not saying this never happens in U.S. sports (the U.S. hockey team trashing a hotel after a loss during the Japan Winter Olympics -- but at least they trashed it together). The more common instinct, though, is to stick together to overcome adversity no matter what the odds. To persevere, not to abandon ship, as the French have seemingly done. Possibly the English, too. Maybe the Spanish, I don't know. Fair play: This business of diving and over-dramatizing some (not all) injuries or fouls, trying to draw penalty kicks by collapsing at the faintest brush from an opponent, is generally viewed in American sports as a sign of weakness at best, effete at worst. It is to be ridiculed, not accepted as a tactic of the game. These sorts of dramatics color the game of soccer in a way that is distasteful to the American notion of sports, I think. Sportsmanship (A tale of two game officials): 1. A baseball umpire makes an obviously bad call at the very end of a game, costing the home-town team a historic achievement, a perfect game for their pitcher. After the game, the umpire owns up to his mistake and apologizes personally to the pitcher, who accepts the apology gracefully. The umpire makes a public statement saying, basically, "I blew it." He takes the same field for the next game between the same two teams a day or two later, tears streaming down his face, and is greeted not with derision, but with applause from many of the fans whose team he denied a perfect game. The fans forgive him, the player forgives him, and everyone shakes hands and admits, "we're human." There is a resolution, though imperfect, of the injustice. 2. A soccer referee makes what appears to be an obviously bad call, denying a team a monumental goal that would have capped a victorious comeback from an 0-2 deficit. The referee gives no explanation of the call either to the players during the game or to anyone else after the game. And there is no resolution of the perceived injustice. Now, these ideals of sportsmanship, fair play and sacrifice for your team are not uniquely American qualities, nor are they always paramount in American sports. Too often the professional athlete is motivated my money and personal glory over team success. But these ideals are loosely summed up in the phrase, "It's not whether you win or lose, it's how you play the game." And "how you play the game" is something that seems suspect in soccer sometimes. I'm sure I'll be criticized for saying this, and there are probably many examples that run counter to what I've laid out, but I think there is a thread of truth running through the above that explains why Americans can't warm to soccer. It's the culture, not the game. That, and the no scoring part.

Now we're gettin' somewhere!

Why yes, I do happen to have some tape. Why do you ask?

... except for the Marlins' Stanton and his first-inning grand salami off Garza just now ... .

I just felt that this post deserved to be quoted.

Some correct calls by the umps every now and then would help ... But everybody could say that. I dunno. They seem real hot and cold, and not winning enough home games (18-15). Upton is not real disciplined at the plate. From what I've seen, I really like Rodriguez and Brignac though. Hopefully they'll be able to get their shit together at home a little more and make a three-team race of it through the summer. The thing I'm loving about baseball this year is all the really talented young players who are emerging, like Heyward. And Dan, that reverse hex is working beautifully. So, I say the Rays are going to fade fast and the Sox are going to run away with the division!

Gotta quadruple and then some that $404.

When the ball is struck there has to be at least two defenders (including the goalie) between the offensive player and the goal. If the offensive player is slightly past, he's off sides. In every Cup they say that the refs are told to give the benefit of the doubt to the offensive player but it rarely seems to happen that way. That's what I understood. Wasn't that Mexican player about 15 yards behind the defenders? Also, I noticed on one of the Argentine goals that the forward on the weak side was behind the defenders while the player on the other side with the ball was not. The player with the ball then somehow got it to the player on the weak side for a goal. That looked like the weak-side player was offside to me as well. But it was a LOT closer than the Mexican goal. At least, seemed to me. Maybe I wasn't paying close enough attention to the whole "when the ball is struck." Anyways, I know you guys say it's not the greatest tournament so far. I'm enjoying it. Thinking things will heat up considerably in the next round! I don't really have a favorite, other than watching some good ball.

Thanks for that. Sweet story. It ends rather abruptly though, which can only mean you're about to post another?

Interesting article on Bunk Johnson.

I hope they play basketball.