World Cup 2010

[brownie]

... and now the French team commits suicide (it's live on French TV) during a rare open training session:

French team training interrupted

[Brad]

From what we are seeing so far, there are no easy matches. The so called minnows are fighting hard.

[kenny weir]

Kiwis! Blimey ...

[J.A.W.]

... and now the French team commits suicide (it's live on French TV) during a rare open training session:

French team training interrupted

It seems the French have taken over the traditional Dutch role of kicking up a row within their own ranks...

[papsrus]

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.

[kenny weir]

Whooooooo - NZ two games, two draws.

[J.A.W.]

Wow, Italy 1, New Zealand 1! A disaster for the reigning world champions...

[Van Basten II]

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.

Nice rationalization but you forgot to mention one thing this is a sport where the US is not a powerhouse, me thinks that you simply can not cope with the fact that you can not be the best at everything , so you elect to act like it is irrelevant.

By the way , and it could be said for a lot of nations so I 'm not being accused of singling out your country, but how many sports generate interest where among the top performers they are not US born competitors ?

Kudos to the Kiwis, this team grew between the Slovakia game and the one today, the late goal gave them confidence. They played with heart and gusto, can't say the same about the dreadful Azzuris. Didn't think they were so bad against Paraguay, but today they were lifeless . Too bad they still will probably qualify...

Edited June 20, 2010 by Van Basten II

[papsrus]

Nice rationalization but you forgot to mention one thing this is a sport where the US is not a powerhouse, me thinks that you simply can not cope with the fact that you can not be the best at everything , so you elect to act like it is irrelevant.

By the way , and it could be said for a lot of nations so I 'm not being accused of singling out your country, but how many sports generate interest where among the top performers they are not US born competitors ?

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.

.

Edited June 20, 2010 by papsrus

[papsrus]

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).

[Van Basten II]

Nice rationalization but you forgot to mention one thing this is a sport where the US is not a powerhouse, me thinks that you simply can not cope with the fact that you can not be the best at everything , so you elect to act like it is irrelevant.

By the way , and it could be said for a lot of nations so I 'm not being accused of singling out your country, but how many sports generate interest where among the top performers they are not US born competitors ?

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.

.

Well gymnastics and Figure skating, the US used to do well internationally , although they seem to have hit hard times lately, but the whole Olympic thing is mostly nowadays a patriotic propaganda, it has little to do with sports but more about to see our compadre win and boast about it. So it's hard to compare it with a specific sport that you can follow on more than a two week period

Regarding your footbal team, it has come a long way and from laughing stock it is not a dark horse and it is now a Concacaf fixture at the World Cup but it is not yet the team that you think that has a strong chance to win it all, to make a comparaison to tennis they are like Robin Soderling prior to this year, they are quite good but have not shown yet they can beat the best.

And in a way, until the team is able to achieve this kind of success , the futbol bashers that are plaguing your country will be the main vociferous voices we wiil unfortunately hear.

[papsrus]

Regarding your footbal team, it has come a long way and from laughing stock it is not a dark horse and it is now a Concacaf fixture at the World Cup but it is not yet the team that you think that has a strong chance to win it all, to make a comparaison to tennis they are like Robin Soderling prior to this year, they are quite good but have not shown yet they can beat the best.

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.

And in a way, until the team is able to achieve this kind of success , the futbol bashers that are plaguing your country will be the main vociferous voices we wiil unfortunately hear.

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?

[.:.impossible]

Good stuff Paps. You very well may be on to something here. Then again, my Dad has been saying

just this about NBA, NFL, MLB competition for decades. It's seems now that he is also fed up with college level sports. I really can't argue with him because he's right.

At any rate, the level of physical contact in the World Cup and the NBA Finals, for that matter, are actually quite impressive in some odd way. These games of finesse transforming into contact sport.

[Matthew]

Regarding your footbal team, it has come a long way and from laughing stock it is not a dark horse and it is now a Concacaf fixture at the World Cup but it is not yet the team that you think that has a strong chance to win it all, to make a comparaison to tennis they are like Robin Soderling prior to this year, they are quite good but have not shown yet they can beat the best.

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.

And in a way, until the team is able to achieve this kind of success , the futbol bashers that are plaguing your country will be the main vociferous voices we wiil unfortunately hear.

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?

On this sportsmanship thing: I have never heard a Yankee fan in my life want to give back game one of the 1996 ALCS -- Jeffrey Maier is a hero!

Video for those who forgot.

I love Mr. Sportsmanship Derek Jeter: "I don't care!"

[Van Basten II]

Regarding your footbal team, it has come a long way and from laughing stock it is not a dark horse and it is now a Concacaf fixture at the World Cup but it is not yet the team that you think that has a strong chance to win it all, to make a comparaison to tennis they are like Robin Soderling prior to this year, they are quite good but have not shown yet they can beat the best.

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.

And in a way, until the team is able to achieve this kind of success , the futbol bashers that are plaguing your country will be the main vociferous voices we wiil unfortunately hear.

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?

There is something to be said about that, will write you an answer a bit later when I'm back in a few days and have more time in my hands , great conversation by the way.

[papsrus]

There is something to be said about that, will write you an answer a bit later when I'm back in a few days and have more time in my hands , great conversation by the way.

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.

[Patrick]

I'm watching a few matches with interest in the worldwide spectacle, and not drawing any stereotypes about nations, their players, their fans, the sport, etc.

Just watched Brazil v. Cote d'Ivoire. Brazil looked good, but this match did not live up to the pre-game hype (at least as hyped by US television).

[Big Wheel]

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.

I call BS on this example; it's completely unrepresentative of actual officiating in the US. The entire reason the perfect game apology was notable was because US refs and umps NEVER admit fault; this one only happened because the decision denied everyone the opportunity to see a once-a-decade achievement. (Though perfect games are getting more frequent these days...wonder why that is?) Occasionally you'll see the NFL do a review well after the game and say "oh, such-and-such call was incorrect," but that's about all the "resolution" provided.

My personal take is that the unpopularity of soccer in the US is largely about spectacle. Soccer requires watching closely to appreciate the nuances, and we don't give a crap about nuances, we want to see crazy plays made frequently. Soccer just doesn't deliver crazy plays more than 3 or 4 times in a typical game. Only baseball offers this low level of highlights, but baseball benefits from having discrete achievements/stats to follow and there is a lot less actual play without highlights (because the ball is in play for such a short time, whereas in soccer the ball is ALWAYS in play.)

Edited June 20, 2010 by Big Wheel

[Brad]

I don't really want to get too involved in this whole sportsmanship argument but I am an American who loves football and I just don't agree. To me, it's just part of the fabric of the game. People here, that is those who only watch the game mostly at WC time, don't realize what a physical game and because goals at any level are at a premium players are always looking for an edge. I also think these kind of comments from people who don't watch the game year round. I would encourage you to get Fox Soccer Channel and watch the English Premier League from August to May and you'll take in what a great game this is.

I think that's what steroids are all about in baseball or spitballs, etc. I'm not saying I like what I see sometimes but it happens and FIFA has tried a little bit to eliminate the dives. I'm sure they will look at the Kaka expulsion and overturn that. Fortunately, that had no effect on the game.

Yes, refs make mistakes but you can blame FIFA for having refs from countries not used to coaching big games. I watch the Premier League in England quite a bit and generally the refs get it right. By the way FIFA has rated the US mail ref "poor" for what it's worth; hopefully he won't work another match in this tournament.

[Big Wheel]

By the way FIFA has rated the US mail ref "poor" for what it's worth; hopefully he won't work another match in this tournament.

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.

[Brad]

Clarification: in my last post in the last sentence, I meant to say the US Slovenia match Mali ref, in case anyone wonders what I meant.

I also heard somehwhere that some match was going to use a ref from the Seychelles. That's another head shaker.

Edited June 20, 2010 by Brad

[papsrus]

I call BS on this example; it's completely unrepresentative of actual officiating in the US. The entire reason the perfect game apology was notable was because US refs and umps NEVER admit fault; this one only happened because the decision denied everyone the opportunity to see a once-a-decade achievement. (Though perfect games are getting more frequent these days...wonder why that is?) Occasionally you'll see the NFL do a review well after the game and say "oh, such-and-such call was incorrect," but that's about all the "resolution" provided.

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.

By the way FIFA has rated the US mail ref "poor" for what it's worth; hopefully he won't work another match in this tournament.

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.

.

Edited June 20, 2010 by papsrus

[Tim McG]

I lost interest when the USA team got screwed out of a legit goal vs. Slovania.

It is fairly obvious that the European/International refs cheat.

Advantage: Anybody but America.

The World Cup is anti-American bullshit.

Fuck the World Cup.

Yeah, that must be it. The World Cup, with its long and illustrious history, is nothing more than "anti-American bullshit." Yep, the event the entire world (except for Canada and the US, although that's changing) looks forward to every four years is simply a celebration of everything un-American. I can see it now... each and every one of those 2 BILLION+ people who will watch the final will do so by burning the American flag and chanting "death to the infidels." None of them will be tuning in to watch the beautiful game, nosiree... they're just going to watch as a way to stick it to Uncle Sam one more time. Oh, and all those referees will be dancing a jig of joy in the realization that they've "cheated" the US out of the tournament.

Tim, you really need to get a grip sometimes. Either use the logical side of your brain, or stay out of the deep end of any conversation regarding a topic you clearly know nothing about.

Cheers,

Shane

Watch the replay, then preach to me about logic, Shane.

I lost interest when the USA team got screwed out of a legit goal vs. Slovania.

It is fairly obvious that the European/International refs cheat.

Advantage: Anybody but America.

The World Cup is anti-American bullshit.

Fuck the World Cup.

Yeeeha! He's back - firing off the same post at two forums.

Look, Indestructible! you just gotta join the dots.

OF COURSE the World Cup is anti-American. For the very simple reasons that 1. American is the centre of the universe; and 2. American is the greatest country in the world.

The US has been one of the under dog teams I've been cheering for - along with (obviously) Australia, but also NZ and all the rest of 'em.

I can happily drop the US now, though, coz the cavalry's arrived!

Perhaps you will read this post from that other BBS [like it matters]:

Like this is the first time in WC history the Americans got screwed? C'mon, Kenny. You know better than that.

My problem is this time it was so damned obvious. Like these guys don't even bother to hide the cheating anymore. The replay clearly shows two USA team players being bear hugged by the Slovac players...but this Mali ref disallows the goal? And not one explanation?

Cheating by the European/International refs and judges has been going on since the Cold War days...and American athletes have been the target. Oh, sure on rare occasion some country like Ghana gets a dumb call in their favor and I didn't like the call in the German game either. But you simply cannot tell me that there isn't a decided prejudice against America and that it hasn't spilled over onto the playing field. With all due respect, Kenny....history is on my side on this issue.

Beat American teams on the playing field and tell these refs to call it as fair as possible or get out of the business. Let the teams play the game and park the anti-America bullshit at the gate.

That's all I'm saying, Kenny.

Edited June 20, 2010 by GoodSpeak

[Tim McG]

BTW, Kenny...I've been here for some time now.

[Brad]

Unfortunately, ref screwups are legion in WC. For instance, the ref screwed up in the Brasil match today by not calling a hand ball on Brasil. I guess he hates the Ivory Coast. But wait, he kicked out a Brasilian player. So I guess he's biased against both of them.

If you read my prior post, you'd see FIFA rated his performance as poor.

I recommend that you watch a few matches and not just WC before making inane pronouncements.

Edited June 21, 2010 by Brad