Comments on: Goner

Goner

The Jesse Helms — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:12:27 -0800

United States collapses as Ghana is "sick with happiness." World Cup, we hardly knew you.

By: Floydd

Floydd — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:16:05 -0800

By: b_thinky

b_thinky — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:20:07 -0800

Well, now that team USA is gone, hopefully ABC won't feel the need to shove soccer down our throats any more. Although now that the NBA Finals are over, we've officially moved into the "nothing good on TV" sports season.

By: jokeefe

jokeefe — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:20:34 -0800

YES! YES! YES! I was watching Argentina/Netherlands last night with my son, and we both agreed on the awesomeness that would be the US being eliminated by Ghana. I don't even mind the spoiler; I won't see the game until 9:00 p.m. PST, but who cares. Go Ghana!

By: I Love Tacos

I Love Tacos — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:21:59 -0800

Lousy play combined with lousy refs, the worst possible combination. Without that PK, they would've needed a single goal which would've been far more reasonable... strategies that can cover 2 goals in one half are far dicier than those that need to cover one.

By: inigo2

inigo2 — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:22:57 -0800

hopefully ABC won't feel the need to shove soccer down our throats any more. Some people like soccer, ya know?

By: sergeant sandwich

sergeant sandwich — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:24:11 -0800

the us was atrocious on set plays, crosses were awful and ghana won 90% of the straight-up footraces. the better team won today. bravo to you, ghana, and may you die well in the second round.

By: I Love Tacos

I Love Tacos — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:25:10 -0800

Oh and special thanks to b_thinky for being the first to make a "This topic does not interest me" post.

By: Wolfdog

Wolfdog — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:25:30 -0800

Collapsing is for things that were at least temporarily upright.

By: chunking express

chunking express — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:25:52 -0800

That was a nice game to watch. Ghana were playing quite well, America not so much. Whine all you want about the PK. America just weren't playing up to Ghana's standard today.

By: lastobelus

lastobelus — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:26:31 -0800

Some people like soccer, ya know? Yes but maybe just a little too much. I can see that Germany did not actually play today; maybe it won't take TOO long to get home from work through the drunken flag-waving throngs :)

By: edgeways

edgeways — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:26:35 -0800

A team that scores one goal in three games? Pretty weak. Yeah that Ref call was pretty lousy, but the US coach was talking after the game and he put waaaay to much emphases on that one call as opposed to, you know, not performing at all well. Ghana was definitely the better team, even without that call.

By: I Love Tacos

I Love Tacos — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:28:17 -0800

sergeant sandwich: unfortunately, you're somewhat right. The US didn't do anything but make sure that Ghana's goalie knew how to catch the ball. (answer: he does.) However, it was far from a blowout. Change the referee, and it's tied going into the half. Teach Reyna how to play soccer, same thing. Convert one of the numerous second half opportunities, and the US is in play. Ghana played well, and the US screwed a lot of things up... but this one wasn't even close to a blowout.

By: I Love Tacos

I Love Tacos — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:29:03 -0800

Collapsing is for things that were at least temporarily upright. I take it you didn't see the Italy game.

By: TetrisKid

TetrisKid — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:29:13 -0800

Finally! Now soccer can slink back into obscurity for another four years.

By: Plutor

Plutor — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:31:41 -0800

edgeways: "A team that scores one goal in three games? Pretty weak. Yeah that Ref call was pretty lousy, but the US coach was talking after the game and he put waaaay to much emphases on that one call as opposed to, you know, not performing at all well. Ghana was definitely the better team, even without that call." One of the things I learned now that I've actually watched some soccer is how big the difference is between performing well and winning. The United States played amazingly against Italy. When they were a man down (and with a never-practiced 9 men), I was certain Italy was going to run away with the game. They didn't, and the US came ridiculously close to actually scoring.

By: b_thinky

b_thinky — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:32:11 -0800

Is it normal to complain about the refs so much? I've heard this talk 2 straight games now. Maybe team USA should go hang out with the Dallas Mavs or something.

By: bonaldi

bonaldi — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:32:33 -0800

Support Ghana or the US? This one's a slam dunk. The world development movement's website WhoshouldIcheerfor.com assesses teams according to 10 criteria ranging from health spending to carbon emissions and ranks them accordingly. Ghana comes first; the US comes last. US citizens spend roughly as much on ice cream as Ghana does on education and health: imagine what they could do with their military budget. -- Guardian column

By: ROU_Xenophobe

ROU_Xenophobe — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:35:16 -0800

we've officially moved into the "nothing good on TV" sports season. My favorite time of the year. Prime open-wheel racing season, and little for it to compete against for air time.

By: nathan_teske

nathan_teske — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:36:38 -0800

US citizens spend roughly as much on ice cream as Ghana does on education and health. And the sad part is that the US probably also spends roughly as much on ice cream as we do on education and health.

By: I Love Tacos

I Love Tacos — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:37:27 -0800

Is it normal to complain about the refs so much? I've heard this talk 2 straight games now. If you watched the games, or even the highlights, you'd understand that the ref in the USA/Italy game was comically bad (like bad for the ages, bad), and the PK call in the USA/Ghana game was truly atrocious. (And a call for a PK is equivalent to awarding the other team about 0.8 points, since they convert about 80% of the time, so getting that wrong is HUGE.)

By: Camel of Space

Camel of Space — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:38:03 -0800

So glad Ghana won. Today's game was called very well compared to the Italy - US game. That referee, with his zealous use of cards, had better be gone for the next round.

By: graymouser

graymouser — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:38:05 -0800

With that out of the way, anybody watch Major League Soccer? I caught a couple games last year and I liked the New England Revolution...is it worth signing up for the MLS tv service?

By: Witty

Witty — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:39:15 -0800

Is it normal to complain about the refs so much? I've heard this talk 2 straight games now. Maybe team USA should go hang out with the Dallas Mavs or something. The referee in the U.S. v. Italy game should be strung up and whipped. I didn't see today's game, but the officiating in the match against Italy was the worst I've ever seen... suspiciously bad in my opinion.

By: biffa

biffa — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:41:03 -0800

Is it normal to complain about the refs so much? It is. Also, if your manager had been a proper professional he would have got his excuses in before the match as well as utilising anything happening in the game.

By: Sand

Sand — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:42:06 -0800

I guess there isn't a rule against spoilers on the main page, but sheesh! I've been trying hard all day to avoid any mention of this game so I can watch it this evening...I did NOT think metafilter was the place where it would be ruined. (Even fark has "open threads" rather than "here is the result".) Is it this hard for Tivo users to avoid spoilers in all sports? In related news, gr.

By: MythMaker

MythMaker — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:42:07 -0800

So?

By: Tullius

Tullius — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:42:52 -0800

Yeah, the US played like ass. There was no intensity. Good for Gana, though I would hate to have to face Brazil (assuming that they win Group F).

By: mr_crash_davis

mr_crash_davis — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:44:01 -0800

"Is it this hard for Tivo users to avoid spoilers in all sports?" Ha ha, a tivo user got fucked. rofl

By: cell divide

cell divide — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:44:56 -0800

Officiating has been pretty bad during the entire cup, but the US lost because they suck, no other reason. In any case they would've played Brazil in the next round so not much chance of getting to the semis like in 2002 anyway. The last cup was all about underdogs, I think this one is going to be about the great powers duking it out as usual in the quarters. A lot of great matches ahead!

By: Jimbob

Jimbob — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:45:58 -0800

Keep watching, Australia will be wiping the floor with Croatia in about 15 minutes time. Also, b_thinky - you think they stop showing the World Cup once your country's team is eliminated? You aren't the brightest bulb, are you?

By: b_thinky

b_thinky — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:47:07 -0800

If you watched the games, or even the highlights, you'd understand that the ref in the USA/Italy game was comically bad (like bad for the ages, bad), and the PK call in the USA/Ghana game was truly atrocious. I did see the part of the Italy game where the ref was tossing everyone out. It seemed lame and the announcers were pissed, but I don't know shit about soccer and it seemed the announcers didn't either. So who am I to judge? What did the Italians say about it? Or people in some country where they know about soccer? Usually when you count up the things (out of your control) that went your way and those that went against you they pretty much even out. The ref in the Italy game threw 2 guys out but don't forget USA only tied Italy because they scored against themselves. Maybe Ghana got a PK today they didn't deserve but from what I heard, USA needed to win, not tie, so it really didn't make a difference.

By: dminor

dminor — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:48:46 -0800

ABC won't feel the need to shove soccer down our throats heh. now you can go back to watching your favorite tv show while the rest of us who aren't lucky enough to be there can watch from home. nothin quite like good 'ole 'merkin ignorance..

By: I Love Tacos

I Love Tacos — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:48:56 -0800

Officiating has been pretty bad during the entire cup, but the US lost because they suck, no other reason. That's bullshit. The ref gave Ghana that goal, and thus the win. If you argue that nothing else would've changed (HA!), then the US would've drawn but failed to advance. Which is different from losing because they suck. I'd argue that if they'd gone into the second half even, at a minimum, it would've been more fun to watch. In the best case, the fact that they only needed ONE goal to win, might've helped inspire some actual offense.

By: moonbiter

moonbiter — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:51:23 -0800

I never liked watching soccer, and I'm not a fan of sports in general, but I have to admit that I enjoyed seeing the game between the US and Italy. I thought they played pretty well, although I don't know much about the sport. My father-in-law was joking before the game that the score was going to be 0-10 Italy, but afterwards he seemed to be more impressed with the American team. Most of the Germans I know were pulling for the US to win. But Ghana has been on a roll. I don't think that the US should feel bad about losing to them. Still, I wonder if that'll be enough to get them past Brazil, who I hear is really tough.

By: hangashore

hangashore — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:51:46 -0800

you think they stop showing the World Cup once your country's team is eliminated? Heh - Canada hasn't been in the World Cup since our goalless performance in '86, yet our two national sports networks have teamed up to show every game live. Now it gets interesting. Go Ghana! Go Ecuador! Go Aussies!

By: MrMustard

MrMustard — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:53:39 -0800

a) If you're disinterested in football, probably best to avoid a thread about the World Cup. b) The USA were unlucky. They got drawn in a tough group and just came up short. They can be proud of their performance against the Italians though. c) If you like football, it doesn't matter whether you're a Yank, a Czech, a Pole, a Serb or an Iranian (or a native to one of the other countries already eliminated), there's still plenty of great football to come in this tournament. Enjoy it.

By: matteo

matteo — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:56:51 -0800

What did the Italians say about it? that De Rossi (the twenty-year-old dumb enough to elbow the American in the face and got a very just red card) is too green, and an asshole. that the ref was very, very obsessive in delivering punishment as per FIFA "zero tolerance" directives. the first red card he gave to the USA was really unavoidable -- a very violent tackle from behind. the second one was very strict. he also gave yellow card like the world was coming to an end (Zambrotta's yellow card, for example). all in all, bad news for the Americans -- a very strict ref is very bad news for a team that plays a very athletic, physical soccer and cannot hide the ball very well. but the US got lucky with Zaccardo's crazy own goal, a once-in-a-lifetime thing, it's basically impossible according to the laws of physics to score a goal from there. if Americans want to complain about a ref, complain about today's ref. the penalty kick didnt make any sense. as Ghana is "sick with happiness. the ref, and Ghana, avoided the USA the humiliation of getting slaughtered by Brazil, possibly 0-4 or worse. if I were American, I'd thank them

By: I Love Tacos

I Love Tacos — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:57:00 -0800

So who am I to judge? What did the Italians say about it? Or people in some country where they know about soccer? People all across Europe decried the officiating in the USA/Italy game. The BBC's search function is terrible, but they had an article up that decried the quality of the officiating in the game, while praising the US's efforts. The referee in question was suspended for 6 months in 2002 for "irregularities". He has a history of other questionable calls, and appears to be a fairly terrible ref, who is unlikely to work another important game for a long, long time. And this might come as a shock to you, but just because you don't know shit about soccer, doesn't mean the rest of us are equally ignorant on the subject.

By: moonbiter

moonbiter — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:57:08 -0800

bthinky: What did the Italians say about it? Or people in some country where they know about soccer? The German commentators after the match seemed to think they were close calls, but that the ref was right in calling them. They had a guest Italian commentator who was some sort of old soccer pro who agreed. I think the consensus was that aggressive is okay, but once the cleats hit the flesh it's time to call a red card.

By: ramix

ramix — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:57:33 -0800

From this Ghanaian domiciled in Portland, all i can say is GO GHANA!!!

By: b_thinky

b_thinky — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:00:05 -0800

Also, b_thinky - you think they stop showing the World Cup once your country's team is eliminated? I don't think, but I can hope, right? I don't have a problem with soccer per se, but I do hate how various entities continously try to force it down the throats of an uncaring American public. I hate poker. Why anyone would watch the World Series of Poker, Celebrity Poker, or any of the 1000 poker shows now regularly airing on TV is well beyond my comprehension. But at least it's filling an honest grown interest of the public. If soccer grew like that, it'd be great. But instead it's the networks or FIFA or adidaas constantly trying to develop a new market in the USA. They can conduct all the market research they want, but I can say for certain right now; people who like NASCAR will never like soccer. Unless they get hot cheerleader dance teams, some serious violence in the game or a cold-war level rivalry, the plan will fail.

By: spock

spock — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:00:27 -0800

Yeah, as an American who has never paid any attention to the World Cup before this year, I'm really enjoying it this year and the U.S. elimination isn't going to change that. I'm glad to see ESPN/ESPN2/ABC providing the coverage and hope that continues.

By: I Love Tacos

I Love Tacos — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:00:38 -0800

if Americans want to complain about a ref, complain about today's ref. the penalty kick didnt make any sense. I am complaining about him :-) The ref in the USA/Italy game was terrible and inconsistent, but I don't think he changed the outcome. He just made the game really, really weird. The PK today was just atrocious. I'd love to see a helmet-cam version of what the ref saw, to try to figure out why he thought it was a foul.

By: Neiltupper

Neiltupper — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:02:06 -0800

Finally! Now soccer can slink back into obscurity for another four years Reading a thread on a subject which evidently doesn't interest you at all is strange enough. Taking the time to let everybody know you're not interested is just, well, sophomoric.

By: inigo2

inigo2 — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:02:25 -0800

but I don't know shit about soccer And yet you keep talking....strange...

By: inigo2

inigo2 — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:03:40 -0800

I do hate how various entities continously try to force it down the throats of an uncaring American public. How does ABC putting the games on their own networks constitute forcing it down your throat? You can change the channel, you know. Even if you don't have a remote!

By: kosem

kosem — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:03:40 -0800

I wouldn't say that the US played atrociously. We simply do not have a world class offensive player. Donovan is clearly not up to snuff, and no one knows how to finish. The US attack today consisted of floating lazy balls either over the crossbar or attempting wild three-pass schemes inside the penalty area. Not once did a US striker or midfielder lower his head and rip a hard shot. Also, and I'm not crazy about whining after the game, but the pentaly call was disgraceful and took the wind right out of the US sails. Still, Ghana was better today. Hopefully, we'll have some offensive weapons or a legit star in 2010.

By: spock

spock — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:04:17 -0800

People who Tivo stuff and want to avoid spoilers should probably avoid public forums where anything might be discussed that would serve as "spoilers". They should also avoid all human contact (for example, around the water cooler at work) until they get to watch what they have Tivo'd. whatever

By: I Love Tacos

I Love Tacos — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:07:42 -0800

spock: I know a few TiVo users who don't have TVs at their desk, and it's almost comic watching them try to avoid human contact.

By: DieHipsterDie

DieHipsterDie — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:09:22 -0800

It could be said that a team that scores one goal in 3 games does not deserve to advance.

By: The Card Cheat

The Card Cheat — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:13:14 -0800

Are you trying to tell private broadcasters and athletic supplies companies how to run their businesses, b_thinky? Sounds like...a classic case of liberal economic intervention!

By: juiceCake

juiceCake — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:15:41 -0800

we've officially moved into the "nothing good on TV" sports season. How is it official? There are a diverse group of people living in the world who enjoy different sports. There are two F1 races in the next two weekends, in North America no less, and many more to come throughout the season in Europe and Asia. Good for me, but then, such things are relative so I won't say it's officially the best time for sports on TV.

By: Aghast.

Aghast. — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:17:06 -0800

The ref today is considered the best ref in the world. I'd like to see more replays but it seemed like the US defender was "subtly" using his hips and thighs to interfere with the Ghanian player in the air. And if you're Marcello Balboa, I'm sorry, you HAVE to do a better job announcing, you HAVE to come in there looking to provide some insight and alter your cadences.

By: romakimmy

romakimmy — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:18:29 -0800

What did the Italians say about it? That the officiating sucked and we* played like ass. The Azzurri played better today but I was still more impressed by the Italy-Ghana game. Maybe today the players were slightly distracted by tonight's pending announcement of penalties for the Italian League ref bribing scandal. or maybe not, seeing as Cannavaro was stellar and Totti was really off IMO... *'we' says the American in Rome...eh, the Azzurri got me hooked on footie in Euro 2000. What else can I say? ;) Pity for the USA, but I do think ghana more than deserved to advance. Here's hoping they kick the shit out of Brazil...

By: nflorin

nflorin — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:22:13 -0800

The US had bad luck (the draw; the schedule, especially facing the Czechs before they could physically break down; some calls) and bad timing (not showing up for the first game). In 2002 they had good luck (Portugal didn't show up to play) and good timing (Freidel had the best two weeks of his career). The US can generate plenty of good role players and goalkeepers, but until we crank out a creative scorer or two we're always going to be dependant on luck and timing to advance.

By: xmutex

xmutex — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:22:26 -0800

I wouldn't say that the US played atrociously. One offensive goal in three games. Nothing more needs to be said, but I'll say it anyway: fire Bruce Arena. That guy played a timid, defensive game and only started to go for it in the like 66th minute of a lose-or-go-home game down 2-1. What a farce. A terribly managed World Cup by the USA, and a terribly played one. Not a good combination. All we can take from this World Cup is a bloodied Brian McBride.

By: matteo

matteo — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:26:17 -0800

I like to watch a gritty, kickass game, and I always played defense, so I'm no fan of excessive punishment by refs. but some of our friends here should consider the effect of violent tackles from behind. 1 -- tackle Totti from behind 2 -- Totti ends up with a grotesquely sprained ankle, needs surgery and several metal plates to try to fix the leg. this happened last February, it's a miracle that Totti is fit to play in Germany. harsh punishment for violent tackles from behind makes sense, sorry guys

By: NationalKato

NationalKato — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:27:25 -0800

b_thinky needs more channels. Apparently, all of his have been showing the World Cup.

By: NationalKato

NationalKato — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:28:50 -0800

And matteo, that's brutal (the image).

By: inigo2

inigo2 — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:29:45 -0800

harsh punishment for violent tackles from behind makes sense, sorry guys Which tackle are you referring to here? Yes, there have been some good calls, but (in case you're referring to either of these): the red on Mastroeni should've been a yellow, and there's no way the call in the box today should've been a penalty. No way.

By: inigo2

inigo2 — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:30:53 -0800

As Bruce Springsteen once sang, "57 channels and nothing's on except the World Cup".

By: romakimmy

romakimmy — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:31:04 -0800

All we can take from this World Cup is a bloodied Brian McBride De Rossi is talented but an immature snot. See also Totti, Spitting, World Cup 2002. on preview: argh matteo! che dolore! I know you posted the picture to make your point but that pic make me want to puke.

By: Hogshead

Hogshead — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:31:28 -0800

you think they stop showing the World Cup once your country's team is eliminated? Yeah, there's a reason it's called the World Cup, and it has nothing to do with a defunct newspaper.

By: Mitheral

Mitheral — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:32:47 -0800

Sand writes "Is it this hard for Tivo users to avoid spoilers in all sports?" Around MetaFilter yes. Jimbob writes "b_thinky - you think they stop showing the World Cup once your country's team is eliminated? You aren't the brightest bulb, are you?" Never watched an American Olympic feed I take it?

By: ROU_Xenophobe

ROU_Xenophobe — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:33:04 -0800

preach it, juicecake. Go Freddo. Or Kimi. Retire so we can miss you, Michael.

By: b_thinky

b_thinky — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:33:24 -0800

b_thinky needs more channels. Apparently, all of his have been showing the World Cup. posted by NationalKato at 12:27 PM PST on June 22 [+fave] [!] Actually, I do! My broken leg has left me parked in front of the TV for almost 3 weeks. More channels would be nice, or a special NFL summer season would be awesome.

By: b_thinky

b_thinky — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:35:40 -0800

That broken ankle looks pretty cool, but the tackle doesn't seem dirty. He's going for the ball, right? Sometimes shit happens.

By: Dormant Gorilla

Dormant Gorilla — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:40:04 -0800

Nothing more needs to be said, but I'll say it anyway: fire Bruce Arena. I'll second that...he MUST have been telling them to play the ball back today. What the hell was he thinking? I mean ok, Ghana is fast and can do damage when they have possession, but when you know you have to win the match why the hell would you play such a defensive game? Also, in general it seems to be the American press repeating this idea that nobody here cares- but somehow everyone I know is watching. Odd.

By: 27

27 — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:44:58 -0800

b_thinky: Go away. Seriously, stop crapping and spreading your ignorance in this thread. Find a topic that interests you and contribute something positive to it. Aghast: That was funny. Couldn't agree more about Balboa. The 2002 W. Cup, the CONCACAF title, and the ridiculously high FIFA ranking put the wheels on the USA Bandwagon and started it downhill - but they were just never that good. More US players need to get out of the MLS into one of the top-shelf Euro leagues (English, Dutch, German, French, osItalian, Portugese...). Watch any of those league games and then flick over to your average MLS game. It's like watching good soccer at 3/4 speed. I don't know if it's Arena's fault or not. He seems to be doing the best with what he's got - even better than expected at times (see CONCACAF, 2002 W. Cup). If he gets canned, it'll be because there were a lot of false expectations around the W. Cup. Not his fault, really. And, when you're trying to build enthusiasm for your program and you finally get it, what do you do - say "whoa, whoa, whoa" and throw a wet blanket over everything or hope his team catches fire and makes a good showing? Tough situation for him. I say keep him and continue building, but get more of the players playing professionally in Europe. I know they're trying to build the MLS, but to hell w/ that. Ronaldo, Ronaldinho, Roberto Carlos, Kaka, & co. haven't played professionally in Brazil probably since they were working suckers and has-beens down at the beach as kids. Nobody's telling them they should stay home to play professionally...

By: I Love Tacos

I Love Tacos — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:55:59 -0800

Ratings info: I couldn't find many references, but I did find that in Atlanta, England/Paraguay (an AM game) had a 6.2 rating, beat out Braves/Astros, the women's French Open finals, and the 3rd game of the Stanley Cup playoffs. Additionally, it's more popular than ever before: The U.S. team's game against the Czech Republic on Monday earned the highest rating (2.3) and the largest audience (2.06 million households) ever for a soccer game on ESPN2, according to Nielsen. The previous all-time high for a soccer game on ESPN2 was set during Saturday's Argentina-Ivory Coast match, which received a 1.8 rating (1.6 million households). ... In 1998, when France hosted the World Cup and kickoff times were similar to those of this year's event, the first seven games on ESPN2 earned a 0.6 rating (352,686 households). As for how soccer compared to NASCAR... FIFA WORLD CUP-6/10 12PM ABC 1200N-0202P 2.6 FOX NASCAR NEXTEL CUP FOX 0220P-0627P 2.4 yep, the World Cup got better ratings than NASCAR. So to all the people who claim Americans all hate soccer... you're wrong. We hate it less than NASCAR, hockey, and baseball.

By: Cyrano

Cyrano — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 13:01:47 -0800

That picture is fucking Theisman-esque.

By: inigo2

inigo2 — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 13:01:53 -0800

And think about how much better the ratings could've been if the games weren't during work hours! I'm curious what the US-Italy ratings were (though they may have been hurt by the massive suckage in the Czech game)...

By: b_thinky

b_thinky — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 13:09:13 -0800

The USA/Italy game had a 4.3 rating on ABC. Through 18 games, ESPN is averaging a 1.3 rating. These numbers have grown since 2002. For comparison, O'Reilly Factor averaged a 1.8 in May. Hockey only scored a 2.2 on ABC for Game 6 of the Finals. It's been crushed since the strike last year. But in 2004, Game 6 got a 3.5, still less than soccer. Game 5 of the NBA Finals received a 9.0 rating. This year's Super Bowl got a 41.6 rating - viewed by 141 million Americans.

By: Flashman

Flashman — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 13:11:31 -0800

in Atlanta, England/Paraguay (an AM game) had a 6.2 rating, beat out Braves/Astros, the women's French Open finals, and the 3rd game of the Stanley Cup playoffs.......We hate it less than NASCAR, hockey, and baseball. I don't necessarily disagree with your conclusion, Tacos - but isn't it drawn from a pretty shaky data set?!

By: Skeptic

Skeptic — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 13:11:45 -0800

b'thinky:That broken ankle looks pretty cool, but the tackle doesn't seem dirty. He's going for the ball, right? That's what it may seem at first sight, but if the tackler was really going for the ball, why would he also be pulling Totti by his shirt at the same time? See that? Perfect jiujitsu move. That's a very, very dirty tackle, designed to produce maximum injury. If the ankle hadn't gone, then he'd have busted the cruciate ligament instead. And that's why professional football (or "soccer") is very definitely not for wussies. When hundreds of millions are at stake, you can forget fair play and be absolutely certain defenders practice this kind of criminal tackle day in, day out.

By: Flashman

Flashman — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 13:18:11 -0800

i.e. the above, a 6.2 rating, in the morning against like The Price Is Right and Dukes of Hazzard reruns doesn't carry the weight you imply it does, no? I doubt Atlanta's much of a hockey town, either.

By: goldism

goldism — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 13:21:30 -0800

thanks prick. i was recording the game.

By: greycap

greycap — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 13:27:46 -0800

I live in a bit of South London that has a big Ghanaian population, and I passed a street party on Wandsworth Road on the way home from work. Music, beers, dancing - and lots of passers by giving them the thumbs up. Congrats Ghana!

By: Pacheco

Pacheco — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 13:28:00 -0800

.thanks prick. i was recording the game. classy...

By: the painkiller

the painkiller — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 13:28:40 -0800

Bruce Arena, thanks for the memories. time to look forward to the arrival of the Jürgen Klinsmann era...

By: athenian

athenian — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 13:32:01 -0800

The Financial Times had an opinion piece on the US performance today. It suggested that the US team should play some 'home' internationals in the UK (as Australia and some Caribbean countries do), given the number of players who play in European leagues. The FT writer argues that this would have the advantage of getting the players together more frequently (players often don't play in friendlies if the journey is too far), while exposing them to high-quality European national sides.

By: jefbla

jefbla — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 13:32:09 -0800

Here's a free headline for american sports page editors: Not Ghana Happen (After the US-Czech game, the headline was, predictably, "Reality Czech.")

By: goldism

goldism — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 13:37:49 -0800

.thanks prick. i was recording the game. classy... posted by Pacheco at 4:28 PM EST on June 22 [+fave] [!] just as classy as posting the result of a sporting event in the title of a thread.

By: Mitheral

Mitheral — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 13:37:53 -0800

I Love Tacos writes "As for how soccer compared to NASCAR...
"FIFA WORLD CUP-6/10 12PM ABC 1200N-0202P 2.6
"FOX NASCAR NEXTEL CUP FOX 0220P-0627P 2.4
"yep, the World Cup got better ratings than NASCAR.

"So to all the people who claim Americans all hate soccer... you're wrong. We hate it less than NASCAR, hockey, and baseball." Doesn't seem like a fair comparison, your talking a once every four years championship game vs. some random NASCAR event.

By: afu

afu — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 13:39:58 -0800

The US played poorly but not atrociously, if we had the schedule of say, England, we would easily have gotten through. I would say the main problem was depending way to much on Donavan. He just never shows up for the big games. He stopped playing in Europe and came back to the MLS because he wanted to spend more time with his girlfriend or some shit like that. The US attack should have been focusing on sending beasley down the side and having him serve to McBride, both players that have proved they can play at a high level in Europe. Instead they slowly worked it up the middle until we had some shitty cross that was easily cleared out. As for Ghana, I thought their numerous dives in the last quarter of the game were very bad form. I look forward to seeing Brazil crush them. Oh, and I third the call for balbao to get a clue, he just isn't cut out to be an announcer

By: boo_radley

boo_radley — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 13:42:51 -0800

this got spoilered out of existence earlier. I wonder why it's staying now.

By: athenian

athenian — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 13:44:37 -0800

Interesting discussion, though.

By: clevershark

clevershark — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 13:56:26 -0800

edgeways writes "A team that scores one goal in three games? Pretty weak." And technically that was an own-goal by the Italians.

By: afu

afu — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 13:59:03 -0800

"And technically that was an own-goal by the Italians." The US scored against Ghana too.

By: wfc123

wfc123 — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 14:02:36 -0800

The U.S.'s first touches are always too heavy. It's a wonder they even made it to Germany (the flag-wavers - as predicted - are already blaming the ref and the manager, Bruce Arena). Overrated, this team. Bordering on "fraud". Period.

By: mr_crash_davis

mr_crash_davis — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 14:06:38 -0800

"the World Cup got better ratings than NASCAR." "Doesn't seem like a fair comparison, your talking a once every four years championship game vs. some random NASCAR event." Also, it was a NASCAR event that started late - and went just barely over halfway before it was called, due to rain. So I'm pretty sure we're comparing apples and oranges here. On the other hand, "The Brawny/World Bank/General Foods FIFA World Cup brought to you by Nike struggled all week, but the guys in the booth all worked hard to get that broadcast out there on the airwaves, and we're happy with our top-25 finish. We'll come back stronger next time and maybe get ourselves a top ten, Lord willin' and the creek don't rise."

By: I Love Tacos

I Love Tacos — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 14:06:49 -0800

My point was solely that World Cup soccer isn't as fringe as some people like to claim it is. Sure, it's not the NFL or anything close to it, but it has a respectable audiance. I don't care if anybody else watches it or likes it, but it annoys me when people declare "nobody watches it" or "nobody likes it", since that doesn't give inexperienced viewers a chance to make up their own minds.

By: SenshiNeko

SenshiNeko — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 14:11:52 -0800

In other news today, leaks from inside the US government to the media indicate that recent intelligence places Osama bin Laden in the Czech Republic working on weapons of mass destruction. US Army Europe has been placed on alert for an invasion. In a related story, the US Air Force base at Aviano is preparing for air strikes against Italian football stadiums. Meanwhile, the US Navy and Marines are sailing toward the coast of West Africa, prompting speculation that American forces may assault Ghana shortly.

By: Reggie Knoble

Reggie Knoble — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 14:11:59 -0800

Your group really wasn't that difficult. That the Czech's went out shows that it was all up for grabs. Until today you hadn't made a single shot on target in two games, that is atrocious. You would benefit from getting your players into European leagues but you have to get the domestic standard high enough to produce more players with the ability to get picked up by a decent European club first.

By: afu

afu — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 14:16:28 -0800

"the flag-wavers " What the fuck, people aren't supposed to back their own country in the World Cup? And everybody who knows anything about soccer knew that the fifa ranking are bullshit. All the hatred of the US soccer team is bizarre. It really seemed like most Americans wanted them to fail.

By: Effigy2000

Effigy2000 — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 14:19:27 -0800

Well, Australia is through to the second round. Honestly, I ask you, what else matters?

By: inigo2

inigo2 — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 14:27:20 -0800

Your group really wasn't that difficult. Which group was, then?

By: dopamine

dopamine — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 14:27:26 -0800

I hope the US never wins the World Cup, because it seems hardly anyone in the US would even care. Until the country can experience the passion and the movement of the World Cup on the level of the other 160-odd nations involved, it will never win. It won't deserve to. I say this as an American, but more so as a fan of the greatest game on the planet.

By: b_thinky

b_thinky — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 14:27:38 -0800

That's what it may seem at first sight, but if the tackler was really going for the ball, why would he also be pulling Totti by his shirt at the same time? See that? Perfect jiujitsu move. That's a very, very dirty tackle, designed to produce maximum injury. If the ankle hadn't gone, then he'd have busted the cruciate ligament instead. That's a terrible position to get tackled in but without the benefit of seeing it in video I can't say it was dirty or cheap. The tackler looks pretty off balance. Grabbing a jersey to get balance or an advantage would be a natural and believeable explanation. On the other hand, if it really was intentional, he should be banned from play. But if they start yellow or red carding anyone who makes a play that looks remotely like that one, won't overall play suffer because players will worry about the refs more than the ball?

By: athenian

athenian — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 14:32:28 -0800

The US's group was fairly tough, but I'd have to say Argentina-Holland-Serbia-Ivory Coast was tougher.

By: mr_roboto

mr_roboto — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 14:40:04 -0800

dopamine writes "I say this as an American, but more so as a fan of the greatest game on the planet." Pthft. Everyone knows the greatest game on the planet is Sorry.

By: Serial Killer Slumber Party

Serial Killer Slumber Party — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 14:52:41 -0800

Unless they get... a cold-war level rivalry, the plan will fail. Yeah, after most games, the fans quietly go home to their loving fans. Seriously, the rivalry is fierce, because it has Europe's entire history behind it. Did you see the aftermath of the Germany/Poland game? That said, GO AUSTRALIA. I have never been more excited over nobody winning.

By: Reggie Knoble

Reggie Knoble — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 14:53:28 -0800

Which group was, then? The Holland/Argentina group was the Group Of Death in this world cup all of the others were about even. Please don't get me wrong but any group will be tough for a team like the USA who are mediocre on their very best day. Once again, not a single shot on target in the first two games, and only one goal scored under your own steam in all three. I firmly believe you will get better but your exit this time around has very little to do with the groupings and a whole lot to do with your team not being very good.

By: Reggie Knoble

Reggie Knoble — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 14:56:15 -0800

b thinky. The thing with tackles from behind is that although you can play the ball you tend to do so while playing a dangerous amount of the player in posession. Its a useful trick for more cynical players and is potentialy very dangerous so its a no no in football and if done with enough force will often yield a straight red.

By: xmutex

xmutex — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 14:56:59 -0800

just as classy as posting the result of a sporting event in the title of a thread. Sports scores are news. If you don't want them "spoiled" so you can watch them occur hours later, stay off the freaking internet.

By: b_thinky

b_thinky — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 14:59:52 -0800

How come the Dutch team wears orange unis but their flag ain't orange?

By: I Love Tacos

I Love Tacos — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 15:00:39 -0800

I firmly believe you will get better but your exit this time around has very little to do with the groupings and a whole lot to do with your team not being very good. And why is it that your team is going to get knocked out in the semis?* *Note: I'm assuming that you're British.

By: bardic

bardic — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 15:03:00 -0800

Me sad. Especially because it's clear to me now that all the times I defended the US performance in 2002 as not being a fluke, I was drinking way too much of my own Kool-Aid. I kind of wish Beasley hadn't had that awesome assist, so that he could be drummed off the national squad forever. Arena? I don't know. He's said he wants to stick around for 2010, but I get the sense that he's got some personal favorites on the team that shouldn't be there under objective standards--Claudio Reyna (WTF was he thinking?), and dare I say it, Donovan and McBride. Your primary strikers don't score any goals in the World Cup? Yank 'em. There are no excuses. But I agree that Australia is a good story. Ghana is the best story. Argentina is scary-good. The Dutch are just under the radar, where they want to be. England is overrated, yet again, but not as much as France. Italy is good, but they haven't convinced me that they're in it to win. Spain and Portugal are going to be interesting to watch--didn't get a chance to see their matches early on, but they know how to score goals.

By: bardic

bardic — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 15:04:34 -0800

Orange is the color the (former) Dutch monarchy, I believe.

By: Reggie Knoble

Reggie Knoble — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 15:08:43 -0800

And why is it that your team is going to get knocked out in the semis? You caught me. We will get knocked out because we invented the game and it would be ungentlemanly to hog all of the glory. That and we aren't terribly good either, at least not while we have a coach with all the tactical genius of the average bloke down the pub. If we experimented with the starting line up and made selections based more on form than column inches i think we could do better, as it is 8/9 players are guaranteed their place even if they have only had half an hour of football in six months.

By: jacalata

jacalata — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 15:08:59 -0800

I didn't mind seeing the US go out, as their '5th' world ranking is a joke. I was fucking ecstatic to see Australia go through. Speaking of a poor ref, whatever the fuck our guy was on, I hope he doesn't do another match at least for this tournament. Preferably life. And shoot the keeper.

By: bardic

bardic — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 15:15:59 -0800

Yeah, the ref calling the Aus/Cro game was on crack. I'm pretty sure he gave Simic a red card but didn't send him off the field. The final whistle was just the ultimate train-wreck--there was obviously a foul in the Cro box, but on whom? You could tell he just wanted to get out of there, rules be damned. Which would be funny if it was a rec league, but kind of sad considering it's the freakin' World Cup. (And what's up with those microphones the refs have taped to their face? Who're they talking to? Their lines judges?)

By: jacalata

jacalata — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 15:17:35 -0800

He gave Simunic three yellow cards before sending him off.

By: wilful

wilful — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 15:19:25 -0800

Wooohooo, Australia through!!!!!!!!!! Simunic, surely the first player ever to be given three yellow cards in a world cup match. And Zelko Kalac, never to play for Australia again!

By: Reggie Knoble

Reggie Knoble — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 15:19:35 -0800

Graham Poll (ref for Aus/Cro) gave Simic three yellow cards, and only showed the red after the third one.

By: afx237vi

afx237vi — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 15:19:39 -0800

How come the Dutch team wears orange unis but their flag ain't orange? Dutch royalty, the House of Orange.

By: afx237vi

afx237vi — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 15:21:50 -0800

(And what's up with those microphones the refs have taped to their face? Who're they talking to? Their lines judges?) Yes, the assistant referees (formerly known as linesmen) and the fourth official, who deals with substitutes.

By: bardic

bardic — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 15:24:24 -0800

(Forgot to mention that Ronaldo is scoring again. Hope none of you didn't bet on anyone other than Brasilia.)

By: b_thinky

b_thinky — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 15:26:57 -0800

OK, here's my big soccer question: why can't we know how much time is left in the game? The game has a 90 minute running clock and then some mystery amount of bonus time is added to make up for injuries and stuff. Why can't we see exactly how much time is remaining? Isn't it in the best interest of the players, the fans and anyone observing the game to know when it's gonna end?

By: jacalata

jacalata — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 15:29:19 -0800

There are two Croatian players: Simic got two yellow cards and was sent off, Simunic got two yellow cards, stayed on, then got a third 10 minutes later and was sent off as the whistle blew.

By: Reggie Knoble

Reggie Knoble — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 15:41:15 -0800

b_thinky Just before the end of a half they hold up a board showing how much added time will be played

By: xmutex

xmutex — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 15:44:50 -0800

OK, here's my big soccer question: why can't we know how much time is left in the game? BECAUSE SOCCER IS LIFE.

By: grapefruitmoon

grapefruitmoon — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 15:46:17 -0800

I'm just glad Sweden got through. (I'm American, but my husband got me watching soccer during the European Championships in '04 and I needed a team to root for - I picked my family's ancestry and my man-crush on Henrik Larsson doesn't hurt.) PHEW. I'm still mad at the Dutch for knocking Sweden out of aforementioned European Championships. Fucking Dutch. (I never thought that the US had even a glimmer of a chance in hell. The US women's team though, is awesome - they won the Women's World Cup last time around.)

By: Skeptic

Skeptic — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 15:50:34 -0800

Isn't it in the best interest of the players, the fans and anyone observing the game to know when it's gonna end? Maybe the players', not the fans', unless you don't understand the whole concept of suspense. But anyway, it would be theoretically possible to do as in basketball and stop the clock when the game is stopped. But it would certainly make the whole game a lot more static. Football (this football), is an endurance game. Stopping the clock would give the players a chance to catch their breath, and the pauses could get really long. Having a running clock forces at least one of the teams to hurry up, and the result is that there is always some movement, even while the game is stopped. It also adds an additional strategic ingredient of "playing the clock". A team that is winning will try to stop the play as often and for as long as possible (and some teams, see Italy, are awfully inventive iat that, which can also be entertaining). The referee, however, can penalize players that are too shameless in doing this, and also has the power, as you point out, of adding as much time as he deems possible at the end of each period (although it rarely reaches 4 minutes). A team that is losing, on the other hand, will always be in a hurry.

By: bardic

bardic — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 15:56:58 -0800

MLS (American professional league--Oh shut up, we're trying over here!) times its games in a manner which b_thinky would approve. The clock stops for penalties or injuries, and stoppage time is also displayed publicly--not just the amount of it in total, but how much is left. Which doesn't really bother me, but it just kind of needlessly complicates things.

By: seanyboy

seanyboy — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 16:04:25 -0800

Well, that's the last time I trust metafilter. Last world cup thread, you were all so sure USA were going to play well this time. We're 5th in the world rankings! You were wrong and I believed you. I'm a fucking idiot.

By: ob

ob — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 16:12:04 -0800

Look, does anyone actually believe that it isn't going to be a Brazil vs Germany final? Optimism aside, did anyone actually think that it would be any different before the WC started? I'm English and I'm well aware that we're going to get our arses kicked in the 1/4 finals (by The Netherlands, I predict). Going into this world cup did anyone actually believe that the US could win this? I'm interested as I've heard the hype over and over again on ESPN, and the other day it dawned on me that going into this tournament some people might of actually believed it...

By: bardic

bardic — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 16:16:13 -0800

ob, a boy can dream, can't he? *sniffle*

By: ob

ob — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 16:18:40 -0800

Bardic now you've made me feel bad. Yes indeed a boy can dream. I'm also trying not to jinx anyone's chances by hyping them up. The fucking ESPN commentators do that enough. Marcelo Balboa's kiss of death. Not a bad name for a band that...

By: ob

ob — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 16:19:18 -0800

Actually that's a shite name. Sorry.

By: Reggie Knoble

Reggie Knoble — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 16:23:33 -0800

Go on ob admit it, you were at least trying to jinx the Germans a little bit weren't you?

By: bardic

bardic — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 16:25:43 -0800

Balboa is boring, but I lurve Wynalda--he's been spewing Haterade (deservedly so) on Arena and Reyna and Beasley and others since the beginning. One of the reasons I like soccer as an American, perversely, is partly because it's under the radar of the general sporting conscience--you'd never have a former player saying things that directly about a coach or current players in (American) football or baseball or basketball (at least, he wouldn't be getting paid to say it on ESPN). He's been refreshingly blunt. Anything that makes Julie Foudy gasp is worth it IMO.

By: ob

ob — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 16:35:14 -0800

Go on ob admit it, you were at least trying to jinx the Germans a little bit weren't you? Yeah

By: deadmessenger

deadmessenger — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 16:40:32 -0800

Look, does anyone actually believe that it isn't going to be a Brazil vs Germany final? I don't. I'm thinking Argentina/Brazil, or Argentina/Spain. Germany hasn't impressed me - I've got them in my bracket getting knocked out in the quarters by Argentina, who looked unbeatable in the first round. As much as I hate to say this, as I've been rooting for England (rather than my native US or my ancestral Italy): The big Round of 16 upset is going to be Ecuador beating England. England has been hanging on by a thread, and Ecuador looks great, the Germany game notwithstanding. Now, with Owen out and Rooney barely fit (WTF was Sven thinking only bringing 4 forwards?), I think England's had it. Ecuador might get past the winner of the Portugal/Netherlands game, as well, making it into the semis where they will, in all likelihood, become roadkill for Brazil or Spain on their way to the finals.

By: chrispederick

chrispederick — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 16:47:50 -0800

The Holland/Argentina group was the Group Of Death in this world cup all of the others were about even Agreed that the Holland/Argentina group was the Group of Death, but I think it's safe to say that the US group was a lot tougher than the Spanish or French groups.

By: inigo2

inigo2 — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 16:51:44 -0800

I kind of wish Beasley hadn't had that awesome assist, so that he could be drummed off the national squad forever. I second.... I almost felt dirty cheering for him on his part that goal, having already decided that I have a pile of laundry back home that could've been playing better.

By: inigo2

inigo2 — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 16:53:08 -0800

PS. Yes, FIFA rankings are poop. That's why they're being changed. (They are, right?)

By: ob

ob — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 16:54:36 -0800

deadmessenger I hear you, but I think home advantage is huge. Look at France in '98 compared to now, look how well the Koreans and the Japanese did in the last WC (they even had crazy refereeing decisions go their way), dare I say it look at '66 (sorry lads). That's why I think Germany for the final. Oh that, and the fact that as ReggieKnoble pointed out, I'm trying to jinx 'em.

By: crashlanding

crashlanding — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 16:59:40 -0800

I know it's way late but some people were saying Mastroeni's tackle was from behind when it was clearly from the side. It was late, he got his studs up, but that should have been a yellow. (I'm also of the opinion that he gave Pope the second yellow completely forgetting that he gave him one in the first half.) As for the US team, Arena is a moron. Reyna did nothing in the first two games (okay he hit the post in the Czech one), and he has shown me nothing that would justify him being the captain. Why he decided to start Beasley is beyond me considering he was subbed into the Italy game late so he could run like hell and did nothing but stand around holding the ball. His speed was his only asset and he decided to become some sort of playmaker. The style of play was way too conservative, instead of playing to our strengths down the wings we tried to methodically pass the ball up the field. That doesn't work when the midfielders aren't making an effort to get open so the defense can pass to you. I swear if they passed it back to Keller from midfield one more time I was going to throw a brick through my TV. The US does not have any "go to guy" but they have 15 decent role players. Until we can produce a couple top level guys we'll always be on the edge of the round of 16, sometimes in, sometimes not. These guys will not develop playing in the MLS either, more players should go to where the rest of the world's talent is playing, in Europe. If those rumors about Klinsmann are true, that would be the best thing to happen to American soccer. The Germans are playing the exact style we should.

By: wilful

wilful — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 17:21:08 -0800

Brazil were hot favourites before the WC Finals started, but they've been fairly average in the group matches, everyone is buzzing about Argentina.

By: bardic

bardic — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 17:38:04 -0800

I think Agentina showed us their best in their 6-0 victory, and their best is quite strong. However, Brazil is just getting warmed up as far as I can tell, fat Ronaldo be damned.

By: wfc123

wfc123 — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 17:49:27 -0800

Bruce Arena is not a moron. He is a genius for getting that hapless side into Germany. Jurgen Klinsmann could do no better. And I root for the teams I like. I support Italy. I watch the sports I like-- and American Baseball, the NFL, NBA and the NHL are no longer on that list. Greed has rendered all of those once-great leagues unwatchable. Of course, greed has permeated European club soccer, but at least they don't fuck with actual rules to "enhance scoring" and make it "fan-friendly" (whatever THAT means), Italian Serie A "scandals" notwithstanding. What corp. America has done to professional sports is a complete disgrace.

By: graventy

graventy — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 18:29:42 -0800

Holy shit! So, what you're telling me is that Americans have sports they like better than soccer?!

By: patricio

patricio — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 18:36:43 -0800

And I root for the teams I like It's all about rooting for the teams you have to root for. Liking them just doesn't come into it.

By: kosem

kosem — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 18:38:19 -0800

I swear if they passed it back to Keller from midfield one more time I was going to throw a brick through my TV. I'm right there with you. All day I've been wondering how Arena could have possibly thought his tactics would work without at least one striker with a killer instinct. Or someone to reliably feed him the ball from the middle of the field. He was coaching the team he hoped he had instead of the team he actually has. Arena's contribution to the development of American soccer has been immeasurable. He's the pater familias. Bronze is head and stick him in the hall of fame. Then hire someone to open up the next chapter.

By: ORthey

ORthey — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 18:45:36 -0800

People seem to forget that you need some luck in soccer. Everyone piles on the US sucks bandwagon - but we twice hit posts/bars and got no calls our way. Say those two crossbars go in - we've scored 4 goals now. Say Ghana is not awarded that ridiculous PK - that's one less goal given up. Say the ref in the italy game took his head out of his ass - who knows? My point is, worse teams can beat better teams with a few breaks. We didn't play great (except against Italy, methought) but we didn't catch a whole lot of breaks, aside from the own goal for Italy. We're behind the pack and we have a looong way to go, but this shouldn't be seen as such a horrible disappointment. Coaching sucked, reffing sucked, and we weren't lucky. Why are people so hard on the US team? It's counterproductive.

By: Aghast.

Aghast. — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 19:16:38 -0800

I like the Lou Holtz approach: saying your team is terrible and you have no chance. What happened after Germany/ Poland? I know my Polish American neighborhood was howling at the moon.

By: Aghast.

Aghast. — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 19:18:05 -0800

Passing backward is important in terms of changing the point of attack right? Going only forward with passes seems amateur to me.

By: tellurian

tellurian — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 19:19:13 -0800

Re: the earlier critcism of the referee in the USA match. Wait till you see Australia v. Croatia. Absolutely appaling. Turned out alright though.

By: jefbla

jefbla — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 19:39:20 -0800

Why are people so hard on the US team? It's counterproductive. The Italy game was the best for the Americans, even though they had to play 9 on 10 for almost the whole second half. The PK in the Ghana game was ridiculous, but hey, what can you can do? Ghana still played a better game. The first game against Czech Republic was atrocious. When you have only 3 games to try to make it to the next round, you can't afford to waste a game. That first game was pure ass. Overall, I feel the US effort was dissappointing, but not too surprising.

By: dw

dw — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 19:44:54 -0800

PS. Yes, FIFA rankings are poop. That's why they're being changed. (They are, right?) Yup. No word on how FIFA is going to ~~slant~~ adjust it. And lest people forget, the Czech Republic was the #2 team coming in, and they're not moving on. So, it's not just the US that was overrated.

By: Kronoss

Kronoss — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 20:01:59 -0800

I didn't catch the end of the second half of Aus/Cro, but I thought the Aussies were awesome in the first. Just running at Croatia almost to the point of recklessness, like the US should have done vs. Ghana. The US were WAY too conservative when they needed a win and were playing a team that isn't exactly a world power. Still, Ghana outplayed them and I'm glad to see them in the second round. The US didn't play like a team that wanted to advance. (Oh, and according to the Guardian, AC/DC's "Thunderstruck" was played in the stadium after the Australian game. How awesome is that?)

By: deadmessenger

deadmessenger — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 20:14:36 -0800

Wait till you see Australia v. Croatia. Absolutely appaling. The last 20 minutes or so was a total train-wreck. Between the confusion at the very end where the ref was too busy handing out yellows and reds to actually blow the whistle for time, the aforementioned third yellow card on Simunic, the missed offside on the second Australian goal, and the missed Croatian handball in the box, it was some of the worst officiating I've ever seen in a sporting event - the last 2 US games included.

By: wilful

wilful — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 20:18:49 -0800

Oh I dunno, the ref for Australia v Japan was fairly ordinary, giving Japan a goal when Schwarzer had been bumped out of the way, and the ref against Brazil was terrible too. In fact, Australia has had the wrong end of the stick three times now. The sad thing is, it's going to be worse, much much worse, against the Azzurri.

By: deadmessenger

deadmessenger — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 20:24:42 -0800

The sad thing is, it's going to be worse, much much worse, against the Azzurri. Amen - the Italian National Grass-Diving team can play a referee like a freaking Stradivarius. It's a fine art to them - I'm really surprised that refs haven't already caught on to their reputation and started compensating - a few yellows for simulation would fix that situation right quick.

By: ob

ob — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 20:48:37 -0800

Normally Graham Poll (the ref for the Aus v Cro) match is one of the better referees (if that isn't in itself an oxymoron) but he was truly dire. How it's possible to book someone twice and not send him off (when I noticed it before the commentators did and I'm hardly the most obseverant viewer of the game) I really don't know. As a more general point we saw bad refs in the 2004 WC and FIFA looked like they were going to do something about it for this one. What they did instead was to provoke a card frenzy...

By: First Post

First Post — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 20:50:01 -0800

I think the whole "everybody should get out of MLS and go play in Europe or we'll suck forever" argument is a little dated. This year's World Cup performance should bear that out. A lot of the guys playing abroad didn't have their best games. The most promising chances came mostly from MLS guys like Dempsey and Johnson. I would have liked to see more from others as well. Frankly I was mystified at some of Arena's lineup choices throughout the tourney. Without going into it too much again, the key is developing US soccer within the US through MLS and the system underneath it. The recent movement toward MLS academies and reserve leagues will really pay off by the next World Cup. It's already starting to make the domestic game pick up a little bit.

By: Cyrano

Cyrano — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 21:14:28 -0800

I work at a huge multi-national company with a lot of Brits, Dutch, Brazilians and Middle-Easterners. And I've really enjoyed watching the way the World Cup has taken them all over. And I don't say that in a disparaging way. I feel the same way about football/soccer that I do about baseball. I'll go to any game I get a free ticket to and I'm always happy to watch it with people who enjoy it. I just can't watch it alone on my couch. There's TV's all over the complex where I work, and if a game is on you can guarantee that productivity is going to suck because there's going to be at least a dozen people gathered around each of those TV's when the games are on. And the "ooohs!" "ahhhs!" and "ohhhs!!" are easily as vehement as any American sporting event I've ever seen or attended, especially when there's some action near the goal. I watched some of the last World Cup and was surprised to find myself enjoying it. I tried to explain it to some of my incredulous Americans sports fans friends thusly: It's like watching a shark attack. There's a lot of circling and vying for position, but when it's time to go in for the kill, damn, it's exciting.

By: jacalata

jacalata — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 22:01:36 -0800

I'm going to use that analogy, Cyrano.

By: A dead Quaker

A dead Quaker — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 22:09:28 -0800

What the fuck kind of seeding system puts Mexico in the same category as Brazil, and the U.S. in the same one as Saudi Arabia, given results like this? It seems like whatever group we ended up in would be a group of death given that framework. But in Clint Dempsey I have finally found a reason to watch the MLS, so this World Cup gives me some hope in our national league.

By: Surfurrus

Surfurrus — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 22:14:18 -0800

America is out. Fine. I agree with the comments above, they played well, but it would have been an international disgrace if they went any further ... there isn't any other country in the world LESS interested in their own team. Really sad ... the guys can kick ass. I have been cheering for the KOREANS ... hot, hot, hot! My only wish is that the local Japanese tv station would play all the games so I don't have to listen to those banal commentaries by the Americans on Cspan and ABC. My favorite game so far was Togo v.Korea -- and the little 'victory dance' the Togo team did when they scored. (Also, loved the coach's French after-game commentary with Korean subtitles) We need World Cup on MORE channels!!

By: spock

spock — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 23:13:56 -0800

So, which is hotter: Brazil's soccer (pardon. . . football) or their women?

By: MrMustard

MrMustard — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 00:53:13 -0800

This is so good I'm going to stick it into every World Cup thread. Click on the result of the match you're interested in, then click the football symbol next to the name of the scorer of the goal you want to see. Et voila.

By: dabitch

dabitch — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 01:10:08 -0800

Surfurrus, glad I'm not the only one with a soft spot for the Koreans. :)

By: psmealey

psmealey — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 02:15:23 -0800

I'm not quite sure I understand some of the bitterness I've seen expressed here and elsewhere. The US had the fourth best team in their group, and that's where they finished. Whether you think Arena is a dolt or a manager who got the best out of his team, take a look at the actual players on the squad. Other than, Kasey Keller (and I am afraid his best days are long since past), is there anyone else on USA would actually make the England team (for example), let alone start? I fail to think of anyone. The US team has always been very fit, runs very hard, plays aggressively, and some of the time plays organized defense, though they are prone to making horrendous mistakes from time to time. This is good enough for any of the top three spots in CONCACAF, a very weak world group. What they have never had is someone a genuine scoring threat up front, and serious depth at the midfield and defender positions. Until they actually get these players, doing well in the World Cup is always going to be a factor of getting lucky (2002, 1994) or unlucky (1990, 1998) or really just finishing where they belong (2004). I will say this, however: as someone who has followed the progression of the US international football squad since 1984 ( I played youth and high school soccer with and against John Harkes in NJ), I found a lot in this team to be encouraged by. Time was when the US team was easily intimidated by very strong teams from England, Holland, (then) Yugoslavia, Brazil, Germany and even Mexico for a long time. To see a US team stand up to the physcial pounding exerted upon them by a larger and more talented Italian side, and moreover, give back better than they got was a revelation. Clearly, the US has at least another decade to go before they are truly considered an elite side, but the game against Italy demonstrated to a lot of us that they are at least physically positioned to get there.

By: psmealey

psmealey — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 02:18:48 -0800

Look at France in '98 compared to now You'll see (save Laurent Blanc, Marcel Desailly, and a few others) pretty much the same team. The heart of the current French team is old and way past their prime. The team they had in 1998 was legitimately the best team in the world, home field advantage be damned. Brazil had every bit the chance to put them in their place in the final, but they were outclassed way beyond whatever lift les Bleus got from playing at home.

By: the cydonian

the cydonian — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 02:25:47 -0800

spock: Clearly, female Brazilian soccer fans.

By: bouncebounce

bouncebounce — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 05:24:02 -0800

Your group really wasn't that difficult. Which group was, then? posted by inigo2 at 10:27 PM GMT on June 22 [+fave] [!] Any group that has England in it automatically becomes the group of death. Stick your three lions up your arse.

By: languagehat

languagehat — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 06:37:08 -0800

the ref, and Ghana, avoided the USA the humiliation of getting slaughtered by Brazil, possibly 0-4 or worse. if I were American, I'd thank them Exactly. I knew going into this the US didn't have a hope in hell, so I've been rooting for Argentina, who will definitely be in the finals; I'm glad Ghana will get the chance to be slaughtered by Brazil, and I hope they have better luck with the draw next time around! Meanwhile, Arena did wonderful things for US soccer, and now it's time for him to go. The whining afterwards was pathetic (right, they should have seeding so our poor widdle babies don't have to play those big mean teams so early!), and somebody else should have a chance to prepare for next time.

By: tannhauser

tannhauser — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 07:21:43 -0800

Ah - penalties called PKs, the confusion of "English" and "British" (many Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish people will emphatically not be supporting England) - all the clichés here and in full effect. Rather unkindly, the advertisements for Budweiser, the sponsors of the ITV coverage in the UK, trade on the idea that North Americans know nothing of "soccerball", which strikes me as a little base-alienating. Personally, as an Englishman, I rather like the US team. It feels exotic, and a little strange, as MLS in general is a little strange. I'm reminded of a story the DJ Danny Baker tells about when he saw the New York Cosmos during the years of the NASL, when Pele and Franz Beckenbauer came on along with the Crystal Palace reject Stuart Jump, whom they promptly treated to exactly the kind of barracking he had probably come to the US to avoid. Likewise, the MLS, and its occasional exports, provide strangely articulate, college-educated and independently wealthy footballers like Brian McBride (the closest European comparison probably being something like Gianluca Vialli, bless him), and also the reports from the front report such magical names as Jaime Moreno, an utter failure at Middlesbrough but apparently MVP in MLS for some years running. It seems oddly alchemical. So, I'm sorry to see the USA go out, but, ultimately, they did very well indeed against Italy, performed largely as expected against the Czech Republic and were slightly unlucky against Ghana. Being around the 27th best team on performance is probably more accurate than 5th in the FIFA rankings.

By: Aghast.

Aghast. — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 09:24:33 -0800

tannhauser: Why does the American team feel exotic to you? That's interesting.